Cities Index.
Agenda

Ceres City Council
April 13, 2026

Document
Agenda
Meeting
April 13, 2026
Body
Ceres City Council
Pages
50
Original file
598.6 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on www.ceres.gov. That file is the official record.

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_005
NB SB EB WB Total
5,534 4,181 0 0 9,715

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 6 5 11 12:00 60 51 111 00:00 01:00 27 15 42
00:15 11 2 13 12:15 51 42 93 01:00 02:00 9 10 19
00:30 3 6 9 12:30 58 40 98 02:00 03:00 23 12 35
00:45 7 2 9 12:45 88 54 142 03:00 04:00 20 21 41
01:00 3 2 5 13:00 55 71 126 04:00 05:00 36 42 78
01:15 3 2 5 13:15 56 58 114 05:00 06:00 78 102 180
01:30 2 4 6 13:30 54 61 115 06:00 07:00 138 126 264
01:45 1 2 3 13:45 59 70 129 07:00 08:00 644 511 1155
02:00 4 4 8 14:00 71 104 175 08:00 09:00 769 410 1179
02:15 6 2 8 14:15 137 111 248 09:00 10:00 187 130 317
02:30 7 2 9 14:30 239 117 356 10:00 11:00 182 121 303
02:45 6 4 10 14:45 101 86 187 11:00 12:00 237 166 403
03:00 1 6 7 15:00 87 110 197 12:00 13:00 257 187 444
03:15 5 3 8 15:15 150 104 254 13:00 14:00 224 260 484
03:30 3 6 9 15:30 287 143 430 14:00 15:00 548 418 966
03:45 11 6 17 15:45 155 84 239 15:00 16:00 679 441 1120 04:00 7 6 13 16:00 117 72 189 16:00 17:00 414 361 775
04:15 8 7 15 16:15 99 94 193 17:00 18:00 462 344 806
04:30 8 15 23 16:30 107 92 199 18:00 19:00 219 155 374
04:45 13 14 27 16:45 91 103 194 19:00 20:00 151 125 276 05:00 19 15 34 17:00 116 90 206 20:00 21:00 104 79 183
05:15 15 18 33 17:15 98 85 183 21:00 22:00 62 72 134
05:30 18 35 53 17:30 139 88 227 22:00 23:00 33 50 83
05:45 26 34 60 17:45 109 81 190 23:00 00:00 31 23 54
06:00 24 18 42 18:00 82 56 138
06:15 26 28 54 18:15 40 42 82 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 46 34 80 18:30 50 32 82 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 42 46 88 18:45 47 25 72 2350 1666 4016
07:00 84 72 156 19:00 29 30 59 7:30 7:30 7:30
07:15 197 114 311 19:15 41 38 79 923 620 1543
07:30 162 145 307 19:30 50 32 82 0.785 0.861 0.879
07:45 201 180 381 19:45 31 25 56
08:00 266 150 416 20:00 13 20 33 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 294 145 439 20:15 23 27 50 3184 2515 5699
08:30 153 68 221 20:30 40 22 62 15:15 14:45 15:00
08:45 56 47 103 20:45 28 10 38 709 443 1120
09:00 41 38 79 21:00 18 24 42 0.618 0.774 0.651
09:15 41 34 75 21:15 16 19 35
09:30 47 28 75 21:30 14 19 33 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 58 30 88 21:45 14 10 24 1413 921 2334
10:00 32 37 69 22:00 9 10 19 7:30 7:30 7:30
10:15 50 22 72 22:15 11 16 27 923 620 1543
10:30 56 27 83 22:30 7 15 22 0.785 0.861 0.879
10:45 44 35 79 22:45 6 9 15
11:00 43 47 90 23:00 5 9 14 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 58 35 93 23:15 14 7 21 876 705 1581
11:30 64 31 95 23:30 4 3 7 17:00 16:15 16:45
11:45 72 53 125 23:45 8 4 12 462 379 810
TOTALS 2350 1666 0 0 4016 TOTALS 3184 2515 0 0 5699 0.831 0.920 0.892 SPLIT % 59% 41% 0% 0% 41% SPLIT % 56% 44% 0% 0% 59%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Central Ave Bet. Service Rd & Central Valley High School Southern Access Dwy

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_006
NB SB EB WB Total
3,784 3,568 0 0 7,352

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 7 4 11 12:00 57 49 106 00:00 01:00 27 14 41
00:15 10 3 13 12:15 41 41 82 01:00 02:00 9 10 19
00:30 3 5 8 12:30 44 32 76 02:00 03:00 18 12 30
00:45 7 2 9 12:45 30 52 82 03:00 04:00 22 21 43
01:00 3 2 5 13:00 51 40 91 04:00 05:00 48 42 90
01:15 3 2 5 13:15 46 39 85 05:00 06:00 78 88 166
01:30 2 4 6 13:30 56 56 112 06:00 07:00 140 113 253
01:45 1 2 3 13:45 48 63 111 07:00 08:00 366 415 781
02:00 4 4 8 14:00 61 89 150 08:00 09:00 441 281 722
02:15 5 2 7 14:15 75 99 174 09:00 10:00 148 114 262
02:30 4 2 6 14:30 139 115 254 10:00 11:00 148 110 258
02:45 5 4 9 14:45 84 77 161 11:00 12:00 166 147 313
03:00 1 6 7 15:00 79 79 158 12:00 13:00 172 174 346
03:15 5 3 8 15:15 86 77 163 13:00 14:00 201 198 399
03:30 4 5 9 15:30 87 182 269 14:00 15:00 359 380 739
03:45 12 7 19 15:45 87 78 165 15:00 16:00 339 416 755
04:00 12 6 18 16:00 80 65 145 16:00 17:00 339 321 660
04:15 10 7 17 16:15 87 84 171 17:00 18:00 318 250 568
04:30 10 15 25 16:30 89 86 175 18:00 19:00 162 125 287
04:45 16 14 30 16:45 83 86 169 19:00 20:00 93 116 209
05:00 19 14 33 17:00 83 61 144 20:00 21:00 68 82 150
05:15 18 16 34 17:15 86 70 156 21:00 22:00 55 67 122
05:30 14 28 42 17:30 91 66 157 22:00 23:00 34 49 83
05:45 27 30 57 17:45 58 53 111 23:00 00:00 33 23 56
06:00 31 16 47 18:00 63 44 107
06:15 30 25 55 18:15 29 33 62 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 45 35 80 18:30 35 28 63 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 34 37 71 18:45 35 20 55 1611 1367 2978
07:00 48 45 93 19:00 22 29 51 7:30 7:30 7:30
07:15 90 84 174 19:15 23 32 55 573 493 1066
07:30 94 124 218 19:30 29 29 58 0.823 0.761 0.900
07:45 134 162 296 19:45 19 26 45
08:00 174 114 288 20:00 14 20 34 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 171 93 264 20:15 19 27 46 2173 2201 4374
08:30 55 48 103 20:30 22 24 46 14:30 15:00 15:00
08:45 41 26 67 20:45 13 11 24 388 416 755
09:00 29 35 64 21:00 12 21 33 0.698 0.571 0.702
09:15 35 32 67 21:15 16 20 36
09:30 44 23 67 21:30 13 17 30 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 40 24 64 21:45 14 9 23 807 696 1503
10:00 30 30 60 22:00 9 11 20 7:30 7:30 7:30
10:15 39 19 58 22:15 12 14 26 573 493 1066
10:30 46 27 73 22:30 7 15 22 0.823 0.761 0.900
10:45 33 34 67 22:45 6 9 15
11:00 29 46 75 23:00 6 9 15 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 47 33 80 23:15 15 7 22 657 571 1228
11:30 49 25 74 23:30 4 3 7 16:45 16:00 16:00
11:45 41 43 84 23:45 8 4 12 343 321 660
TOTALS 1611 1367 0 0 2978 TOTALS 2173 2201 0 0 4374 0.942 0.933 0.943 SPLIT % 54% 46% 0% 0% 41% SPLIT % 50% 50% 0% 0% 59%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Central Ave Bet. Central Valley High School Southern Access Dwy & E Redwood Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_007
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 5,613 6,574 12,187

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 7 13 20 12:00 100 93 193 00:00 01:00 21 31 52
00:15 7 5 12 12:15 101 77 178 01:00 02:00 7 21 28
00:30 4 10 14 12:30 69 101 170 02:00 03:00 19 24 43
00:45 3 3 6 12:45 65 85 150 03:00 04:00 33 28 61
01:00 1 6 7 13:00 66 99 165 04:00 05:00 80 56 136
01:15 2 4 6 13:15 67 80 147 05:00 06:00 120 100 220
01:30 3 4 7 13:30 81 86 167 06:00 07:00 168 189 357
01:45 1 7 8 13:45 84 110 194 07:00 08:00 443 493 936
02:00 3 5 8 14:00 73 114 187 08:00 09:00 495 455 950
02:15 1 6 7 14:15 125 140 265 09:00 10:00 266 231 497
02:30 8 7 15 14:30 158 133 291 10:00 11:00 273 256 529
02:45 7 6 13 14:45 137 170 307 11:00 12:00 305 304 609
03:00 8 8 16 15:00 103 168 271 12:00 13:00 335 356 691
03:15 2 4 6 15:15 112 172 284 13:00 14:00 298 375 673
03:30 10 4 14 15:30 186 185 371 14:00 15:00 493 557 1050 03:45 13 12 25 15:45 156 132 288 15:00 16:00 557 657 1214 04:00 12 5 17 16:00 104 150 254 16:00 17:00 453 628 1081 04:15 27 12 39 16:15 125 169 294 17:00 18:00 418 540 958 04:30 22 12 34 16:30 105 163 268 18:00 19:00 253 400 653 04:45 19 27 46 16:45 119 146 265 19:00 20:00 211 297 508 05:00 20 13 33 17:00 117 139 256 20:00 21:00 148 215 363 05:15 23 16 39 17:15 101 121 222 21:00 22:00 99 176 275 05:30 41 30 71 17:30 103 149 252 22:00 23:00 85 106 191 05:45 36 41 77 17:45 97 131 228 23:00 00:00 33 79 112
06:00 31 36 67 18:00 76 117 193
06:15 44 39 83 18:15 61 101 162 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 42 39 81 18:30 55 95 150 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 51 75 126 18:45 61 87 148 2230 2188 4418
07:00 58 88 146 19:00 52 87 139 7:30 7:30 7:30
07:15 94 111 205 19:15 54 71 125 603 573 1176
07:30 132 128 260 19:30 64 75 139 0.838 0.863 0.905
07:45 159 166 325 19:45 41 64 105
08:00 180 145 325 20:00 42 40 82 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 132 134 266 20:15 31 64 95 3383 4386 7769
08:30 107 110 217 20:30 34 56 90 15:30 14:45 14:45
08:45 76 66 142 20:45 41 55 96 571 695 1233
09:00 63 58 121 21:00 29 55 84 0.767 0.939 0.831
09:15 63 57 120 21:15 26 43 69
09:30 70 60 130 21:30 24 43 67 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 70 56 126 21:45 20 35 55 938 948 1886
10:00 68 60 128 22:00 18 32 50 7:30 7:30 7:30
10:15 76 56 132 22:15 16 27 43 603 573 1176
10:30 64 57 121 22:30 36 27 63 0.838 0.863 0.905
10:45 65 83 148 22:45 15 20 35
11:00 84 70 154 23:00 8 26 34 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 76 81 157 23:15 14 16 30 871 1168 2039
11:30 69 71 140 23:30 8 21 29 16:15 16:00 16:15
11:45 76 82 158 23:45 3 16 19 466 628 1083
TOTALS 0 0 2230 2188 4418 TOTALS 0 0 3383 4386 7769 0.932 0.929 0.921 SPLIT % 0% 0% 50% 50% 36% SPLIT % 0% 0% 44% 56% 64%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Pine St Bet. Central Ave & El Camino Ave

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_008
NB SB EB WB Total
736 774 0 0 1,510

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 0 2 2 12:00 10 18 28 00:00 01:00 2 6 8
00:15 0 1 1 12:15 14 19 33 01:00 02:00 7 1 8
00:30 2 2 4 12:30 12 13 25 02:00 03:00 0 3 3
00:45 0 1 1 12:45 16 11 27 03:00 04:00 4 8 12
01:00 4 0 4 13:00 12 15 27 04:00 05:00 3 10 13
01:15 1 0 1 13:15 14 11 25 05:00 06:00 6 14 20
01:30 1 0 1 13:30 10 14 24 06:00 07:00 29 16 45
01:45 1 1 2 13:45 13 13 26 07:00 08:00 61 48 109
02:00 0 1 1 14:00 17 12 29 08:00 09:00 48 58 106
02:15 0 1 1 14:15 12 15 27 09:00 10:00 26 40 66
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 13 14 27 10:00 11:00 23 29 52
02:45 0 1 1 14:45 20 16 36 11:00 12:00 40 45 85
03:00 2 2 4 15:00 24 17 41 12:00 13:00 52 61 113
03:15 1 2 3 15:15 16 14 30 13:00 14:00 49 53 102
03:30 0 1 1 15:30 24 13 37 14:00 15:00 62 57 119
03:45 1 3 4 15:45 25 14 39 15:00 16:00 89 58 147
04:00 0 2 2 16:00 11 16 27 16:00 17:00 60 54 114
04:15 0 3 3 16:15 22 15 37 17:00 18:00 52 65 117
04:30 2 0 2 16:30 13 11 24 18:00 19:00 32 45 77
04:45 1 5 6 16:45 14 12 26 19:00 20:00 35 35 70
05:00 1 2 3 17:00 16 20 36 20:00 21:00 23 28 51
05:15 0 1 1 17:15 17 12 29 21:00 22:00 18 15 33
05:30 3 6 9 17:30 9 20 29 22:00 23:00 9 16 25
05:45 2 5 7 17:45 10 13 23 23:00 00:00 6 9 15
06:00 7 2 9 18:00 8 12 20
06:15 7 6 13 18:15 7 13 20 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 7 2 9 18:30 7 11 18 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 8 6 14 18:45 10 9 19 249 278 527
07:00 10 8 18 19:00 13 12 25 7:15 7:30 7:30
07:15 14 7 21 19:15 8 12 20 67 73 140
07:30 21 11 32 19:30 9 4 13 0.798 0.608 0.761
07:45 16 22 38 19:45 5 7 12
08:00 16 30 46 20:00 10 9 19 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 14 10 24 20:15 3 8 11 487 496 983
08:30 12 6 18 20:30 3 2 5 15:00 17:00 15:00
08:45 6 12 18 20:45 7 9 16 89 65 147
09:00 7 11 18 21:00 4 6 10 0.890 0.813 0.896
09:15 9 8 17 21:15 8 2 10
09:30 7 9 16 21:30 2 3 5 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 3 12 15 21:45 4 4 8 109 106 215
10:00 4 6 10 22:00 2 10 12 7:15 7:30 7:30
10:15 9 7 16 22:15 3 2 5 67 73 140
10:30 3 6 9 22:30 2 2 4 0.798 0.608 0.761
10:45 7 10 17 22:45 2 2 4
11:00 6 10 16 23:00 1 4 5 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 8 8 16 23:15 1 2 3 112 119 231
11:30 10 11 21 23:30 3 0 3 16:15 17:00 16:15
11:45 16 16 32 23:45 1 3 4 65 65 123
TOTALS 249 278 0 0 527 TOTALS 487 496 0 0 983 0.739 0.813 0.831 SPLIT % 47% 53% 0% 0% 35% SPLIT % 50% 50% 0% 0% 65%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Collins Rd Bet. Service Rd & Don Pedro Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_009
NB SB EB WB Total
346 420 0 0 766

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 1 2 3 12:00 3 3 6 00:00 01:00 1 3 4
00:15 0 1 1 12:15 1 4 5 01:00 02:00 1 1 2
00:30 0 0 0 12:30 1 2 3 02:00 03:00 0 1 1
00:45 0 0 0 12:45 2 4 6 03:00 04:00 2 0 2
01:00 0 0 0 13:00 1 1 2 04:00 05:00 2 0 2
01:15 0 0 0 13:15 2 3 5 05:00 06:00 2 4 6
01:30 0 0 0 13:30 1 9 10 06:00 07:00 5 5 10
01:45 1 1 2 13:45 6 10 16 07:00 08:00 30 91 121
02:00 0 1 1 14:00 3 9 12 08:00 09:00 77 104 181
02:15 0 0 0 14:15 3 16 19 09:00 10:00 9 6 15
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 32 13 45 10:00 11:00 5 5 10
02:45 0 0 0 14:45 19 6 25 11:00 12:00 11 13 24
03:00 0 0 0 15:00 10 8 18 12:00 13:00 7 13 20
03:15 0 0 0 15:15 5 11 16 13:00 14:00 10 23 33
03:30 0 0 0 15:30 18 5 23 14:00 15:00 57 44 101
03:45 2 0 2 15:45 15 5 20 15:00 16:00 48 29 77
04:00 0 0 0 16:00 5 12 17 16:00 17:00 32 31 63
04:15 0 0 0 16:15 10 6 16 17:00 18:00 20 10 30
04:30 1 0 1 16:30 10 8 18 18:00 19:00 9 13 22
04:45 1 0 1 16:45 7 5 12 19:00 20:00 10 8 18
05:00 1 2 3 17:00 6 1 7 20:00 21:00 4 8 12
05:15 0 0 0 17:15 4 5 9 21:00 22:00 2 4 6
05:30 1 1 2 17:30 7 3 10 22:00 23:00 2 3 5
05:45 0 1 1 17:45 3 1 4 23:00 00:00 0 1 1
06:00 0 2 2 18:00 5 7 12
06:15 3 0 3 18:15 2 1 3 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 1 1 2 18:30 1 3 4 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 1 2 3 18:45 1 2 3 145 233 378
07:00 0 5 5 19:00 2 3 5 7:45 7:30 7:30
07:15 9 19 28 19:15 4 0 4 91 161 245
07:30 3 24 27 19:30 2 0 2 0.632 0.660 0.696
07:45 18 43 61 19:45 2 5 7
08:00 27 61 88 20:00 0 3 3 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 36 33 69 20:15 1 1 2 201 187 388
08:30 10 5 15 20:30 3 1 4 14:30 13:45 14:15
08:45 4 5 9 20:45 0 3 3 66 48 107
09:00 3 2 5 21:00 1 2 3 0.516 0.750 0.594
09:15 3 1 4 21:15 0 1 1
09:30 0 1 1 21:30 0 1 1 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 3 2 5 21:45 1 0 1 107 195 302
10:00 1 2 3 22:00 1 1 2 7:45 7:30 7:30
10:15 1 1 2 22:15 1 0 1 91 161 245
10:30 1 0 1 22:30 0 2 2 0.632 0.660 0.696
10:45 2 2 4 22:45 0 0 0
11:00 2 3 5 23:00 0 0 0 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 1 4 5 23:15 0 0 0 52 41 93
11:30 5 2 7 23:30 0 1 1 16:15 16:00 16:00
11:45 3 4 7 23:45 0 0 0 33 31 63
TOTALS 145 233 0 0 378 TOTALS 201 187 0 0 388 0.825 0.646 0.875 SPLIT % 38% 62% 0% 0% 49% SPLIT % 52% 48% 0% 0% 51%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Moffett Rd S/O Service Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 20
40 60
80 100
120 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_010
NB SB EB WB Total
4,854 5,660 0 0 10,514

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 3 12 15 12:00 75 75 150 00:00 01:00 19 33 52
00:15 7 7 14 12:15 71 71 142 01:00 02:00 12 25 37
00:30 5 9 14 12:30 67 86 153 02:00 03:00 20 16 36
00:45 4 5 9 12:45 67 77 144 03:00 04:00 36 24 60
01:00 4 6 10 13:00 78 90 168 04:00 05:00 91 53 144
01:15 2 9 11 13:15 65 82 147 05:00 06:00 152 89 241
01:30 5 4 9 13:30 69 87 156 06:00 07:00 186 153 339
01:45 1 6 7 13:45 69 112 181 07:00 08:00 352 353 705
02:00 4 2 6 14:00 63 101 164 08:00 09:00 384 279 663
02:15 5 5 10 14:15 76 120 196 09:00 10:00 273 223 496
02:30 7 6 13 14:30 111 103 214 10:00 11:00 256 228 484
02:45 4 3 7 14:45 97 116 213 11:00 12:00 271 287 558
03:00 8 8 16 15:00 93 121 214 12:00 13:00 280 309 589
03:15 7 2 9 15:15 92 108 200 13:00 14:00 281 371 652
03:30 10 3 13 15:30 117 142 259 14:00 15:00 347 440 787 03:45 11 11 22 15:45 101 111 212 15:00 16:00 403 482 885 04:00 21 6 27 16:00 95 120 215 16:00 17:00 382 528 910
04:15 24 11 35 16:15 104 142 246 17:00 18:00 323 487 810 04:30 22 5 27 16:30 95 138 233 18:00 19:00 248 392 640
04:45 24 31 55 16:45 88 128 216 19:00 20:00 192 284 476 05:00 30 14 44 17:00 91 125 216 20:00 21:00 144 212 356 05:15 29 17 46 17:15 66 117 183 21:00 22:00 86 196 282
05:30 54 24 78 17:30 91 129 220 22:00 23:00 79 111 190
05:45 39 34 73 17:45 75 116 191 23:00 00:00 37 85 122
06:00 40 34 74 18:00 69 114 183
06:15 35 34 69 18:15 59 95 154 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 56 28 84 18:30 48 91 139 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 55 57 112 18:45 72 92 164 2052 1763 3815
07:00 63 67 130 19:00 39 87 126 7:45 7:30 7:30
07:15 86 75 161 19:15 57 64 121 423 383 803
07:30 101 98 199 19:30 58 71 129 0.912 0.847 0.934
07:45 102 113 215 19:45 38 62 100
08:00 116 92 208 20:00 44 45 89 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 101 80 181 20:15 32 60 92 2802 3897 6699
08:30 104 55 159 20:30 35 45 80 15:30 16:15 15:30
08:45 63 52 115 20:45 33 62 95 417 533 932
09:00 63 54 117 21:00 27 49 76 0.891 0.938 0.900
09:15 76 63 139 21:15 21 58 79
09:30 65 54 119 21:30 17 53 70 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 69 52 121 21:45 21 36 57 736 632 1368
10:00 61 59 120 22:00 22 33 55 7:45 7:30 7:30
10:15 75 51 126 22:15 14 28 42 423 383 803
10:30 63 57 120 22:30 26 27 53 0.912 0.847 0.934
10:45 57 61 118 22:45 17 23 40
11:00 55 75 130 23:00 6 26 32 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 72 57 129 23:15 14 16 30 705 1015 1720
11:30 78 70 148 23:30 10 23 33 16:00 16:15 16:15
11:45 66 85 151 23:45 7 20 27 382 533 911
TOTALS 2052 1763 0 0 3815 TOTALS 2802 3897 0 0 6699 0.918 0.938 0.926 SPLIT % 54% 46% 0% 0% 36% SPLIT % 42% 58% 0% 0% 64%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
El Camino Ave N/O Pine St

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_011
NB SB EB WB Total
1,629 1,107 0 0 2,736

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 0 4 4 12:00 33 24 57 00:00 01:00 2 7 9
00:15 0 2 2 12:15 25 19 44 01:00 02:00 2 3 5
00:30 1 1 2 12:30 27 17 44 02:00 03:00 1 1 2
00:45 1 0 1 12:45 28 19 47 03:00 04:00 1 7 8
01:00 1 1 2 13:00 27 15 42 04:00 05:00 8 13 21
01:15 0 1 1 13:15 21 21 42 05:00 06:00 15 19 34
01:30 0 1 1 13:30 29 16 45 06:00 07:00 27 19 46
01:45 1 0 1 13:45 26 16 42 07:00 08:00 113 79 192
02:00 0 1 1 14:00 19 16 35 08:00 09:00 197 84 281
02:15 1 0 1 14:15 21 24 45 09:00 10:00 56 42 98
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 53 17 70 10:00 11:00 68 50 118
02:45 0 0 0 14:45 39 27 66 11:00 12:00 91 80 171
03:00 0 0 0 15:00 30 24 54 12:00 13:00 113 79 192
03:15 0 0 0 15:15 27 19 46 13:00 14:00 103 68 171
03:30 1 2 3 15:30 51 26 77 14:00 15:00 132 84 216
03:45 0 5 5 15:45 55 21 76 15:00 16:00 163 90 253
04:00 1 4 5 16:00 30 31 61 16:00 17:00 138 116 254
04:15 1 2 3 16:15 39 27 66 17:00 18:00 110 63 173
04:30 0 1 1 16:30 31 29 60 18:00 19:00 89 61 150
04:45 6 6 12 16:45 38 29 67 19:00 20:00 66 44 110
05:00 3 6 9 17:00 31 20 51 20:00 21:00 48 42 90
05:15 2 1 3 17:15 22 9 31 21:00 22:00 43 24 67
05:30 6 2 8 17:30 36 16 52 22:00 23:00 29 26 55
05:45 4 10 14 17:45 21 18 39 23:00 00:00 14 6 20
06:00 5 4 9 18:00 25 21 46
06:15 4 5 9 18:15 17 12 29 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 8 3 11 18:30 26 14 40 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 10 7 17 18:45 21 14 35 581 404 985
07:00 12 9 21 19:00 18 7 25 7:45 7:30 7:30
07:15 30 13 43 19:15 18 14 32 218 113 328
07:30 31 21 52 19:30 18 9 27 0.747 0.785 0.812
07:45 40 36 76 19:45 12 14 26
08:00 71 30 101 20:00 14 7 21 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 73 26 99 20:15 10 11 21 1048 703 1751
08:30 34 13 47 20:30 13 13 26 15:30 16:00 15:30
08:45 19 15 34 20:45 11 11 22 175 116 280
09:00 14 11 25 21:00 18 9 27 0.795 0.935 0.909
09:15 10 9 19 21:15 9 7 16
09:30 17 14 31 21:30 11 2 13 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 15 8 23 21:45 5 6 11 310 163 473
10:00 14 8 22 22:00 6 7 13 7:45 7:30 7:30
10:15 17 17 34 22:15 10 9 19 218 113 328
10:30 20 12 32 22:30 7 6 13 0.747 0.785 0.812
10:45 17 13 30 22:45 6 4 10
11:00 17 22 39 23:00 5 1 6 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 23 17 40 23:15 4 1 5 248 179 427
11:30 30 20 50 23:30 4 2 6 16:15 16:00 16:00
11:45 21 21 42 23:45 1 2 3 139 116 254
TOTALS 581 404 0 0 985 TOTALS 1048 703 0 0 1751 0.891 0.935 0.948 SPLIT % 59% 41% 0% 0% 36% SPLIT % 60% 40% 0% 0% 64%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
El Camino Ave N/O Service Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 50
100
150
200
250 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_012
NB SB EB WB Total
14,183 13,207 0 0 27,390

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 26 54 80 12:00 220 198 418 00:00 01:00 103 149 252 00:15 30 46 76 12:15 217 187 404 01:00 02:00 73 91 164
00:30 26 23 49 12:30 211 217 428 02:00 03:00 95 81 176
00:45 21 26 47 12:45 199 201 400 03:00 04:00 159 127 286 01:00 21 18 39 13:00 177 214 391 04:00 05:00 212 210 422 01:15 25 26 51 13:15 223 175 398 05:00 06:00 405 334 739 01:30 10 26 36 13:30 230 201 431 06:00 07:00 548 521 1069 01:45 17 21 38 13:45 222 208 430 07:00 08:00 792 706 1498 02:00 19 17 36 14:00 210 215 425 08:00 09:00 946 804 1750 02:15 15 28 43 14:15 243 216 459 09:00 10:00 672 662 1334 02:30 24 18 42 14:30 257 221 478 10:00 11:00 678 633 1311 02:45 37 18 55 14:45 263 241 504 11:00 12:00 770 745 1515 03:00 33 24 57 15:00 237 266 503 12:00 13:00 847 803 1650 03:15 32 27 59 15:15 200 240 440 13:00 14:00 852 798 1650 03:30 42 31 73 15:30 260 237 497 14:00 15:00 973 893 1866 03:45 52 45 97 15:45 268 201 469 15:00 16:00 965 944 1909 04:00 31 37 68 16:00 284 235 519 16:00 17:00 1072 974 2046 04:15 47 47 94 16:15 237 234 471 17:00 18:00 1132 1004 2136 04:30 77 73 150 16:30 263 256 519 18:00 19:00 834 835 1669 04:45 57 53 110 16:45 288 249 537 19:00 20:00 664 592 1256 05:00 86 53 139 17:00 313 247 560 20:00 21:00 499 474 973 05:15 90 62 152 17:15 278 265 543 21:00 22:00 411 335 746 05:30 122 105 227 17:30 265 261 526 22:00 23:00 282 262 544 05:45 107 114 221 17:45 276 231 507 23:00 00:00 199 230 429 06:00 107 124 231 18:00 267 206 473
06:15 112 127 239 18:15 203 225 428 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 188 128 316 18:30 174 224 398 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 141 142 283 18:45 190 180 370 5453 5063 10516
07:00 133 132 265 19:00 192 179 371 7:45 7:45 7:45
07:15 220 188 408 19:15 173 166 339 992 812 1804
07:30 207 195 402 19:30 146 135 281 0.932 0.962 0.960
07:45 232 191 423 19:45 153 112 265
08:00 247 206 453 20:00 121 119 240 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 266 204 470 20:15 153 140 293 8730 8144 16874
08:30 247 211 458 20:30 101 115 216 16:45 16:45 16:45
08:45 186 183 369 20:45 124 100 224 1144 1022 2166
09:00 164 166 330 21:00 101 109 210 0.914 0.964 0.967
09:15 164 153 317 21:15 117 83 200
09:30 179 169 348 21:30 107 86 193 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 165 174 339 21:45 86 57 143 1738 1510 3248
10:00 178 159 337 22:00 72 70 142 7:45 7:45 7:45
10:15 179 158 337 22:15 73 75 148 992 812 1804
10:30 162 155 317 22:30 73 67 140 0.932 0.962 0.960
10:45 159 161 320 22:45 64 50 114
11:00 198 192 390 23:00 45 76 121 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 177 211 388 23:15 58 60 118 2204 1978 4182
11:30 186 165 351 23:30 49 50 99 16:45 16:45 16:45
11:45 209 177 386 23:45 47 44 91 1144 1022 2166
TOTALS 5453 5063 0 0 10516 TOTALS 8730 8144 0 0 16874 0.914 0.964 0.967 SPLIT % 52% 48% 0% 0% 38% SPLIT % 52% 48% 0% 0% 62%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Mitchell Rd Bet. Don Pedro Rd & Service Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_013
NB SB EB WB Total
14,395 14,558 0 0 28,953

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 28 59 87 12:00 178 212 390 00:00 01:00 111 146 257 00:15 33 35 68 12:15 226 219 445 01:00 02:00 92 90 182
00:30 29 26 55 12:30 208 222 430 02:00 03:00 99 95 194
00:45 21 26 47 12:45 177 211 388 03:00 04:00 169 152 321 01:00 26 18 44 13:00 204 266 470 04:00 05:00 236 252 488 01:15 27 20 47 13:15 222 182 404 05:00 06:00 465 364 829 01:30 17 29 46 13:30 214 219 433 06:00 07:00 632 588 1220 01:45 22 23 45 13:45 244 230 474 07:00 08:00 861 845 1706 02:00 18 24 42 14:00 223 240 463 08:00 09:00 894 850 1744 02:15 17 21 38 14:15 265 206 471 09:00 10:00 657 780 1437 02:30 28 25 53 14:30 260 260 520 10:00 11:00 688 741 1429 02:45 36 25 61 14:45 258 239 497 11:00 12:00 746 804 1550 03:00 39 25 64 15:00 263 283 546 12:00 13:00 789 864 1653 03:15 38 34 72 15:15 217 262 479 13:00 14:00 884 897 1781 03:30 47 40 87 15:30 256 274 530 14:00 15:00 1006 945 1951 03:45 45 53 98 15:45 263 229 492 15:00 16:00 999 1048 2047 04:00 35 46 81 16:00 260 251 511 16:00 17:00 1026 1097 2123 04:15 46 62 108 16:15 243 274 517 17:00 18:00 1104 1099 2203 04:30 86 83 169 16:30 252 282 534 18:00 19:00 820 860 1680 04:45 69 61 130 16:45 271 290 561 19:00 20:00 634 601 1235 05:00 89 72 161 17:00 302 287 589 20:00 21:00 528 509 1037 05:15 98 82 180 17:15 271 266 537 21:00 22:00 451 390 841 05:30 149 95 244 17:30 273 262 535 22:00 23:00 308 310 618 05:45 129 115 244 17:45 258 284 542 23:00 00:00 196 231 427 06:00 105 127 232 18:00 227 222 449
06:15 147 151 298 18:15 209 209 418 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 215 167 382 18:30 196 228 424 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 165 143 308 18:45 188 201 389 5650 5707 11357
07:00 157 147 304 19:00 175 184 359 7:45 7:15 7:45
07:15 216 223 439 19:15 163 176 339 972 895 1845
07:30 222 229 451 19:30 140 115 255 0.914 0.910 0.901
07:45 266 246 512 19:45 156 126 282
08:00 242 197 439 20:00 144 112 256 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 217 214 431 20:15 143 150 293 8745 8851 17596
08:30 247 216 463 20:30 122 127 249 16:45 16:15 16:45
08:45 188 223 411 20:45 119 120 239 1117 1133 2222
09:00 157 182 339 21:00 102 128 230 0.925 0.977 0.943
09:15 173 190 363 21:15 127 98 225
09:30 172 217 389 21:30 120 93 213 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 155 191 346 21:45 102 71 173 1755 1695 3450
10:00 173 183 356 22:00 80 81 161 7:45 7:15 7:45
10:15 177 178 355 22:15 75 87 162 972 895 1845
10:30 161 188 349 22:30 85 76 161 0.914 0.910 0.901
10:45 177 192 369 22:45 68 66 134
11:00 178 209 387 23:00 60 75 135 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 186 219 405 23:15 55 54 109 2130 2196 4326
11:30 186 186 372 23:30 48 60 108 16:45 16:15 16:45
11:45 196 190 386 23:45 33 42 75 1117 1133 2222
TOTALS 5650 5707 0 0 11357 TOTALS 8745 8851 0 0 17596 0.925 0.977 0.943 SPLIT % 50% 50% 0% 0% 39% SPLIT % 50% 50% 0% 0% 61%
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Mitchell Rd S/O Service Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume 0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_014
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 5,690 5,926 11,616

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 4 6 10 12:00 96 81 177 00:00 01:00 22 34 56
00:15 4 10 14 12:15 74 83 157 01:00 02:00 17 30 47
00:30 9 7 16 12:30 76 85 161 02:00 03:00 14 30 44
00:45 5 11 16 12:45 78 95 173 03:00 04:00 31 68 99
01:00 5 5 10 13:00 96 83 179 04:00 05:00 42 146 188
01:15 6 12 18 13:15 71 78 149 05:00 06:00 95 230 325
01:30 3 5 8 13:30 96 96 192 06:00 07:00 148 351 499
01:45 3 8 11 13:45 68 73 141 07:00 08:00 450 377 827
02:00 3 7 10 14:00 94 83 177 08:00 09:00 417 430 847
02:15 1 7 8 14:15 105 84 189 09:00 10:00 240 262 502
02:30 5 5 10 14:30 117 108 225 10:00 11:00 242 244 486
02:45 5 11 16 14:45 91 103 194 11:00 12:00 315 294 609
03:00 11 12 23 15:00 114 89 203 12:00 13:00 324 344 668 03:15 6 16 22 15:15 150 93 243 13:00 14:00 331 330 661
03:30 8 17 25 15:30 149 177 326 14:00 15:00 407 378 785 03:45 6 23 29 15:45 113 118 231 15:00 16:00 526 477 1003 04:00 6 29 35 16:00 141 102 243 16:00 17:00 580 414 994 04:15 12 34 46 16:15 128 96 224 17:00 18:00 617 391 1008 04:30 10 33 43 16:30 171 103 274 18:00 19:00 281 358 639 04:45 14 50 64 16:45 140 113 253 19:00 20:00 204 262 466 05:00 23 31 54 17:00 182 98 280 20:00 21:00 139 181 320 05:15 21 55 76 17:15 154 102 256 21:00 22:00 124 142 266 05:30 24 65 89 17:30 153 91 244 22:00 23:00 72 103 175
05:45 27 79 106 17:45 128 100 228 23:00 00:00 52 50 102 06:00 39 77 116 18:00 90 95 185
06:15 29 93 122 18:15 70 92 162 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 37 79 116 18:30 74 91 165 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 43 102 145 18:45 47 80 127 2033 2496 4529
07:00 79 67 146 19:00 63 64 127 7:30 8:00 7:30
07:15 122 105 227 19:15 58 73 131 518 430 925
07:30 121 112 233 19:30 39 65 104 0.945 0.814 0.968
07:45 128 93 221 19:45 44 60 104
08:00 137 95 232 20:00 33 43 76 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 132 107 239 20:15 32 55 87 3657 3430 7087
08:30 86 132 218 20:30 38 41 79 16:30 15:30 16:30
08:45 62 96 158 20:45 36 42 78 647 493 1063
09:00 46 60 106 21:00 35 34 69 0.889 0.696 0.949
09:15 74 64 138 21:15 35 38 73
09:30 55 67 122 21:30 25 43 68 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 65 71 136 21:45 29 27 56 867 807 1674
10:00 61 59 120 22:00 23 33 56 7:30 8:00 7:30
10:15 54 59 113 22:15 22 20 42 518 430 925
10:30 64 72 136 22:30 13 23 36 0.945 0.814 0.968
10:45 63 54 117 22:45 14 27 41
11:00 89 71 160 23:00 13 15 28 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 62 59 121 23:15 10 15 25 1197 805 2002
11:30 95 80 175 23:30 17 7 24 16:30 16:30 16:30
11:45 69 84 153 23:45 12 13 25 647 416 1063
TOTALS 0 0 2033 2496 4529 TOTALS 0 0 3657 3430 7087 0.889 0.920 0.949 SPLIT % 0% 0% 45% 55% 39% SPLIT % 0% 0% 52% 48% 61%
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Service Rd Bet. Morgan Rd & Blaker Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_015
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 6,937 6,843 13,780

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 5 7 12 12:00 108 86 194 00:00 01:00 24 38 62
00:15 4 12 16 12:15 89 92 181 01:00 02:00 21 34 55
00:30 9 7 16 12:30 89 101 190 02:00 03:00 15 25 40
00:45 6 12 18 12:45 83 109 192 03:00 04:00 47 59 106
01:00 7 7 14 13:00 102 95 197 04:00 05:00 57 123 180
01:15 7 13 20 13:15 77 93 170 05:00 06:00 114 203 317
01:30 3 7 10 13:30 104 96 200 06:00 07:00 183 345 528
01:45 4 7 11 13:45 86 91 177 07:00 08:00 668 414 1082
02:00 3 7 10 14:00 122 103 225 08:00 09:00 569 499 1068 02:15 1 5 6 14:15 136 103 239 09:00 10:00 278 281 559
02:30 5 4 9 14:30 164 142 306 10:00 11:00 278 276 554
02:45 6 9 15 14:45 121 123 244 11:00 12:00 338 339 677
03:00 13 8 21 15:00 145 108 253 12:00 13:00 369 388 757 03:15 7 14 21 15:15 188 120 308 13:00 14:00 369 375 744 03:30 13 16 29 15:30 172 223 395 14:00 15:00 543 471 1014 03:45 14 21 35 15:45 145 143 288 15:00 16:00 650 594 1244 04:00 8 26 34 16:00 156 134 290 16:00 17:00 658 525 1183 04:15 16 28 44 16:15 153 123 276 17:00 18:00 711 492 1203 04:30 15 23 38 16:30 191 128 319 18:00 19:00 351 460 811 04:45 18 46 64 16:45 158 140 298 19:00 20:00 232 317 549 05:00 28 26 54 17:00 203 111 314 20:00 21:00 173 226 399 05:15 25 49 74 17:15 176 125 301 21:00 22:00 140 172 312 05:30 30 55 85 17:30 179 116 295 22:00 23:00 90 125 215 05:45 31 73 104 17:45 153 140 293 23:00 00:00 59 62 121 06:00 47 73 120 18:00 107 129 236
06:15 34 90 124 18:15 85 116 201 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 44 79 123 18:30 87 110 197 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 58 103 161 18:45 72 105 177 2592 2636 5228
07:00 96 76 172 19:00 66 73 139 7:30 7:45 7:30
07:15 167 118 285 19:15 69 87 156 797 500 1261
07:30 187 119 306 19:30 50 80 130 0.914 0.806 0.950
07:45 218 101 319 19:45 47 77 124
08:00 217 115 332 20:00 40 52 92 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 175 129 304 20:15 39 69 108 4345 4207 8552
08:30 103 155 258 20:30 52 49 101 16:30 15:30 15:15
08:45 74 100 174 20:45 42 56 98 728 623 1281
09:00 64 66 130 21:00 37 46 83 0.897 0.698 0.811
09:15 80 67 147 21:15 37 45 82
09:30 63 71 134 21:30 34 49 83 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 71 77 148 21:45 32 32 64 1237 913 2150
10:00 77 69 146 22:00 31 39 70 7:30 7:45 7:30
10:15 61 70 131 22:15 25 25 50 797 500 1261
10:30 69 82 151 22:30 19 31 50 0.914 0.806 0.950
10:45 71 55 126 22:45 15 30 45
11:00 95 85 180 23:00 14 23 37 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 72 63 135 23:15 12 13 25 1369 1017 2386
11:30 103 94 197 23:30 20 11 31 16:30 16:00 16:30
11:45 68 97 165 23:45 13 15 28 728 525 1232
TOTALS 0 0 2592 2636 5228 TOTALS 0 0 4345 4207 8552 0.897 0.938 0.966 SPLIT % 0% 0% 50% 50% 38% SPLIT % 0% 0% 51% 49% 62%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Service Rd Bet. Blaker Rd & Central Ave

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_016
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 8,195 7,894 16,089

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 6 12 18 12:00 131 99 230 00:00 01:00 33 48 81
00:15 9 9 18 12:15 108 102 210 01:00 02:00 26 42 68
00:30 9 13 22 12:30 107 128 235 02:00 03:00 32 32 64
00:45 9 14 23 12:45 119 102 221 03:00 04:00 59 72 131
01:00 6 7 13 13:00 106 120 226 04:00 05:00 84 132 216
01:15 9 18 27 13:15 97 117 214 05:00 06:00 161 255 416
01:30 5 10 15 13:30 119 114 233 06:00 07:00 248 384 632 01:45 6 7 13 13:45 96 125 221 07:00 08:00 565 537 1102
02:00 9 10 19 14:00 128 127 255 08:00 09:00 590 486 1076 02:15 5 6 11 14:15 135 154 289 09:00 10:00 339 304 643
02:30 6 5 11 14:30 249 123 372 10:00 11:00 352 325 677
02:45 12 11 23 14:45 133 129 262 11:00 12:00 428 398 826 03:00 9 12 21 15:00 128 165 293 12:00 13:00 465 431 896 03:15 13 15 28 15:15 137 168 305 13:00 14:00 418 476 894 03:30 16 22 38 15:30 268 151 419 14:00 15:00 645 533 1178 03:45 21 23 44 15:45 208 143 351 15:00 16:00 741 627 1368 04:00 14 26 40 16:00 202 139 341 16:00 17:00 777 614 1391 04:15 25 28 53 16:15 163 145 308 17:00 18:00 806 577 1383 04:30 24 35 59 16:30 212 166 378 18:00 19:00 463 518 981 04:45 21 43 64 16:45 200 164 364 19:00 20:00 343 369 712 05:00 51 41 92 17:00 213 139 352 20:00 21:00 244 288 532 05:15 36 51 87 17:15 190 150 340 21:00 22:00 170 205 375 05:30 40 79 119 17:30 200 131 331 22:00 23:00 136 159 295 05:45 34 84 118 17:45 203 157 360 23:00 00:00 70 82 152 06:00 73 78 151 18:00 147 149 296
06:15 45 100 145 18:15 107 140 247 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 64 85 149 18:30 100 113 213 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 66 121 187 18:45 109 116 225 2917 3015 5932
07:00 100 100 200 19:00 85 94 179 7:30 7:15 7:30
07:15 140 146 286 19:15 108 94 202 685 568 1224
07:30 162 134 296 19:30 74 95 169 0.887 0.904 0.956
07:45 163 157 320 19:45 76 86 162
08:00 167 131 298 20:00 50 69 119 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 193 117 310 20:15 62 84 146 5278 4879 10157
08:30 133 131 264 20:30 69 81 150 15:30 15:00 16:30
08:45 97 107 204 20:45 63 54 117 841 627 1434
09:00 87 75 162 21:00 50 58 108 0.785 0.933 0.948
09:15 75 67 142 21:15 51 67 118
09:30 87 78 165 21:30 39 44 83 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 90 84 174 21:45 30 36 66 1155 1023 2178
10:00 88 90 178 22:00 39 48 87 7:30 7:15 7:30
10:15 81 78 159 22:15 35 40 75 685 568 1224
10:30 97 94 191 22:30 39 37 76 0.887 0.904 0.956
10:45 86 63 149 22:45 23 34 57
11:00 98 90 188 23:00 13 32 45 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 109 84 193 23:15 19 17 36 1583 1191 2774
11:30 119 102 221 23:30 19 12 31 16:30 16:30 16:30
11:45 102 122 224 23:45 19 21 40 815 619 1434
TOTALS 0 0 2917 3015 5932 TOTALS 0 0 5278 4879 10157 0.957 0.932 0.948 SPLIT % 0% 0% 49% 51% 37% SPLIT % 0% 0% 52% 48% 63%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Service Rd Bet. Central Ave & Moffett Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_017
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 9,065 9,811 18,876

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 11 14 25 12:00 141 129 270 00:00 01:00 46 53 99
00:15 11 11 22 12:15 122 128 250 01:00 02:00 26 51 77
00:30 12 17 29 12:30 121 170 291 02:00 03:00 37 31 68
00:45 12 11 23 12:45 140 143 283 03:00 04:00 71 69 140
01:00 6 12 18 13:00 117 161 278 04:00 05:00 105 131 236 01:15 11 21 32 13:15 113 153 266 05:00 06:00 185 263 448 01:30 4 11 15 13:30 136 148 284 06:00 07:00 284 438 722 01:45 5 7 12 13:45 114 170 284 07:00 08:00 589 685 1274 02:00 12 8 20 14:00 144 154 298 08:00 09:00 616 661 1277 02:15 6 7 13 14:15 143 183 326 09:00 10:00 397 373 770
02:30 7 6 13 14:30 241 149 390 10:00 11:00 403 422 825
02:45 12 10 22 14:45 173 193 366 11:00 12:00 491 520 1011 03:00 14 12 26 15:00 155 212 367 12:00 13:00 524 570 1094 03:15 15 18 33 15:15 142 198 340 13:00 14:00 480 632 1112 03:30 16 20 36 15:30 238 191 429 14:00 15:00 701 679 1380 03:45 26 19 45 15:45 233 178 411 15:00 16:00 768 779 1547 04:00 17 23 40 16:00 200 185 385 16:00 17:00 841 760 1601 04:15 31 28 59 16:15 216 193 409 17:00 18:00 884 720 1604 04:30 27 35 62 16:30 209 185 394 18:00 19:00 510 612 1122 04:45 30 45 75 16:45 216 197 413 19:00 20:00 397 475 872 05:00 57 41 98 17:00 244 189 433 20:00 21:00 276 351 627 05:15 38 60 98 17:15 207 179 386 21:00 22:00 189 252 441 05:30 47 84 131 17:30 216 170 386 22:00 23:00 168 191 359 05:45 43 78 121 17:45 217 182 399 23:00 00:00 77 93 170 06:00 87 99 186 18:00 170 168 338
06:15 48 104 152 18:15 113 162 275 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 73 101 174 18:30 106 147 253 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 76 134 210 18:45 121 135 256 3250 3697 6947
07:00 97 126 223 19:00 97 116 213 7:30 7:15 7:30
07:15 149 175 324 19:15 129 121 250 699 772 1465
07:30 165 177 342 19:30 88 137 225 0.971 0.906 0.942
07:45 178 207 385 19:45 83 101 184
08:00 176 213 389 20:00 59 101 160 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 180 169 349 20:15 75 92 167 5815 6114 11929
08:30 151 160 311 20:30 72 96 168 15:30 14:45 16:15
08:45 109 119 228 20:45 70 62 132 887 794 1649
09:00 112 95 207 21:00 59 69 128 0.932 0.936 0.952
09:15 86 85 171 21:15 50 83 133
09:30 98 96 194 21:30 42 55 97 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 101 97 198 21:45 38 45 83 1205 1346 2551
10:00 96 108 204 22:00 50 56 106 7:30 7:15 7:30
10:15 102 99 201 22:15 42 49 91 699 772 1465
10:30 102 111 213 22:30 48 47 95 0.971 0.906 0.942
10:45 103 104 207 22:45 28 39 67
11:00 107 97 204 23:00 15 38 53 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 131 124 255 23:15 20 18 38 1725 1480 3205
11:30 124 144 268 23:30 21 16 37 16:15 16:15 16:15
11:45 129 155 284 23:45 21 21 42 885 764 1649
TOTALS 0 0 3250 3697 6947 TOTALS 0 0 5815 6114 11929 0.907 0.970 0.952 SPLIT % 0% 0% 47% 53% 37% SPLIT % 0% 0% 49% 51% 63%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Service Rd Bet. El Camino Ave & Mitchell Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_018
NB SB EB WB Total
325 371 0 0 696

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 1 0 1 12:00 9 4 13 00:00 01:00 2 2 4
00:15 0 1 1 12:15 6 4 10 01:00 02:00 1 2 3
00:30 0 0 0 12:30 3 3 6 02:00 03:00 1 2 3
00:45 1 1 2 12:45 4 7 11 03:00 04:00 2 0 2
01:00 1 0 1 13:00 7 8 15 04:00 05:00 2 4 6
01:15 0 1 1 13:15 5 7 12 05:00 06:00 3 3 6
01:30 0 1 1 13:30 9 6 15 06:00 07:00 10 10 20
01:45 0 0 0 13:45 2 7 9 07:00 08:00 27 25 52
02:00 1 1 2 14:00 7 5 12 08:00 09:00 31 40 71
02:15 0 0 0 14:15 5 4 9 09:00 10:00 16 12 28
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 7 7 14 10:00 11:00 15 14 29
02:45 0 1 1 14:45 4 9 13 11:00 12:00 22 22 44
03:00 1 0 1 15:00 9 7 16 12:00 13:00 22 18 40
03:15 0 0 0 15:15 6 5 11 13:00 14:00 23 28 51
03:30 0 0 0 15:30 11 12 23 14:00 15:00 23 25 48
03:45 1 0 1 15:45 14 7 21 15:00 16:00 40 31 71
04:00 0 0 0 16:00 5 17 22 16:00 17:00 21 36 57
04:15 1 2 3 16:15 2 4 6 17:00 18:00 22 31 53
04:30 0 2 2 16:30 7 9 16 18:00 19:00 11 22 33
04:45 1 0 1 16:45 7 6 13 19:00 20:00 11 13 24
05:00 1 0 1 17:00 6 12 18 20:00 21:00 9 16 25
05:15 0 0 0 17:15 7 7 14 21:00 22:00 4 9 13
05:30 1 0 1 17:30 5 8 13 22:00 23:00 3 5 8
05:45 1 3 4 17:45 4 4 8 23:00 00:00 4 1 5
06:00 2 1 3 18:00 2 5 7
06:15 3 3 6 18:15 4 10 14 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 1 1 2 18:30 4 2 6 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 4 5 9 18:45 1 5 6 132 136 268
07:00 1 9 10 19:00 1 3 4 7:15 7:45 7:30
07:15 6 3 9 19:15 4 2 6 38 43 79
07:30 8 5 13 19:30 2 4 6 0.792 0.672 0.790
07:45 12 8 20 19:45 4 4 8
08:00 12 13 25 20:00 3 6 9 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 5 16 21 20:15 1 4 5 193 235 428
08:30 6 6 12 20:30 2 4 6 15:00 15:15 15:15
08:45 8 5 13 20:45 3 2 5 40 41 77
09:00 5 3 8 21:00 0 1 1 0.714 0.603 0.837
09:15 3 3 6 21:15 2 1 3
09:30 4 4 8 21:30 1 4 5 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 4 2 6 21:45 1 3 4 58 65 123
10:00 3 5 8 22:00 0 1 1 7:15 7:45 7:30
10:15 6 3 9 22:15 2 2 4 38 43 79
10:30 3 3 6 22:30 1 2 3 0.792 0.672 0.790
10:45 3 3 6 22:45 0 0 0
11:00 2 2 4 23:00 1 0 1 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 7 7 14 23:15 0 0 0 43 67 110
11:30 2 8 10 23:30 1 0 1 16:30 16:00 16:30
11:45 11 5 16 23:45 2 1 3 27 36 61
TOTALS 132 136 0 0 268 TOTALS 193 235 0 0 428 0.964 0.529 0.847 SPLIT % 49% 51% 0% 0% 39% SPLIT % 45% 55% 0% 0% 61%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
Lucas Rd S/O Service Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_019
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 410 441 851

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 0 1 1 12:00 5 2 7 00:00 01:00 0 1 1
00:15 0 0 0 12:15 2 3 5 01:00 02:00 1 1 2
00:30 0 0 0 12:30 2 2 4 02:00 03:00 0 1 1
00:45 0 0 0 12:45 7 4 11 03:00 04:00 0 0 0
01:00 0 1 1 13:00 3 2 5 04:00 05:00 1 1 2
01:15 0 0 0 13:15 2 3 5 05:00 06:00 0 3 3
01:30 0 0 0 13:30 2 3 5 06:00 07:00 3 8 11
01:45 1 0 1 13:45 4 11 15 07:00 08:00 38 97 135
02:00 0 1 1 14:00 5 7 12 08:00 09:00 97 126 223
02:15 0 0 0 14:15 4 15 19 09:00 10:00 9 7 16
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 43 15 58 10:00 11:00 6 6 12
02:45 0 0 0 14:45 17 5 22 11:00 12:00 9 9 18
03:00 0 0 0 15:00 8 11 19 12:00 13:00 16 11 27
03:15 0 0 0 15:15 9 12 21 13:00 14:00 11 19 30
03:30 0 0 0 15:30 25 5 30 14:00 15:00 69 42 111
03:45 0 0 0 15:45 16 6 22 15:00 16:00 58 34 92
04:00 0 0 0 16:00 8 13 21 16:00 17:00 46 33 79
04:15 0 1 1 16:15 10 7 17 17:00 18:00 24 18 42
04:30 0 0 0 16:30 14 6 20 18:00 19:00 6 7 13
04:45 1 0 1 16:45 14 7 21 19:00 20:00 8 6 14
05:00 0 0 0 17:00 5 3 8 20:00 21:00 2 4 6
05:15 0 0 0 17:15 6 7 13 21:00 22:00 2 4 6
05:30 0 2 2 17:30 6 6 12 22:00 23:00 3 2 5
05:45 0 1 1 17:45 7 2 9 23:00 00:00 1 1 2
06:00 0 3 3 18:00 5 4 9
06:15 1 2 3 18:15 1 2 3 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 2 0 2 18:30 0 0 0 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 0 3 3 18:45 0 1 1 164 260 424
07:00 2 3 5 19:00 2 2 4 7:45 7:30 7:30
07:15 10 24 34 19:15 2 0 2 114 183 288
07:30 5 24 29 19:30 2 3 5 0.713 0.654 0.661
07:45 21 46 67 19:45 2 1 3
08:00 39 70 109 20:00 0 3 3 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 40 43 83 20:15 1 0 1 246 181 427
08:30 14 8 22 20:30 1 1 2 14:30 13:45 14:30
08:45 4 5 9 20:45 0 0 0 77 48 120
09:00 4 1 5 21:00 0 2 2 0.448 0.800 0.517
09:15 2 2 4 21:15 0 0 0
09:30 1 2 3 21:30 0 1 1 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 2 2 4 21:45 2 1 3 135 223 358
10:00 1 0 1 22:00 1 2 3 7:45 7:30 7:30
10:15 1 0 1 22:15 2 0 2 114 183 288
10:30 1 1 2 22:30 0 0 0 0.713 0.654 0.661
10:45 3 5 8 22:45 0 0 0
11:00 1 1 2 23:00 1 0 1 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 2 2 4 23:15 0 0 0 70 51 121
11:30 4 1 5 23:30 0 1 1 16:00 16:00 16:00
11:45 2 5 7 23:45 0 0 0 46 33 79
TOTALS 0 0 164 260 424 TOTALS 0 0 246 181 427 0.821 0.635 0.940 SPLIT % 0% 0% 39% 61% 50% SPLIT % 0% 0% 58% 42% 50%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
E Redwood Rd Bet. Central Ave & Moffett Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Day: Thursday City: Ceres
Date: 11/30/2023 Project #: CA23_090146_020
NB SB EB WB Total
0 0 154 124 278

TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 00:00 0 0 0 12:00 3 2 5 00:00 01:00 0 0 0
00:15 0 0 0 12:15 2 0 2 01:00 02:00 1 1 2
00:30 0 0 0 12:30 3 2 5 02:00 03:00 0 0 0
00:45 0 0 0 12:45 3 1 4 03:00 04:00 0 0 0
01:00 0 1 1 13:00 2 1 3 04:00 05:00 0 0 0
01:15 0 0 0 13:15 3 2 5 05:00 06:00 0 1 1
01:30 0 0 0 13:30 2 0 2 06:00 07:00 6 4 10
01:45 1 0 1 13:45 0 3 3 07:00 08:00 13 15 28
02:00 0 0 0 14:00 5 7 12 08:00 09:00 27 19 46
02:15 0 0 0 14:15 2 3 5 09:00 10:00 3 3 6
02:30 0 0 0 14:30 12 1 13 10:00 11:00 5 3 8
02:45 0 0 0 14:45 4 3 7 11:00 12:00 3 3 6
03:00 0 0 0 15:00 2 4 6 12:00 13:00 11 5 16
03:15 0 0 0 15:15 5 2 7 13:00 14:00 7 6 13
03:30 0 0 0 15:30 9 4 13 14:00 15:00 23 14 37
03:45 0 0 0 15:45 5 4 9 15:00 16:00 21 14 35
04:00 0 0 0 16:00 4 9 13 16:00 17:00 15 13 28
04:15 0 0 0 16:15 2 0 2 17:00 18:00 7 6 13
04:30 0 0 0 16:30 3 2 5 18:00 19:00 2 3 5
04:45 0 0 0 16:45 6 2 8 19:00 20:00 3 6 9
05:00 0 0 0 17:00 2 1 3 20:00 21:00 3 2 5
05:15 0 0 0 17:15 2 1 3 21:00 22:00 1 3 4
05:30 0 1 1 17:30 0 4 4 22:00 23:00 2 2 4
05:45 0 0 0 17:45 3 0 3 23:00 00:00 1 1 2
06:00 2 1 3 18:00 0 2 2
06:15 2 2 4 18:15 1 0 1 NB SB EB WB TOTAL
06:30 1 0 1 18:30 1 1 2 00:00 to 12:00
06:45 1 1 2 18:45 0 0 0 58 49 107
07:00 1 0 1 19:00 1 2 3 7:45 7:30 7:45
07:15 2 3 5 19:15 0 1 1 29 22 51
07:30 5 4 9 19:30 1 1 2 0.806 0.688 0.911
07:45 5 8 13 19:45 1 2 3
08:00 8 6 14 20:00 1 1 2 12:00 to 00:00
08:15 9 4 13 20:15 0 0 0 96 75 171
08:30 7 4 11 20:30 1 1 2 14:00 15:15 15:15
08:45 3 5 8 20:45 1 0 1 23 19 42
09:00 2 0 2 21:00 1 1 2 0.479 0.528 0.808
09:15 0 2 2 21:15 0 0 0
09:30 1 0 1 21:30 0 1 1 07:00 to 09:00
09:45 0 1 1 21:45 0 1 1 40 34 74
10:00 1 0 1 22:00 1 1 2 7:45 7:30 7:45
10:15 1 1 2 22:15 1 0 1 29 22 51
10:30 2 0 2 22:30 0 1 1 0.806 0.688 0.911
10:45 1 2 3 22:45 0 0 0
11:00 1 0 1 23:00 1 0 1 16:00 to 18:00
11:15 0 1 1 23:15 0 1 1 22 19 41
11:30 0 1 1 23:30 0 0 0 16:00 16:00 16:00
11:45 2 1 3 23:45 0 0 0 15 13 28
TOTALS 0 0 58 49 107 TOTALS 0 0 96 75 171 0.625 0.361 0.538 SPLIT % 0% 0% 54% 46% 38% SPLIT % 0% 0% 56% 44% 62%
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Peak Hour Factor
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
Peak Volume
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
VOLUME
E Redwood Rd Bet. Moffett Rd & Lucas Rd

DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS
15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals
TIME

STATISTICS
Peak Period
Volume
Peak Hour
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00

NB SB EB WB
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Copper Trails Master Plan TIA
Ceres, CA
WR #8878001 March 2024

APPENDIX F
SimTraffic Queueing Reports
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
01_NT_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 101 94 85 94 84 73 97 125
Average Queue (ft) 46 44 27 24 28 24 36 27
95th Queue (ft) 92 86 67 66 70 59 81 86
Link Distance (ft) 33 33 33 31 765 765 765 765
Upstream Blk Time (%) 18 21 12 6
Queuing Penalty (veh) 29 33 18 6
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB
Directions Served R
Maximum Queue (ft) 3
Average Queue (ft) 0
95th Queue (ft) 3
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB SB SB
Directions Served T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 2 179 179
Average Queue (ft) 0 89 93
95th Queue (ft) 2 152 152
Link Distance (ft) 26 132 132
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 2 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 4
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
01_NT_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement WB NB NB
Directions Served T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 5 119 92
Average Queue (ft) 0 52 23
95th Queue (ft) 6 99 69
Link Distance (ft) 46 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 87 107 117 36 114 125 150 201
Average Queue (ft) 25 42 76 5 47 46 61 21
95th Queue (ft) 66 88 118 21 93 98 113 103
Link Distance (ft) 51 51 51 56 325 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 3 10 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 6 21 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
01_NT_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 168 107 155 82 222 122 173 188 147 154 128 173 Average Queue (ft) 67 20 61 16 102 53 93 98 66 63 45 75 95th Queue (ft) 133 65 118 60 177 97 149 157 127 118 96 131 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 469 469
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 2 0 1 0 0 1
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 233 285 264 103
Average Queue (ft) 111 131 130 38
95th Queue (ft) 225 254 239 80
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement SB SB
Directions Served T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 6 21
Average Queue (ft) 0 1
95th Queue (ft) 5 15
Link Distance (ft) 469 469
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
01_NT_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB SB
Directions Served L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 87 100
Average Queue (ft) 40 14
95th Queue (ft) 70 62
Link Distance (ft) 90 628
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 138 142 18 25 89 85
Average Queue (ft) 68 67 3 1 44 57
95th Queue (ft) 112 115 14 10 74 86
Link Distance (ft) 95 95 444 411 70
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 2 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 7 9
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB
Directions Served LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 4 8
Average Queue (ft) 0 0
95th Queue (ft) 6 6
Link Distance (ft) 549 549
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
01_NT_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 NB Ramps/4th St Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 99 42 89 242 187
Average Queue (ft) 45 3 36 101 79
95th Queue (ft) 77 24 69 187 137
Link Distance (ft) 654 419 848 539
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 3 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 156
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term PM Peak Hour
02_NT_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 120 118 115 102 152 112 164 73
Average Queue (ft) 77 79 76 29 53 38 72 5
95th Queue (ft) 117 120 118 75 115 88 140 34
Link Distance (ft) 33 33 33 31 765 765 765 765
Upstream Blk Time (%) 32 38 36 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 82 98 93 8
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB SB
Directions Served L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 14 5
Average Queue (ft) 0 0
95th Queue (ft) 7 4
Link Distance (ft) 1576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB SB SB
Directions Served T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 2 162 220
Average Queue (ft) 0 86 112
95th Queue (ft) 2 145 181
Link Distance (ft) 26 132 132
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 1 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 3 9
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term PM Peak Hour
02_NT_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement WB NB NB
Directions Served T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 124 110
Average Queue (ft) 0 59 38
95th Queue (ft) 8 107 92
Link Distance (ft) 46 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 100 108 139 52 130 146 176
Average Queue (ft) 34 42 95 9 60 66 86
95th Queue (ft) 83 89 128 31 109 121 141
Link Distance (ft) 51 51 51 56 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 3 4 24 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 11 68 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term PM Peak Hour
02_NT_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 196 189 131 160 112 119 174 176 158 207 117 152 Average Queue (ft) 93 74 68 68 50 52 97 101 67 87 44 67 95th Queue (ft) 166 150 119 130 89 101 153 157 134 159 92 117 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 224 249 247 97
Average Queue (ft) 106 123 125 40
95th Queue (ft) 206 220 222 78
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement WB SB SB SB
Directions Served R T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 3 44 24 11
Average Queue (ft) 0 2 1 0
95th Queue (ft) 3 46 12 7
Link Distance (ft) 2849 437 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term PM Peak Hour
02_NT_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB SB
Directions Served L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 100 408
Average Queue (ft) 42 146
95th Queue (ft) 78 365
Link Distance (ft) 72 607
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 172 154 36 31 80 89
Average Queue (ft) 125 92 7 3 38 79
95th Queue (ft) 177 147 23 17 70 95
Link Distance (ft) 68 68 406 400 71
Upstream Blk Time (%) 63 26 27
Queuing Penalty (veh) 238 99 106
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB B12
Directions Served LT T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 467 300 159
Average Queue (ft) 153 61 38
95th Queue (ft) 472 326 335
Link Distance (ft) 586 586 1306
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term PM Peak Hour
02_NT_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 Ramp/4th St
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 110 99 81 247 264
Average Queue (ft) 42 17 41 104 107
95th Queue (ft) 81 67 69 184 198
Link Distance (ft) 812 829 879 609
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 2 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 835
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
03_NT+P_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 123 123 109 191 167 92 109 86
Average Queue (ft) 63 67 52 139 71 34 45 21
95th Queue (ft) 115 115 105 198 138 76 97 63
Link Distance (ft) 37 37 37 45 765 765 765
Upstream Blk Time (%) 21 27 25 30
Queuing Penalty (veh) 52 68 64 150
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 800
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served L L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 3 3 260
Average Queue (ft) 0 0 66
95th Queue (ft) 3 0 193
Link Distance (ft) 1576 1576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB SB SB
Directions Served T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 2 181 171
Average Queue (ft) 0 82 82
95th Queue (ft) 2 151 141
Link Distance (ft) 42 130 130
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
03_NT+P_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 6 6 132 110
Average Queue (ft) 0 0 0 54 35
95th Queue (ft) 8 4 4 105 87
Link Distance (ft) 46 46 46 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement NB
Directions Served T
Maximum Queue (ft) 4
Average Queue (ft) 0
95th Queue (ft) 5
Link Distance (ft) 1349
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 131 107 133 43 164 158 168 39
Average Queue (ft) 60 44 87 9 71 84 84 2
95th Queue (ft) 121 91 130 31 133 143 142 18
Link Distance (ft) 51 51 51 56 325 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 11 5 22 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 29 13 55 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
03_NT+P_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 148 62 130 50 200 113 169 174 148 147 119 204 Average Queue (ft) 60 15 56 13 90 49 91 95 64 59 45 76
95th Queue (ft) 113 39 103 41 155 95 148 151 123 114 96 143 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 0 0 1
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 288 286 284 93
Average Queue (ft) 121 138 140 40
95th Queue (ft) 235 248 247 79
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 5 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 7 0
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 40 62 7
Average Queue (ft) 2 2 0
95th Queue (ft) 33 39 6
Link Distance (ft) 437 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
03_NT+P_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB SB
Directions Served L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 99 118
Average Queue (ft) 44 27
95th Queue (ft) 79 87
Link Distance (ft) 72 607
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 100 121 24 20 103 86
Average Queue (ft) 53 55 4 1 52 61
95th Queue (ft) 85 94 15 10 88 90
Link Distance (ft) 68 68 406 400 71
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 3 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 6 13
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB
Directions Served LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 19 8
Average Queue (ft) 1 0
95th Queue (ft) 14 5
Link Distance (ft) 586 586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project AM Peak Hour 03/22/2024
03_NT+P_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 Ramp/4th St
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 107 43 80 173 151
Average Queue (ft) 52 2 42 79 65
95th Queue (ft) 89 21 69 133 113
Link Distance (ft) 812 829 879 609
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 5 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 473
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project PM Peak Hour
04_NT+P_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 134 132 134 192 790 781 574 132
Average Queue (ft) 100 100 98 165 582 442 209 9
95th Queue (ft) 124 120 125 187 877 815 445 118
Link Distance (ft) 37 37 37 45 765 765 765
Upstream Blk Time (%) 46 54 55 50 3 1 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 196 229 235 332 19 6 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 800
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served L L R
Maximum Queue (ft) 968 1074 913
Average Queue (ft) 120 337 572
95th Queue (ft) 740 1339 1123
Link Distance (ft) 1576 1576
Upstream Blk Time (%) 4
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875
Storage Blk Time (%) 21
Queuing Penalty (veh) 31
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB EB SB SB
Directions Served T T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 57 6 205 156
Average Queue (ft) 6 0 96 70
95th Queue (ft) 33 4 174 134
Link Distance (ft) 42 42 130 130
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 3 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0 5 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project PM Peak Hour
04_NT+P_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 43 15 3 198 150
Average Queue (ft) 2 1 0 101 80
95th Queue (ft) 21 8 3 174 142
Link Distance (ft) 46 46 46 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 5 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 10 3
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement NB NB
Directions Served T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 76 29
Average Queue (ft) 5 1
95th Queue (ft) 38 21
Link Distance (ft) 1349
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 775
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 125 123 128 52 215 244 242 20
Average Queue (ft) 70 63 85 7 113 141 145 0
95th Queue (ft) 122 118 126 29 197 224 224 0
Link Distance (ft) 51 51 51 56 325 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 18 13 27 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 70 50 107 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project PM Peak Hour
04_NT+P_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 208 162 151 162 88 115 172 166 152 174 134 145 Average Queue (ft) 89 77 72 64 42 47 86 93 61 84 54 72
95th Queue (ft) 169 138 128 121 75 94 139 147 125 147 109 121 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 1 1
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 200 219 225 93
Average Queue (ft) 87 112 116 39
95th Queue (ft) 171 200 197 77
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 33 36 7
Average Queue (ft) 1 1 0
95th Queue (ft) 29 28 5
Link Distance (ft) 437 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project PM Peak Hour
04_NT+P_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served L T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 90 9 303
Average Queue (ft) 40 0 93
95th Queue (ft) 73 7 267
Link Distance (ft) 72 71 607
Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 133 121 40 32 152 91
Average Queue (ft) 79 55 7 2 71 76
95th Queue (ft) 124 97 24 16 117 96
Link Distance (ft) 68 68 406 400 71
Upstream Blk Time (%) 13 4 17
Queuing Penalty (veh) 31 10 70
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB
Directions Served LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 62 22
Average Queue (ft) 4 1
95th Queue (ft) 28 12
Link Distance (ft) 586 586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project PM Peak Hour
04_NT+P_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 Ramp/4th St
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 120 43 104 222 165
Average Queue (ft) 65 2 48 94 73
95th Queue (ft) 105 24 87 167 126
Link Distance (ft) 812 829 879 609
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 11 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 5 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1420
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements AM Peak Hour
05_NT+P+Imp_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 113 113 117 177 147 59 139 142 76
Average Queue (ft) 63 62 50 83 76 12 60 56 14
95th Queue (ft) 114 105 103 154 132 41 112 115 50
Link Distance (ft) 37 37 37 92 92 754 754 754
Upstream Blk Time (%) 20 25 25 5 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 49 62 62 11 11
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 800
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served L R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 73 46 34
Average Queue (ft) 4 4 2
95th Queue (ft) 33 23 15
Link Distance (ft) 1576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875 875
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB SB
Directions Served T L
Maximum Queue (ft) 2 260
Average Queue (ft) 0 154
95th Queue (ft) 2 249
Link Distance (ft) 53 162
Upstream Blk Time (%) 8
Queuing Penalty (veh) 25
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements AM Peak Hour
05_NT+P+Imp_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement NB NB
Directions Served L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 132 117
Average Queue (ft) 54 34
95th Queue (ft) 103 86
Link Distance (ft) 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement
Directions Served
Maximum Queue (ft)
Average Queue (ft)
95th Queue (ft)
Link Distance (ft)
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 113 98 118 51 147 168 164 25
Average Queue (ft) 59 39 72 8 76 86 86 1
95th Queue (ft) 114 87 119 32 133 144 142 14
Link Distance (ft) 31 31 31 56 325 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 16 10 26 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 40 26 67 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements AM Peak Hour
05_NT+P+Imp_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 151 61 133 53 179 124 159 182 127 149 140 197 Average Queue (ft) 60 17 56 13 86 55 93 99 63 62 46 74
95th Queue (ft) 114 45 106 41 146 102 144 156 119 120 101 145 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 0 2
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 268 294 287 109
Average Queue (ft) 117 139 142 42
95th Queue (ft) 225 245 247 88
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 4 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 6 0
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 10 33 2
Average Queue (ft) 0 2 0
95th Queue (ft) 7 18 2
Link Distance (ft) 437 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements AM Peak Hour
05_NT+P+Imp_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB SB
Directions Served L T
Maximum Queue (ft) 100 132
Average Queue (ft) 43 28
95th Queue (ft) 78 93
Link Distance (ft) 72 607
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 102 109 25 15 109 85
Average Queue (ft) 52 53 4 1 50 62
95th Queue (ft) 86 92 16 8 86 89
Link Distance (ft) 68 68 406 400 71
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 3 5
Queuing Penalty (veh) 4 5 14
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB
Directions Served LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 18 2
Average Queue (ft) 1 0
95th Queue (ft) 11 2
Link Distance (ft) 586 586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements AM Peak Hour
05_NT+P+Imp_AM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 Ramp/4th St
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 99 39 90 201 142
Average Queue (ft) 52 2 42 80 64
95th Queue (ft) 85 18 73 141 111
Link Distance (ft) 812 829 879 609
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 5 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 3 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 391
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements PM Peak Hour
06_NT+P+Imp_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 1
Intersection: 1: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn
Movement WB WB WB SB SB NE NE NE NE
Directions Served L L L R R T T T >
Maximum Queue (ft) 132 137 132 207 181 206 295 318 55
Average Queue (ft) 101 101 99 140 117 107 188 191 4
95th Queue (ft) 122 124 125 212 179 188 273 296 27
Link Distance (ft) 37 37 37 92 92 754 754 754
Upstream Blk Time (%) 46 53 56 16 15
Queuing Penalty (veh) 197 228 240 55 52
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 800
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 2: SB Off-Ramp Right_turn/SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served L R R
Maximum Queue (ft) 47 146 114
Average Queue (ft) 3 28 11
95th Queue (ft) 26 96 60
Link Distance (ft) 1576
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 875 875
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 3: SB Off-Ramp Left-Turn
Movement EB EB EB SB
Directions Served T T T L
Maximum Queue (ft) 16 31 42 249
Average Queue (ft) 1 2 2 140
95th Queue (ft) 10 19 24 236
Link Distance (ft) 53 53 53 162
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 7
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 21
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements PM Peak Hour
06_NT+P+Imp_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 2
Intersection: 4:

Movement WB WB WB NB NB
Directions Served T T T L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 39 17 8 189 168
Average Queue (ft) 2 1 0 107 87
95th Queue (ft) 21 10 7 180 152
Link Distance (ft) 39 39 39 121 121
Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 0 0 6 3
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0 1 13 5
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 5: NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement NB NB
Directions Served T TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 69 33
Average Queue (ft) 6 1
95th Queue (ft) 42 22
Link Distance (ft) 1349
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 775
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 6: DDI NB SR 99 Signal
Movement EB EB EB NB SW SW SW
Directions Served L L L R T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 119 111 113 49 212 246 236
Average Queue (ft) 70 61 65 7 109 138 142
95th Queue (ft) 118 108 111 28 190 219 219
Link Distance (ft) 31 31 31 56 325 325 325
Upstream Blk Time (%) 27 24 29 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 106 94 115 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements PM Peak Hour
06_NT+P+Imp_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 3
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L TR L T R L T T T TR L L
Maximum Queue (ft) 198 162 153 158 88 116 163 164 145 191 150 169 Average Queue (ft) 85 75 73 63 41 48 88 89 60 89 55 74
95th Queue (ft) 157 138 132 125 74 93 143 143 121 157 112 130 Link Distance (ft) 510 2192 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 250 150 200 225 350 350 145 145
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 1 0 0 0 1
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 1 1 0 0 1
Intersection: 7: Mitchell Road & Ceres Gateway Access/Rhode Road Movement SB SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T R
Maximum Queue (ft) 206 231 245 111
Average Queue (ft) 97 120 125 39
95th Queue (ft) 183 211 221 81
Link Distance (ft) 442 442 442
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 319
Storage Blk Time (%) 2
Queuing Penalty (veh) 4
Intersection: 8: Mitchell Road & NB SR 99 Off-Ramp
Movement SB SB SB
Directions Served T T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 2 14 8
Average Queue (ft) 0 0 0
95th Queue (ft) 2 10 5
Link Distance (ft) 437 437 437
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements PM Peak Hour
06_NT+P+Imp_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 4
Intersection: 9: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB NB SB
Directions Served L T T
Maximum Queue (ft) 98 6 297
Average Queue (ft) 42 0 100
95th Queue (ft) 79 6 290
Link Distance (ft) 72 71 607
Upstream Blk Time (%) 2 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 2 0 0
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Intersection: 10: El Camino Ave & SR 99 SB Off Ramp/North St Movement EB EB WB WB NB SB
Directions Served T R L R TR LT
Maximum Queue (ft) 148 113 33 20 138 90
Average Queue (ft) 81 55 6 2 70 75
95th Queue (ft) 132 94 20 10 117 97
Link Distance (ft) 68 68 406 400 71
Upstream Blk Time (%) 14 4 16
Queuing Penalty (veh) 35 9 68
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 25
Storage Blk Time (%) 1 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Intersection: 11: SR 99 SB Off Ramp
Movement EB EB
Directions Served LT T
Maximum Queue (ft) 106 11
Average Queue (ft) 10 0
95th Queue (ft) 64 7
Link Distance (ft) 586 586
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft)
Storage Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Queuing and Blocking Report
Near-Term Plus Project Plus Improvements PM Peak Hour
06_NT+P+Imp_PM Copper Trails Master Plan SimTraffic Report Wood Rodgers, Inc. Page 5
Intersection: 13: El Camino Ave & SR 99 Ramp/4th St
Movement EB EB WB NB SB
Directions Served LT R LTR LTR LTR
Maximum Queue (ft) 125 37 98 201 147
Average Queue (ft) 60 2 46 91 73
95th Queue (ft) 101 20 76 159 124
Link Distance (ft) 812 829 879 609
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 50
Storage Blk Time (%) 9 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 4 0
Zone Summary
Zone wide Queuing Penalty: 1254
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
MITIGATION MONITORING/
REPORTING PROGRAM

FOR THE
COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN
CERES, CA
March 2026
Prepared for:

City of Ceres
Community Development Department
2220 Magnolia Street
Ceres, CA 95307
Prepared by:

BaseCamp Environmental, Inc.
802 W. Lodi Avenue
Lodi, CA 95240
209-224-8213
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
Copper Trails Specific Plan, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 1-1 MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM
for the
COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION PROJECT
CITY OF CERES, CA

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Ceres (City) is considering certification of the Final EIR (FEIR) for and approval of, the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (project). This document is the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project, which is to be adopted by the City in conjunction with EIR certification and the City’s consideration of the proposed project. The primary source document for the MMRP is the Final EIR, a separate document, which is inclusive of the Draft EIR.

1.1 THE PROJECT
The project proposes a Specific Plan that would guide the development of new urban land uses on undeveloped or under-developed lands located within the 534.6-acre CTSP Area, which is adjacent to and southwest of Ceres in unincorporated Stanislaus County (Figures 1-1 through 1-4). The CTSP proposes a mix of urban commercial, public, park, and lowto high-density residential land uses. Total potential development pursuant to the CTSP would include 2,392 new single- and multi-family residential units and 1,169,586 square feet of new regional commercial development. It also would include approximately 42.3 acres of new parks and open space and 3.4 acres of new public space to add to an existing

74.1 acres of public space (schools) within the CTSP Area. The CTSP also proposes the construction of streets and other public facilities that would encourage use of alternate modes of transportation, such as walking and bicycling. Utilities and other supporting infrastructure would be installed in conjunction with planned new development.

The project includes adoption of the CTSP, annexation of the CTSP Area and annexation of 146.1 acres of other unincorporated lands to the north and east, hereinafter referred to as the “Pocket Area;” The total proposed annexation is 680.7 acres. The Pocket Area consists of partially-developed lands lying between the CTSP Area and the existing City of Ceres boundary. This area is proposed to be pre-zoned prior to annexation consistent with the existing Ceres General Plan land use designations.

Annexation of the CTSP Area without the Pocket Area would create an unincorporated island within the City limits, which is contrary to LAFCo annexation policy.

Approval of the CTSP, the proposed annexation and of subsequent development in both areas would involve several interrelated City approvals and other actions. Annexation of the CTSP Area and other unincorporated lands would require the approval of the Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
Copper Trails Specific Plan, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 1-2

1.2 CEQA REQUIREMENTS REGARDING MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING
To ensure that mitigation measures included in EIR are implemented, CEQA requires the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and/or reporting program (CEQA Guidelines Section 15074). The Guidelines require that the lead agency:
" . . . adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects."
These requirements are met by the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program table for the project shown in Section 2.0 of this document. The table lists all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the CTSP project as identified in the Final EIR, identifies all of the mitigation measures that can reduce these effects to a less than significant level, and identifies the entities that would be responsible for implementing and monitoring implementation of the mitigation measures.

EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
Copper Trails Specific Plan, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 2-1

2.0 MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PLAN
The following table summarizes the significant environmental effects that could result from approval of the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project, based on the analysis contained in the certified EIR. The table identifies 1) each significant effect, 2) how each significant effect would be mitigated, 3) the responsibility for implementation of the mitigation measures, and 4) the responsibility for monitoring of mitigation measures. The table follows the same sequence as the impact analysis in the EIR.

Environmental issue areas where the project would have no significant effect are also listed for the sake of continuity.

EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
BaseCamp
Figure 1
BaseCamp Environmental REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
San Diego Imperial
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Ventura Los Angeles
Santa Barbara
Kern San Luis
Obispo
Inyo
Tulare
Kings Monterey
Fresno
San
Benito
Mono
Madera
Mariposa
Tuolumne
Calaveras
Amador
El Dorado
Sacramento
Alpine
Santa
Clara
San
Joaquin
Contra
Costa
Merced
Marin
Napa
Yolo
Solano
Sutter
Placer
Nevada
Sierra Glenn Butte
Lake
Mendocino
Colusa Yuba
Sonoma
Stanislaus Alameda
Santa Cruz
San Mateo
San Francisco
www.csac.counties.org

CITY OF CERES

PROJECT AREA
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
Figure 2
BaseCamp Environmental PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN SOURCE: Wood Rodgers LEGEND
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR)
High Density Residential (HDR)
Regional Commercial (RC)
Parks & Open Space (P/OS)
Community Facilities (CF)
Schools (ES/HS)
MDR
MDR
LDR
LDR
LDR

LDR LDR

LDR LDR
RC
RC
RC
RC
HDR
HDR
MHDR
MHDR
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
ES

ES/HS MDR
HDR
P/OS
CF CF
MDR
MDR
LDR
LDR
LDR

LDR LDR

LDR LDR
RC
RC
RC
RC
HDR
HDR
MHDR
MHDR
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
P/OS
ES

ES/HS MDR
HDR
P/OS
CF CF
Gondring Road
UPRR
Service Road
Blaker Road
Mitchell Road
State Route 99
Mitchell Road
Central Avenue
Gondring Road
E. Redwood Road
Moffett Road
UPRR
Service Road
Blaker Road
Lucas Road
Mitchell Road
State Route 99
Mitchell Road
Street B
Street A
Street C
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-1 March 2026

4.0 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
The EIR does not identify significant effects or mitigation measures in this issue area.

5.0 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland. The CTSP would convert 319.5 acres of Farmland as defined by CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The City’s Plan for Agricultural Preservation would compensate for impacts on Farmland but not avoid conversion. [This issue was analyzed in the Ceres General Plan EIR and was determined to be significant and unavoidable even with mitigating General Plan policies.] AG-1: Prior to the approval of improvement plans, building permits, or recordation of a final map, applicants for projects in the Specific Plan Area shall offset the loss of Prime Farmland. This shall be done in coordination with the City, through the acquisition of conservation easements in Stanislaus County at a 1:1 ratio (i.e., one acre on which easements are acquired to one acre of Prime Farmland removed from agricultural use) that provide in-kind or similar resource value protection; payment of in-lieu fees to an established, qualified, mitigation program to fully fund the acquisition and maintenance of agricultural land or easements; or compliance with the City’s adopted Plan for Agricultural Preservation, as adopted by Stanislaus LAFCO in accordance with LAFCO Policy 22.

The project applicant will
be responsible for
easement acquisition of
payment of fees and
related documentation
The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that mitigation is completed and
documented as required.

EIR
Chapter 5.0
Impact AG-3: Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act. The CTSP Area is mostly zoned General Agriculture, while three parcels within the project site are under a Williamson Act contract. The project would rezone the CTSP Area to be consistent with proposed urban development, and the Williamson Act contracts would be cancelled or not renewed.

AG-2: Project applicants for urban development of lands with a surviving Williamson Act contract shall apply to the City for approval of immediate cancellation of the contract. The application shall be processed pursuant to the requirements of Sections 51282 and 51284 of the Government Code, including detailed findings specified in the law, and review and comment by the California Department of Conservation:

1. That the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, and
The project applicant will
be responsible for
applying for Williamson
Act contract cancellation
where needed.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
review of cancellation application and
recommendation to City Council.

EIR
Chapter 5.0
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-2 March 2026

2. That cancellation is in the public interest.

Provided that required findings can be made, immediate cancellation of remaining Williamson Act contracts will reduce potential conflicts to a less than significant level.

6.0 AIR QUALITY
Impact AIR-1: Air Quality Plans and Standards – Construction Emissions. Project construction emissions would not exceed SJVAPCD significance thresholds in a maximum development year, thereby being consistent with adopted air quality plans. Dust emissions would be reduced through the required implementation of SJVAPCD Regulation VIII and the Indirect Source Rule.

No mitigation required beyond existing APCD rules and regulations Recommended Air Quality Measures:

AIR-1: Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit for each phase of the Project, the Project Proponent shall prepare and submit a Dust Control Plan that meets all of the applicable
requirements of APCD Rule 8021, Section 6.3, for the
review and approval of the APCD Air Pollution Control
Officer.

AIR-2: During all construction activities, the Project Proponent shall implement dust control measures, as required by APCD
Rules 8011-8081, to limit Visible Dust Emissions to 20% opacity or less. Dust control measures shall include
application of water or chemical dust suppressants to
unpaved roads and graded areas, covering or stabilization of transported bulk materials, prevention of carryout or trackout of soil materials to public roads, limiting the area subject to soil disturbance, construction of wind barriers, access restrictions to inactive sites as required by the applicable rules.

AIR-3: During all construction activities, the Project proponent shall implement the following dust control practices identified in Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the GAMAQI (2016).
a. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be The project applicant will
be responsible for
preparation and submittal
of the Dust Control Plan
and asphalt paving plans
to the APCD, and for
meeting applicable APCD
requirements.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that the APCD has reviewed and
approved the Dust Control Plan and
asphalt paving plans.

EIR
Chapter 6.0
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-3 March 2026 effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or vegetative ground cover.
b. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
c. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall control fugitive dust emissions by application of water or by presoaking.
d. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, or at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
e. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at least once every 24 hours when operations are occurring. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.
f. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. g. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 5 mph.
h. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

AIR-4: Asphalt paving shall be applied in accordance with APCD Rule 4641, the purpose of which is to limit VOC emissions by restricting the application and manufacturing of certain types of asphalt for paving and maintenance operations. This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt and EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-4 March 2026 emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations. The Applicant shall coordinate with the APCD and provide the City with evidence of consultation with the APCD, including confirmation of compliance with APCD Rule 4641.

Impact AIR-4: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants. Development in the project site is unlikely to generate or be exposed to TACs at a level that can present a risk to human health. Projects that could generate potentially significant amounts of TACs would be subject to City review.

AIR-5: For service station projects, as part of the Conditional Use Permit evaluation process, the Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Look-up Tool shall be used to screen service stations for their cancer and non-cancer chronic and acute risks. If the results of the Look-up Tool indicate that the proposed service station would not exceed the significance thresholds for cancer and noncancer chronic and acute risks, as set by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), then no further action need be taken. However, if the service station project exceeds one or more of these thresholds, particularly the cancer risk threshold, then the project shall be required to prepare a Health Risk Assessment. The Health Risk Assessment shall quantify the health risks associated with the project and identify project or design changes sufficient to reduce these risks to levels below their respective significance thresholds.

These recommendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit and shall be implemented upon permit approval.

The applicant for a
service station project will
be responsible for
preparing and submitting
the results of the Gasoline
Service Station
Industrywide Risk
Assessment Look-up Tool
to the City and APCD,
and for preparation of an
HRA if warranted by the
Look-Up Tool results.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that an HRA has been prepared
if warranted by Look-Up Tool results,
and that the APCD has reviewed and
approved the HRA.

EIR
Chapter 6.0

7.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Special-Status Species and Habitats. Project development would involve the potential for impacts on foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk and Elderberry shrub habitat for Valley elderberry longhorn beetle.

BIO-1: If ground-disturbing activities would take place on sites where suitable nesting habitat may exist, a survey for nesting Swainson’s hawks and burrowing owl shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist, following survey methods developed by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (2000) and CDFW’s Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (2012) prior to undertaking any grounddisturbing activities. The survey shall include recommended mitigation measures for any potential impacts from the project.

If ground disturbing activities would take place during the nesting season (February 1 through September 15) and Swainson’s hawk The applicant for a will be
responsible for retaining
the qualified biologist to
perform required surveys
and to specify temporal
restrictions if required.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
biological requirements have been met
before authorizing project ground
disturbance.

EIR
Chapter 7.0
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-5 March 2026 nests are found to be present, a no-disturbance buffer consistent with CDFW guidance shall be established around active nests until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged.
(BIO-1 continued) A qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment to determine if the project area contains habitat suitable to support Crotch’s bumble bee nesting, including identification of potential nesting sites. If the habitat assessment indicates high potential to support the bumble bee nesting, the biologist shall recommend appropriate mitigation.

BIO-2: Prior to the start of construction activities for an approved development project, a survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) shrubs. Should such shrubs be discovered by the survey, the development project shall avoid removal of these shrubs to the extent feasible. If avoidance is not feasible, then the biologist shall recommend actions to be taken to minimize or to compensate for any impacts on blue elderberry shrubs in accordance with the applicable state or federal regulations.

Impact BIO-4: Migration Corridors and Nursery Sites. Existing trees and grassy areas could be used by protected migratory bird species for nesting.

BIO-3: If construction of a development project commences during the general avian nesting season (February 1 through September 15), a pre-construction survey for all species of nesting birds shall be conducted. If active nests for any bird species are found, work in the vicinity of the nests shall be delayed until the young have fledged. No survey shall be required if construction occurs outside the general avian nesting season.

The applicant will be
responsible for retaining
the qualified biologist to
perform required surveys
and to specify temporal
restrictions if required.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
biological requirements have been met
before authorizing project ground
disturbance.

EIR
Chapter 7.0
Impact BIO-5: Local Policies and Ordinances. Development on the project site would be consistent with Ceres General Plan policies on biological resources, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. No local ordinances protecting biological resources have been enacted.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 As provided for
Mitigation Measure BIO1
As provided for Mitigation Measure BIO1EIR
Chapter 7.0

8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CULT-1: Historical Resources. No historical resources have been recorded on the project site. However, buildings of at least 50 years of age may exist and be subject to impact during development activity.

EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-6 March 2026 CULT-1:Based on a determination of potential historical value by the Community Development Director, prior to issuance of a
development permit for a site within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, existing buildings or other structures on the site that are 50 years of age or older shall be evaluated by a qualified architectural historian to determine if they are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and/or the California Register of Historical Resources.

Should any buildings be found eligible for such designation(s), then the architectural historian shall make recommendations concerning the disposition of the identified buildings, which shall be implemented by the project developer. Recommendations may include, but are not limited to, preservation of the existing structure or reuse of the structure in accordance with historic property standards of the U.S.

Secretary of the Interior.

The applicant retaining a
qualified architectural
historian by the CE
Director and
incorporation of historic
avoiding impact will be
responsible for
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed notification
requirements.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
historical resource reporting requirements
are incorporated into the project plans and
specifications and observed during
construction.

EIR
Chapter 8.0
Impact CULT-2: Archaeological Resources. No archaeological resources have been recorded on the project site. However, it is possible that currently unknown cultural resources may be encountered during project construction.

CULT-2: If any subsurface cultural resources are encountered during project construction that occurs within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, the City of Ceres Community Development Department shall be immediately notified of the discovery, and all construction activity within 50 feet of the find shall be halted. A qualified archaeologist shall examine the find and determine its significance. If the find is determined to be significant, then the archaeologist shall recommend further mitigation measures that would reduce potential effects on the find to a level that is less than significant. Recommended measures may include, but are not limited to, 1) avoidance and preservation in place, or 2) excavation, recovery, and curation by qualified professionals. Construction activities in the area of the find shall not resume until the mitigation measures are in place. The project developer shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in a written report to the City’s Development Services Department, consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines.

The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for
inserting cultural resource
protection requirements in
the project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed notification
requirements.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
cultural resource protection requirements
are incorporated into the project plans and
specifications and observed during
construction.

EIR
Chapter 8.0
Impact CULT-3: Tribal Cultural Resources. No tribal cultural resources have been identified on the project site. However, it is possible that currently unknown tribal cultural resources may be inadvertently impacted during project construction.

Implementation of CULT-2 The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for The Community Development Director will be responsible for ensuring that
EIR
Chapter 8.0
EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-7 March 2026 inserting cultural resource
protection requirements in
the project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed notification
requirements.
cultural resource protection requirements
are incorporated into the project plans and
specifications and observed during
construction.

9.0 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact GEO-6: Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features. The project site does not contain unique geological features or any known paleontological resources; however, project construction could unearth previously unknown paleontological materials of significance.

GEO-1: If paleontological resources are encountered during project construction, the City of Ceres shall be immediately notified of the discovery, and construction activity within 50 feet of the encounter shall cease until a qualified paleontologist examines the materials, determines their significance under CEQA, and recommends mitigation measures that would be necessary to reduce potentially significant effects to a level that is less than significant. The developer or its contractor shall be responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist and for implementing recommended mitigation measures. Construction activities in the area of the find shall not resume until the mitigation measures are in place.

The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for
inserting paleontological
resource reporting
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed notification
requirements.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
paleontological resource reporting
requirements are incorporated into the
project plans and specifications and
observed during construction.

EIR
Chapter 9.0

10.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The EIR does not identify any mitigation measures in this issue area.

11.0 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-4: Hazardous Material Sites. No active hazardous material sites were identified on the project site. Past agricultural activities within the CTSP Area have the potential of leaving hazardous residues that could be released during construction. Also, demolition of older buildings could release asbestos and lead-based paints into the environment.

EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-8 March 2026 HAZ-1: Prior to approval of a site plan or a tentative subdivision map for future development, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall be conducted and submitted to the City Community
Development Department. The Phase I Assessment shall evaluate the site for potential contamination, including residues of agricultural chemicals on sites of previous agricultural land use. If the Phase I Assessment determines the potential presence of any hazardous material contamination, then a Phase II Environmental Site assessment shall be conducted to identify the type and extent of hazardous material contamination. If necessary, the Phase II report shall include remediation measures. Project approval shall include requirements for completion of any Phase II remediation needed to permit the proposed land use under existing applicable regulations.

HAZ-2: If evidence of unusual odors or soil discoloration is noted during construction, construction shall be halted and the City shall be notified. The property owner or responsible party shall contact a qualified environmental professional to evaluate the situation and take action as required by applicable environmental regulations.

Construction work at the identified site shall not resume until the site is either remediated or found to pose no risk to worker health.

HAZ-3: Demolition permits shall be obtained from the City for structures to be removed from development sites. Demolition would occur in accordance with the conditions of the City Demolition Permit, which shall include a Demolition Plan that is reviewed and approved by the Building Official. The Demolition Plan shall include the required qualifications of demolition contractors, demolition procedures, safety requirements, testing for hazardous materials that shall include asbestos-containing material and lead-based paint, waste disposal worker and public health, and environmental protections.

Permit applications for uses regulated shall include a Demolition Permit Release Form from the SJVAPCD.

The project applicant will
be responsible for
obtaining Phase I and II
ESAs as warranted by site
contamination.

The project applicant will
be responsible for
including requirements of
the contractor to address
unusual odors or soil
discoloration during
construction.

The contractor will be
responsible for addressing
unusual odors or soil
discoloration concerns
during construction.

The project applicant or
contractor will be
responsible for obtaining
demolition permits for
removal of existing
structures.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
review and approval of the Phase I and/or
II reports.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
review and approval of project plans and
specifications and for ensuring that
demolition plans have been obtained prior
to removal of existing structures.

EIR
Chapter

11.0 Impact HAZ-5: Airport Hazards. A portion of the project site is within the Airport Influence Area established for the Modesto City-County Airport.

HAZ-4: For projects located within the Airport Influence Area of the Modesto City-County Airport, as delineated within the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, site plan and design review submittals for the project shall be referred to the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission for its review and
recommendations. Implementation of applicable recommendations of the Airport Land Use Commission shall be made a condition of City The Community
Development Department
will be responsible for
referring applications to
the ALUC when
warranted.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that this requirement is met and
that ALUC recommendations are
incorporated in project conditions of
approval.

EIR
Chapter

11.0 EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-9 March 2026 approval unless the City overrides any recommendation in accordance with State law.

Impact HAZ-6: Interference with Emergency Vehicle Access and Evacuations. The project would also include improvements to existing roadways that could potentially interfere with emergency vehicle access and evacuations in the area.

HAZ-5: Encroachment permits for work within the public right-ofway shall be obtained from the City of Ceres. As a condition of the permit, and prior to the start of project construction, the permittee shall prepare and implement a Traffic Control Plan, which shall include such items as traffic control requirements, resident notification of access closure, and daily access restoration. The contractor shall specify dates and times of road closures or restrictions, if any, and shall ensure that adequate access will be provided for emergency vehicles. The Traffic Control Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Department of Public Works and shall be coordinated with the Ceres Police Department and the applicable firefighting agency if construction will require road closures or lane restrictions.

The project applicant
and/or contractor will be
responsible for
preparation and submittal
of the Traffic Control
Plan.

The Department of Public Works will be
responsible for review, interagency
coordination and approval of the Traffic
Control Plan.

EIR
Chapter

11.0 Impact HAZ-8: Waterway Hazards. Residential development adjacent to TID Lower Lateral 2 could lead to trespassing that could endanger trespassers.

HAZ-6: Prior to the start of development within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, design plans for any trails along Turlock Irrigation District (TID) canals shall be submitted to TID for its review and approval. TID approval shall be obtained for any trail construction along the TID canals.

The project applicant
and/or engineer will be
responsible for submittal
of plans for trail
development along TID
canals for TID review and
approval.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that trail development plans
have been reviewed and approved by TID
incorporating relevant TID
recommendations.

EIR
Chapter

11.0 12.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HYDRO-2: Groundwater Resources and Quality. Project would be served by the City’s water system, which relies in part on groundwater. Project can be accommodated from City’s existing groundwater supplies. Project may reduce groundwater recharge through increased impervious surfaces, but the impact is not considered substantial. Existing groundwater wells in proposed development areas would need to be plugged over the course of development per County standards.

HYDRO-1: Prior to the start of development within any portion of the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, any remaining existing groundwater wells shall be plugged and abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources and the provisions of California Water Code Section 13751.

The project applicant
and/or engineer will be
responsible for obtaining
well demolition and/or
dewatering permits for the
project site.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
ensuring that well demolition and/or
dewatering permits for the project site
have been obtained.

EIR
Chapter

12.0 EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-10 March 2026 HYDRO-2: For areas containing a shallow groundwater table, a dewatering permit shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to the start of construction activities. Dewatering shall be done in accordance with the conditions of the permit.

13.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
The EIR does not identify significant effects or mitigation measures in this issue area.

14.0 NOISE
Impact NOISE-1: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Traffic. Traffic generated under Near Term Plus Project conditions would increase traffic noise levels along East Service Road by an amount exceeding applicable significance thresholds. Mitigation would reduce this impact.

NOISE-1: To reduce traffic noise increases under Near-Term Plus Project conditions to less than +1.5 dB, widening or new improvements to the segment of East Service Road north of the Copper Trails Specific Plan boundary shall be paved with quiet pavement, or another equivalent mitigation shall be provided, with approval from a qualified noise consultant and City staff. The pavement would be required for any portion of the roadway passing a noise-sensitive use, and for a distance of 100 feet on either side of the sensitive use.

The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for
inserting noise control
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications, or
demonstrating that
equivalent noise reduction
would be provided by
another means. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed noise control
requirements.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that noise
control requirements are incorporated into
the project plans and specifications and
observed during construction.

EIR
Chapter

14.0 Impact NOISE-2: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Other Project Noise. Noise from commercial operations were determined to not significantly affect nearby sensitive land uses, mainly residences. However, specific land uses could adversely affect nearby residences if placed too closely.

NOISE-2: Proposed commercial and active sports recreational projects shall be subject to a preliminary review by Community Development staff for potentially significant noise impacts. Where potential noise impacts may be significant, an acoustical analysis shall be performed by a qualified acoustical consultant as to the project’s consistency with the City’s noise level standards and mitigation measures needed to bring the proposed source into compliance with The Community
Development Director
will be responsible for
determining whether
noise impact analysis is
required for commercial
or active sports projects.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that
additional noise analysis has been
obtained if required and that
recommended noise control requirements
are incorporated into the project plans and
EIR
Chapter

14.0 EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-11 March 2026 City standards.

The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for
obtaining additional noise
analysis and for inserting
recommended noise
control requirements in
project plans and
specifications.
specifications.

Impact NOISE-3: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Construction. Construction activities may potentially increase ambient noise above City standards at nearby sensitive receptors.

NOISE-3: The City shall establish the following as conditions of approval for any permit that results in the use of construction equipment:
• Construction shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. unless allowed by special permit issued by the Building Inspector or City Engineer.
• All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained.
• Quiet construction equipment, particularly air compressors, are to be selected whenever possible.
• All stationary noise-generating construction equipment such as generators or air compressors are to be located as far as is practical from existing residences. In addition, the project contractor shall place such stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors closest to the project site.
• Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited.

In accordance with State regulations, idling shall be limited to no more than five minutes.
• The construction contractor shall, to the maximum extent practical, locate on-site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noisesensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project The applicant’s engineer
will be responsible for
inserting noise control
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for adhering
to the listed noise control
requirements.

The Community Development Director
will be responsible for ensuring that noise
control requirements are incorporated into
the project plans and specifications and
observed during construction.

EIR
Chapter

14.0 EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
IMPACT/MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
RESPONSIBILITY AND

TIMING/SCHEDULE
MONITORING/REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY
SOURCE
INFORMATION
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program Table Page 2-12 March 2026 construction.

15.0 PUBLIC SERVICES
The EIR does not identify significant effects or mitigation measures in this issue area.

16.O TRANSPORTATION
The EIR does not identify any mitigation measures in this issue area.

17.0 UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Impact UTIL-1: Relocation and Construction of Infrastructure Facilities. Pocket Area served by existing infrastructure. The CTSP Area would require new infrastructure, which would be provided in accordance with City and State requirements and standards. Project may require removal or relocation of existing TID facilities.

UTIL-1: Prior to the start of development that impacts TID irrigation facilities, the project shall design one or more method acceptable to the City and TID that will minimize or avoid the impacts of development on the continued operation of existing TID irrigation facilities. The agreed-upon methods shall be incorporated as applicable into the design and construction of future development.

The project applicant and
engineer will be
responsible for
development of
infrastructure designs that
could address TID
concerns.

The Community
Development Department
will be responsible for
coordinating the review of
such improvements with
other departments and
TID.

The Community Development
Department will be responsible for
interagency coordination has occurred
and that resulting designs are
incorporated into project plans and
specifications.

EIR
Chapter

17.0 EXHIBIT C ITEM 13
CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
FOR THE
COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION
City of Ceres, CA
State Clearinghouse No: 2023090637
March 2026
Prepared for:

City of Ceres
Community Development Department
2220 Magnolia Street
Ceres, CA 95307

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2

1.3 THE CEQA PROCESS FOR THE COPPER TRAILS PROJECT 3

2.0 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA 7

2.1 General Findings by the City of Ceres 8

2.2 Findings Regarding Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects 9

2.3 Findings and Recommendations
Regarding Significant Impacts Which Are
Mitigated to a Less Than Significant Level 15

2.4 Findings and Recommendations Regarding
Environmental Impacts That Have No Effect, Are Less Than Significant, or Less Than Cumulatively Considerable 33

3.0 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES 38

3.1 Project Alternatives 38

3.2 Project Objectives 38

3.3 Alternatives Not Selected For Further
Consideration 40

3.4 Findings Regarding Alternatives Analyzed in EIR 40

4.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE COPPER TRAILS PROJECT 44

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 1 March 2026
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE
COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AND ANNEXATION

PROJECT
CITY OF CERES
March 2026
(As Adopted by the Ceres City Council, ___________, 2026)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) when a proposed project may involve significant environmental effects. Prior to approval of the project, the Lead Agency is required to certify that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA and that the Lead Agency reviewed and considered the information in the EIR before approving the project. If the EIR identifies significant or potentially significant environmental effects, CEQA requires that the Lead Agency include feasible mitigation measures in the project and that the Lead Agency make specified written findings regarding disposition of significant environmental effects prior to project approval.

If the Lead Agency intends to approve a project but finds that mitigation measures are not feasible for one or more of the significant environmental effects of the project, it must also adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration that identifies economic, social, technical, and other benefits of the project that override any significant unavoidable impacts that would result from the project. The Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation (CTSP) project involves several potentially significant environmental effects, and the project EIR indicates that there are not feasible mitigation measures that will substantially reduce these impacts or reduce them to a less than significant level. The proposed Statement of Overriding Considerations for these unavoidable effects of the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation project is shown in Section 4.0 of this document.

If an EIR identifies significant or potentially significant environmental effects, the Lead Agency must also adopt a Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) that lists all of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR and identifies responsibility for their implementation and/or monitoring. The proposed MMRP for the Copper Trails Annexation and Specific Plan project is shown in the separate document cited below.

Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation project. City of Ceres. November, 2025.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 2 March 2026
The City of Ceres (the “City”) is the Lead Agency for the Copper Trails project. This document sets forth the Lead Agency’s findings regarding the project as required by CEQA Guidelines sections 15091-15093. The primary source document for the findings is the Environmental Impact Report for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (SCH# 2020120283) (the “EIR”). When referenced as such, the EIR includes both the Public Review Draft EIR (the DEIR) dated November 2024 and the Final EIR (the FEIR) dated November 2025, as well as documents that are incorporated into either the DEIR or FEIR, or both, by reference.

The proposed project that is the subject of these findings, the environmental review process, the environmental documentation prepared for the project, and the findings that the City must make to fulfill the requirements of CEQA, are discussed below. The City’s findings with respect to the Copper Trails project are described in subsequent sections of this document.

These findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of the Ceres City Council regarding the project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives to the project, and the overriding considerations, which in the City Council’s view, justify approval of the project, despite the project’s significant and unavoidable environmental impacts.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Copper Trails project consists of the annexation of a 680.7-acre area south and west of the City of Ceres, hereinafter referred to as the “project site.” The project “site” includes two components, which are referred to for convenience as the “CTSP Area” and the “Pocket Area,” both of which are proposed for annexation and future development; the Pocket Area is already largely developed See attached Figures 1-1 through 1-5.

The CTSP Area is associated with the proposed City adoption of the CTSP, approval of related permits and other approvals that would lead to development of their area. The CTSP establishes a land use plan for, and would result in, development of residential, commercial, and other urban land uses on 68 existing parcels within the approximately 534.6-acre CTSP area. Planned urban development within the CTSP Area would require City approvals of the CTSP, the proposed annexation, and pre-zoning of the CTSP Area. Future development within the CTSP Area is expected to require one or more development agreements and Tentative Map application submittals.

The project also includes annexation of the “Pocket Area,” comprised of 176 additional parcels totaling 146.1 acres of unincorporated land outside and north of the CTSP Area.

The “Pocket Area,” is located between the existing City boundary and the CTSP Area. If the CTSP Area were annexed without the Pocket Area, the Pocket Area lands would become an unincorporated “island,” which is contrary to State statute and local annexation policies. Both the CTSP and Pocket Area annexations would require approval from the City, and from the Stanislaus LAFCo.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 3 March 2026
CTSP approval and annexation of the CTSP Area would result in the potential for development of approximately 260.3 acres of low-, medium-, medium high-, and highdensity residential units. A total of approximately 107.4 acres within the CTSP Area is proposed for Regional Commercial development. The CTSP also proposes approximately

42.3 acres of parks and open space, including street landscapes, and 3.4 acres for new public uses that would be in addition to the 74.1 acres already occupied by the Central Valley High School, Ceres Adult School, and Hidahl Elementary School, all operated by the Ceres Unified School District (CUSD). The planned circulation system within the CTSP Area would utilize and improve existing roads and add new roads and streets and would provide for development of new bicycle and pedestrian trails and open space linkages that would and between the planned residential neighborhoods, commercial areas, schools, and parks.

Annexation of the Pocket Area would include pre-zoning of the 146.1-acre Pocket Area consistent with existing Ceres General Plan designations; annexation of this area would make City utilities and services available to this largely developed unincorporated area.

The Pocket Area includes approximately 25 scattered acres comprising some 25 noncontiguous parcels of undeveloped land with some new but unquantified development potential. The largest of these parcels, approximately 5.7 acres in size, would be pre-zoned for Neighborhood Commercial development in conjunction with the proposed annexation.

Approximately 4.5 acres in two parcels would be available for Medium High Density Residential development, and 12 parcels totaling 17 acres would be available for Medium Density Residential development. The Pocket Area includes several scattered parcels that would be available for Community Commercial or Industrial use. There are, however, no known plans for development of these lands.

1.3 THE CEQA PROCESS FOR THE COPPER TRAILS PROJECT
The potential environmental effects of the project, mitigation measures necessary to address significant effects and alternatives to the project are discussed in detail in the EIR prepared by the City of Ceres. In addition to preparing the EIR, the City conducted the EIR process as required by CEQA. Steps in the EIR process included preparation and public review of a Notice of Preparation, conducting a scoping meeting, publication and distribution of a Draft EIR for a 45-day public review period, preparation of a Final EIR addressing comments received during the public review period, and preparation of this CEQA Findings document and the associated MMRP that are intended to be adopted by the Ceres City Council prior to taking action on the project.

Notice of Preparation
The City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR on September 27, 2023; the NOP was circulated for agency review for a 30-day period as required by CEQA. Detailed information on the content, circulation and comments received by the City on the Notice of Preparation is contained in DEIR Appendix A; comments submitted on the NOP were considered during the preparation of the DEIR and were incorporated into the DEIR.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 4 March 2026
The City also held a virtual public scoping meeting for the project on October 16, 2023.

Public notice of the meeting was provided by the City in accordance with its standard noticing procedures. Verbal comments during the meeting were provided by local residents Robert Conway, Don Lawrence and Bob Kachel. No written comments were submitted to the City during or after the scoping meeting.

Draft EIR Public Circulation
The Public Review Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared by consultants, independently reviewed by the City and distributed for agency and public comment during a 45-day period extending from November 5, 2024 to December 20, 2024. The public review period was extended for an additional 45 days at the request of the Stanislaus LAFCo.

The DEIR contained a description of the project, a description of the environmental setting, identification of project impacts, and discussion of feasible mitigation measures for environmental impacts found to be potentially significant, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growthinducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. The DEIR also identifies areas of environmental concern determined to involve no impact or a less than significant impact.

The public notification and distribution process for the DEIR is outlined below.

The DEIR was available for viewing and download on the City’s web site during the public review period.

A Notice of Availability was filed with the Stanislaus County Clerk, published in the Ceres Courier, a newspaper of regional circulation, and uploaded to the State Clearinghouse. The Notice of Availability was distributed to a list of agencies and interested parties as shown in Appendix A of the FEIR.

A Notice of Completion, the DEIR and the State Clearinghouse Summary were posted to the State Clearinghouse CEQAnet web site for review by State agencies.

The City received nine written comments on the DEIR during and shortly after the public review period. The ninth comment from the Ceres USD was received several months after the close of the review period.

1. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (6 pages)

2. State Water Resources Control Board (3 pages)

3. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (10 pages)

4. Stanislaus LAFCo (4 pages)

5. John and Patti Warren (2 pages)

6. Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources (1 page)

7. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (15 pages)

8. Stanislaus County Chief Executive Office
EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 5 March 2026

9. Ceres Unified School District (submitted outside of the review period) The City considered the above-listed comments and made specific responses to each of the comments. These comments and the City’s responses are shown in Chapter 3.0 of the Final EIR. An additional comment from Lozano Smith for the Ceres Unified School District was submitted August 2025, well outside the EIR public review period.

Final EIR
The City prepared the FEIR (March, 2026) in advance of a planned meeting of the Ceres Planning Commission. As required by CEQA, the City’s responses to comments were provided to each of the agency commenters at least 10 days ahead of the Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission reviewed the FEIR and recommended that the Ceres City Council certify the Final EIR. An additional comment for Lozano Smith for the Ceres Unified School District was submitted in August 2025, well outside the EIR public review period.

Recirculation Requirements
The City of Ceres received a total of eight comment letters during the EIR review period.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, the Final EIR responds to all of the comments received, including the one comment submitted outside the review period. Based on its detailed review of the comments and consideration of the EIR, the City has determined that the comments, responses to comments and revisions to the EIR shown in FEIR Chapter 4.0 do not reveal any new significant impacts or “significant new information” that would require recirculation of the EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

The FEIR for the Copper Trails project does include additional information, but the FEIR does not identify any new significant environmental impacts or impacts that are substantially more severe than those that were identified in the Draft EIR. No feasible new project alternatives or mitigation measures have been identified that are considerably different from others previously analyzed and that would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, nor have the project’s proponents declined to adopt any alternatives or feasible mitigation measures. No party has suggested that meaningful public review and comment on the EIR were precluded.

Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record:

For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings consists of the following documents and testimony, at a minimum:

1. The NOP, comments received on the NOP, and all other public notices issued by the City in relation to the project (e.g., NOA and State Clearinghouse Notice of Completion).

2. The Draft EIR and the Final EIR.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 6 March 2026

3. Comments on the Draft EIR and the City’s responses to those comments.

4. All non-draft and/or non-confidential reports and memoranda prepared by the City and consultants in relation to the EIR.

5. Minutes and transcripts of the discussions regarding the project and/or project components at public hearings held by the City.

6. Staff reports associated with City Council meetings on the project.

7. Those categories of materials identified in Public Resources Code § 21167.6.

The Ceres City Clerk is the custodian of the administrative record for this project. The documents and materials that constitute the administrative record are available for review at the Ceres Community Development Department, 222 Magnolia Street Ceres , CA 95307.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 7 March 2026

2.0 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
Public Resources Code § 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects” Further, the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” Section 21002 also provides that “in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.”
The mandate and principles established by the Legislature in Public Resources Code §21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement in Public Resources Code §21081 that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which an EIR is required. The CEQA Guidelines §15091 provides specific direction regarding findings required under CEQA:
15091. No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

As described in the EIR and shown in the FEIR Summary Table 2-1, the project would involve a range of potential environmental effects; these effects include numerous potential effects that are identified as Less than Significant or that would have No Effect on the environment. Several additional potential environmental effects are identified as potentially significant or significant; the EIR prescribes feasible mitigation measures for these effects that would avoid or reduce most of the identified significant effects to a less than significant level.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 8 March 2026
The EIR, however, describes five potentially significant environmental effects that are, after the inclusion of all feasible mitigation measures, considered unavoidable:

Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland
Impact AG-4: Indirect Agricultural Land Conversion
Impact GHG-2: GHG Emissions from Project Operations.

Impact TRANS-3: Vehicle Miles Traveled.

Impact TRANS-5: Traffic Hazards - Queuing.

Provided that the City wishes to approve the project, it must therefore adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to these impacts.

The proposed CEQA findings for the Copper Trails project are described in the following sections, including the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0. The proposed findings are based upon substantial evidence, comprised primarily of the information, analysis and mitigation measures described in the EIR, the responses to public comments shown in Chapter 3.0 of the FEIR and any other information incorporated into these documents by reference. Specific references to supporting information are provided in conjunction with the City’s finding for each potentially significant effect of the project.

2.1 GENERAL FINDINGS BY THE CITY OF CERES
Consideration of the Environmental Impact Report
In adopting these Findings, the Ceres City Council finds that the EIR, inclusive of the DEIR and the FEIR, was presented to this City Council, the decision-making body of the lead agency, which has reviewed and considered the information in the EIR prior to approving the project. By adopting these findings, this City Council ratifies, adopts, and incorporates the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the EIR.

The City Council finds that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA and that the EIR represents the independent judgment of the City.

Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program
A Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the project in a separate document and has been adopted concurrently with these Findings. The City will use the MMRP to document the project’s compliance with the mitigation measures described in the certified EIR.

Severability
If any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 9 March 2026
provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the project, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.

2.2 FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND

UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
As noted above, the EIR describes five potentially significant environmental effects are considered unavoidable:

Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland
Impact AG-4: Indirect Agricultural Land Conversion
Impact GHG-2: GHG Emissions from Project Operations.

Impact TRANS-3: Vehicle Miles Traveled.

Impact TRANS-5: Traffic Hazards - Queuing.

The CEQA Guidelines provide in Section 15021 that if significant impacts cannot be feasibly avoided or substantially lessened with mitigation measures, a public agency may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the specific reasons that the project’s benefits outweigh its significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects. These requirements are identified and discussed in Section 4.0 of this document.

Whether mitigation measures or alternatives are considered feasible is central to CEQA findings related to significant and unavoidable effects. As defined by CEQA, “feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors. The concept of “feasibility” also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project.

Moreover, “feasibility” under CEQA encompasses “desirability” to the extent that overall desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors.”
The following information defines each of the project’s unavoidable environmental effects, the mitigation measures that are applied to the effect in the EIR, and the City Council’s determinations with respect to each effect under CEQA Guidelines 15091 – 15093. In order to address the project’s significant and unavoidable effects, findings related to alternatives and a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the project are also required. These subjects are addressed in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of this document.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 10 March 2026
IMPACT AG-1: CONVERSION OF FARMLAND
(a) Potential Impact:

The CTSP would convert 319.5 acres of Farmland, which consists of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The City’s Plan for Agricultural Preservation would compensate for impacts on Farmland but would not avoid or substantially reduce Farmland conversion. [This issue was analyzed in the Ceres General Plan EIR and was determined to be significant and unavoidable even with mitigating General Plan policies.]
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the adopted MMRP:

AG-1: Prior to the approval of improvement plans, building permits, or recordation of a final map, applicants for projects in the Specific Plan Area shall offset the loss of Prime Farmland. This shall be done in coordination with the City, through the acquisition of conservation easements in Stanislaus County at a 1:1 ratio (i.e., one acre on which easements are acquired to one acre of Prime Farmland removed from agricultural use) that provide in-kind or similar resource value protection; payment of in-lieu fees to an established, qualified, mitigation program to fully fund the acquisition and maintenance of agricultural land or easements, or compliance with the City’s adopted Plan for Agricultural Preservation, as adopted by Stanislaus LAFCO in accordance with LAFCO Policy 22Ceres.

This same impact was previously addressed in Ceres General Plan EIR and was included in the City’s Statement of Overriding Considerations when the General Plan was adopted.

No other feasible mitigation measures for this impact have been identified. (c) Findings:

Based on the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, the City Council finds that:

The project would result in the permanent conversion of 319.5 acres of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance under the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping Program to non-agricultural use. These losses are considered a significant environmental impact.

Mitigation Measure AG-1 requires the project to provide “agricultural mitigation land” - land encumbered by an agricultural conservation easement - on a 1:1 basis for each acre of Farmland converted by the project, or alternatively, projects must pay an established Agricultural Land Mitigation Fee, which is used to acquire agricultural mitigation land or easements or administer the program.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 11 March 2026
While the proposed project will acquire agricultural land conservation easements or contribute fees toward the purchase of conservation easements on agricultural lands , the resulting easements would not result in the creation of new farmland to offset the loss that would occur with project implementation. There are no other known mitigation measures for agricultural land conversion. As such, the conversion of agricultural land is considered a significant and unavoidable impact.

The Ceres General Plan 2040 and the certified General Plan EIR (GPEIR) considered potential conversion of agricultural land in conjunction with planned urban development mapped in the General Plan, which included urban development of the CTSP Area. The agricultural land conversion impact associated with the project was also identified in the GPEIR as significant and unavoidable. The GPEIR concluded that no additional mitigation was available that would reduce this impact to a level that would be less than significant.

The Ceres City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for agricultural land conversion impacts when it adopted the General Plan 2035. (d) Overriding Considerations:

The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the project that would override the significant adverse effect of the project on Farmlands, are described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0, below. A corresponding Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to agricultural land conversion was adopted at the time of adoption of the Ceres General Plan 2035.

IMPACT AG-4: INDIRECT AGRICULTURAL LAND CONVERSION
(a) Potential Impact: The project may indirectly result in conversion of other agricultural land in the vicinity of the CTSP to non-agricultural uses, even with the implementation of City policies intended to reduce conversion pressure. The DEIR noted that these influences would include division of large tracts of agricultural land into smaller, less agriculturally viable tracts; increases in land values and taxes; and loss of agricultural support infrastructure, such as agricultural product processing facilities. Urban growth may also compete with agriculture for the use of water resources. This same impact was considered in the Ceres General Plan EIR and found to be significant and unavoidable. (b) Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are available. (c) Findings: Based on the CTSP EIR and the entire record before it, the City Council finds that the project may indirectly result in conversion of other agricultural land in the vicinity of the CTSP to non-agricultural uses. Although potential for agricultural land conversion is not quantified by the DEIR, these potential losses are considered a significant environmental impact.

The DEIR analysis of this issue describes a range of City and County policies and practices that would help limit indirect effects on agricultural land conversion. Beside these provisions, which are already in place, however, no other potential mitigation measures have been identified that would substantially reduce this impact.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 12 March 2026
The Ceres General Plan EIR stated that existing and proposed general plan policies would not eliminate the indirect impacts that could result in agricultural conversion, leaving this as a significant and unavoidable impact of general plan adoption and the new development that could result from its adoption. The CTSP DEIR likewise concludes that this would be a significant and unavoidable impact of CTSP approval.
(d) Overriding Considerations: The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the project that override the significant adverse impact of the project associated with indirect agricultural land conversion are described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0, below.

IMPACT GHG-2: GHG EMISSIONS FROM PROJECT OPERATIONS
(a) Potential Impact:

Unmitigated operational GHG emissions would be reduced by mitigating features of the project, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The CTSP land use plans, alternative transportation, walkability, parks and open space, adopted San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District regulations and other provisions described in the CTSP EIR would help to reduce operational GHG emissions, which would, as calculated by the EIR’s air emissions modeling be reduced from unmitigated emissions by a percentage that is consistent with the State’s GHG reduction plans. Additional GHG reduction measures to be implemented by the State, such as the Clean Fleet regulations and the Renewables Portfolio Standard would further reduce GHG emissions. These elements of the project and State GHG reduction measures would substantially reduce the GHG impacts of the project but not necessarily to a less than significant level.

No other feasible mitigation measures have been identified for this impact.

Nevertheless, GHG emissions resulting from CTSP development may remain significant even with application of GHG reduction measures and regulations. Therefore, project impacts are considered potentially significant and unavoidable. (c) Findings:
(1) The project would result in potentially significant emissions of GHGs, which would be offset by project features that limit VMT and promote reduced GHG emissions and by compliance with applicable SJVAPCD regulations and programs This is nonetheless considered a potentially significant environmental impact. No additional mitigation measures are available.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the project that override the significant adverse impact of the project associated with greenhouse gas emissions are described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0, below.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 13 March 2026
IMPACT TRANS-3: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
(a) Potential Impact:

Based on significance thresholds developed for the project, the project would have a potentially significant impact on residential and commercial VMT. Mitigation has the potential to substantially reduce but not demonstrably avoid this impact. (b) Mitigation Measures:

Other mitigation listed in Chapter 4.0 Errata would be assigned during review of future CTSP projects, which would increase potential VMT mitigation, but still leave the impact potentially significant and unavoidable.

The Draft EIR evaluated elements of new development and related transportation improvements required by the CTSP that could be expected to reduce VMT for both residential and commercial uses as described in the CAPCOA (2021) handbook for analyzing potential greenhouse gas emission reduction. These elements are detailed in Wood Rodgers’ transportation report Table 6.15, which is Appendix G of the Draft EIR. The CTSP defines a range of alternative transportation, pedestrian and bicycle path improvements that would be included with proposed new development, and which would produce quantifiable GHG emission reductions. Additional GHG analysis in future projects could reveal additional potential emission reductions.

The potential for office development, and associated VMT generation, is relatively small and potential emissions were considered speculative and not quantified by Wood Rodgers. Should large office projects be proposed in the CTSP area, additional GHG reduction measures should be explored including Commute Reduction Programs, Ridesharing Programs, End of Trip Bicycle Facilities and Employer-Sponsored Vanpool. In addition, SJVAPCD Rule 9410, requires that projects with more than 100 employees incorporate Transportation Demand Measures such as these.
(c) Findings:

Although a range of potential GHG reduction measures were explored, Wood Rodgers concluded that the project’s VMT impacts would remain potentially significant and unavoidable. Although the EIR identified a range of project features and other measures and programs that would result in substantial reductions in GHG emissions, the EIR concluded that the project’s VMT impacts would remain potentially significant and unavoidable. The effectiveness of these measures, their quantification with respect to the project and their potential to substantially reduce the subject impact, is uncertain. As a result, the project’s effects on VMT are considered potentially significant.
(d) Overriding Considerations: The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the project override the significant adverse impact of the project associated with EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 14 March 2026
VMT as described in, in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0, below.

IMPACT TRANS-5: TRAFFIC HAZARDS
(a) Potential Impact:

The DEIR identifies Impact TRANS-5: Traffic Hazards – Queuing as a significant environmental effect. As discussed in the EIR, project traffic would lead to excessive queuing at southbound off-ramp and northbound on-ramp at the SR 99/Service Road interchange. Reconstruction of the interchange is in the design process, and the City is considering a substantial change in the direction of interchange planning. No workable interim queuing solution can be defined at this time. Until interchange improvements are constructed, implementation of the CTSP would result in a significant and unavoidable queuing impact.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

No mitigation measures are available for this impact other than planned interchange reconstruction. Interchange reconstruction is expected to occur well ahead of CTSP buildout. Impact may be significant and unavoidable but only in the short term. (c) Findings:

Traffic Hazards – Queuing had been identified as a significant traffic effect occur expected to occur at the SR 99/Service Road interchange. Reconstruction of the interchange is currently in the design process, and the City and Caltrans are considering a substantial change in the direction of interchange planning.

As the interchange design is uncertain and in flux for the foreseeable future, no specific mitigation measure for queuing impacts can be defined. This is, however, a short-term impact as the approved interchange design is expected to provide adequate queuing storage arriving and departing traffic at Service Road upon project completion.
(d) Overriding Considerations: The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the project override the significant adverse queuing impact of the project as described in the DEIR at Impact TRANS-5, in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 4.0, below.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 15 March 2026

2.3 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING

SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH ARE MITIGATED TO A

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The environmental effects that were found by the EIR to be significant and/or potentially significant prior to the application of mitigation measures include the effects listed below.

As required by CEQA, the City must make specific findings with respect to each of these significant effects; the City’s findings are discussed in more detail below. All of the following environmental effects would be reduced to a less than significant level by incorporating the mitigation measures prescribed in the EIR into the project.

Impact AG-3: Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act.

Impact AIR-1: Air Quality Plans and Standards - Construction Emissions Impact AIR-4: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants.

Impact BIO-1: Special-Status Species and Habitats.

Impact BIO-4: Migration Corridors and Nursery Sites.

Impact BIO-5: Local Policies and Ordinances.

Impact CULT-1: Historical Resources.

Impact CULT-2: Archaeological Resources.

Impact CULT-3: Tribal Cultural Resources.

Impact GEO-6: Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features.

Impact HAZ-4: Hazardous Material Sites.

Impact HAZ-5: Airport Hazards.

Impact HAZ-6: Interference with Emergency Vehicle Access and Evacuations.

Impact HAZ-8: Waterway Hazards.

Impact HYDRO-2: Groundwater Resources and Quality.

Impact NOISE-1: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Traffic.

Impact NOISE-2: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Other Project Noise.

Impact NOISE-3: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Construction.

Impact UTIL-1: Relocation and Construction of Infrastructure Facilities.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 16 March 2026
IMPACT AG-3: AGRICULTURAL ZONING AND WILLIAMSON ACT
(a) Potential Impact:

The CTSP Area is mostly zoned General Agriculture, while three parcels within the project site are under a Williamson Act contract. The project would rezone the CTSP Area to be consistent with proposed urban development, and the Williamson Act contracts would be cancelled or not renewed.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

AG-2: Project applicants for urban development of lands with a surviving Williamson Act contract shall apply to the City for approval of immediate cancellation of the contract. The application shall be processed pursuant to the requirements of Sections 51282 and 51284 of the Government Code, including detailed findings specified in the law, and review and comment by the California Department of Conservation:

1. That the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, and

2. That cancellation is in the public interest.

Provided that required findings can be made, immediate cancellation of remaining Williamson Act contracts will reduce potential conflicts to a less than significant level.
(c) Findings:

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts on agricultural zoning is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the potential to have direct or indirect effects on agricultural zoning resources will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

IMPACT AIR-1: AIR QUALITY PLANS AND STANDARDS – CONSTRUCTION

EMISSIONS
(a) Potential Impact:

Project construction emissions would not exceed SJVAPCD significance thresholds in a maximum development year, thereby being consistent with adopted air quality plans. Dust emissions would be reduced through the required implementation of SJVAPCD Regulation VIII and the Indirect Source Rule.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 17 March 2026
(b) Mitigation Measures:

Recommendation: The CTSP and/or conditions of approval should specifically require project conformance with existing SJVAPCD rules and regulations, including Regulation VIII and Rule 9510, as shown in the following measures:

AIR-1: Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit for each phase of the Project, the Project Proponent shall prepare and submit a Dust Control Plan that meets all of the applicable requirements of APCD Rule 8021, Section 6.3, for the review and approval of the APCD Air Pollution Control Officer.

AIR-2: During all construction activities, the Project Proponent shall implement dust control measures, as required by APCD Rules 8011-8081, to limit Visible Dust Emissions to 20% opacity or less. Dust control measures shall include application of water or chemical dust suppressants to unpaved roads and graded areas, covering or stabilization of transported bulk materials, prevention of carryout or trackout of soil materials to public roads, limiting the area subject to soil disturbance, construction of wind barriers, access restrictions to inactive sites as required by the applicable rules.

AIR-3: During all construction activities, the Project proponent shall implement the following dust control practices identified in Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the GAMAQI (2002).
a. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or vegetative ground cover. b. All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. c. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall control fugitive dust emissions by application of water or by presoaking.
d. When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, or at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
e. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at least once every 24 hours when operations are occurring. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.

Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.
f. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 18 March 2026
g. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 5 mph.
h. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

AIR-4: Asphalt paving shall be applied in accordance with APCD Rule 4641, the purpose of which is to limit VOC emissions by restricting the application and manufacturing of certain types of asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.

This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asphalt and emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations. The applicant shall coordinate with the APCD, prior to paving activities and provide the City of Ceres with evidence of consultation with the APCD, including confirmation of compliance with APCD Rule 4641.
(c) Findings:

The above-described recommendations for impacts on air quality during project construction is an/are appropriate and effective measures that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or will substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR.

IMPACT AIR-4: EXPOSURE OF SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO TOXIC AIR

CONTAMINANTS
(a) Potential Impact: Development in the project site is unlikely to generate or be exposed to TACs at a level that can present a risk to human health. Projects that could generate potentially significant amounts of TACs would be subject to City review. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

AIR-5: For service station projects, as part of the Conditional Use Permit evaluation process, the Gasoline Service Station Industrywide Risk Assessment Look-up Tool shall be used to screen service stations for their cancer and non-cancer chronic and acute risks. If the results of the Look-up Tool indicate that the proposed service station would not exceed the significance thresholds for cancer and non-cancer chronic and acute risks, as set by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), then no further action need be taken. However, if the service station project exceeds one or more of these thresholds, particularly the cancer risk threshold, then the project shall be required to prepare a Health Risk Assessment.

The Health Risk Assessment shall quantify the health risks associated with the project and identify project or design changes sufficient to reduce these risks to levels below their respective significance thresholds. These recommendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the Conditional Use Permit and shall be implemented upon permit approval.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 19 March 2026
(c) Findings:

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts of toxic air contaminates on sensitive receptors is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR.

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the potential of the project to have direct or indirect of toxic air contaminat impacts on sensitive receptors will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

IMPACT BIO-1: SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES AND HABITATS.
(a) Potential Impact:

Project development would involve the potential for impacts on foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk and Valley elderberry longhorn beetle. The potential for the project to result in impacts on special-status species is discussed on pages 7-11 and 7-12 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

BIO-1: If ground-disturbing activities would take place on sites where suitable nesting habitat may exist, a survey for nesting Swainson’s hawks shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist, following survey methods developed by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee (2000) prior to undertaking any ground-disturbing activities. The survey shall include recommended mitigation measures for any potential impacts from the project.

If ground disturbing activities would take place during the nesting season (March 1 through August 31) and Swainson’s hawk nests are found to be present, a nodisturbance buffer of a minimum of 0.5 miles shall be established around active nests until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged.

BIO-2: Prior to the start of construction activities for an approved development project, a survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) shrubs. Should such shrubs be discovered by the survey, the development project shall avoid removal of these shrubs to the extent feasible. If avoidance is not feasible, then the biologist shall recommend actions to be taken to minimize or to compensate for any impacts on blue elderberry shrubs in accordance with the applicable state or federal regulations.
(c) Findings:

Project development would involve the potential for impacts on foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk and elderberry shrub habitat for the Valley elderberry longhorn beetle.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 20 March 2026
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 are effective mitigation measures that have been required in, or will be incorporated into, the project which would avoid or substantially lessen the significant biological resource effect as identified in the EIR. Based upon the EIR and the record before it, this City Council finds that the project’s potential to have direct or indirect effects on special-status species will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

IMPACT BIO-4: MIGRATION CORRIDORS AND NURSERY SITES
(a) Potential Impact: Existing trees and grassy areas could be used by protected migratory bird species for nesting. The potential for the project to result in impacts on migration corridors and nursery sites is discussed on pages 7-13 and 7-14 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

BIO-3: If construction of a development project commences during the general avian nesting season (March 1 through July 31), a pre-construction survey for all species of nesting birds shall be conducted. If active nests for any bird species are found, work in the vicinity of the nests shall be delayed until the young have fledged. No survey shall be required if construction occurs outside the general avian nesting season.
(c) Findings:

Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure(s) for impacts on migratory wildlife habitat is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3 is appropriate mitigation for the above described impact that will be incorporated into the project and which avoids or substantially lessens the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. As a result, the project, as mitigated, will not involve a significant effect on migratory fish and wildlife habitats.

IMPACT BIO-5: LOCAL POLICIES AND ORDINANCES
(a) Potential Impact:

The Ceres General Plan has goals and policies intended to protect biological resources. The CTSP implements the City’s goals and directing future development activity, including impacts on special status species through the implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO1 above. The City of Ceres has no other requirements protecting biological resources. With the implementation of BIO-1, the project’s effect on local policies and ordinances would be less than significant. The potential for the project to result in impacts on local biological requirements is discussed on pages 7-14 and 7-15 of the Draft EIR.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 21 March 2026
(b) Mitigation Measures:

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1, as described above, would reduce this potential effect to a less than significant level
© Findings
Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

Development on the project site would be consistent with Ceres General Plan policies on biological resources with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. No local ordinances protecting biological resources have been enacted.

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts on Local Biological Requirements is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR.

IMPACT CULT-1: HISTORICAL RESOURCES
(b) Potential Impact:

No historical resources have been recorded on the project site. However, buildings of at least 50 years of age may exist in areas planned for development. The potential for the project to result in impacts on historical resources is discussed on pages 8-6 and 8-7 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

CULT-1: Based on a determination of potential historical value by the Community Development Director, existing buildings or other structures on the site that are 50 years of age or older that are planned to be removed shall be evaluated by a qualified architectural historian to determine if they are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and/or the California Register of Historical Resources. This evaluation shall be conducted prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Should any buildings be found eligible for such designation(s), then the architectural historian shall make recommendations concerning the disposition of the identified buildings, which shall be implemented by the project developer.

Recommendations may include, but are not limited to, preservation of the existing structure or reuse of the structure in accordance with historic property standards of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. © Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure(s) for impacts on historical resources is an/are appropriate and effective measures that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 22 March 2026
or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that the potential to have direct or indirect effects on historic resources will be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

IMPACT CULT-2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
(b) Potential Impact:

It is possible that subsurface archaeological resources, including Native American burials, may be encountered during project construction. The potential for the project to impact Native American burials is discussed on pages 8-7 and 8-8 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided in the MMRP:

CULT-2: If any subsurface cultural resources are encountered during project construction that occurs within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, the City of Ceres Community Development Department shall be immediately notified of the discovery, and all construction activity within 50 feet of the find shall be halted. A qualified archaeologist shall examine the find and determine its significance. If the find is determined to be significant, then the archaeologist shall recommend further mitigation measures that would reduce potential effects on the find to a level that is less than significant. Recommended measures may include, but are not limited to, 1) avoidance and preservation in place, or 2) excavation, recovery, and curation by qualified professionals. Construction activities in the area of the find shall not resume until the mitigation measures are in place. The project developer shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in a written report to the City’s Development Services Department, consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines.
© Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

Although the cultural resource study did not indicate the presence of any archaeological resources in the project area. It is conceivable that archaeological resources could be encountered during project construction activities. Mitigation Measure CULT-2 sets forth procedures to be observed by the project and City should any subsurface archaeological resources be encountered during project construction. This will reduce potential archaeological effects to a less than significant level.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 23 March 2026
IMPACT CULT-3: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
(b) Potential Impact:

It is possible that tribal cultural resources, including Native American burials, may be encountered during project construction. The potential for the project to impact Native American burials is discussed on pages 8-8 and 8-9 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2, as described above, will reduce this potential effect to a less than significant level.

The above-described mitigation measure(s) for impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources are appropriate and effective measures that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

The cultural resource study did not indicate the presence of any human burials on the project site. Discoveries of remains are considered unlikely, given the negative results of the research, survey, and Native American community outreach. However, it is conceivable that human remains, including Native American burials, could be encountered during project construction activities.

Mitigation Measure CULT-2 sets forth procedures to be observed by the project should any human burials be encountered during project construction beginning with notification of the County Coroner. If the burial is determined to be Native American in origin, then the Native American Heritage Commission would be contacted and additional required procedures would be implemented. This would ensure that the Native American burial would be treated with appropriate dignity and that significant tribal cultural resource effects would be avoided.

IMPACT GEO-6: PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND UNIQUE

GEOLOGICAL FEATURES
(a) Potential Impact:

Construction could unearth previously unknown paleontological materials of significance.

The potential for the project to impact paleontological resources is discussed on pages 9-9 and 9-10 of the Draft EIR.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 24 March 2026
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

GEO-1: If paleontological resources are encountered during project construction, the City of Ceres shall be immediately notified of the discovery, and construction activity within 50 feet of the encounter shall cease until a qualified paleontologist examines the materials, determines their significance under CEQA, and recommends mitigation measures that would be necessary to reduce potentially significant effects to a level that is less than significant. The developer or its contractor shall be responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist and for implementing recommended mitigation measures. Construction activities in the area of the find shall not resume until the mitigation measures are in place.

The above-described mitigation measure(s) for impacts on paleontological resources is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. (c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that the project has the potential to disturb paleontological resources.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1 sets forth procedures to be observed by the project should any paleontological resources be encountered during project construction. An important part of this mitigation is for project work to stop within 50 feet of the find and to not resume until a paleontologist can examine the find and make recommendations on its disposition. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 will reduce the potential for paleontological impacts to a less than significant level.

IMPACT HAZ-4 : HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SITES
(a) Potential Impacts:

No active hazardous material sites were identified on the project site. Past agricultural activities within the CTSP Area have the potential of leaving hazardous pesticide residues that could be released to the environment. Also, demolition of older buildings could release asbestos and lead-based paints into the environment. The potential for project impact hazardous materials is discussed on pages 11-9 through 11-11 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

HAZ-1: Prior to approval of a site plan or a tentative subdivision map for future development, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall be conducted and submitted to the City Community Development Department. The Phase I Assessment shall evaluate the site for potential contamination, including residues EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 25 March 2026
of agricultural chemicals on sites of previous agricultural land use. If the Phase I Assessment determines the potential presence of any hazardous material contamination, then a Phase II Environmental Site assessment shall be conducted to identify the type and extent of hazardous material contamination. If necessary, the Phase II report shall include remediation measures. Project approval shall include requirements for completion of any Phase II remediation needed to permit the proposed land use under existing applicable regulations.

HAZ-2: If evidence of unusual odors or soil discoloration is noted during construction, construction shall be halted and the City shall be notified. The property owner or responsible party shall contact a qualified environmental professional to evaluate the situation and take action as required by applicable environmental regulations. Construction work at the identified site shall not resume until the site is either remediated or found to pose no risk to worker health.

HAZ-3: Demolition permits shall be obtained from the City for structures to be removed from development sites. Demolition would occur in accordance with the conditions of the City Demolition Permit, which shall include a Demolition Plan that is reviewed and approved by the Building Official. The Demolition Plan shall include the required qualifications of demolition contractors, demolition procedures, safety requirements, testing for hazardous materials that shall include asbestos-containing material and lead-based paint, waste disposal worker and public health, and environmental protections. Permit applications for uses regulated shall include a Demolition Permit Release Form from the SJVAPCD. (c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that the project may result in disturbance of existing hazardous materials contamination and potential releases to the environment.

The above-described mitigation measure(s) HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and HAZ-3 for hazardous materials impacts are appropriate and effective measures that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. As a result, the projects effect on hazardous materials sites would be reduced to less than significant level with mitigation.

IMPACT HAZ-5: AIRPORT HAZARDS
(a) Potential Impacts:

A portion of the project site is within the Airport Influence Area established for the Modesto City-County Airport and could therefore involve an aviation hazard. The potential for project impact airport hazards is discussed on page 11-11 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 26 March 2026
HAZ-4: For projects located within the Airport Influence Area of the Modesto CityCounty Airport, as delineated within the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, site plan and design review submittals for the project shall be referred to the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission for its review and recommendations. Implementation of applicable recommendations of the Airport Land Use Commission shall be made a condition of City approval unless the City overrides any recommendation in accordance with State law. (c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that although the project could result in potential for aviation hazards, the process of referring such projects to the Stanislaus County ALUC and incorporation of their recommendations in the project would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.

IMPACT HAZ-6: INTERFERENCE WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS AND EVACUATIONS.
(a) Potential Impacts:

The project would also include improvements to existing roadways that could potentially interfere with emergency vehicle access and evacuations in the area. The potential for project impact on emergency vehicle access and evacuations is discussed on pages 11-11 through 11-12 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

HAZ-5: Encroachment permits for work within the public right-of-way shall be obtained from the City of Ceres. As a condition of the permit, and prior to the start of project construction, the permittee shall prepare and implement a Traffic Control Plan, which shall include such items as traffic control requirements, resident notification of access closure, and daily access restoration. The contractor shall specify dates and times of road closures or restrictions, if any, and shall ensure that adequate access will be provided for emergency vehicles. The Traffic Control Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Department of Public Works and shall be coordinated with the Ceres Police Department and the applicable firefighting agency if construction will require road closures or lane restrictions. (c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts on emergency vehicle access and evacuations is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 27 March 2026
described in the EIR. As a result, the subject environmental effect will be reduced to a less than significant level.

IMPACT HAZ-8: WATERWAY HAZARDS.
(a) Potential Impacts:

Residential development adjacent to TID Lower Lateral 2 could lead to trespassing and safety hazards to trespassers. The potential for project impact on waterway hazards is discussed on page 11-13 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

HAZ-6: Prior to the start of development within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, design plans for any trails along Turlock Irrigation District (TID) canals shall be submitted to TID for its review and approval. TID approval shall be obtained for any trail construction along the TID canals.
(c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts on waterway hazards is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. As a result, the subject environmental effect will be reduced to a less than significant level.

IMPACT HYDRO-2: GROUNDWATER RESOURCES AND QUALITY
(a) Potential Impacts:

The project would be served by the City’s water system, which relies in part on groundwater. The project can be accommodated from City’s existing groundwater supplies. The project may reduce groundwater recharge through increased impervious surfaces, but the impact is not considered substantial. Existing groundwater wells would need to be plugged over the course of development. The potential for project impact on waterway hazards is discussed on page 12-10 – 12-11 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

HYDRO-1: Prior to the start of development within any portion of the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, any remaining existing groundwater wells shall be plugged and abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the Stanislaus EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 28 March 2026
County Department of Environmental Resources and the provisions of California Water Code Section 13751.

HYDRO-2: For areas containing a shallow groundwater table, a dewatering permit shall be obtained from the RWQCB prior to the start of construction activities.

Dewatering shall be done in accordance with the conditions of the permit. (c) Findings
Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure(s) for impacts on groundwater resources is an/are appropriate and effective measures that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. As a result, the subject environmental effect will be reduced to a less than significant level.

IMPACT NOISE-1: INCREASE IN NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF

STANDARDS-TRAFFIC
(a) Potential Impact:

Traffic generated under Near Term Plus Project conditions would increase traffic noise levels along East Service Road by an amount exceeding applicable significance thresholds.

Mitigation would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. (b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measures are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the adopted MMRP:

NOISE-1: To reduce traffic noise increases under Near-Term Plus Project conditions to less than +1.5 dB, widening or new improvements to the segment of East Service Road north of the Copper Trails Specific Plan boundary shall be paved with quiet pavement, or another equivalent mitigation shall be provided, with approval from a qualified noise consultant and City staff. The pavement would be required for any portion of the roadway passing a noise-sensitive use, and for a distance of 100 feet on either side of the sensitive use. (c) Findings:

Application of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 as required by the adopted MMRP will reduce this potential noise impact to a less than significant level.

IMPACT NOISE-2: INCREASE IN NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF

STANDARDS-OTHER PROJECT NOISE
(a) Potential Impact:

Noise from recreational uses, trailer parking and truck loading/unloading in planned commercial areas could affect nearby sensitive land uses, mainly residences. The potential EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 29 March 2026
for project construction to result in the generation of other project noise in excess of standards is discussed under IMPACT NOISE-3.
(b) Mitigation Measures:

The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

NOISE-2: Proposed commercial and active sports recreational projects shall be subject to a preliminary review by Community Development staff for potentially significant noise impacts. Where potential noise impacts may be significant, an acoustical analysis shall be performed by a qualified acoustical consultant as to the project’s consistency with the City’s noise level standards and mitigation measures needed to bring the proposed source into compliance with City standards, assuming that compliance with City noise standards is maintained. (c) Findings:

Based upon the FEIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

Operation of the proposed retail commercial uses would generate new noise that may affect nearby noise-sensitive land uses but not to a significant level. The resulting calculated noise levels would be 54 decibels (dB) Leq and 74 dB Lmax. The noise levels would comply with the City’s daytime noise level standards of 55 dB Leq and 75 dB Lmax; however, they would not comply with the nighttime noise level standards of 45 dB Leq and 65 dB Lmax. The noise study indicates sound walls may need to be placed at specific locations where residences are close to potential commercial or recreational activity areas. The need for noise barriers would vary from project to project, but the recommended mitigation NOISE-2 would require additional professional analysis and specify that noise walls or other mitigation be incorporated into the project to maintain conformance with City standards.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-2 is an appropriate change or alteration that will be incorporated into the project which avoids or substantially lessens the potentially significant noise effect as identified in the EIR. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that the potential to have direct or indirect effects related to noise from other project noise sources will be reduced to a less than significant level.

IMPACT NOISE-3: INCREASE IN NOISE LEVELS IN EXCESS OF

STANDARDS-CONSTRUCTION
(a) Potential Impact:

Construction activities may potentially increase ambient noise above City standards at nearby residences or other sensitive land uses. The potential for project construction to result in the generation of noise in excess of standards is discussed on pages 14-11, 14-12 and 14-13 of the Draft EIR.(b) Mitigation Measures:

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 30 March 2026
The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

NOISE-3: The City shall establish the following as conditions of approval for any permit that results in the use of construction equipment:
● Construction shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. unless allowed by special permit issued by the Building Inspector or City Engineer. ● All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained.
● Quiet construction equipment, particularly air compressors, are to be selected whenever possible.
● All stationary noise-generating construction equipment such as generators or air compressors are to be located as far as is practical from existing residences. In addition, the project contractor shall place such stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors closest to the project site.
● Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited. In accordance with State regulations, idling shall be limited to no more than five minutes.
● The construction contractor shall, to the maximum extent practical, locate on-site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
(c) Findings:

Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this City Council, this City Council finds that:

Noise from project construction activities would temporarily add to the noise environment in the project vicinity during the construction period and may generate noise levels exceeding City standards. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and would occur primarily during daytime working hours, which is allowed by the Ceres Municipal Code.

Mitigation Measure NOISE-3 requires project construction activities to adhere to the requirements of the City of Ceres Municipal Code with respect to hours of operation and other specific noise control requirements.

The above-described mitigation measures for construction noise impacts are an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR. As a result, the subject environmental effect will be reduced to a less than significant level.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 31 March 2026
IMPACT UTIL-1: RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF
INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES.
(a) Potential Impact:

The CTSP Area would require new infrastructure, which would be provided in accordance with City and State requirements and standards. The project may require removal or relocation of TID facilities as discussed on pages 17-10 and 17-11 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the MMRP:

UTIL-1: Prior to the start of development that impacts TID irrigation facilities, the project shall design one or more method acceptable to the City and TID that will minimize or avoid the impacts of development on the continued operation of existing TID irrigation facilities. The agreed-upon methods shall be incorporated as applicable into the design and construction of future development. (c) Findings:

Based upon the FEIR and the entire record before it, this City Council finds that:

The above-described mitigation measure for impacts on future operation of TID facilities is an appropriate and effective measure that will be incorporated into the project and will avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect, as it is described in the EIR.

As a result, the project will have a less than significant on the operation of TID facilities.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 32 March 2026

2.4 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT HAVE NO EFFECT,

ARE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR LESS THAN

CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE
Among the potentially significant environmental effects analyzed and described in the EIR, including potential cumulative impacts, numerous potential impacts were found to be less than significant or to have no substantial effect on the environment. The following specific impacts within the defined categories of environmental effect described in the EIR were found to be less than significant as described in more detail in the FEIR. No CEQA Findings are required for these less than significant effects.

Chapter 4.0 Aesthetics and Visual Resources: The following specific aesthetic and visual resource impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact AES-1: Scenic Vistas, DEIR page 4-4
Impact AES-2: Scenic Resources, DEIR page 4-5
Impact AES-3: Visual Character and Quality, DEIR pages 4-5,6 Impact AES-4: Light and Glare, DEIR pages 4-6,7,8
Chapter 5.0 Agricultural Resources: The following specific agricultural resource impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact AG-2: Conflict Between Agricultural and Urban Land Uses, DEIR pages 5-7, 8
Chapter 6.0 Air Quality: The following specific air quality impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact AIR-2: Air Quality Plans and Standards – Operational Emissions, DEIR pages 6-16, 17,18,19
Impact AIR-3: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants, DEIR pages 6-19
Impact AIR-5: Odor Emissions, DEIR pages 6-21
Chapter 7.0 Biological Resources: The following specific biological resource impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact BIO-2: Riparian and Other Sensitive Habitats, DEIR page 7-13 Impact BIO-3: State and Federally Protected Wetlands, DEIR page 7-13 EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 33 March 2026
Impact BIO-6: Habitat Conservation Plans, DEIR page 7-14, 15 Chapter 9.0 Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources: The following specific geology, soils and mineral resource impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact GEO-1: Fault Rupture, Seismic Shaking, and Seismically Induced Failure, DEIR page 9-8
Impact GEO-2: Soil Erosion, DEIR page 9-8
Impact GEO-3: Exposure to or Effects on Unstable Geologic Units or Soils, DEIR page 9-8,9
Impact GEO-4: Expansive Soils, DEIR page 9-9
Impact GEO-5: Adequacy of Soils for On-Site Wastewater Disposal Systems, DEIR page 9-9
Impact GEO-7: Mineral and Energy Resources, DEIR page 9-10 Chapter 10.0 Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The following specific greenhouse gas impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact GHG-1: GHG Emissions from Construction Activities, DEIR pages 10-10,11
Impact GHG-3: Consistency with Applicable GHG Plans and Policies, DEIR pages 10-12, 13, 14
Chapter 11.0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The following specific hazards impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact HAZ-1: Hazardous Material Transportation, DEIR pages 11-7, 8 Impact HAZ-2: Hazardous Material Storage and Use, DEIR page 11-8 Impact HAZ-3: Hazardous Material Releases, DEIR page 11-8, 9 Impact HAZ-7: Wildfire Hazards, DEIR pages 11-12, 13
Impact HAZ-9: Railroad Hazards, DEIR pages 11-13, 14
Chapter 12.0 Hydrology and Water Quality: The following specific hydrology and water quality impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact HYDRO-1: Surface Water Features and Quality, DEIR pages 12-7, 8 Impact HYDRO-3: Exposure to Flooding Hazards, DEIR pages 12-11, 12 Impact HYDRO-4: Conflict with Water Plans, DEIR page 12-12 EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 34 March 2026
Chapter 13.0 Land Use, Population and Housing: The following specific land use, population and housing impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact LUP-1: Division of Established Communities, DEIR page 13-8 Impact LUP-2: Conflict with Land Use Plans, Policies, and Regulations, DEIR pages 13-8, 9, 10.

Impact LUP-3: Unplanned Population Growth, DEIR pages 13-10, 11.

Impact LUP-4: Displacement of Housing and People, DEIR page 13-11 Chapter 14.0 Noise: The following specific noise impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact NOISE-4: Groundborne Vibrations, DEIR page 14-13 Impact NOISE-5: Airport and Airstrip Noise, DEIR page 14-13 Chapter 15.0 Public Services and Recreation: The following specific public services and recreation impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact PSR-1: Fire Protection Service, DEIR pages 15-6, 15-7 Impact PSR-2: Police Protection Services, DEIR pages 15-7, 8 Impact PSR-3: Schools, DEIR pages 15-8, 9
Impact PSR-4: Parks and Recreational Services, DEIR page 15-9 Impact PSR-5: Other Public Facilities, DEIR pages 15-9, 10 Chapter 16.0 Transportation: The following specific transportation impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact TRANS-1: Conflict with Circulation Plans – Motor Vehicle, DEIR pages 16-9, 10, 11, 12
Impact TRANS-2: Conflict with Circulation Plans Non-Motor Vehicle, DEIR pages 16-12, 13
Impact TRANS-4: Traffic Hazards - Collisions, DEIR pages 16-16, 17 Impact TRANS-6: Emergency Access, DEIR pages 16-18
Chapter 17.0 Utilities and Energy: The following specific utilities and energy impacts were found to be less than significant:

Impact UTIL-2: Availability of Adequate Domestic Water Supply, DEIR pages 17-11, 12
Impact UTIL-3: Wastewater System Capacity, DEIR pages 17-13, 14 EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 35 March 2026
Impact UTIL-4: Storm Drainage Services, DEIR page 17-14 Impact UTIL-5: Irrigation Water Systems, DEIR pages 17-14, 15 Impact UTIL-6: Solid Waste, DEIR pages 17-15, 16
Impact UTIL-7: Energy Consumption, DEIR pages 17-16, 17 The cumulative impacts of the project were evaluated in separate issue-specific sections of Chapter 18.0 of the EIR. The project was found to have a less than cumulatively considerable contribution to cumulatively significant impacts within the following categories of environmental effects, as described in more detail in the DEIR.

18.3.1 Aesthetics and Visual Resources: DEIR page 18-3.

18.3.2 Agricultural Resources: DEIR pages 18-3, 4.

18.3.3 Air Quality: DEIR pages 18-4, 5, 6

18.3.4 Biological Resources: EIR pages 18-6,7.

18.3.5 Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources: DEIR page 18-7.

18.3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources: DEIR pages 18-7,8.

18.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions: DEIR pages 18-7, 8.

18.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials: DEIR pages 18-8,9.

18.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality: DEIR pages 18-9.

18.3.10 Land Use, Population, and Housing: DEIR pages 18-10.

18.3.11 Noise: DEIR pages 18-10, 11, 12.

18.3.12 Public Services and Recreation: DEIR pages 18-12, 13.

18.3.13 Transportation: DEIR pages 18-13,14,15,16.

18.3.14 Utilities and Energy: DEIR pages 18-17.

Each of the above-listed potential cumulative impacts were determined to be less than significant or less than cumulatively considerable for one of the following reasons:

The DEIR determined that the impact is less than significant for the Copper Trails project;
The DEIR determined that the project would have a less than cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative impact; or
EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 36 March 2026
The DEIR determined that the impact is beneficial (would be substantially reduced) for the project.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 37 March 2026

3.0 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES

3.1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR include a discussion of a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project or to the location of the project. Alternatives to the proposed project are addressed in Chapter 19.0 of the DEIR.

When a Lead Agency finds that mitigation measures needed to reduce a significant effect to less than significant, or to substantially reduce it, are infeasible (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, Finding 3), the Lead Agency must also describe the specific reasons for rejecting alternatives that could meet the same need. As discussed in Section 2.1, the City is making Finding 3 with regard to five environmental effects that could result from the project; these effects will not be sufficiently reduced by mitigation measures and are therefore considered significant and unavoidable. The City Council’s findings with regard to project alternatives are shown in the following sections.

An EIR is required to identify a range of reasonable alternatives to the project. The potential alternatives to the project include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one of more of the significant effects. “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent).” With the exception of the No Project Alternative, the alternatives discussed in the EIR are generally feasible but are unlikely to avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effects of the project. Therefore, these alternatives are not specifically rejected by the City, but their environmental effects are not such that any of the alternatives should be considered “environmentally superior” to the project and therefore selected in lieu of the proposed project. The alternatives are discussed below.

3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The quantifiable objectives of the Copper Trails project include annexation of the project site into the Ceres city limits, pre-zoning of the site and the subsequent development of the site for the urban use shown in the CTSP Land Use Plan. The DEIR identified the following CTSP project objectives:
● General Plan Implementation: Implement the General Plan by directing new development to the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI), consistent with City-adopted policies and regulations defined in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Improvement Standards, and other applicable plans, documents, and programs. ● Comprehensive Planning: Prepare a Specific Plan and associated regulatory documents that create a comprehensive development plan for the orderly expansion EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 38 March 2026
of the City within the CTSP Sphere of Influence (SOI), consistent with the preliminary land uses identified on the adopted General Plan Land Use Diagram and as directed by General Plan policy that prioritizes growth in the City’s SOI. ● Balanced Land Use Mix: Create a development plan with a mix of land uses that results in a balance of jobs and housing by accommodating approximately 2,300 residential units and 1.2-million square feet of non-residential, employmentgenerating uses, which are in town supported by neighborhood parks, open space areas, and various public/quasi-public uses.
● Housing Diversity: Designate areas for construction of a diverse array of housing types that provide housing choices in varying densities for all market segments, including opportunities for single-family homes in conventional and compact development patterns, townhomes, apartments, as well as opportunities for rental units and affordable housing consistent with the City’s General Plan. ● Regional Housing Needs Allocation: Aid the City in achieving its fair share obligation to accommodate a percentage of the region’s forecasted population growth, as mandated by the California Department of Housing and Community Development and as directed by StanCOG.
● Land Use and Transportation Integration: Provide a mixture of land uses along the Service Road transportation corridor to take advantage of higher-intensity uses in proximity to State Route 99.
● Regional Roadway Planning: Establish a corridor for the future widening of Service Road, including land area for a planned interchange at State Route 99 and realignment of Lucas Road.
● Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Develop a system of multi-use trails and Class II bikeway facilities that create alternative transportation modes within the CTSP Area and allow for connections to existing/planned bicycle/pedestrian facilities in the City.
● Backbone Infrastructure: Create a development plan that can be implemented in a phased manner and provides utility services via existing and planned infrastructure, which facilitates the logical, orderly expansion of the City adjacent to existing, urbanized areas.
● Economic Viability: Implement a public facility financing plan with logical development phases that enables the CTSP Area to develop in an economically feasible manner.
● Fiscal Responsibility: Create a development plan that can be implemented in a fiscally responsible manner, with neutral or positive fiscal impacts to the City and with identified revenue sources for the long-term maintenance of park facilities, open space areas, trails, landscape corridors, public services, and infrastructure.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 39 March 2026

3.3 ALTERNATIVES NOT SELECTED FOR FURTHER

CONSIDERATION
The EIR briefly considered several alternatives that were not addressed in detail; these alternatives were not considered “feasible” alternatives under CEQA. These alternatives, discussed in detail in Section 19.3 of the EIR: 1) were clearly infeasible, or 2) did not have the ability to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project. The alternatives considered are shown below.

Alternative Location
Alternative Land Use Plan or Design
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was circulated to agencies and the public as part of the effort to identify a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project. Additionally, the City held a public scoping meeting during the NOP review period. No specific alternatives were identified during the NOP public review process or scoping meeting.

3.4 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED IN EIR
The DEIR alternatives analysis provides a summary of the relative environmental impacts associated with each alternative analyzed in the Draft EIR.

NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE:

The No Project Alternative is discussed on page 19-5, 6 and 7 of the EIR. The EIR defines the “No Project” Alternative as no annexation to the City of Ceres, no pre-zoning, and no urban residential or commercial development as proposed by the project. The project site would continue to be used for agricultural and rural residential activities consistent with the existing Stanislaus County zoning.

Since urban development would not occur under this alternative, there would be no impacts associated with such development on the project site. Most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project would be avoided, particularly agricultural land, air pollutant and GHG emissions, noise, and traffic. However, this alternative would meet none of the objectives of the proposed project. It also would be inconsistent with the City of Ceres General Plan, which anticipates urban development of the project site. No annexation and development of the site also would mean that the City would not realize increase in revenue from property taxes, utility user taxes, license fees, and other taxes and fees. With no development, the site would offer only limited employment opportunities.

It is uncertain if continuing agricultural operations in the project area, even those involving higher-value crops, would be viable in the long term, given its location in an area designated for urban development under the Ceres General Plan. Continued agricultural use may require agricultural chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, with the potential to affect nearby residential areas and contaminate the project site if not EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 40 March 2026
properly applied. Agricultural activities would continue to generate dust emissions to which nearby land uses, including residences, may be exposed.

Findings: Environmental benefits of this alternative over the proposed project include the reduction of impacts to aesthetics and visual resources, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gases and climate change, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and population, noise, transportation and circulation, and utilities.

While the City understands the environmental benefits of the No Project Alternative, this alternative would not achieve any of the project objectives. Specifically, this alternative would not permit urban development of the site or any of the project’s attendant economic impacts. It is not a reasonable expectation for the existing property owner(s) to keep the project site in the existing condition for the foreseeable future. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected.

The City Council hereby rejects the No Project Alternative because it would not meet the objectives of the project and could cause some environmental impacts that would not occur with the proposed project. The evidence in support of this finding is provided in Chapter

19.0 of the EIR.
2007 CTSP ALTERNATIVE:

The 2007 CTSP Alternative, would involve adoption of an earlier version of the CTSP as published for a public hearing in 2007. The 2007 CTSP involved approximately 175 acres vs. the 534.6 acres covered by the proposed CTSP. The land area covered by the 2007 CTSP included all land within the proposed CTSP west of Central Avenue. The development proposed in the 2007 CTSP is shown in Table 19-2 of the Draft EIR.

The 2007 CTSP alternative would permit substantially less development than under the proposed project; the number of residential units would be reduced to 411, the majority of these units would be Low Density Residential, and the project would include no regional commercial development. Neighborhood parks, a “pocket park,” and linear parkways would be provided, linked with residential units with pedestrian/bicycle paths. The project would include improvements to major roads and extension of City utilities to serve new development.

This alternative would reduce the proposed project’s direct physical environmental effects including conversion of Farmland to urban uses; much of the existing rural landscape would remain in place; increased remaining open space would retain more wildlife habitat value. Fewer housing units and elimination of commercial development would produce a substantial reduction in traffic generation and related noise and air pollutant emissions.

Demands on the City’s utility systems would be reduced, as would demands for public services.

The 2007 CTSP Alternative would not, however, meet the objectives of the proposed project. Specifically, the alternative would not involve development of commercial uses, and it would not provide a balance of residential and non-residential land uses. The alternative would not aid the City in achieving its fair-share obligation to provide its share EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 41 March 2026
of affordable housing, as set forth in the StanCOG RHNA. The alternative would not promote a diverse array of housing types and would narrow the City’s options for accommodating the housing needs of all economic segments, leading to increased land disturbance as the City moves to meet to its housing obligations on alternative sites.

The 2007 CTSP Alternative would involve a general reduction of environmental effects as compared to the proposed project. However, this alternative is not consistent with important project objectives, is in conflict with important Housing Element policies, and it could lead to some new or more severe environmental impacts. For these reasons, this alternative is rejected.

The City Council hereby rejects the 2007 CTSP Alternative because it would not adequately meet the objectives of the project and could cause some environmental impacts that would not occur with the proposed project. The evidence in support of this finding is provided in Chapter 19.0 of the FEIR.

CURRENT CERES GENERAL PLAN MAP ALTERNATIVE:

The Current Ceres General Plan Map Alternative would involve annexation and development of the CTSP area in accordance with the current land use designations of the Ceres General Plan and City development standards. The development potential of the Pocket Area would be the same under the proposed project and this alternative.

The General Plan Map Alternative could lead to as many as 2,461 new housing units, all low-density, which would slightly exceed the maximum 2,392 housing units that could be developed under the proposed CTSP. The Medium Density and High Density Residential designations might lead to additional housing units, but this effect is unquantifiable.

Business Park development under this alternative would be slightly higher than the potential Regional Commercial development under the proposed CTSP. It is assumed that new development would require road improvements, and extension of City water, sewer, and storm drainage services would be required.

This alternative might meet CTSP objectives of providing some diversity in housing and in meeting RHNA targets, but these effects are not certain or quantifiable. This alternative could meet the objective of a more balanced land use mix of residential and commercial land uses and potentially-reduced VMT, with associated reductions in air pollutant and GHG emissions and noise.

On the whole, however, the environmental impacts of the alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project and not substantially reduced. The alternative would involve the same amount of Farmland conversion, changes to the rural landscape and the same potential for biological resources and water quality impacts. Demands on the City utilities would be increased, as would demands for public services, comparable to the proposed CTSP. However, the General Plan Alternative may lead to more severe impacts on air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and traffic. Development within the Business Park may introduce more trucks to local traffic in the area, which would contribute to toxic air pollutant and GHG emissions, as well as to ambient noise levels. It is possible that the EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 42 March 2026
General Plan Alternative may have greater or lesser impacts on several issues in comparison to the proposed CTSP.

This alternative might meet the objectives of the project, but it would not provide more specific land use guidance or provide plans for infrastructure and public facility development.

In summary, the General Plan Alternative would be consistent with many of the project objectives and might lead to some reduction of environmental impact compared to the proposed project; however, it also could lead to an increase in the severity of some impacts, and it would not meet some CTSP objectives.

The City Council hereby rejects the General Plan Map Alternative because it would not necessarily meet the objectives of the project and may cause more environmental impact than would occur with the proposed project. The evidence in support of this finding is provided in Chapter 19.0 of the FEIR.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE:

As the No Project Alternative would eliminate or avoid all potential environmental effects associated with the proposed project, it would be considered the environmentally superior alternative. However, this alternative would meet none of the project objectives, while it could generate adverse environmental impacts of its own.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires that, if a No Project Alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, then an EIR shall identify an environmentally superior alternative from the other alternatives. The other alternatives analyzed in the EIR would involve environmental effects comparable to the proposed project but would not effectively meet the objectives of the proposed project. Therefore, none of the alternatives would not be considered the environmentally superior alternative in comparison to the No Project Alternative.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 43 March 2026

4.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE COPPER TRAILS PROJECT
As described in detail in Section 2.0 of these Findings, the following five significant and unavoidable impacts could occur with implementation of the project:

Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland
Impact AG-4: Indirect Agricultural Land Conversion
Impact GHG-2: GHG Emissions from Project Operations.

Impact TRANS-3: Vehicle Miles Traveled.

Impact TRANS-5: Traffic Hazards - Queuing.

The adverse effects listed above, and described in detail in Section 2.0, are substantive issues of concern to the City of Ceres. The project is, however, consistent with City of Ceres land use designations and zoning and would implement important goals and policies of the Ceres General Plan while conforming with its applicable standards. The overall objective of the General Plan is to accommodate the City’s needs for growth over the foreseeable future. The proposed CTSP project is designated for development of land uses that will generate jobs and tax revenue for the City, and which could reduce the number of residents that commute to work in areas outside of the City. The project would provide short-term employment opportunities during the design and construction of new land uses, and the proposed project would generate revenue that would, over time, exceed public costs associated with providing services to the project.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Ceres hereby finds that the five potential environmental effects of the CTSP project, as described above and in the referenced sections of Final EIR for the project, are potentially significant and cannot be avoided, or are mitigated to Less Than Significant or substantially reduced by the mitigation measures described in the EIR and which will be required of the project.

The City also finds in Section 3.0 of this document that none of the project alternatives have the potential to avoid or substantially reduce the significant environmental effects of the project except the No Project Alternative, which is inconsistent with the project objectives.

The City Council hereby adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) with respect to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which is shown in its entirety below. The SOC describes the anticipated economic, legal, social, technological and/or other benefits or considerations that warrant the City Council’s decision to approve the project even though all of the environmental effects of the project are not fully mitigated.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 44 March 2026
The Ceres City Council specifically finds that the potentially significant and unavoidable environmental impacts of the CTSP project are considered acceptable in light of overriding social, economic and other benefits or considerations related to the project, and these overriding effects are listed below. The City Council finds that the social, economic and other benefits or considerations related to the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable environmental effects of the project. The City Council considers the following items to be the overriding social, economic and other benefits or considerations of the project.

1. The project site and surroundings are currently designated for urban development by the Ceres General Plan.

2. The project area is within the City’s designated Sphere of Influence which is intended to be annexed and pre-zoned for urban development in the near future. In anticipation of eventual annexation and development, the project site is designated Urban Transition by Stanislaus County General Plan.

3. Economic development and job creation, including the designation of sufficient land for development of job-generating commercial land uses, are among the core objectives of the Ceres General Plan.

4. The project is in compliance with Ceres General Plan policies supporting urban growth on lands with existing transportation and utility services, thereby preventing unnecessary urban expansion into other greenfield areas on the periphery of the City.

The project site is surrounded by other unincorporated areas designated for eventual urban development.

5. The General Plan EIR, considered and certified by the Ceres City Council before adopting the General Plan, described a range of potential environmental impacts associated with planned development in accordance with the adopted General Plan designations. The project would make contributions to these previously identified impacts consistent with the analysis provided in the certified General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). The significant impacts analyzed in the GPEIR include conversion of agricultural lands, emissions of criteria pollutants including oxides of nitrogen, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic and noise increases along Service Road that would result from planned urban growth as a whole.

6. Proposed urban development is within the allowable land use intensities for the various General Plan land use designations applicable to the CTSP area. Approval of the project would not confer any substantial increase in planned future development intensity in the CTSP area that is not already accounted for in the Ceres General Plan and the GPEIR.

7. The 2025 Fiscal Impact Analysis and Public Facilities Financing Plan reports, prepared by Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) indicate that the project will produce significant economic benefits to the local economy at buildout, including tax revenue, development impact fee revenue, construction spending and resulting one-time construction and ongoing employment associated with planned commercial uses.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 45 March 2026

8. EPS estimates that the project will generate approximately $193 million in construction spending for backbone infrastructure and public facilities required to support project development at buildout.

9. At buildout, EPS estimates the project will generate an estimated $3.4 million annually in property tax and other General Fund revenues directly benefitting the City of Ceres, net of estimated annual General Fund expenditures to serve the project. In addition, the project is estimated to generate an additional $1.7 million in annual Measure H Public Safety Sales Tax revenue for the City at buildout.

10. Future commercial development in the CTSP area has the potential to employ an estimated 2,338 full-time employees generating substantial new employee spending, taxable sales, and sales tax revenue to the City and surrounding areas.

11. The project is estimated to generate nearly $254 million in development impact fee revenues to the City, Stanislaus County, and Ceres Unified School District. Of these revenues, the project is estimated to generate $118 million in citywide development impact fees and nearly $82 million in project-specific development impact fees, to fund costs of new facilities or upgrades to existing streets, utilities, police, fire, parks and general government facilities required by new development.

12. The project is subject to the requirements of the Stanislaus County Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program. Mitigation for agricultural land conversion impacts will require acquisition and dedication of conservation easement-protected agricultural land or payment of equivalent in-lieu fees to the Mitigation Program as compensation for the 319.5 acres of agricultural land conversion associated with implementation of the CTSP.

13. The project will widen, improve and construct a wide range of existing and planned streets in the CTSP area, including turning lanes, pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes, including:

Central Avenue from E. Service Road to Central Backbone Street $2,344,596.20 Central Avenue from Central Backbone Street to TID Lateral $4,170,086.45 Blaker Street from E. Service Road to TID Lateral $9,512,001.63 Service Road from Blaker Road to Existing High School Frontage $1,350,418.69 Western Backbone Street from Blaker Road to Central Avenue $5,286,700.55 E. Service Road from Central Avenue to Moffett Road $5,828,153.95 Moffett Road from E. Service Road to Central Backbone Street $3,551,664.56 Moffett Road from Central Backbone Street to E. Redwood Road $4,234,699.12 Central Backbone Street from Central Avenue to Moffett Road $7,887,471.73 E. Redwood Road from Central Avenue to Moffett Road $4,930,275.43 E. Redwood Road from Moffett Road to Mitchell Road $6,679,990.91 Mitchell Road from TID Lateral to Prairie Flower Road $2,236,147.32 Commercial Backbone Street #1 from Moffett Road to Prairie Flower Road $3,308,810.21 Commercial Backbone Street #2 from Prairie Flower Road to E. Redwood Road $2,581,455.73 Intersection Improvements Level of Service Improvements $4,794,475.00 STREET CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL $68,696,947.48
EXHIBIT D ITEM 13
CTSP CEQA Findings of Fact 46 March 2026

14. Except for the five significant and unavoidable impacts addressed in this section of the CEQA Findings, all of the numerous other potential environmental effects of the project as described in the EIR were determined to be less than significant or would be reduced to less than significant level with implementation of mitigation measures listed in the project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in conjunction with the project
In addition to the above-listed social, economic and other benefits of the project, the City Council has also taken the following points into consideration:

15. The EIR considers a range of feasible alternatives to the proposed project. None of the alternatives would result in avoidance or a substantial reduction in the significant and unavoidable effects of the project.

16. The agricultural land conversion impacts of developing the project site were included in the analysis of this environmental concern in the EIR prepared and certified by the City prior to adoption of the Ceres General Plan. Agricultural land conversion impacts were accepted by the City as significant and unavoidable in its Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan.

17. While the FEIR considers greenhouse gas emissions impacts to be significant and unavoidable, these impacts were also addressed for planned urban development foreseen by the General Plan EIR and accepted in the City’s Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan.

The City Council of the City of Ceres hereby finds in light of the whole record before it that the above-described economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits or considerations related to the project outweigh the environmental effects of the project that may remain unmitigated or are considered to be unavoidable. These environmental effects of project implementation are, therefore, considered to be acceptable.

The City Council also finds that any environmental detriment caused by the proposed project has been minimized to the extent feasible through the mitigation measures identified in the CTSP EIR, mitigation monitoring/reporting plan and herein. Where mitigation of environmental impacts is not feasible, these impacts will be outweighed and counterbalanced by the significant economic, social, environmental, and other benefits to be generated within the region.

EXHIBIT D ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF CERES GENERAL

PLAN LAND USE MAP TO REFLECT THE LAND USES CONTAINED IN

THE COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AND EXISTING LAND

USES IN THE POCKET AREA

THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Ceres
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. and considered the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.03.030 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, the City Council has the responsibility to hear and decide applications for zoning amendments, general plan amendments, community plans, specific/master plans, special planning areas, pre-zoning, and development agreements, and to direct planning-related special studies; and WHEREAS, the City, as Lead Agency, has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2023090637) to evaluate the Project pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was made available for the statutory minimum 45-day public review from December 12, 2024, to January 27, 2025, and public comments received were posted and responded to in the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was issued by the City on February 6, 2026, indicating that the Planning Commission would consider the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project at a public hearing on March 2, 2026, and that a Final EIR was available for public review; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project, adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS, the Project Area is located in the City of Ceres Sphere of Influence and Planning Area, as identified in the Ceres General Plan, which includes a Land Use Diagram that establishes preliminary land use designations for properties in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, existing land uses for the Project Area as identified on the County of Stanislaus General Plan Land Use Map include a mixture of Urban Transition, Agriculture, Commercial, Industrial, Low Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, and Planned Development designations; and
WHEREAS, the preliminary land uses for the Project Area, as identified in the Ceres General Plan, include a mixture of Regional Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, School, Light Industrial, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium-High Density Residential, High Density Residential, Park and Open Space, and Community Facilities designations; and
ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT B
WHEREAS, the Project has been found to be consistent with applicable policies of the Ceres General Plan and Ceres Zoning Ordinance, as described in the City Council Staff Report dated April 13, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 2, 2026 at 6:00 p.m., and after receiving a staff report and public testimony, recommended that the City Council approve the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at a public hearing, including any supporting reports by City staff, recommendation from the Planning Commission, and any information provided during public meetings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ceres, pursuant to the Ceres Municipal Code, and upon evidence in the staff report and associated documents incorporated by reference herein, approves the amendment to the General Plan Land Use Diagram for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project based on the following findings:

1. The General Plan Amendment is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.A.1 by prioritizing growth within the City’s Sphere of Influence.

2. The new land use designations for the Project Area, as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto, are consistent with the preliminary land use designations currently identified on the Land Use Diagram in the City of Ceres General Plan.

3. The new land uses in the Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) area would facilitate development that is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.A.11 by encouraging new commercial uses and encouraging a range of housing options, which together would result in development that benefits the community and City at large.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ceres City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 13
th day of April 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
________________________________
Javier Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Fallon Martin, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A: General Plan Land Use Designations Exhibit
ITEM 13
Exhibit A
Existing General Plan Land Use Designations
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations
ITEM 13
ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT C
{CW126823.1}
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-XXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CERES APPROVING

THE PRE-ZONING FOR THE COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AREA AND

POCKET AREA LOCATED WITHIN UNINCORPORATED STANISLAUS COUNTY AND AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP ACCORDINGLY
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. and considered the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.03.030 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, the City Council has the responsibility to hear and decide applications for zoning amendments, general plan amendments, community plans, specific/master plans, special planning areas, pre-zoning, and development agreements, and to direct planning-related special studies; and
WHEREAS, the City, as Lead Agency, has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2023090637) to evaluate the Project pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was made available for the statutory minimum 45-day public review from December 12, 2024 to January 27, 2025, and public comments received were posted and responded to in the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was issued by the City on February 6, 2026, indicating that the Planning Commission would consider the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project at a public hearing on March 2, 2026 and that a Final EIR was available for public review; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project, adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, the Project Area is located in the City of Ceres Sphere of Influence and Planning Area, as identified in the Ceres General Plan, which includes a Land Use Diagram that establishes preliminary land use designations for properties in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Project area is located within an unincorporated area of Stanislaus County and would require annexation into the City of Ceres prior to any development ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT C
{CW126823.1}
activity occurring under the City’s jurisdiction and pursuant to City standards and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the annexation area is contiguous with the City of Ceres current City limits and is identified in the Ceres General Plan as a logical area for City expansion; and WHEREAS, Section 18.05.100 (Zoning Annexed Areas) of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance establishes the requirements for zoning for areas to be annexed into the City and requires that all territory considered for annexation shall be pre-zoned with a zone classification which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026, the City Council adopted a Resolution amending the General Plan Land Use Diagram to establish land use designations for all properties in the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the existing zoning for the Project Area, as identified County of Stanislaus Zoning Map, includes a mixture of Rural Residential, Multiple Family, Medium Density Residential, General Commercial, Industrial, General Agriculture 10 Acre Urban Transition, General Agriculture 40 Acre, and Highway Frontage districts; and WHEREAS, pre-zoning of the Project Area would allow all properties in the annexation area to establish new zoning districts that align with the districts and definitions contained in the City’s Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Pre-Zoning districts for the Project Area include a mixture of Planned Community (P-C), Single-Family Residential (R-1), Medium Density Residential (R-3), Medium-High Density Residential (R-4), Neighborhood Commercial (C-1), Community Commercial (C-2), and Light Industrial (M-1) districts, as defined in the Ceres Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the pre-zoning to be applied to the CTSP area is the Planned Community (P-C) district in accordance with Section 18.13 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, which allows projects such as Copper Trails to be master-planned and for a Specific Plan to function as the primary Zoning tool for its implementation; and WHEREAS, the Project has been found to be consistent with applicable policies of the Ceres General Plan and Ceres Zoning Ordinance, as described in the City Council Staff Report dated April 13, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 2, 2026 at 6:00 p.m., and after receiving a staff report and public testimony, recommended that the City Council approve the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT C
{CW126823.1}
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at a public hearing, including any supporting reports by City staff, recommendation from the Planning Commission, and any information provided during public meetings.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF CERES CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The City Council hereby adopts the following findings to prezone all properties in the Project area, as evaluated in the City Council staff report dated April 13, 2026, as follows:

1. The pre-zoning, as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, is consistent with Section 18.05.100 (Zoning Annexed Areas) of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance by establishing new zoning districts for all properties in the Project Area that are consistent with each District’s respective General Plan land use designation.

2. The proposed pre-zoning for the Project Area and amendment to the Zoning Map are consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable goals and policies of the City of Ceres General Plan and the Copper Trails Specific Plan.

3. The pre-zoning is consistent with Chapter 32 (Amendments) of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, which requires that the City Council hold a public hearing to consider any request to pre-zone properties located outside of the City’s jurisdiction and to amend the Zoning Map accordingly.

4. The proposed pre-zoning and amendment to the Zoning Map for the Project Area will have no adverse effect on properties currently under the City's jurisdiction.

5. The pre-zoning was reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as part of its evaluation of the defined Project.

SECTION 2. AMENDMENT. The Zoning Map is hereby amended to establish zoning districts to all properties in the Project Area, as shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.

SECTION 4. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption, provided it is published in a newspaper of a general circulation at least within fifteen (15) days after its passage or a summary of the Ordinance is published in a newspaper of general circulation at least five (5) days prior to adoption and again at least fifteen (15) days after its passage.

ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT C
{CW126823.1}
SECTION 5. CERTIFICATION OF COUNCIL ADOPTION AND APPROVAL. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 13 th day of
April 2026, and passed and adopted as Ordinance No. 2026-XXX at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 27
th day of April 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

APPROVED:
___________________________________
Javier Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Fallon Martin, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Nubia I. Goldstein, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A: Pre-Zoning Districts Exhibit
ITEM 13
Exhibit A
Pre-Zoning Districts
Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project
ITEM 13
ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT D
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CERES

ADOPTING THE COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC PLAN AND

ASSOCIATED PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN

THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Ceres
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. and considered the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project (Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.03.030 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, the City Council has the responsibility to hear and decide applications for zoning amendments, general plan amendments, community plans, specific/master plans, special planning areas, pre-zoning, and development agreements, and to direct planning-related special studies; and
WHEREAS, the City, as Lead Agency, has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2023090637) to evaluate the Project pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was made available for the statutory minimum 45-day public review from December 12, 2024 to January 27, 2025, and public comments received were posted and responded to in the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was issued by the City on February 6, 2026, indicating that the Planning Commission would consider the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project at a public hearing on March 2, 2026 and that a Final EIR was available for public review; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing on April 13, 2026, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project, adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
WHEREAS, the Project area is located within an unincorporated area of Stanislaus County and would require annexation into the City of Ceres prior to any development activity occurring under the City’s jurisdiction and pursuant to City standards and regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Project Area is located in the City of Ceres Sphere of Influence and Planning Area, as identified in the Ceres General Plan, which includes a Land Use Diagram that establishes preliminary land use designations for properties in the Project Area; and
ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT D
WHEREAS, the preliminary land uses for the Project Area, as identified in the Ceres General Plan, include a mixture of Regional Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, School, Light Industrial, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium-High Density Residential, High Density Residential, Park and Open Space, and Community Facilities designations; and WHEREAS, the Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) establishes a development framework for the 535-acre CTSP area and addresses development aspects of land use, circulation, parks and recreation, public utilities, public services, phasing, financing, and implementation, in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 3, Article 8 (Sections 65450 – 65457), Planning and Zoning Law, of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the CTSP incorporates a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) that estimates the costs and funding mechanisms to construct the public improvements necessary to support and facilitate development of the CTSP area; and WHEREAS, the pre-zoning to be applied to the CTSP area is the Planned Community (P-C) district in accordance with Section 18.13 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance, which allows projects such as Copper Trails to be master-planned and for a Specific Plan to function as the primary Zoning tool for its implementation; and WHEREAS, the City and the proponent(s) of the CTSP are currently negotiating one or more Development Agreements, which are contemplated to be brought to the Planning Commission and City Council at future public hearings; and WHEREAS, the CTSP contains different landowners, including the Project proponent(s), some of which may be subject to a Development Agreement and others which may not be subject to a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, in the interest of orderly development, avoiding service deficiencies, and preventing undersized or piecemeal construction of public infrastructure and facilities, the City desires to establish certain conditions as part of the CTSP regarding the phasing and timing of the required infrastructure and facilities for development of the CTSP; and WHEREAS, development of the CTSP is anticipated to generate increased demand for school facilities within the Ceres Unified School District (CUSD), and the City desires to ensure mitigation to school facility impacts and encourage coordination with CUSD prior to student generation in Project area; and
WHEREAS, the Project has been found to be consistent with applicable policies of the Ceres General Plan and Ceres Zoning Ordinance, as described in the City Council Staff Report dated April 13, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 2, 2026 at 6:00 p.m., and after receiving a staff report and public testimony, recommended that the City Council approve the Copper Trails Specific Plan and Annexation Project ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT D
(Project), consisting of an Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment, a Pre-Zoning, a Specific Plan, and an Annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at a public hearing, including any supporting reports by City staff, recommendation from the Planning Commission, and any information provided during public meetings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ceres, pursuant to the Ceres Municipal Code, and upon evidence in the staff report and associated documents incorporated by reference herein, approves the Copper Trails Specific Plan and associated Public Facilities Financing Plan based on the following findings:

1. The CTSP is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.I.2, which requires a master plan or specific plan to comprehensively plan for new neighborhood developments, by establishing a development framework and regulatory structure for the CTSP area.

2. The land uses and development potential allowed through implementation of the CTSP are consistent with the preliminary land use designations and development assumptions for the City’s existing Sphere of Influence, as identified by the Ceres General Plan Land Use Map for the Project Area.

3. The CTSP is consistent with the policies of the City of Ceres General Plan, applicable State and local regulations, and the process for “planned communities” described in Chapter 18.13, Planned Community Zone, of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance.

4. The CTSP would implement General Plan Policy 2.A.6 by facilitating construction of a wide range of housing types by utilizing a mixture of LDR, MDR, MHDR, and HDR residential land use designations, which each have a unique density range to allow for a mixture of lot sizes that can accommodate a variety of single-family and multi-family housing types throughout the CTSP.

5. The CTSP would implement General Plan Policy 2.L.11 by designating portions of the Plan Area with a Regional Commercial land use designation that would encourage development of commercial destination and other development attractive to the regional market.

6. The CTSP is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.I.3 by including a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) that identifies the costs and funding sources for the construction of public improvements to ensure that new development pays for its fair share portion of costs associated with impacts on infrastructure.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ceres hereby adopts the following requirements regarding the necessary infrastructure and facilities for development of the CTSP:

1. In the interest of orderly development of the CTSP, avoiding service deficiencies, and preventing undersized or piecemeal construction of necessary infrastructure ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT D
and facilities, an infrastructure phasing plan shall be required for each subdivision map application filed within the CTSP, subject to approval of the City Engineer.

The infrastructure phasing plan shall be an application requirement of a subdivision map application to be considered for approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. The infrastructure phasing plan shall be consistent with all applicable plans, ordinances, and standards of the City, including the Ceres General Plan, the CTSP, City subdivision ordinances and standards, and the Ceres Municipal Code.

2. The infrastructure phasing plan shall include at minimum, the stormwater drainage, circulation, potable water, non-potable water, wastewater, and parkland requirements for each subdivision map application, including the timing of each improvement or facility item. Parkland, open space, and paseo sites shall be developed and made available as residents arrive to the CTSP area.

3. The phasing plan shall further include detail regarding the proposed financing mechanisms of the subdivider consistent with the PFFP. Any public financing district or mechanism which requires the City to adopt, facilitate, or administer financing or reimbursement on behalf of a developer shall be subject to City approval.

4. City staff is hereby authorized to update its planning application forms to include the infrastructure phasing plan as an application requirement for development within the CTSP, consistent with the provisions of this Resolution.

5. The foregoing phasing plan requirements shall apply to each subdivision map application filed within the CTSP area, whether such properties are subject or not subject to a Development Agreement between the City and the development applicant.

6. In the event that a master infrastructure phasing plan for the entire CTSP area is prepared for consideration and approval by the City, the foregoing requirements may be modified or waived by the City for subsequent subdivision map applications.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ceres that development of the CTSP shall be subject to the following requirements regarding impacts to school facilities, hereby incorporated by reference and made part of the CTSP:

1. CTSP area developers will be required to coordinate with the Ceres Unified School District (CUSD) to ensure that sufficient school facilities are available to serve the plan area. Each new project shall mitigate impacts caused by the project and/or pay its fair share contribution for school facilities through the payment of fees or other negotiated methods, as permitted under State law. Developers and CUSD shall discuss methods and options to provide the school facilities required to serve the project, including but not limited to, payment of fees, mitigation agreement(s), and/or formation of a community facilities district. Prior to approval of subdivision maps or building permits in the CTSP area (as determined by the City), developers shall demonstrate compliance with applicable school impact requirements, ITEM 13

ATTACHMENT D
including but not limited to, entering into an agreement with CUSD concerning school facilities funding and mitigation.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Ceres City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 13
th day of April 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
________________________________
Javier Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Fallon Martin, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit A: Copper Trails Specific Plan, Copper Trails Specific Plan, dated February 2026
Exhibit B: Public Facilities Financing Plan, dated November 2025 ITEM 13
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | February 2026 Adopted Ordinance No. Prepared for City of Ceres Community Development Department 2220 Magnolia Street Ceres, California 95307

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Ceres
 City Council

Javier Lopez, Mayor
Daniel A. Martinez, Vice Mayor, District 4
James Casey, District 1  Rosalinda L. Vierra, District 2  Cerina Otero, District 3  Planning Commission

Gary Condit, Chair
Ruldip (RJ) Jammu, Vice Chair
Bob Gobble  Francisco Mireles  Dorie Perez
 City Staff

Doug Dunford, City Manager
Lea Simvoulakis, Planning Consultant
Michael Beltran, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Sam Royal, Director of Public Works
Consultant Team
Specific Plan
Traffic Impact Analysis
 BaseCamp Environmental

Environmental Impact Report
 Economic & Planning Systems

Public Facilities Financing Plan
Fiscal Impact Analysis
 NorthStar Engineering Group

Land Use Planning
Utility Master Plans

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Specific Plan Tool ....................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Objectives ....................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Specific Plan Organization ....................................................................... 1-3 Chapter 2: Setting & Context 2.1 Project Location ........................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Site Conditions & Uses ............................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Relationship to Surrounding Uses ............................................................. 2-4 2.4 Factors Influencing the Development Plan ............................................. 2-6 Chapter 3: Community Vision 3.1 Vision for Copper Trails ............................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Community Form & Design ........................................................................ 3-2 Chapter 4: Land Use 4.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Land Use Plan & Development Estimations ............................................ 4-1 4.3 Residential Uses & Development Regulations ....................................... 4-4 4.4 Commercial Uses & Development Regulations .................................... 4-10 4.5 Park, Open Space & Public Uses .......................................................... 4-13 Chapter 5: Circulation 5.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Existing Circulation System ........................................................................ 5-1 5.3 Planned Roadways ..................................................................................... 5-2 5.4 Public Transit .............................................................................................. 5-11 Chapter 6: Parks, Trails & Trees 6.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Parks & Recreation Facilities .................................................................... 6-1 6.3 Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility .................................................................. 6-6 6.4 Public Realm Design ................................................................................... 6-8 Chapter 7: Utilities 7.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 7-1 7.2 Potable Water ............................................................................................ 7-2 7.3 Wastewater ................................................................................................. 7-4 7.4 Non-Potable Water ................................................................................... 7-6 7.5 Drainage & Flood Control ........................................................................ 7-8 7.6 Energy ......................................................................................................... 7-11 7.7 Voice & Data Communications ............................................................... 7-11 7.8 Solid Waste ............................................................................................... 7-11

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
ii City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Chapter 8: Public Services 8.1 Overview ...................................................................................................... 8-1 8.2 Schools........................................................................................................... 8-2 8.3 Library Services ........................................................................................... 8-4 8.4 Law Enforcement ......................................................................................... 8-4 8.5 Fire & Emergency Services ........................................................................ 8-5 Chapter 9: Design Guidelines 9.1 Overview & Application ............................................................................ 9-1 9.2 Residential Neighborhoods ....................................................................... 9-1 9.3 Commercial Development ....................................................................... 9-10 Chapter 10: Implementation 10.1 Overview ................................................................................................. 10-1 10.2 Regulatory Authority, Zoning & Severability.................................... 10-1 10.3 Relationship to City Plans & Policies ................................................... 10-2 10.4 Specific Plan Related Documents ........................................................ 10-3 10.5 Public Facilities Financing ...................................................................... 10-3 10.6 Infrastructure Phasing ............................................................................ 10-4 10.7 Entitlements & Approvals ...................................................................... 10-6 10.8 Specific Plan Fee .................................................................................... 10-8 10.9 Amendments & Minor Modifications ................................................... 10-9 10.10 Residential Unit Transfers & Density Blending ........................... 10-11 10.11 Parcel Modifications & Housing Diversity ................................... 10-12 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1: Regional Vicinity .......................................................................... 2-1 Figure 2-2: Plan Area Location ...................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-3: Site Opportunity and Constraints ............................................. 2-5 Figure 3-1: Community Form Elements .......................................................... 3-3 Figure 4-1: Land Use Plan............................................................................... 4-3 Figure 5-1: Roadway Key Map .................................................................... 5-3 Figure 5-2: Service Road (West of High School Site) ............................... 5-5 Figure 5-3: Service Road (Along High School Frontage) .......................... 5-5 Figure 5-4: Service Road (East of Central Avenue) ................................... 5-6 Figure 5-5: Central Avenue & Moffett Road .............................................. 5-6 Figure 5-6: Blaker Road .................................................................................. 5-7 Figure 5-7: E. Redwood Road (West of Moffett Road)............................ 5-7 Figure 5-8: E. Redwood Road (East of Moffett Road) .............................. 5-8 Figure 5-9: Interior Collector Road (Residential Frontage) ...................... 5-8 Figure 5-10: Interior Collector Road (Commercial Frontage) .................. 5-9 Figure 5-11: Interior Collector Road (Park Frontage) ............................... 5-9 Figure 5-12: Interior Street ........................................................................... 5-10 Figure 5-13: Public Transit ............................................................................ 5-12 Figure 6-1: Park & Open Space Sites .......................................................... 6-3 Figure 6-2: Multi-Use Path Design Section .................................................. 6-6 Figure 6-3: TID Lateral Trail Design Section ............................................... 6-6 Figure 6-4: Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility Network .................................. 6-7 Figure 7-1: Potable Water Infrastructure .................................................... 7-3 Figure 7-2: Wastewater Infrastructure ........................................................ 7-5 Figure 7-3: Non-Potable Water Infrastructure ........................................... 7-7

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Figure 7-4: Storm Drainage Infrastructure .................................................. 7-9 Figure 8-1: School Facilities ............................................................................ 8-3 Figure 10-1: Preliminary Infrastructure Phasing ....................................... 10-5 Figure 10-2: Parcel Reconfiguration ........................................................ 10-13 Figure 10-3: Parcel Realignment .............................................................. 10-13 Figure 10-4: Housing Product Diversity ................................................... 10-14 LIST OF TABLES Table 4-1: Land Use Summary ........................................................................ 4-2 Table 4-2: Residential Permitted Uses ........................................................... 4-8 Table 4-3: Residential Development Standards .......................................... 4-9 Table 4-4: RC Permitted Uses ....................................................................... 4-11 Table 4-5: RC Development Standards ...................................................... 4-12 Table 5-1: Roadway Classifications............................................................... 5-2 Table 6-1: Population Estimates ...................................................................... 6-5 Table 6-2: Municipal Code Park Requirements ........................................... 6-5 Table 6-3: Primary Street Tree Palette ....................................................... 6-11 Table 7-1: Utility Providers .............................................................................. 7-1 Table 8-1: Public Service Providers ............................................................... 8-1 Table 8-2: Student Generation Estimates ..................................................... 8-2

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
iv City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
PAGE

INTENTIONALLY
BLANK

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Introduction
Inside this Chapter 1.1 Overview 1.2 Specific Plan Tool 1.3 Project Objectives 1.4 Specific Plan Organization

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
1-1
INTRODUCTION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

1.1 OVERVIEW The Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) establishes the regulatory framework for the development of an approximately 535-acre land area near the southwestern edge of the City of Ceres, west of State Route 99 and south of Service Road. The Plan Area is included in the City’s General Plan planning area and is located in its Sphere of Influence (SOI), and as such, is recognized as a logical growth extension for the City. The CTSP establishes a vision for the development plan, addressing its ultimate urban form and development pattern. Its framework is shaped by the desire to create a series of residential neighborhoods and commercial centers, which are linked to one another by a clearly-defined network of parks and trails. As an implementation tool, the CTSP includes plans for land uses, circulation systems, parks, trails, open space areas, public services, and utility systems. At full buildout, the development plan provides for approximately 2,400 housing units in a mix of densities that support all population segments and nearly 1.2-million square feet of commercial uses. The CTSP also incorporates design guidelines for streetscapes, community identity features, and other unique aspects of the planned development. Together, these elements provide the regulatory framework that the City can use to evaluate and implement individual projects within the CTSP, helping to ensure that its buildout is consistent with the overarching vision.

1.2 SPECIFIC PLAN TOOL A Specific Plan is a planning and regulatory tool intended to implement a City or County General Plan through the development of policies, programs, and regulations that provide an intermediate level of detail between the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and individual development projects. The authority to prepare and adopt specific plans is set forth in the California Government Code (Planning and Zoning Law). As a mechanism for the implementation of the goals and policies of the City General Plan, State law stipulates that specific plans can only be adopted or amended if they are consistent with the jurisdiction’s adopted General Plan. This Specific Plan is consistent with the policies of the City of Ceres General Plan, as well as other applicable State and local regulations. Chapter 10, Implementation, provides additional details regarding the City’s authority to adopt the Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP). When the CTSP area was approved and subsequently annexed to the City of Ceres, the entire Plan Area was placed into a P-C (Planned Community Zone) zoning district. Consistent with the regulations for this district as outlined in Chapter 13 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the Ceres Municipal Code), this allows the CTSP to function as the primary zoning tool and regulatory mechanism to implement the Specific Plan. As such, the CTSP establishes a comprehensive development plan to guide development activity in the Plan Area. It includes a development framework for land uses, circulation systems, parks and recreation, utilities, public services, and implementation. The intent is to promote the systematic and orderly development of the Plan Area, consistent with the overarching vision for the community. All subsequent development projects and related activities in the Plan Area are required to be consistent with the CTSP.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
1-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

1.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The CTSP’s development plan, including its land use organization, roadway alignments, and resulting balance of residential and non-residential uses, has been designed to achieve the following Project Objectives:  General Plan Implementation: Implement the General Plan by directing new development to the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI), consistent with City-adopted policies and regulations defined in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Improvement Standards, and other applicable plans, documents, and programs.  Comprehensive Planning: Prepare a Specific Plan and associated regulatory documents that create a comprehensive development plan for the orderly expansion of the City within its Sphere of Influence (SOI), consistent with the preliminary land uses identified on the adopted General Plan Land Use Diagram and as directed by General Plan policy that prioritizes growth in the City’s SOI.  Balanced Land Use Mix: Create a development plan with a mix of land uses that results in a balance of jobs and housing by accommodating approximately 2,400 residential units and 1.2-million square feet of non-residential, employment-generating uses, which is supported by neighborhood parks, open space areas, and public/quasi-public uses.  Housing Diversity: Designate areas for construction of a diverse array of housing types that provide housing choices in varying densities for all market segments, including opportunities for single-family homes in conventional and compact development patterns, townhomes, apartments, as well as opportunities for rental units and affordable housing consistent with the City’s General Plan.  Regional Housing Needs Allocation: Aid the City in achieving its fair share obligation to accommodate a percentage of the region’s forecasted population growth, as mandated by the California Department of Housing and Community Development and as directed by the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG).  Land Use and Transportation Integration: Provide a mixture of land uses along the Service Road transportation corridor to take advantage of higher-intensity uses in proximity to State Route 99.  Regional Roadway Planning: Establish a corridor for the future widening of Service Road, including land area for a planned interchange at State Route 99 and realignment of Lucas Road.  Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities: Develop a system of multi-use trails and Class II bikeway facilities that create alternative transportation modes within the Plan Area and allow for connections to existing/planned bicycle/pedestrian facilities in the City.  Backbone Infrastructure: Create a development plan that can be implemented in a phased manner and provides utility services via existing and planned infrastructure, which facilitates the logical, orderly expansion of the City adjacent to existing, urbanized areas.  Economic Viability: Implement a public facilities financing plan with logical development phases that enables the Plan Area to develop in an economically-feasible manner.  Fiscal Responsibility: Create a development plan that can be implemented in a fiscally-responsible manner, with neutral or positive fiscal impacts to the City and with identified revenue sources for the long-term maintenance of park facilities, open space areas, trails, landscape corridors, public services, and infrastructure.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
1-3
INTRODUCTION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

1.4 SPECIFIC PLAN ORGANIZATION The Copper Trails Specific Plan is organized into the following chapters: Chapter 1: Introduction Provides an overview of the Specific Plan’s regulatory framework, purpose as an implementation tool, and Copper Trail’s project objectives. Chapter 2: Setting & Context Illustrates the project’s location relative to the City of Ceres, and describes the project site’s existing conditions and uses, opportunities and constraints, relationship with surrounding uses, and factors that influenced the development plan. Chapter 3: Community Vision Describes the overarching project vision, organizing principles, and community form elements that shape the development plan. Chapter 4: Land Use Provides a land use diagram illustrating location and distribution of land uses, including descriptions, development assumptions, permitted uses, and development standards for all land uses. Chapter 5: Circulation Outlines the Plan Area’s automobile circulation system including roadway classifications, street hierarchy, and design sections for each street type with standards for automobile travel lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks. Also addresses provisions for public transit.

Chapter 6: Parks, Trails & Trees Describes all park & recreation facilities and open space areas identified on the development plan, including trail alignments for bicycle and pedestrian mobility through the Plan Area. Provides design guidance for the public realm, with provisions for streetscape landscaping, community identification monumentation, walls & fences, and lighting. Chapter 7: Utilities Provides preliminary designs for backbone infrastructure improvements, including plans for the CTSP’s potable water, wastewater, and storm drainage utility systems. Also outlines plans for solid waste service and dry utilities, including energy, voice, and data communications. Chapter 8: Public Services Describes the approach and plans for various public services, including schools, library services, law enforcement, and fire and emergency services. Chapter 9: Design Guidelines Provides guidance for the design of the Plan Area’s residential uses, including neighborhood design and home architecture, as well as guidance for commercial uses to address site design and building architecture. Chapter 10: Implementation Describes the components that implement long-term project build-out, including the Specific Plan’s regulatory authority and relationship to City plans and policies, infrastructure phasing, financing and maintenance of public improvements, subsequent entitlements and approvals, and amendment procedures.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
1-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
PAGE

INTENTIONALLY
BLANK

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Setting & Context
Inside this Chapter 2.1 Project Location 2.2 Site Conditions & Uses 2.3 Relationship to Surrounding Uses 2.4 Factors Influencing the Development Plan

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-1
SETTING & CONTEXT PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION The Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) area is a proposed project for annexation to the City of Ceres. Regionally, Ceres is located within the San Joaquin Valley in central Stanislaus County, approximately 35 miles south of the City of Stockton and 10 miles north of the City of Turlock, along State Route 99. The City is nearly 9.4 square miles in size and is immediately adjacent to the southern edge of the City of Modesto. Locally, the CTSP is located to the southwest of the City of Ceres, approximately one mile south of downtown. The Plan Area’s boundaries are generally formed by Lucas Road and Mitchell Road to the east, Service Road to the north, Blaker Road to the west, and Turlock Irrigation District (TID) Canal Lateral #2 to the south. At the time of Specific Plan approval, the entire Plan Area was located in unincorporated Stanislaus County and within the City of Ceres’ Sphere of Influence (SOI) and General Plan planning area. Figure 2-1 shows the project’s regional location relative to surrounding communities and major roadway corridors. Additionally, Figure 2-2 shows the Plan Area locally relative to the City of Ceres.

FIGURE 2-1: REGIONAL VICINITY

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 2-2: PLAN AREA LOCATION

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-3
SETTING & CONTEXT PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

2.2 SITE CONDITIONS & USES At approximately 534.6 acres, the Plan Area is comprised of multiple properties ranging in size from approximately two to 35 acres. Land forms are characterized by relatively flat topography with elevations ranging from approximately 91 feet in the eastern area near SR-99, to 80 feet in the west area near Blaker Road. While mostly level, existing terrain includes gentle slopes and generally falls in an east-to-west direction. The Plan Area is primarily comprised of agricultural uses, including row crops and orchards, with a mix of rural residential uses spread throughout. Most residential uses consist of ranchette housing, some of which are clustered along small segments of Central Avenue and E. Redwood Road. Two schools are sited within the Plan Area, which include Central Valley High School located at the southwestern corner of the intersection of Service Road and Central Avenue, and Hidahl Elementary School located along the north edge of E. Redwood Road, just east of Central Avenue. Additionally, the Ceres Sports Arena is located along the eastern edge of the Plan Area, at the intersection of Mitchell Road and Lucas Road. Southwest view from intersection of Service Road and Moffett Road Southeast view from intersection of Service Road and Blaker Road Northeast view of Plan Area from Blaker Road and TID Lateral #2 Eastward view of Plan Area from intersection of Central Avenue and E. Redwood Road Northwest view of TID Lateral #2 and powerline corridor from Mitchell Road Northwest view from intersection of Lucas Road and Mitchell Road

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

2.3 RELATIONSHIP TO SURROUNDING USES The Copper Trails Specific Plan area is situated immediately adjacent to the southern edge of the City of Ceres, west of SR-99. As illustrated in Figure 2-2, the Plan Area is located entirely within the City’s SOI and General Plan planning area. The City’s adopted General Plan Land Use Diagram provides preliminary land use designations for the Plan Area, which includes a mixture of residential, commercial, and public/quasi-public uses. The Plan Area is surrounded by urbanized land uses to the north, west, and east, and agricultural uses to the south. Immediately north of the CTSP, existing development is comprised of a mixture of residential uses, with a limited number of commercial and quasi-public uses. The City’s wastewater treatment plant is located to the west and existing/planned commercial uses are located to the east, across SR-99. Agricultural and rural residential uses are located to the south of the Plan Area, however the City’s General Plan Land Use Diagram indicates that, within the City’s SOI, future urbanization could accommodate a mixture of residential, park, and school uses.

Notable physical features, developed areas, and planned improvements in proximity to the CTSP area include:  State Route 99 is located east of the Plan Area, adjacent to the eastern edge of the UPRR corridor.
 The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) corridor is located immediately east of the Plan Area, along the eastern edge of Lucas Road.  A new highway interchange is planned at the intersection of SR-99 and Service Road, which will provide reconfigured roadway access to development within the CTSP.  Central Avenue provides direct access from the Plan Area to downtown Ceres, which is located approximately one mile to the north.  A small pocket of light industrial and commercial uses are located north of Service Road, adjacent to SR-99.
 TID’s Lateral #2 canal extends along the Plan Area’s southern edge, north of Gondring Road, and a portion of the Plan Area’s eastern edge, along the eastern edge of Mitchell Road.  A series of overhead high-tension powerlines and associated support poles are located along a portion of the Plan Area’s southern boundary, adjacent to TID Lateral #2.  An above-ground water storage tank and associated groundwater well are located near the northwestern corner of the Plan Area, southwest of the intersection of Service Road and Blaker Road.  The Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is located immediately west of the Plan Area along the western edge of Blaker Road.

Existing and planned land uses, including on- and off-site features, are identified on the Site Opportunities and Constraints exhibit illustrated in Figure 2-3.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-5
SETTING & CONTEXT PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 2-3: SITE OPPORTUNITY & CONSTRAINTS

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
2-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

2.4 FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Copper Trails’ development plan was influenced by several factors, which are reflected in the organization and mix of land uses, and the roadway alignments on the land use plan. Some of these factors were physical, with the development plan influenced by existing features that created various site constraints or locational opportunities. Other factors that influenced the Specific Plan were reflective of City General Plan policies and property owner objectives. The key elements that bear importance to the final development plan include:  Planning Area/SOI Land Use Designations: The City’s adopted General Plan Land Use Diagram includes preliminary land use designations for areas outside the City limits, but within its SOI and Planning Area. The development plan was designed to be consistent with these preliminary designations, which includes Regional Commercial uses along SR-99, residential uses surrounding schools, a system of well-distributed parks, and a mix of supporting uses.  General Plan Goals & Policies: The development plan was designed to implement applicable General Plan goals and policies that seek to prioritize growth in the City’s SOI, to provide a range of housing types and densities, to utilize mechanisms such as a Specific Plan to comprehensively plan for new neighborhood developments, and to ensure that new development be implemented with fiscal responsibility.  Project Objectives: The project objectives influenced the development plan in several manners, such as providing a balanced mix of land uses, establishing areas for new housing, creating opportunities for a diverse array of housing types, and developing corridors for an interconnected network of bicycle/pedestrian trails.
 Interface with City of Ceres: The northern edge of the Plan Area is contiguous with several residential neighborhoods in the City of Ceres. In addition, the alignments of Service Road, Central Avenue, and Blaker Road provide opportunities for street and utility connections between the CTSP and Ceres’ existing roadway network. The CTSP’s development plan incorporates low-density residential uses along its northern edge to create a compatible interface with existing uses in the City.  Physical Site Features: The Plan Area includes several physical attributes that influenced the land use planning effort. Existing developed areas including single family homes and schools affected the siting of residential land uses. Additionally, features such as TID’s Lateral #2 canal and powerline corridors influenced the location of parks and trail corridors. Collectively, these physical site constraints influenced how land uses throughout the site were placed.  SR-99/Service Road Highway Interchange: A new roadway interchange is planned at the Service Road overcrossing of SR-99. This facility is planned to enhance automobile access to/from the City’s southern-most highway access point. The development plan responds to this planned interchange by incorporating realigned roadway corridors where needed in proximity to SR-99 and Service Road.  Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant: The City’s wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is located to the west of Plan Area along Blaker Road. In response to this existing facility, parks and landscape corridors were included in the land use plan to create a spatial buffer between the WWTP and planned residential uses.  Regional Housing Needs Allocation: The Stanislaus Council of Governments has adopted a Regional Housing Needs Plan that specifies the amount of housing that Stanislaus County must plan to provide. This includes an allocation that constitutes the City’s “fair share” of the regional housing need. To help the City meet these requirements, the CTSP’s development plan designates land areas for the construction of 2,392 new residential units, of which approximately 46% are allocated for housing at densities of 20 du/ac or greater.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Community Vision
Inside this Chapter 3.1 Vision for Copper Trails 3.2 Community Form & Design

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-1
COMMUNITY VISION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

3.1 VISION FOR COPPER TRAILS The overarching vision for the Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) area is to foster new development that upholds Ceres’ small town character while complementing the more modern, conventional style of development patterns of the City’s southern area. The CTSP’s location functions as a logical expansion area for the City and its design builds upon the existing urban framework to create a visually-integrated master-planned community. This new development area is envisioned to enhance Ceres’ sense of identity while providing a diversity of places for people to live, work, and shop. Several key elements define the vision for Copper Trails and its relationship to the City’s existing core. The most prominent element of the development plan is a regional commercial center at the southern gateway into the City. This is contemplated as a large-scale commercial destination point with “big-box” anchor retailers, restaurants, hotels, offices, and other use types that can benefit from exposure to high traffic volumes along the Highway 99 corridor. Further, the mix of non-residential uses creates employment opportunities, provides places to shop and dine, and expands the City’s tax base. In addition, Copper Trails establishes an area that will help the City achieve its housing goals by providing places for new residential neighborhoods. Consistent with the City’s past practice of emphasizing high-quality neighborhood design, residential development is to have visually appealing streetscapes framed by homes that are contextually appropriate to the City’s established development patterns and neighborhood design. The intent is for the Copper Trails area to build out over time and become one of the City’s most desirable areas to live. Finally, the development plan incorporates a “green” network of parks, trails, and trees that provide a “backbone” of interconnected landscaped corridors that link residential neighborhoods with recreational amenities and schools. This network is anticipated to visually define Copper Trails’ distinct sense of place while providing a plan-wide amenity that benefits new residents in the Plan Aera. Combined, these elements lay a framework for Copper Trails to become a balanced community, with a range of services, amenities, and residential areas that can help the City of Ceres achieve its General Plan goals of accommodating growth along its southern edge.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

3.2 COMMUNITY FORM & DESIGN Copper Trails’ visual character is defined by several placemaking elements that include a regional commercial core, a series of diverse residential neighborhoods, and an interconnected network of parks and trails. The Plan Area’s commercial core and residential neighborhoods are envisioned to have strong connectivity with one another, utilizing a comprehensive trail network that intentionally places new homes in walking and biking proximity to schools, parks, and neighborhood services. The organizing principles for Copper Trails’ development plan respond to several key influences described in Chapters 1 and 2. These include the Project Objectives in Section 1.3, as well as several factors outlined in Chapter 2, Setting & Context. These influential components shaped the foundation for the CTSP’s overall form and development pattern. Factors influencing the community form elements include physical site features, adjacent development patterns, existing and planned roadways, and General Plan policy guidance for new growth areas in the City’s Sphere of Influence.

For purposes of defining the organization of the community, the Copper Trails land use plan provides for several key community form elements:  Regional Commercial Core  Diverse Residential Neighborhoods  Parks & Trails Network These community form elements are reflected on Figure 3-1.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-3
COMMUNITY VISION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 3-1: COMMUNITY FORM ELEMENTS

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Regional Commercial Core One of the predominant elements defining Copper Trails’ urban form is a large-scale, regionally-serving commercial core sited at the crossroads of Highway 99 and Service Road. This location capitalizes on the Plan Area’s significant visibility to the adjacent highway corridor and future access via a new interchange planned at intersection of SR-99 and Service Road. The Regional Commercial Core functions as the CTSP’s primary economic employment and commercial district by providing approximately 107 acres of land designated for non-residential uses. Specific Plan parcels are organized within the confines of SR-99, Service Road, and Moffett Road, with a network of internal streets to enhance mobility and access throughout. Combined, these sites support over 1.1-million square feet of non-residential uses. The intent is to capitalize on its exposure to the high volume of passing vehicular traffic and to provide commercial/employment uses that cater to both local residents and regional travelers. When developed, Copper Trails’ commercial core is contemplated to support a variety of large-scale, “big-box” retailers, neighborhood-serving commercial establishments and services, restaurants, and hotels. Depending on the ultimate demand for commercial uses at this location, the vision is that development regulations can be implemented with flexibility, allowing portions of the area to be developed with professional office uses and potentially mixed-use and/or higher-density residential uses. While the ultimate mix of uses is anticipated to vary, full buildout of the commercial core is envisioned to become a major retail anchor and destination point that defines the City’s southern gateway.

Large format “big box” stores in aggregated commercial centers Regional-serving hotels and hospitality Professional office buildings Neighborhood-serving shops and services Restaurants and drive-through eateries

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-5
COMMUNITY VISION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. Diverse Residential Neighborhoods A mixture of residential land uses is envisioned to allow Copper Trails’ neighborhoods to develop with a wide array of housing types. The intent is to expand the City’s available housing choices in a manner that supports the needs of all market segments. Residential densities, while varied through the Plan Area, are intentionally directed to key locations where they respond appropriately to existing and planned adjacent land uses. In general, higher density residential uses are focused to the eastern portion of the Plan Area, where located in proximity to SR-99 and the Regional Commercial Core. Depending on the land use designation, these areas support a mixture of single and multi-family housing with options for apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and detached homes on compact lots. Lower density neighborhoods are generally sited in the central and western portions of the Plan Area, in proximity to existing school facilities. In all of these areas, single-family homes are likely expected as the predominant housing type, on a mixture of larger and conventionally-sized lots. The architectural design of homes is intended to be dynamic, with harmonious, yet different styles that collectively evoke a “built over time” appearance. Design features such as porches, front doors, and living spaces are to be oriented to the street, fostering social interaction among residents and promoting “eyes on the street” neighborhood watch. In addition, “home forward” design approaches are contemplated, making garages less visually prominent elements along the streetscape. To achieve this vision, the CTSP incorporates design criteria for residential neighborhoods that focus on the public realm, the street, and how it relates to the private realm, the home. This is ultimately accomplished with a combination of residential development standards, neighborhood design guidelines, and roadway design standards. Working in tandem with one another, these standards and guidelines seek to create a diverse array of residential neighborhoods throughout the Copper Trails Plan Area.

Conventional single-family detached homes in low-density residential neighborhoods Small-lot single-family homes in medium-density residential neighborhoods Multi-family attached dwelling units in high-density residential neighborhoods

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
3-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Parks & Trails Network A comprehensive network of parks, trails, and recreational amenities are planned throughout the Copper Trails Plan Area, which are intended to help establish a communal sense of neighborhood ownership. Five neighborhood parks are provided, ranging between approximately 2 and 6 acres in size. Parks are spaced throughout the residential neighborhoods in a manner that places them in walkable proximity to homes and schools. Parks are anticipated to include a combination of active and passive facilities, supporting multiple recreational needs of surrounding residential neighborhoods. Parks also provide spaces for stormwater detention and conveyance facilities. As a means to connect Copper Trails’ neighborhoods parks and enhance the community’s recreational amenities, open space corridors are also planned throughout the Plan Area to link parks with residential neighborhoods and the Regional Commercial Core. Located along internal street corridors and the southern TID canal, these corridors are designed as linear parkways with landscaping, informal seating areas, and multi-use trails that can be shared by pedestrians and bicyclists. As a whole, the system of parks and trails is envisioned as highly-accessible and prominent green network that provides a visual backbone to Copper Trails’ urban form and character.

Large open turf areas for field sports and active play Tot lots and playgrounds in centrally-located neighborhood parks Multi-use trail networks that link schools, parks, and residential neighborhoods

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Land Use
Inside this Chapter 4.1 Overview 4.2 Land Use Plan & Development Estimations 4.3 Residential Uses & Development Regulations 4.4 Commercial Uses & Development Regulations 4.5 Park, Open Space & Public Uses

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-1
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

4.1 OVERVIEW The Copper Trails Specific Plan provides for a mix of land uses to achieve the community vision illustrated in Chapter 3 and the project objectives outlined in Chapter 1. Land uses consist of several residential designations including low-, medium-, and high-density residential uses, a commercial designation for regional commercial uses, and various public/quasi-public designations for school, park, open space, and public facility uses. At full buildout, the CTSP Land Use Plan accommodates development of approximately 2,392 single- and multi-family dwelling units in densities ranging from 4 to 30 units per acre (du/ac), ultimately housing approximately 6,755 residents. In addition, the CTSP adds nearly 1.2-million square feet of retail and office uses, creating approximately 2,339 jobs, assuming one job for every 500 sq. ft. of commercial space developed in the Plan Area. 4.2 LAND USE PLAN &

DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATIONS
The Copper Trails land use plan defines the parcel boundaries, acreages, land use designations, and development estimations for each use in the Plan Area. Because land use planning has been conducted at a Specific Plan level, it is anticipated that minor adjustments to parcel boundaries and associated acreages could occur as tentative subdivision maps are processed and improvement plans for roadways are approved. Provisions for these types of adjustments are outlined in Chapter 10, Implementation. This section describes the CTSP’s land uses, which are to be implemented with the permitted uses and development standards listed for each designation. The list of permitted uses and development standards for each land use designation function as the zoning regulations for development projects and contain details regarding allowable uses, yard setbacks, site coverage, building height, etc. In addition, the Design Guidelines in Chapter 9 provide supplemental information regarding the design expectations for development projects.

The development plan for Copper Trails consists of the following:  Land Use Plan (Figure 4-1): Diagram showing roadway alignments, specific plan parcel boundaries, and land use designations.  Land Use Summary (Table 4-1): Table summarizing total acreage for each land use, including residential and non-residential development assumptions for each.

Development Estimations & Assumptions As shown in the Land Use Summary in Table 4-1, each land use designation includes an “estimated” density and/or FAR, which is used to derive the total residential unit allocation and square footage assumption for each use type. These density/FAR allocations are applied to the net area of individual Specific Plan parcels in order to generate their precise dwelling unit/sq. ft. allocation. For instance, a 10-acre MDR parcel, which has an assumed density of 9.0 du/ac, would have an allocation of 90 units. If the calculation for an individual parcel results in a fractional number, its development allocation is derived by rounding to the nearest whole unit/sq. ft. Development on any given Specific Plan parcel should not exceed the development allocation except as allowed by Section 10.10 (Residential Unit Transfers & Density Blending), by density bonuses allowed under State and local laws, or as approved by the Community Development Director. Specific Plan Zoning When the Copper Trails Specific Plan area was annexed to the City of Ceres, the entire Plan Area was placed into a P-C (Planned Community Zone) zoning district. Consistent with the regulations for this district as outlined in Chapter 13 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the Ceres Municipal Code), this allows the CTSP to function as the primary zoning tool and regulatory mechanism to implement the Copper Trails development plan. As such, development activity is subject to the permitted uses and development standards contained in this chapter.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE 4-1: LAND USE SUMMARY Note: Land use acreages are preliminary and subject to refinement during the City’s Tentative Map/Development Review process.

Land Use Designation Acres % of Total Estimated Density/FAR Dwelling Units Square Footage % of Total Units Residential UsesLDR - Low Density Residential (up to 7.0 du/ac) 177.6 ac 33.2% ±5.5 du/ac 988 du 41.3% MDR - Medium Density Residential (7.1-12.0 du/ac) 37.6 ac 7.0% ±9.0 du/ac 338 du 14.1%MHDR - Medium-High Density Residential (12.1-20.0 du/ac) 16.8 ac 3.1% ±20.0 du/ac 336 du 14.0%HDR - High Density Residential (20.1-30.0 du/ac) 28.9 ac 5.4% ±25.0 du/ac 730 du 30.5% Subtotal 260.9 ac 48.8% 2,392 du 100.0%
Commercial and Employment UsesRC - Regional Commercial (up to 0.5 FAR) 106.5 ac 19.9% ±0.25 FAR 1,169,586 sf Subtotal 106.5 ac 19.9% 1,169,586 sf
Park, Open Space & Public UsesP/OS - Parks & Open Space 42.4 ac 7.9%CF - Community Facilities 3.4 ac 0.6%ES/HS - Schools 74.1 ac 13.9% Subtotal 119.9 ac 22.4%
OtherROW/LS - Major Roadways / Landscape Corridors 47.3 ac 8.8% Subtotal 47.3 ac 8.8%
Total 534.6 ac 100.0% 2,392 du 1,169,586 sf 100.0%

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-1
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 4-1: LAND USE PLAN

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

4.3 RESIDENTIAL USES & DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The CTSP’s residential uses support an array of housing types by utilizing several residential land use designations that collectively encourage a diverse mix. This is comprised of Low Density Residential (LDR), Medium Density Residential (MDR), Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR), and High Density Residential (HDR) land uses, each with a unique density range that allows for a mixture of lot sizes that can accommodate a variety of housing types. Coupled with the land use specifications and development regulations outlined in this section, the CTSP includes Design Guidelines that help ensure that neighborhoods and home architecture are designed in a manner that uphold the desired community vision. Approximately 55% of Copper Trails residential units are designated for LDR and MDR uses, with the remaining 45% planned for MHDR and HDR uses. The majority of the residential neighborhoods are envisioned to consist of conventional-style detached housing units on both large and small lots. However, in proximity to planned regional commercial centers, higherdensity residential uses are planned, which provides for units on smaller lots for detached cluster housing, attached and detached townhomes, and multifamily units. Information about each residential land use, including allowable density ranges, permitted uses, and development standards, is outlined in this section.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-5
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Low Density Residential (LDR) Density Range  Permitted: Up to 7.0 du/ac Description The Low Density Residential (LDR) land use designation supports singlefamily detached homes on conventional lots within the density range noted above. Lot sizes typically range between 4,500 and 7,500 square feet, but could be smaller or larger depending on site slope, natural features, and neighborhood design. Typical housing product types include frontloaded, alley-loaded, or clustered, single-family detached units. Development Regulations All LDR parcels are subject to the development regulations noted below:  Permitted Uses: See Table 4-2  Development Standards: See Table 4-3
B. Medium Density Residential (MDR) Density Range  Permitted: 7.1 to 12.0 du/ac Description The Medium Density Residential (MDR) land use designation primarily accommodates single-family detached homes, but also attached homes. Lot sizes are typically smaller than those in LDR areas, which allows greater densities per the range outlined above. Single-family detached housing can be supported on standard or alley-loaded lots, courtyard lots, green court lots, auto courts, alley/pocket/courtyard clusters, zero-lot lines, or zshaped lots. Attached single-family homes and multi-family units can be accommodated at the upper limits of the permitted density range, which could take the form of duet/half-plex homes, attached townhomes, row houses, and condominiums. Development Regulations All MDR parcels are subject to the development regulations noted below:  Permitted Uses: See Table 4-2  Development Standards: See Table 4-3

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) Density Range  Permitted: 12.1 to 20.0 du/ac Description The Medium-High Density Residential (MHDR) land use designation accommodates both single-family detached homes and attached homes. At the lower end of the density range, single-family detached homes can be accommodated on conventional and/or alley-loaded small lots, which may take the form of cluster housing such as homes that are accessed via I-courts or T-courts. At the upper end of the density range, housing likely consists of attached single-family and/or multi-family units such as multi-plex and live/work homes, townhomes, row houses, multi-level condominiums, and apartment buildings. In addition, multi-family housing in this land use designation can provide for both a mix of for-sale and for-rent units in support of the CTSP’s housing strategies. Development Regulations All MHDR parcels are subject to the development regulations noted below:  Permitted Uses: See Table 4-2  Development Standards: See Table 4-3
D. High Density Residential (HDR) Density Range  Permitted: 20.1 to 30.0 du/ac Description The High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation accommodates attached housing within the density range noted above. The types of housing units that can be accommodated include attached courtyard/alley/pocket cluster homes, multi-plex and mid-rise buildings, live/work and loft units, townhomes, condominiums, garden-style apartments, and podium design apartments/condominiums. In addition, these types of multi-family housing can provide for both a mix of for-sale and for-rent units in support of the CTSP’s housing strategies. Development Regulations All HDR parcels are subject to the development regulations noted below:  Permitted Uses: See Table 4-2  Development Standards: See Table 4-3

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-7
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
E. Residential Permitted Uses
& Development Standards
Development of any Specific Plan parcel with a designation of LDR, MDR, MHDR, or HDR is subject to the permitted uses and development regulations outlined in this subsection. These regulations supersede those in the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and where the CTSP’s provisions differ from those in the Zoning Ordinance, such as building setbacks or landscape standards, the CTSP’s standards prevail. However, where a standard is not addressed in the CTSP, the City’s Zoning Ordinance shall apply. Permitted Uses Table 4-2 outlines the permitted and conditionally-permitted uses for residential parcels. None other than the uses listed in this table are permitted, subject to City review shown for each use, and any applicable standards and provisions in the Specific Plan. The Community Development Director shall have the discretion to permit land uses that are not listed if they are consistent with the intent of the Residential designations, pursuant to Section 18.04.080 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance. The Community Development Director may also forward questions about equivalent uses to the Planning Commission for a determination. Development Standards For residential Specific Plan parcels, development standards are provided in Table 4-3 that are specific to each of the CTSP’s residential land use designations. All buildings, structures, and accessory structures shall conform to these standards unless otherwise noted and/or allowed via an approved deviation permitted pursuant to Chapter 10, Implementation. For public/quasi-public use types that are permitted in residential land uses, refer to Sections 18.08.060, 18.11.060, or 18.12.060 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance for applicable development standards.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE 4-2: RESIDENTIAL PERMITTED USES
Use LDR MDR MHDR HDR Residential Use Types Single-family detached dwellings P P -- -- Single-family attached dwellings -- C P P Two-family dwellings P P P C Multiple-family dwellings -- C P P Group and cluster dwellings, condominiums C P P P Residential care facilities, State licensed P P P P Supportive housing C C C P Transitional housing C C C P Boarding house or rooming house C C C C Accessory or junior dwelling unit Per CMC Section 18.28.060 Public/Quasi-Public Use Types Child care facilities, State licensed C C C C Churches (w/ 1-acre lot size min.) C C P P Educational institution C C C C Parks and playgrounds, public P P P P Public buildings and utility substations P P P P Schools, private C C C C Schools, public P P P P Use LDR MDR MHDR HDR Accessory Use Types Garage, private P P P P Accessory Structures (up to 120 sq. ft.) P P P P Home occupations Per CMC Section 18.02.010 Kennels Per CMC Section 18.28.080 Outdoor storage units & shipping containers Per CMC Section 18.28.110 Signs Per CMC Chapter 18.26 Subdivision tract sales offices, signs, flagsand temporary construction job site trailers Per CMC Chapter 18.38
Swimming pools P P P P Other Uses Any other uses similar in nature, function, andoperations to the permitted, conditionallypermitted, and accessory uses listed above.

Subject to review and approval by
Community Development Director
Table Notes:  “P” = Permitted Use; “C” = Conditionally Permitted Use; “--” = Not Permitted  Some uses subject to Title 18, Zoning, of Ceres Municipal Code (CMC) as referenced.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-9
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE 4-3: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
LDR MDR MHDR 4, 5 HDR 5
Lot Size and Building Intensity Lot Area (minimum) 3,500 sf 2,500 sf 9 2,000 sf 9 n/a Lot Coverage (maximum) 60% 70% n/a n/a Width, Interior Lot (minimum) 1 45’ 35’ 35’ n/a Width, Corner Lot (minimum) 55’ 45’ 45’ n/a Front Setback 2To living area 15’ 15’ 15’ 40’ To porch or ground-level patio 10’ 10’ 10’ 40’ To garage door (facing primary street) 20’ 18’ 18’ n/a To street-facing wall of side-loaded garage 15’ 15’ n/a n/a To accessory structure (facing street) 35’ 35’ n/a n/a Side Setback 2Interior side 5’ 4’ 4’ 20’ 3Street side to living area on corner lot 10’ 10’ 10’ 50’ To porch or ground-level patio (facing street) 10’ 10’ 10’ 45’ To accessory structure (interior lot) 5’ 5’ 5’ n/a To accessory structure (facing street) 10’ 10’ 10’ 50’ Rear Setback To living area: 1st floor 15’ 10’ 10’ 20’ 3 To garage 10’ 4’ 4’ n/a To accessory structure 5’ 5’ 5’ 10’ 3Building Height Height (maximum) 35’ 35’ 50’ 50’ Parking Spaces (minimum)Resident 2 in garage 2 in garage Varies 7 Varies 7Guest 6 n/a Varies 7 Varies 7 Varies 7Bicycle n/a Varies 8 Varies 8 Varies 8 Table Notes:

1. Lot width measured at front setback line for living area. 2. Setbacks are expressed as minimum requirements and are typically measured from property line. Along street frontages, LDR and MDR setbacks measured from back of sidewalk or from back of curb where no sidewalk exists. For MDR and MHDR, interior side setbacks may be reduced to 0’ provided that 8’ min. building separation is maintained. For multi-family MHDR and HDR developments along public street frontages, setbacks are measured from back of curb regardless of sidewalk location.

3. For multi-family buildings, side (interior) and rear setbacks are measured as the minimum distance between building facades. Ground-level patios are exempt from this requirement provided that adequate emergency access is provided along building edges.

4. Clustered housing developments may be approved by the City with concurrent processing of a Small Lot Tentative Map to establish project-specific development standards that deviate from the typical MHDR standards outlined herein.

5. Multi-family developments shall be approved by the City to establish project-specific site design and development standards, which shall be depicted with a site plan, building elevations, floor plans, a landscape plan, and associated information deemed necessary by the City.

6. The number of guest parking spaces listed is required of each detached dwelling unit, including clustered units (I-court, T-court) which may be provided on a driveway apron. On-street parking that is located adjacent to an individual residential lot or specific plan parcel may be counted towards meeting the off-street guest parking requirement, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director.

7. Multi-family developments shall provide one covered, off-street parking space for each unit regardless of size, plus one additional off-street parking space for units with two bedrooms or more. In addition, one guest parking space shall be provided for every four units in a multi-family complex, rounded upward to the nearest whole number. Duet developments do not require guest parking.

8. For multi-family developments, a minimum of one (1) bicycle parking space per unit shall be provided on-site, with guest bicycle parking spaces provided at one (1) space per 20 units on-site.

9. Lot size may be reduced to 1,800 sf (30’x60’) to provide for duet housing units.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

4.4 COMMERCIAL USES & DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The Copper Trails development plan allocates over 100 acres for the development of commercial uses. A single land use designation, Regional Commercial (RC), accommodates a great diversity of commercial and service uses. RC sites are generally sited along the State Route 99 corridor where they have superior visibility to vehicular traffic and access via the planned SR-99/Service Road interchange. At full buildout, the CTSP’s commercial parcels support nearly 1.2 million sq. ft. of commercial development. Regional Commercial (RC) Floor Area Ratio (FAR)  Permitted: Up to 0.5 FAR, and up to 3.0 FAR in select cases  Estimated: 0.25 FAR Description The Regional Commercial (RC) land use designation provides for a broad range of retail goods and services, which is intended to serve both area residents and those from nearby communities. Development of RC sites can accommodate different types of commercial and service uses, including those that are oriented to highway travelers, those that serve as destination shopping centers, and those that provide goods for nearby residential neighborhoods. Development is estimated to accommodate a FAR of up to 0.5, however a FAR of up to 3.0 may be permitted in select cases of substantial community benefit, provided that adequate vehicular access and adequate public safety response is maintained. The types of uses envisioned for development of these parcels include “bigbox” stores, national retailers, hotels, office buildings, entertainment venues, grocery stores, drug stores, gas stations, dining establishments, and service-type uses. Neighborhood-serving professional uses are also appropriate, which could include facilities such as medical offices, veterinarians, child care facilities, fitness centers, and similar uses. Additionally, multi-family residential uses may be permitted if included as part of a mixed-use development project.

Development Regulations All RC parcels are subject to the development regulations outlined this subsection. Individual development projects on RC-designated Specific Plan parcels shall obtain a Use Permit and/or other applicable discretionary entitlement(s), subject to review and approval by the City.  Permitted Uses: Table 4-4 outlines the permitted and conditionallypermitted uses for regional commercial parcels. None other than the uses listed in this table are permitted, subject to City review shown for each use, and any applicable standards and provisions in the Specific Plan. The Community Development Director shall have the discretion to permit land uses that are not listed if they are consistent with the intent of the RC designation, pursuant to Section 18.04.080 of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance. The Community Development Director may also forward questions about equivalent uses to the Planning Commission for a determination.  Development Standards: Table 4-5 outlines the development standards appliable to Specific Plan parcels with an RC designation. These regulations supersede those in the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and where the CTSP’s provisions differ from those in the Zoning Ordinance, such as lot coverage or building setbacks, the CTSP’s standards prevail. However, where an applicable standard is not addressed in the CTSP, the City Zoning Ordinance shall apply.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-11
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE 4-4: RC PERMITTED USES Permitted Use Types Office Uses  Bail Bond Offices  Banks, Financial Institutions  Business, Administrative, Professional  Editorial Offices  Employment Agencies  Insurance Brokers, Adjusters, Agents  Law Offices  Medical Offices (including dentists,
opticians, chiropractors)
 Notary Public  Real Estate Brokers  Tax Consulting Services Commercial Uses  Antique Stores  Apparel-Clothing, Millinery, etc.  Art Supplies  Automotive Retail/Sales (Auto parts, tires, batteries and accessories, tire installation, but no second-hand sales)  Bakeries  Bars (only)  Bar Restaurants  Bicycle Sales or Rentals  Book stores  Building Materials Sales Yard  Carpet Sales (Retail)  Computer Stores  Department Stores and Variety Stores (large scale)
 Drug Stores  Electrical Fixture Supply Stores  Electronic Equipment Stores (radios, televisions, stereos, cameras, etc.)
 Emergency Medical & Sickroom
Sales and Service Facilities
 Florists  Furniture Stores – New/Used (Retail)  Garden Supply/Patio Furniture, Masonry
 Gifts  Grocery Stores (Supermarkets)
 Gun Shops and Repair  Hardware Stores  Hobby Shops  Household Appliance Stores  Ice Cream/Candy Stores  Jewelry, Camera & Supply, Luggage Stores
 Liquor Stores  Meat/Fish Markets  Music, Musical Instrument & Record Stores
 Office Supply Stores
 Paint Supply Stores  Pet Stores with Grooming  Plumbing Supplies  Pool & Spa Equipment (Retail)  Restaurants, Fast Food  Restaurants, Sit-Down, Quality  Shoe Store  Souvenirs  Sporting Goods, Toys  Stationary Stores  Video Rentals/Sales Stores  Wallpaper and Floor Covering Stores
 Wholesale Outlets (big box uses,
home supply, furniture, carpet, etc.)
TABLE 4-4: RC PERMITTED USES Permitted Use Types Service Commercial Uses  Automotive Service/Repair – Auto Club Offices with Repair; Car Washes; Rental Agencies; Repair Garages including oil and lube, muffler, & brake shops Education Uses  Colleges, Modeling Schools  Libraries  Gym, Self Defense, Dance Schools  Vocational Colleges, Barber/Beauty Health Service Uses  Acute Care Offices  Ambulance Offices (Ambulance Parking and Overnight Sleeping)
 Convalescent Hospitals/Nursing
Homes
 Pharmacy Shops
Personal Service Uses  Barbershops, Beauty Salons  Dry Cleaning (Retail)  Laundromats  Shoe Repair, Tailor, Dressmaker
Shops
 Suntanning Booths (within exercise
facilities and beauty salons)
Recreational Uses  Archery Ranges, Batting Cages, Slot Car, Etc.
 Billiards, Pool Parlors  Bowling Alleys
 Entertainment  Health Clubs (Indoor & Outdoor)  Parks and Recreational Facilities  Skating Rinks Social Service Uses  Day Nursery and Nursery Schools (12 or less children) Other Service Uses  Alarms, Sales and Services  Bicycle Repair Shops  Electricians (without outdoor storage)  Hotels, Motels, Motor Hotels  Locksmiths  Pest Control Services  Plumbers (without outdoor storage)  Printing, Graphic Arts, Copying
Services
 Studios – Art Studios; Art Galleries;
Interior Decoration/Design; Costume Design; Arts & Crafts, Photography  Studios – Radio/Television  Studios – Music, Recording  Upholstery Shops (indoor)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
TABLE 4-4: RC PERMITTED USES Conditionally Permitted Use Types Commercial Uses  Automotive Retail/Sales (Auto, RV, Trailer, Truck, Motorcycle sales and service, new and uses, but not service stations)  Boat Retail/Sales and Service  Equipment/Sales-Agricultural, Industrial & Construction
Service Commercial Uses  Automotive Service/Repair (Body Shops; Machinery Repair and Painting totally within enclosed buildings; Service Stations; and Towing Services) Health Services  Hospitals Recreation  Operation of Amusement Devices (coin operated)
 Night Clubs (with dancing and music)
 Social Halls (non-public banquets,
bingo, bridge clubs, etc.)
 Stadiums/Arenas  Theaters
Social Service Uses  Churches  Conference Centers
 Day Nursery and Nursery Schools
(13 or more children)
Other Service Uses  Auctions  Equipment Rental (Agricultural, industrial and construction)
 Mini-Storage Facilities  Mortuaries
Industrial Uses  Outside Storage (ancillary to
commercial uses)
 Technical and Industrial Training
Schools
Residential Uses  Multi-Family Housing (as part of a mixed-use development) Accessory and Other Uses Any other uses similar in nature, function, operation, to the permitted, conditionallypermitted, and accessory uses listed above, including ancillary accessory uses asdetermined by the Community Development Director.

TABLE 4-4: RC PERMITTED USES Restricted Use Types Subject to review and interpretation by the Community Development Director, thefollowing use types are prohibited:  Smoke shops  Cannabis retail  Tobacco related uses  Grub hubs  Convenience store without
accompanying fuel station
 Outdoor recycling facility
TABLE 4-5: RC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Development Feature Standard Parcel Size No minimum lot area or lot width required Setbacks Front/Primary Street: Side: Rear: Interior Separation: Parking Areas:
- 15’ min. landscape setback along public streets - 15’ min. from property line - 15’ min. from property line - 20’ min. between buildings - 50’ min. from public streets Building Placement N/A Site Coverage 50% max. Height 65’ max. Parking As required by Section 18.18.060.L (Off-Street Parking Standards for H-1 Zoning District) and Chapter 25 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Standards) of the Ceres Zoning Ordinance.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-13
LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

4.5 PARK, OPEN SPACE & PUBLIC USES Approximately 22% of the Copper Trails Specific Plan is designated for parks, open space, schools, and public uses. As illustrated on the land use plan, this includes parcels designated for Parks and Open Space (P/OS), Community Facilities (CF), and School (ES/HS) land uses. These include several park sites that are incorporated throughout the Plan Area, which are augmented by a network of linear parks and open space corridors that link parks to planned residential neighborhoods. These uses also include two public/quasi-public (CF) sites near the intersections of E. Redwood Road and Moffett Road. Finally, a School land use designation is applied to properties where a High School and Elementary School were constructed prior to Specific Plan approval.

Parks & Open Space (P/OS) Description The Parks & Open Space (P/OS) designation is for development of active park facilities. The CTSP includes multiple parks, which are sized between approximately 2 and 6 acres each, plus several linear parkway corridors for multi-use trails, which are generally aligned along the southern and western edges of the Plan Area. These park spaces are sited throughout the Plan Area such that these recreational amenities are located within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. As neighborhood-serving amenities, park programming is anticipated to include active play facilities such as flat fields, ball fields, and hard courts, augmented by passive recreation features such as tot lots, sitting areas, and open turf areas for informal play. The ultimate design and programming for all parks is to be determined by the Ceres Recreation Department. Development Regulations All P/OS parcels are subject to the applicable regulations contained in both Chapter 6, Community Facilities Zone (C-F), of Title 18, Zoning, and Chapter 16, Parks, Public Property, and Public Facilities, of Title 9, Public Peace, Safety and Morals, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
4-14 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Community Facilities (CF) Description The Community Facilities (CF) designation allows for several types of public-serving uses and facilities. Two CF sites are provided in the Plan Area, which are located south of the intersection of E. Redwood Road and Moffett Road. In proximity to the CTSP’s most intensive residential and commercial uses, these sites can be utilized by the City to construct public safety facilities or other uses deemed necessary to augment public services for the Plan Area. Development Regulations All CF parcels are subject to the applicable regulations contained in both Chapter 6, Community Facilities Zone (C-F), of Title 18, Zoning, and Chapter 16, Parks, Public Property, and Public Facilities, of Title 9, Public Peace, Safety and Morals, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

Schools (ES/HS) Description Two schools are located within the Plan Area. These include Central Valley High School, located southwest of the intersection of Service Road and Central Avenue, and Hidahl Elementary School located on the northern edge of E. Redwood Road, immediately east of Central Avenue. Because these schools were constructed prior to Specific Plan approval, the CTSP designates these parcels with a School land use designation for consistency with their existing uses. Development Regulations Except where preempted by State law, all ES/HS parcels are subject to the applicable regulations contained in Chapter 6, Community Facilities Zone (C-F), of Title 18, Zoning, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Circulation
Inside this Chapter 5.1 Overview 5.2 Existing Circulation System 5.3 Planned Roadways 5.4 Public Transit

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-1
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

5.1 OVERVIEWThe circulation system for the Copper Trails Specific Plan is comprised of a roadway hierarchy that is designed to improve upon the existing local roadway network and provide efficient travel options within the Plan Area. This chapter focuses on the roadway facilities required for automobile travel and public transit. The CTSP also incorporates plans and standards for pedestrian and bicycle mobility options, which are outlined in Chapter 6, Parks, Trails & Trees. Together, a comprehensive circulation system is planned for the entire Plan Area, emphasizing connectivity between uses, transportation choices, and efficient travel modes for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Because this chapter focuses on the roadway system design that primarily serves automobiles and public transit, the following related components should be referenced for additional information regarding the CTSP’s planned circulation system design:  Roadway Design Standards: Section 5.3 includes street sections illustrating the design of the CTSP’s various roadways, including onstreet bike lanes.  Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility: Section 6.3 illustrates the planned alignment for off-street sidewalks and multi-use trails, including design sections for each.  Public Realm Design: Section 6.4 outlines the requirements for streetscape landscaping, including a plant palette to create a unified appearance, plus entry features, walls and fences, and street lighting.

5.2 EXISTING CIRCULATION SYSTEM At the time of Specific Plan approval, several roadways provided access to the Plan Area, which informed the ultimate design of the planned roadway system. These include:  State Route 99: Located adjacent to the Plan Area’s eastern edge, SR-99 consists of a six-lane facility in the City of Ceres. It provides access to the Plan Area via Mitchell Road and Service Road, located north and east of the CTSP. A new interchange is planned at Service Road, and when complete, direct access to the Plan Area will be provided from SR-99 via Service Road.  Service Road: This east/west roadway is aligned along the northern edge of the Plan Area and extends from SR-99 in Ceres westward for approximately 3.5 miles where it terminates at S. Carpenter Road in Stanislaus County. Along the CTSP’s edge, this facility has differing levels of improvement. East of Central Avenue, it provides two travel lanes and has no frontage improvements. West of Central Avenue, it provides three or four travel lanes and a center turn lane, with completed frontage improvements on its northern edge and some frontage improvements on its southern edge, adjacent to the existing high school.  Blaker Road: This two-lane, north/south roadway is located along the western edge of the Plan Area and provides access between E. Whitmore Avenue in Ceres and E. Keyes Road in Stanislaus County. Along the CTSP’s edge, this facility has no frontage improvements.  Central Avenue: This north/south roadway transects the center of the Plan Area and extends from SR-99 in Ceres southward to agricultural areas in Stanislaus County. Within the CTSP, this facility has differing levels of improvement. Adjacent to the High School, it provides four travel lanes and includes frontage improvements on its western edge. South of the High School, this facility provides two travel lanes and has no frontage improvements.  Lucas Road & Mitchell Road: These roadways are located adjacent to SR-99 and form the eastern edge of the Plan Area. Both roadways provide two travel lanes and have no frontage improvements.  Moffett Road: This two-lane, north/south roadway transects the eastern portion of the Plan Area and extends from Service Road southward to E. Redwood Road in Stanislaus County. Within the CTSP, this facility has no frontage improvements.  E. Redwood Road: This two-lane, east/west roadway is located entirely within the Plan Area and provides access between Mitchell Road and Central Avenue. Except where adjacent to an existing elementary school, this facility has no frontage improvements.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

5.3 PLANNED ROADWAYS Copper Trails’ planned roadway system is comprised of arterial and collector streets, which form a network that provides access to all Specific Plan parcels. As illustrated herein, improvements are planned for all existing roadways within, and adjacent to, the Plan Area in order to accommodate buildout of the Development Plan. Additionally, several new roadways are planned to enhance the efficiency of the CTSP’s circulation system. The type and locations of all roadways are shown on Figure 5-1, Roadway Key Map. Information regarding each roadway’s size, lane capacity, right-of-way, and other requirements are summarized in Table 5-1, Roadway Classifications. TABLE 5-1: ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS 1 Moffett Road north of Road B is planned as a 6-lane arterial roadway. Ultimate right-of-way and roadway geometry to be determined by City during the first Tentative Map/Development Review for any property adjacent to this segment.

Roadway Type/Name Right- of-Way Auto Lanes Bike Lanes Median/ Turn Lane Curbside Parking Sidewalk / Path Fig. # Arterial & Collector RoadsService Road (West of High School Site) 99' 4 0' / 6' 12' Turn Lane None 12' / 12' 5-2Service Road (Along High School Frontage) 103'-116' 4 8' / 6' 12' Turn Lane None 12' / 5'-12' 5-3 Service Road (East of Central Avenue) 85' 4 None 14' Turn Lane None 12' / None 5-4Central Avenue & Moffett Road 1 100' 4 7' / 7' 14' Median None 5' / 5' 5-5 Blaker Road 58' 2 7' / 0' None East Side 0' / 12' 5-6E. Redwood Road (West of Moffett Rd.) 84' 2 5' / 5' 12' Median Both Sides 5' / 5' 5-7E. Redwood Road (East of Moffett Rd.) 90' 2 5' / 5' 12' Median Both Sides 8' / 8' 5-8Interior Collector Road (Residential Frontage) 62' 2 None None Both Sides 5' / 5' 5-9Interior Collector Road (Commercial Frontage) 70' 2 None 12' Turn Lane None 8' / 8' 5-10Interior Collector Road (Park Frontage) 44' 2 None None Both Sides 5' / 0' 5-11Local StreetsInterior Street (Typical) 50' 2 None None Both Sides 6' / 6' 5-12

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-3
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-1: ROADWAY KEY MAP

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Arterial & Collector Design Standards Arterial roadways are designed for the movement of high traffic volumes and function as the primary circulation routes within the Plan Area. These facilities provide connections among collector and local streets to regionalserving roadways and typically have restricted and/or consolidated access. Collector streets are secondary circulation routes that generally distribute trips from the arterial street system to the local street system. As illustrated in the street sections, arterials are designed with 4 travel lanes and collectors with 2 lanes, and both typically include on-street bike lanes and parking lanes. For some roadway segments, street design also incorporates a landscape median. Frontage improvements vary by roadway type and include a combination of landscaping and attached/street-separated sidewalks. An overview of each type of planned arterial and collector roads is summarized below: Service Road  Reference: Figures 5-2, 5-3 & 5-4 This existing roadway is planned to be improved in its current alignment along the northern edge of the Plan Area. When fully improved, Service Road is designed to accommodate 4 travel lanes, a center turn lane, bike lanes, and a combination of sidewalks and multi-use paths. Because portions of this road have previously been partially improved, the degree of roadway widening varies depending on its location adjacent to the Plan Area.

Central Avenue & Moffett Road  Reference: Figure 5-5
These existing roadways are planned to be improved in their current alignments within the Plan Area. When fully improved, these roads are generally designed to accommodate 4 travel lanes, a center median, bike lanes, and detached sidewalks, however Moffett Road north of Street B is planned as a 6-lane arterial roadway. Because portions of these roads have been previously improved, the degree of roadway widening and associated improvements varies depending location in the Plan Area. For instance, Central Avenue’s improvements adjacent to the high school are primarily needed along its eastern edge. For other segments, full roadway improvements are needed to upgrade them from current conditions.

Blaker Road  Reference: Figure 5-6 This existing roadway is planned to be improved in its current alignment along the western edge of the Plan Area. When fully improved, Blaker Road is designed to accommodate 2 travel lanes, a bike lane, and a parking lane along its eastern edge. Additionally, a landscape corridor with a detached multi-use path is incorporated along this road’s eastern edge. East Redwood Road  Reference: Figures 5-7 & 5-8 This existing roadway is planned to be improved in its current alignment within the Plan Area. When fully improved, East Redwood Road is designed to accommodate 2 travel lanes, a center median, bike lanes, parking lanes, and detached sidewalks. Because this road has previously been partially improved, the degree of roadway widening and associated improvements varies depending on its location in the Plan Area. Interior Collector Roads  Reference: Figures 5-9, 5-10 & 5-11 These street sections apply to several planned roadways within the Plan Area, as identified on the Roadway Key Map in Figure 5-1. Depending on the intended application, these sections provide for 2 travel lanes and sidewalks, along with a center turn lane and on-street curbside parking in some instances.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-5
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-2: SERVICE ROAD (WEST OF HIGH SCHOOL SITE)
FIGURE 5-3: SERVICE ROAD (ALONG HIGH SCHOOL FRONTAGE)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-4: SERVICE ROAD (EAST OF CENTRAL AVENUE)
Note: Moffett Road north of Road B is planned as a 6-lane arterial roadway. Ultimate right-of-way and roadway geometry to be determined by City during the first Tentative Map/Development Review for any property adjacent to this segment.

FIGURE 5-5: CENTRAL AVENUE & MOFFETT ROAD

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-7
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-6: BLAKER ROAD
FIGURE 5-7: E. REDWOOD ROAD (WEST OF MOFFETT ROAD)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-8: E. REDWOOD ROAD (EAST OF MOFFETT ROAD)
FIGURE 5-9: INTERIOR COLLECTOR ROAD (RESIDENTIAL FRONTAGE)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-9
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-10: INTERIOR COLLECTOR ROAD (COMMERCIAL FRONTAGE) FIGURE 5-11: INTERIOR COLLECTOR ROAD (PARK FRONTAGE)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. Local Street Design Standards Compared to the other road types in Copper Trails, local streets have the lowest traffic volumes and are designed to provide direct access to homes and businesses. Typically, these street types include two travel lanes with space for on-street parking and an adjacent sidewalk. One design standard for local streets is included in the CTSP, as noted below. Interior Street (Typical)  Reference: Figure 5-12 Although locations are not specified on the Roadway Key Map in Figure 5- 1, the Interior Street design section is planned as the primary “in-tract” street design section within all residential subdivisions in the Plan Area. The typical Interior Street design section provides for 2 travel lanes, on-street parking lanes, and attached sidewalks.

FIGURE 5-12: INTERIOR STREET

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-11
CIRCULATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

5.4 PUBLIC TRANSIT The Stanislaus Regional Transit Authority (StanRTA) is the primary public transit provider for Stanislaus County. With a service area covering the cities of Ceres, Crows Landing, Grayson, Hickman, Hughson, Modesto, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Turlock, Waterford, and Westley, StanRTA offers several public transit options in both rural and urbanized areas. The system’s primary transit option consists of a fixed-route bus service with over 20 different routes throughout the County, all of which provide a connection to a Transit Center in downtown Modesto. Two of StanRTA’s routes provide service to the City of Ceres. StanRTA also provides a commuter service to the Amtrak station in Modesto, ACE station in Lathrop, Manteca Transit Center, Stockton Transit Center, and Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. Together, these scheduled, fixed-route public transit services provide public transit options throughout the County, including neighboring counties and destinations in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to the fixed-route services noted above, StanRTA offers several demand response services. These include ADA Paratransit, Dial-A-Ride and Medivan. Within Ceres, Dial-A-Ride provides a curb-to-curb service that is available for riders with disabilities that prevent them from riding the StanRTA fixed route bus service.

To facilitate the expansion and use of transit, the CTSP’s highest intensity land uses are located in proximity to major transportation corridors and potential transit stops. These uses include regional commercial, employment, and high density residential uses that are planned within the confines of SR-99, Service Road, and Moffett Road, which maximizes transit accessibility to a regional service area. This provides an opportunity to link these uses to the CTSP’s residential neighborhoods and schools, while also connecting with other regional-serving routes including downtown Modesto. A conceptual alignment for the extension of StanRTA’s fixed-route bus service is illustrated on Figure 5-13, Public Transit. As the Plan Area’s roadway improvements are constructed and public transit services are expanded, bus turnouts and shelters will be located and constructed in accordance with applicable City and StanRTA design standards.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
5-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 5-13: PUBLIC TRANSIT

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Parks, Trails & Trees
Inside this Chapter 6.1 Overview 6.2 Parks & Recreation Facilities 6.3 Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility 6.4 Public Realm Design

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-1
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

6.1 OVERVIEW A unifying element of the Copper Trails Specific Plan is its planned system of parks, green spaces, multi-use trails, and streetscapes. The CTSP establishes the framework to ensure that as these types of facilities are constructed over time, they will collectively have a cohesive appearance that visually defines Copper Trails as a distinctive place within the City. This chapter provides an overview of the key public spaces and facilities that are to be developed as the Plan Area builds out over time. This includes plans for:  Parks & Recreation Facilities to identify the location and function of parks and green spaces throughout the Plan Area.
 Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility plans to highlight the multi-use trail network that links the CTSP’s residential neighborhoods, schools, and commercial/employment centers.  Public Realm Design elements to create visually-cohesive streetscapes by using a consistent palette of landscaping, entry and identification features, walls and fencing, and street lighting.

6.2 PARKS & RECREATION

FACILITIES
The CTSP includes several planned parks and linear parkway/open space greenbelts that provide active and passive recreation opportunities for residents. The intent is to develop a network of “green” spaces with a diverse mix of recreational amenities and public gathering spaces that serve the anticipated needs of local residents. Parks range in size from approximately two (2) to six (6) acres and are distributed throughout the Plan Area such that they are in walkable proximity to all residential neighborhoods. Most parks are designed for dual functionality, providing space for both recreational amenities and stormwater storage. In several instances, parks are sited adjacent to linear parkway features that include multi-use trails, thereby enhancing the park system’s recreational value and accessibility throughout the Plan Area.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Neighborhood Park Facilities A total of five (5) neighborhood park spaces are planned throughout the CTSP, as shown in Figure 6-1. Several parks are sited along the southern edge of the Plan Area adjacent to the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) canal and associated linear park/greenbelt corridor, which create a strong “green” linkage between these neighborhood amenities. Similarly, small, linear parkways are sited along the northern and western edges of the Plan Area, where they provide passive recreation opportunities for adjacent neighborhoods, while also functioning as a visual buffer to the City’s wastewater treatment plant and major roadways. Two centrally-located parks are included in the Plan Area, each envisioned to serve a different purpose. One park is located immediately north of Hidahl Elementary School and provides a recreational anchor for adjacent residential neighborhoods. At approximately 3.7 acres, this park space is sized to provide active and passive recreational features and a dual-use stormwater basin. Additionally, a small park space is planned at the northeast corner of East Redwood Road and Moffett Road, where it can serve the CTSP’s most intensive residential and commercial/employment uses. This park space is envisioned to include “urban” programming, which could include a large pedestrian gathering space and food truck plaza, designed to support nearby multi-family and commercial developments. All public parks are envisioned to be programmed with a mix of active and passive recreational amenities, plus dual-use stormwater basins. Ultimate programming and design of each park varies depending on site size, location, and adjacent uses. Larger park spaces can support active recreation, with amenities such as multi-sport ball fields (soccer, lacrosse, rugby, baseball), hard courts (basketball, tennis), and other amenities. Smaller parks can support some limited active play facilities while emphasizing passive recreation. Typical amenities in smaller parks could include features such as tot-lots, sitting/picnic areas, shade structures, water quality features, and small turf areas for informal play. The City may use its authority to regulate park design, facilities and programming to ensure that potential noise impacts to nearby residential uses are mitigated. Additionally, all parks are intended to provide some level of function for the CTSP’s drainage and flood control system, which includes dual-use detention/retention basins for the temporary storage of stormwater during rain events. The design and programming of all park facilities is to be determined by the Ceres Recreation Department.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-3
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 FIGURE 6-1: PARK & OPEN SPACE SITES

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. Linear Parkways & Greenbelt Corridors A comprehensive network of linear parkways and greenbelt corridors are planned throughout the CTSP. This network is comprised of the following elements:  TID Lateral Greenbelt: This feature consists of a 50’-wide landscaped greenbelt located along the southern edge of the Plan Area, adjacent to an existing TID canal. It includes an 8’-wide multi-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists that provides east/west linkages to several planned park spaces and residential neighborhoods. The greenbelt also provides space for stormwater storage and treatment.  Linear Parkways: These features consists of a 22’ to 25’-wide landscaped parkway located at the edge of right-of-way along two roadway corridors. These are provided along the southern edge of Service Road (except along High School frontage), and along the eastern edge of Blaker Road. Linear Parkways are also sited alongside a 12’-wide multi-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists that provides linkages to nearby parks.  Landscape Corridors: These features consist of 15’-wide landscape lots adjacent to major roadways, which are aligned along the right-ofway edge of the adjacent street’s sidewalk. These features are intended to enhance the visual quality of the streetscape network while providing pedestrian access between residential neighborhoods and the linear parks/greenbelts located along Plan Area edges.

The CTSP’s network of linear parkways and greenbelts collectively support creation of a comprehensive network of multi-use paths throughout the Plan Area while also providing an enhanced aesthetic value to the streetscapes.

Planned improvements typically include water conserving landscaping, efficient low water use irrigation systems and controls, stormwater quality (LID) features, security lighting, and 8’ to 12’-wide paved pathways. Their primary purpose is to encourage walking and biking by providing linkages for pedestrians and bicyclists between the residential neighborhoods, parks, schools, and commercial/employment centers.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-5
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 C. Parkland Dedication & Credits General Plan & Municipal Code Park Requirements The Ceres General Plan requires 4.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Based on the persons per household factors specified in Table 6-1, which vary by dwelling unit type, full residential buildout of the CTSP is estimated to generate a population of 6,755 people. Based on this population, the City’s requirement of 4.0 acres per 1,000 residents generates the need for approximately 27.0 acres of credited parkland. TABLE 6-1: POPULATION ESTIMATES The City’s Municipal Code also includes parkland dedication requirements, with unique factors applied to different household types. By applying these factors to the planned distribution of residential uses within the Plan Area, development of the CTSP generates the need for approximately 33.8 acres of credited parkland. The Municipal Code’s parkland generation factors are summarized in Table 6-2.

TABLE 6-2: MUNICIPAL CODE PARK REQUIREMENTS
Parkland Provided & Credit Received The CTSP development plan includes a total of 42.4 acres of parks and open space areas to be dedicated and developed with recreational uses, which is eligible for 100% credit. This exceeds both the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code requirements noted above. Additionally, full development of planned facilities results in nearly 6.3 acres of parks and greenbelts per 1,000 residents.

Residential Unit Type Dwelling Units PPH Factor Population LDR - Low Density Residential 988 du 3.2 3,161MDR - Medium Density Residential 338 du 2.75 930MHDR - Medium-High Density Residential 336 du 2.5 840HDR - High Density Residential 730 du 2.5 1,825Total 2,392 du 6,755 Residential Unit Type Dwelling Units Muni Code Park Factor Acreage Required LDR - Low Density Residential 988 du 0.0151 14.9 acMDR - Medium Density Residential 338 du 0.0151 5.1 acMHDR - Medium-High Density Residential 336 du 0.0129 4.3 acHDR - High Density Residential 730 du 0.0129 9.4 acTotal 2,392 du 33.8 ac

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

6.3 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY A comprehensive network of multi-use trails and paths, and on-street Class II bikeways is planned to provide non-vehicular connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians throughout Copper Trails. As planned, this system provides both off-street and on-street facilities throughout the Plan Area, connecting with existing facilities in the City of Ceres to the north and east. Copper Trails bicycle and pedestrian mobility network consists of three key components:  Multi-Use Trails and Paths  Class II Bikeways  Sidewalks These facilities are identified on Figure 6-4, Bicycle & Pedestrian Mobility Network. Multi-Use Trails and Paths Multi-use paths and trails are the widest, street-separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities provided in the Plan Area. Two key corridors are identified for construction of these features:  Service Road & Blaker Road Multi-Use Paths: Along the southern edge of Service Road and the eastern edge of Blaker Road, as illustrated in the street sections in Chapter 5, the landscape corridors include a 12’-wide, street separated, multi-use path. These facilities augment the bicycle and pedestrian mobility system in the Plan Area.

This feature is illustrated in Figure 6-2.
 TID Greenbelt Multi-Use Path: Along the southern edge of the Plan Area, an 8’-wide, street-separated multi-use path is planned within the greenbelt adjacent to the TID canal. This facility provides an east/west linkage between several residential neighborhoods, parks, and the regional commercial center. It also includes two northward spurs providing connections to East Redwood Road at Moffett Road and at the regional commercial center. This feature is shown in Figure 6-3.

FIGURE 6-2: MULTI-USE PATH DESIGN SECTION
FIGURE 6-3: TID LATERAL TRAIL DESIGN SECTION

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-7
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 FIGURE 6-4: BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MOBILITY NETWORK

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Class II Bikeways Class II bikeways are designated on-street bike lanes located along the edge of arterial roadways and collector streets. The width of these lanes varies depending on the roadway type and planned vehicle volumes. The widest facility consists of an 8’-wide on-street bike lane along the High School’s frontage on Service Road, with 6’-wide lanes planned on other segments as depicted in the roadway design sections on Figures 5-2 through 5-4. On-street bike lanes are also planned on Central Avenue, Moffett Road, and East Redwood Road, with lane widths ranging between 5’ and 7’-wide. Roadway design sections for these streets are illustrated on Figures 5-5 through 5-8. All Class II bike lanes are delineated with signage and painted stripes. Sidewalks Sidewalks are required along all public roadways and are a key component of the pedestrian mobility system at the neighborhood level. Combined with the multi-use paths and trails, the overall sidewalk network provides pedestrian access to all planned uses in the Plan Area. The width of sidewalks varies depending on a roadway’s classification and function. The widest facility consists of a 12’-wide attached sidewalk along Service Road, as depicted on Figures 5-2 and 5-3. Otherwise, sidewalks on all other streets in the Plan Area range between 8’ and 5’-wide, and are provided in both a detached and attached condition depending on the roadway classification. Sidewalks are typically 5’ to 6’-wide along residential street frontages and are typically 8’-wide along commercial street frontages, but actual width may vary depending on location within the Plan Area. The design sections in Chapter 5 (Figures 5-2 through 5-12) provide details regarding each roadway’s planned sidewalk width and location. Additionally, Figure 6-4 depicts the typical sidewalk and/or multi-use trail width along the Plan Area’s major roadways.

6.4 PUBLIC REALM DESIGN The design concept for Copper Trails’ public realm is intended to evoke a high-quality community, with cohesive streetscapes that utilize a consistent application of landscaping, community identification features, walls and fencing, and street lighting. The overarching goal is to create a design framework for the public realm that establishes a clear identity for Copper Trails within the City of Ceres. This section provides design guidance for several key elements of Copper Trails public realm:  Streetscape Landscaping  Street Tree Plan  Entry Features & Project Identification  Walls & Fences  Street Lighting This section primarily applies to major roadway corridors, but should also be used to guide design of high-visibility features of the CTSP’s public realm, such as neighborhood entries, parks, trail corridors, and areas that warrant an enhanced landscape treatment. Adherence to these guidelines is required to ensure that buildout of the Plan Area is visually cohesive and maintains a uniquely-identifiable theme.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-9
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 A. Streetscape Landscaping Street trees are envisioned to function as a key defining element of the Copper Trails community. Large-scale trees are to dominate the sight lines of all major roadways, creating a distinctive backdrop to the built environment. To complete the streetscape design, a cohesive palette of shrubs and groundcovers should augment the selection of street trees, which harmonizes the landscape architecture throughout the public realm. Along major roadways such as Service Road, Blaker Road, Central Avenue, Moffett Road, and E. Redwood Road, landscape corridors are purposefully large in scale in order to provide space for large trees and extensive landscaping. All streets are to be landscaped with a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover consistent with the planting concepts outlined in this subsection. In addition, landscape irrigation must comply with the State of California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), as approved by the City of Ceres. All streetscape landscaping shall conform to applicable City-adopted standards and specifications, including requirements in Title 12, Chapter 12.05, Street Trees, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

Primary Street Trees Primary street trees are those designated for landscape planters along roadway edges and in medians. Generally, primary trees are of a deciduous variety, with bright leaf coloring that has high contrast with “backdrop” trees. Primary trees are also intended to have vibrant flowering characteristics during the Spring season and/or distinctive color in the Fall. Where a significant tree backdrop is desired, evergreen tree species may also be suitable. Consistent application of primary street trees is intended provide scale along various street sections, helping define form and visual character. Special consideration should be given to tree types in high-visibility or special areas, such as the eastern entrance gateway to Copper Trails along Service Road. Primary street trees shall be consistent with the criteria below:  Trees should be provided along all public roadways, to create a continuous, shaded canopy along the street, as well as to shade homes.  Large-scale, single-trunk trees with high canopies that grow over the roadway.
 Selected from the master plant palette, provided later in this section.  Spaced 30 to 40-feet on center depending upon species, or a minimum of one per lot along residential streets.
 Planted from a minimum 15-gallon container.  Planted in a regular linear fashion, set back from the curb far enough to accommodate ultimate growth. Root barriers should be installed on trees that are planted within 5-feet of a curb or paved surface.  Drought-resistant when established.  Where feasible, trees should be placed on separate irrigation valves from shrubs, groundcovers, and turf to facilitate the appropriate level of irrigation.  Plants shall be planted in hydro zones.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Backdrop & Accent Trees To supplement primary street trees within landscape corridors, backdrop trees should be incorporated into streetscape design to enhance the landscape architectural theme and to provide a visual transition between roadway corridors and developed areas. Backdrop trees are those located in landscape corridors along roadway edges, but behind the sidewalk, and in the background of the primary trees. Species identified for backdrop trees are selected based on their height, scale, color, and texture in order to provide the envisioned juxtaposition with the primary trees. Typically, backdrop trees are to be an evergreen variety in order to provide a dark backdrop to primary trees, which have a brighter color and leaving characteristics. Backdrop trees also help screen sound walls and create a year-round transition between residential neighborhoods and roadway corridors. Accent Trees should be utilized to provide color and visual interest at key transition points, such as at street intersections and at entry features. Accent trees are selected from the same palette of backdrop trees and should be used to provide color and accents at the intersection of major roadways, at project and neighborhood entries, and at points of interest along the streetscape. Medians may also incorporate accent trees, particularly at major roadway intersections. Application of backdrop and accent trees should be:  Planted in informal fashion as determined by space and tree species.  Selected from the master plant palette, provided later in this section.  Complementary to the form and color of the primary street tree.  Planted from a minimum 15-gallon container.  Spaced an average of 20 to 30-feet on center depending upon species, or in equivalent quantities if planted in clusters.  Have a root zone character that does not prohibit adjacent plants.

Shrubs Shrubs should be used in landscape corridors and medians to provide a visual barrier to fences, walls, and utility equipment, to soften the ground plane, and to visually link all landscape materials. Application of shrubs should be:  Planted from a minimum 1 to 5-gallon container.  Selected according to size, color, texture, and seasonal interest.  Placed to avoid obstructing important pedestrian or vehicular sight lines.
 Selected to minimize food sources for other animals.

Groundcover Groundcover should be planted in all portions of landscape corridors and medians that are not planted with shrubs or otherwise occupied by landscape bark or hardscape. Selection of plant material should consider the pedestrian use of a particular area. High-activity areas, such as parks and sports fields, should utilize turf to the extent feasible while complying with applicable water efficient landscape ordinance requirements. Lowactivity areas, such as landscape corridors along major roadways, should use a combination of drought-tolerant groundcovers and bark. Use of groundcover should consider the following:  To the extent permitted by the MWELO, landscape planters (between a street edge and sidewalk) should utilize turf for a groundcover. Where turf is not feasible, these planters should be landscaped with a low, creeping groundcover that mimics the green appearance of turf and can be irrigated in compliance with the MWELO.  Non-turf groundcover (or a combination of non-turf groundcover and bark) should be utilized in landscape corridors behind the back of sidewalk.  Turf and groundcover areas should be defined with concrete mow strips. Mow strips should also be used at the edges of formal landscape areas, or where needed, to delineate the limits of formal maintenance or to designate property limits.  Drought-resistant groundcover species, including turf that requires lowwater usage.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-11
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 B. Street Tree Plan The CTSP includes a palette for primary street trees to ensure that plantings help create a visually-cohesive streetscape theme. This notion is intended to reinforce Copper Trail’s sense of place by using landscape architecture to establish a tangible identity for primary roadway corridors that define the public realm. Because development of the Plan Area is expected to occur over several years, the intent is to establish a design framework that ensures that, at buildout, the Plan Area is unified through its landscaping and creates a clearly-identifiable place within the City. To that end, tree selection should retain enough similarity in color, texture, and appearance to ensure that the entire Plan Area retains a common landscape theme. The primary street tree palette is listed in Table 6-3, which specifies a visually unified variety of primary, backdrop, and accent trees to be used along Copper Trail’s roadway corridors. Tree selection and application is also subject to requirements outlined in Chapter 12.05, Street Trees, of the Ceres Municipal Code. TABLE 6-3: PRIMARY STREET TREE PALETTE Tree Type/Application Species Primary Street Trees  Red Sunset Maple  London Plane Columbia  Scarlet/Red Oak
Backdrop Trees  Evergreen Elm
 Deodar Cedar  Raywood Ash  Chanticleer Pear
Accent Trees  Ginko Biloba
 Crape Myrtle  Flowering Plum  Dogwood
Deodar Cedar Raywood Ash Crape Myrtle Red Sunset Maple Chanticleer Pear Dogwood

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Entry Features & Project Identification Entry features and associated project identification signage are an integral component for the visual character of Copper Trail’s public realm design. Working in tandem with the streetscape design elements outlined in this section, entry features utilize a single design approach that is repeated throughout the Plan Area to reinforce its sense of place. By utilizing a consistent palette of hardscape elements, materials and finishes, signage style, and accent features, the public realm will have a unified streetscape theme. Furthermore, these features can be utilized to create visual transition points into and out of the Copper Trails Plan Area to strengthen the streetscape’s cohesive appearance. Two types of entry features are planned for Copper Trails: Project Entries and Neighborhood Entries. Project Entries consist of large-scale monuments and/or walls that announce arrival to a project area, such as the Regional Commercial center planned to the east of Moffett Road. Neighborhood Entries consist of smaller-scale monuments and/or walls that announce arrival to a residential neighborhood or multi-family development. Both types of features are intended to incorporate limited signage to identify the name of a project or neighborhood. The design concept and guidelines for entry features and associated identification signage is outlined below. Examples of Project Entries into Large Commercial Centers & Neighborhoods Project Entries Project Entries consist of large-scale monuments and/or walls that visually reinforce the streetscape theme and announce arrival to project areas. These features are located at major roadway intersections to identify larger project or neighborhood areas. The application of landscape and hardscape materials should be consistent throughout the Plan Area to ensure that a cohesive theme is maintained for Copper Trails’ public realm. The design characteristics for Project Entries should adhere to the following guidelines:  Large-scale hardscape elements, such as masonry walls, pilasters, or obelisks, may be used in intersection corner clips or in landscape easements along roadway edges to visually denote entry into a project area or large neighborhood unit. Walls should be no greater than 6’-high, and pilasters no greater than 8’-high, unless determined by the City to be warranted by its high-quality design appearance.  Low walls with decorative caps, used in conjunction with pilasters at street edges, may be utilized to reinforce a sense of arrival.  Hardscape elements should be accented with stone or other natural materials, which complement the streetscape design theme and reinforce the character of the landscape.  Identification signage may be incorporated into entry feature design, consistent with the signage provisions in the sub-section below.  Energy efficient, indirect lighting may be incorporated with concealed fixtures that provide a subtle lighting wash across hardscape and landscape elements during nighttime hours (subject to Planning Commission approval).  Accent trees and layering groupings of colorful shrubs and groundcovers should be incorporated to further define the physical form of an entry feature, with a scale that complements hardscape elements and reinforces the sense of arrival.  Trees, shrubs, and landscape materials should consist of native and local vegetation that is drought tolerant and is compliant with the MWELO.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-13
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 Neighborhood Entries Neighborhood Entries are features that identify a formal entrance into a residential neighborhood or a multi-family development. These features may be located in a small center median at a neighborhood entrance, or may flank the edges of a neighborhood’s entry roadway and/or drive aisle. The design of Neighborhood Entries should utilize a visuallycompatible palette of materials, colors, and exterior finishes and should be consistent with the design palette utilized for Project Entries in keeping with the overarching streetscape theme. Additionally, its design should be smaller in scale than a Project Entry and in scale with the surrounding built environment. The design characteristics for Neighborhood Entries should adhere to the following guidelines:  Entry features should be located at an entrance to a residential neighborhood or multi-family development, either in an entrance median or along each street/drive aisle edge, at the primary access point from an arterial or collector street.  Thematic walls or other hardscape features (such as trellises, raised planters, pilasters, etc.) that are consistent with the overall streetscape design theme for Copper Trails’ public realm may be incorporated into entry features.  Identification signage may be incorporated into entry feature design, consistent with the signage provisions in the sub-section below.  Iconic emblems, logos, or symbols may be used to identify the neighborhood/project, which reinforces the streetscape theme.  Entry features should be sited and designed in a manner that does not impact site distance requirements for automobiles.
 Energy efficient, indirect lighting may be incorporated with concealed fixtures that provide a subtle lighting wash across hardscape and landscape elements during nighttime hours (subject to Planning Commission approval).  The number, height, and size of all entry feature signage is subject to the requirements outlined in Chapter 18.26, Signing Standards, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

Examples of Neighborhood Entries into Residential Neighborhoods

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-14 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Signage on Entry Features Identification signage is permitted on entrance features and should be utilized in a limited manner. Entrance feature signage and permitting requirements are subject to the regulations outlined in Chapter 18.26, Signing Standards, of the Ceres Municipal Code. All signs, including those related to commercial, office, and multi-family use, as well as temporary construction, marketing, and sales signs, are also regulated by the Ceres Municipal Code. Entry features signage should adhere to the following guidelines:  Sign text should be used to identify the City of Ceres at an entrance gateway, the name of a project or neighborhood area, or the name of an individual residential neighborhood or multi-family development.  Signage should consist of high-quality materials that are capable of enduring seasonal, outdoor conditions and that are resistant to vandalism.  Signs and sign lettering are encouraged to be monolithic or panels/plaques, versus individual letters, such as flush-mount channel letters, flush-mount masonry or metal wall plaques, or cast in concrete.  All sign elements on pilasters or walls should use mounting hardware securely embedded into the surface onto which it is affixed. No epoxymounted elements are permitted.  Where signs and entry features are to be up-lit, such lighting equipment is subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission.

D. Walls & Fences The use of walls and fences throughout Copper Trails is intended to provide screening between differing land uses, create a transition between developed and undeveloped areas, secure utility facilities from public access, and provide privacy and security for private property. The design and material for walls and fencing varies throughout the Plan Area, depending on the specific purpose. The use of walls and fencing is subject to the regulations outlined in Chapter 18.27, Fences, Hedges, Walls Standards, of the Ceres Municipal Code, except as modified herein. Several wall and fence types are specified, with the general design characteristics for each specified below.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-15
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 Masonry Walls Masonry walls are intended to provide security, screening, privacy, and/or sound attenuation where appropriate along roadways or between differing land uses. The typical application of masonry walls is on hightraffic volume roadways, such as Service Road, Central Avenue, and Blaker Road, located along the back edge of the landscape lot where needed for sound attenuation adjacent to single-family residential uses. Additionally, masonry walls are required along the interface between differing land uses, such as where a LDR land use adjoins a HDR, MHDR, School, or CF land use. Additional locations for the use of masonry walls may be required if deemed necessary by the City, such as along the interface between a residential use and a public park. Masonry wall examples, some with decorative pilasters and top caps, that reflect the streetscape theming of a Specific Plan area. Actual design to be determined with landscape improvement plans for roadway construction.

The guidelines below outline the key design requirements and common applications for masonry walls:  Masonry walls along public streets should be placed to avoid obstructing important pedestrian or vehicular sight lines and should not conflict with underground or above-ground electric, telephone, cable, water, or sewer services or equipment.  Walls should be a minimum of 6’-high along high-traffic volume roadways and located at the back edge of a landscape lot where adjoining a single-family residential land use. Higher walls may be permitted if deemed necessary to meet the requirements of a sitespecific noise analysis.  Opportunities for wall openings between land uses should be included where appropriate to encourage and facilitate pedestrian connection/access between residential neighborhoods and adjacent roadways.  A consistent wall design should be utilized throughout the Plan Area to ensure continuity in the public realm’s design and streetscape theme.  Wall materials shall have a textured face such as cast patterns, splitfaced, or stucco-finished on the side facing the street or public view and include a trim cap which adds color and texture change and visual interest.  Pilasters shall be incorporated into wall design and used at edges of neighborhood vehicular and pedestrian entrances to define openings, and at angle points or directional changes to enhance its aesthetics.  Landscaping in front of the wall shall include shrubs close to the wall to break up any stretches of wall not interrupted by columns.  Where walls are located adjacent to neighborhood entrances, pilasters should be incorporated into wall design and be coordinated with any neighborhood entry features.  Pilasters may include embellishments such as graphic logos or emblems, subject to applicable regulatory requirements outlined in Chapter 18.26, Signing Standards, of the Ceres Municipal Code.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-16 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Residential Wood Fencing Wood fencing is permitted to provide privacy and security in single-family residential areas. Two types of wood fencing are specified, which are intended to be used for different interfaces. The application of residential wood fencing depends on several factors, such as adjacent uses, visibility from public streets, and placement within a residential neighborhood. The application of each wood fencing design type should be guided by the following parameters:  Enhanced Wood Fence: This fence type is required where residential lot edges face (or adjoin) a residential street. Enhanced wood fences incorporate a base and decorative top rail, with encased fence boards between posts, to create an identical appearance on both sides.  Standard Wood Fence: This fence type is required on shared property lines between residential lots. Fence design is simpler than the Enhanced Wood Fence, with alternating fence boards and/or panels and an optional decorative top rail.

The application of residential wood fencing should adhere to the following requirements:  Fences located along side yard or rear yard lot lines shall not exceed 6’-high. In addition, pilasters and decorative caps may extend higher than the height limitation of the fence.
 Constructed in module widths between 6-feet and 8-feet and supported by 4-by-4 posts.
 Wood fencing shall consist of redwood or cedar construction and may be stained in an earth tone color.
 Side yard fences and walls shall be permitted on a shared property line, but not within a front setback.
 Front yard fences shall not exceed 3½’-high except if located outside the setback at the front of the building, where the maximum is 6’-high.

Enhanced wood fence examples that incorporate a base, decorative top rail, and colorized stain, some with decorative pilasters, that reflect the streetscape theming of a Specific Plan area. Actual design to be determined with landscape improvement plans for roadway construction.

Standard wood fence examples with alternating fence panels and/or boards and optional decorative top rail.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-17
PARKS, TRAILS & TREES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026 Open View Fencing Open view fences are intended to provide a visually transparent barrier at land use interfaces and unique locations where security and access prevention is warranted, but through-visibility is desired. Depending on the interface, open view fencing may be used between residential uses and greenbelts and/or linear parks, along the street-side adjacent to a multifamily development, or at other miscellaneous locations within the Plan Area where conditions warrant. The following guidelines should be used to direct the design and application of open fencing throughout the Plan Area, as appropriate for each location:  Open fencing should be 4’-6’-high and constructed of tubular steel or wrought iron.
 Fencing should have a durable finish designed to withstand outdoor seasonal conditions and should consist of a dark black or green color.  Brick or other masonry pilasters or columns may be used as an optional detail with tubular steel or wrought iron fences.
 Both sides of fencing are to be addressed aesthetically if they are visible from public streets.
 Where residential lots back up to a greenbelt or linear park parcel, knee walls with or without a tubular steel fence on top may be used. If tubular steel fencing is required on top of the knee wall, the top of the fence/wall combination shall not exceed 6-feet.  Chain link fencing shall not be permitted.

Open view fencing examples, some with decorative pilasters and/or knee walls. Actual design and application to be determined with improvement plans.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
6-18 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
E. Street Lighting Street lighting is required along all roadways and may vary in design and height based on a roadway’s size. Light fixture design, luminaries, specification, and installation are subject to the City’s adopted Improvement Standards and are subject to applicable regulations in the City of Ceres Municipal Code. As permitted by City standards, consistently-themed decorative street lighting may be used on public streets in residential neighborhoods to maintain a cohesive design for the public realm. Where utilized, decorative fixtures are permitted on collector and residential streets. Decorative light fixtures are also encouraged on private streets within medium-high and high-density residential developments.

Examples of decorative lighting standards for public streets and/or private developments.

Actual design of public street lighting to be determined with roadway improvement plans, subject to City approval.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Utilities
Inside this Chapter 7.1 Overview 7.2 Potable Water 7.3 Wastewater 7.4 Non-Potable Water 7.5 Drainage & Flood Control 7.6 Energy 7.7 Voice & Data Communications 7.8 Solid Waste

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-1
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.1 OVERVIEW The development plan for Copper Trails includes provisions for the construction of all backbone utility systems needed to support buildout of the Plan Area. This section describes the approach for constructing potable water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and energy utility systems within the Plan Area. Additionally, water conservation, stormwater management, solid waste, and voice/data communications are addressed in this section. Infrastructure phasing and funding obligations are detailed in Chapter 10 Implementation. Utility infrastructure is to be constructed, dedicated, and easements provided consistent with this Specific Plan, project development agreements, and the applicable requirements of the City of Ceres, Stanislaus County, and relevant utility providers. The utility providers for Copper Trails are identified in Table 7-1. TABLE 7-1: UTILITY PROVIDERS Utility Provider Potable Water City of Ceres,
Stanislaus Regional Water Authority (SRWA)
Wastewater City of Ceres Drainage and Flood Control
City of Ceres, Turlock Irrigation District
Electric Services Turlock Irrigation District Gas Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) Communications AT&T, Spectrum Solid Waste Bertolotti Disposal

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.2 POTABLE WATER Within City limits, potable water is provided by the City of Ceres. Outside of City limits, potable water is provided by private wells or small water systems with wells. The City’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) describes the City’s water system in detail. It was last adopted in 2021 and is updated every five years. The City of Ceres Water Master Plan dated June 2011 delineates a primary sphere of influence, which includes the CTSP area. Infrastructure improvements for the CTSP are to be constructed per applicable City standards. Potable Water Supply Sources The City of Ceres relies extensively on groundwater from the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin for potable water. Raw water from non-potable, shallow park wells are utilized for some irrigation uses. As of 2020, the City operated a total of 13 groundwater wells with a total well capacity of 11,120 gallons per minute (GPM). In 2022, the City’s water division supplied an average of 5.9 million gallons of water daily. There is a planned groundwater well just south of the Plan Area at the southeast intersection of E. Redwood Road and Central Avenue. Due to constraints on groundwater consumption, such as treatment costs and supply limits, the City of Ceres and City of Turlock partnered with the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority (SRWA) for the Regional Surface Water Supply project. This partnership included the construction of a new water treatment plant (WTP) designed to utilize surface water from the Tuolumne River. This treatment plant began operating in late 2023 and its surface water supplements the City’s groundwater supply. The WTP is located east of Ceres and bordered by Geer Road to the east and the Tuolumne River to the north. The SRWA project pipeline has the capacity to provide the City of Ceres with 5 million gallons per day (mgd) and this water supply is expected to meet demand through the year 2035.

Planned Potable Water Infrastructure Improvements At the time of Specific Plan approval, existing potable water infrastructure in proximity to the Plan Area included a large groundwater well, storage tank, and booster pump. These facilities are located at the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) site to the west of the Plan Area along Blaker Road. This infrastructure serves a 24-inch trunk line located in E. Service Road and extends past the boundaries of the Copper Trails Specific Plan. An additional 8-inch line is within E. Service Road and used for local transmission to existing residential neighborhoods north of the Plan Area. Additionally, a 12-inch main line is located in Central Avenue, which supplies both school sites in the Plan Area. Finally, a short run of 24-inch trunk line connects Service Road to the existing tank at the Ceres WWTP. The CTSP’s potable water distribution system consists of looping pipelines located in arterial and collector roads to form a transmission main grid consisting of 12-inch to 24-inch diameter mains through the Plan Area. This system includes a planned connection to the 24-inch trunk line in Service Road, and additional connections are planned at Moffett Road and Lucas Road. The construction of an additional domestic well, storage tank, and booster pump is planned to meet the flow demand for buildout of the Plan Area. A domestic well and tank site are planned at the south terminus of Moffett Road. The key components of the potable water infrastructure system are shown in Figure 7-1. All water infrastructure improvements are to be constructed to the City of Ceres and/or SRWA standards using a phased approach. Detailed information regarding the CTSP’s potable water facilities is available in the Preliminary Master Plan for the CTSP’s utilities, which is included as an appendix to the Copper Trails EIR on file with the City.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-3
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 7-1: POTABLE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.3 WASTEWATER City Wastewater Infrastructure System The City of Ceres is the planned sanitary sewer service provider for Copper Trails. Wastewater from the Plan Area is collected and conveyed to the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) for treatment. The Ceres WWTP is located adjacent to the western boundary of the Plan Area. In 2020, the WWTP treated an average flow of 2.5 million gallons per day. Due to capacity constraints at the WWTP at the time of Specific Plan approval, a significant portion of existing wastewater flows were partially treated in Ceres and then pumped to the City of Turlock’s Wastewater Treatment Plant for remaining processing. Planned Backbone Wastewater Infrastructure Backbone wastewater infrastructure facilities in, and adjacent to, the Plan Area consist of a network of existing and planned pipes ranging in size from eight inches to 42 inches in diameter. Wastewater generated by the CTSP will be directed into existing infrastructure located in Service Road where it will flow to the Ceres WWTP for treatment. The backbone wastewater collection system is shown in Figure 7-2.

A Preliminary Master Plan for the CTSP’s utilities has been prepared to support the development of Copper Trails, which divides the Plan Area into four subareas: south, east, west, and north. Each subarea is described briefly below, with additional information and design detail provided in the Preliminary Master Plan for the CTSP’s utilities, which is included as an appendix to the Copper Trails EIR on file with the City.  South Area: Flows from the south area are to be conveyed by trunk lines to a planned regional sewer lift station located along Central Avenue, south of Redwood Road. From there, flows are to be discharged via a forced main into an existing line in Central Avenue. Various 10-inch, 12-inch, and 15-inch lines feed the trunk line for the regional lift station.  East Area: In the east area, the majority of flows are to be conveyed to the south in Moffett Road and Redwood Road, with discharge to the regional sewer lift station. This includes a large portion of the regional commercial parcels. In the northeast portion of this subarea, some flows are to be conveyed via trunk main lines directly to the a 42-inch line in Service Road.  West Area: The west area is to be served by a trunk line in Blaker Road, which allows for gravity flow to an existing trunk line in Service Road. To the extent feasible, the trunk line in Blaker Road is to be fed by smaller main lines for the construction of planned residential development in this subarea. Portions of this subarea may need to gravity flow toward Central Avenue, which conveys flows to the regional sewer lift station.  North Area: Main lines are planned to serve the north area via gravity, discharging to an existing 42-inch trunk line in Service Road. As planned, this subarea does not contribute flows to the regional sewer lift station.

All sewer improvements are to be constructed to the City of Ceres standards and be consistent with the Ceres Sewer System Master Plan. Improvements are to be constructed using a phased approach. Detailed information about the CTSP’s sanitary sewer system is contained in the Preliminary Master Plan for the CTSP’s utilities.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-5
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 7-2: WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.4 NON-POTABLE WATER Overview At the time of Specific Plan approval, there were no non-potable water systems in or near the Plan Area. However, at that same time, the City of Ceres was examining the feasibility of upgrades to the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) for tertiary treatment. This type of treatment is intended to create the opportunity to distribute raw water to the Plan Area and other areas of the City. This would provide a source of irrigation water that augments the City’s potable water supply portfolio.

Planned Non-Potable Water Infrastructure The CTSP includes plans for construction of a non-potable water system, which has been designed to be self-contained and includes the opportunity for expansion with a connection to the Ceres WWTP if a raw water supply becomes available. With or without a raw water supply from the WWTP, the CTSP’s planned non-potable water system provides a source of irrigation water for the Plan Area’s landscape corridors and park spaces. The non-potable water backbone infrastructure system consists of a distribution network with a combination of groundwater wells and distribution lines. This network includes three groundwater wells that are dispersed through the Plan Area and located in park spaces. These groundwater wells are linked by a network of 8-inch and 12-inch distribution lines located in Central Avenue, E. Redwood Road, Street A, and Street B. Additionally, a potential point of connection to the Ceres WWTP is provided the western terminus of a planned 12-inch line in Street A, at the intersection with Blaker Road. The planned backbone non-potable water infrastructure system is illustrated in Figure 7-3. Detailed information about the CTSP’s non-potable water facilities and supplies is provided in Preliminary Master Plan for the CTSP’s utilities, which is included as an appendix to the Copper Trails EIR on file with the City.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-7
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 7-3: NON-POTABLE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.5 DRAINAGE & FLOOD CONTROL Pre-Development Conditions The CTSP is located within the Middle San Joaquin-Lower Merced-Lower Stanislaus Watershed, which encompasses over 1,700 square miles and extends across the Central Valley from the foot of the Sierra Nevada in the east to the Coast Range and Interstate 5 in the west. Several existing stormwater facilities are located adjacent to the CTSP. There is a stormwater pump station and basin located directly west of the Plan Area at the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant. Additionally, the Turlock Irrigation District Lateral #2 canal is located along the southern boundary of the Plan Area. The City utilizes a collection of smaller, individual storm drainage systems, with design based on a 100-year, 24-hour storm to manage stormwater. Runoff flows into a detention pond at the Ceres WWTP before being discharged into the Turlock Irrigation District Lateral #2 Canal. The majority of stormwater drainage flows into detention basins. Drainage & Flood Control Improvements The CTSP’s planned drainage improvements consist of a combination of conventional subsurface and surface drainage systems including construction of pipe conveyance systems and storm drainage basins. Development of the CTSP includes construction of all necessary storm water collection and disposal facilities to serve the Plan Area, as well as appropriate financing mechanisms to generate funding that the City can use to maintain the system. After storm water basins are constructed by developers, they are to be dedicated to the City. The storm drainage infrastructure system is designed to create four major drainage sheds within the Plan Area that serve separate north, south, east and west areas, each with its own stormwater basin. System design does not account for school sites in the Plan Area, which were developed prior to Specific Plan approval and include storm drainage facilities that “selfserve” each school site’s needs. For the balance of the Plan Area, planned basins have been sized and located based on several factors including predevelopment topography and site drainage patterns, development phasing and construction feasibility, and earthwork and pipeline efficiencies. Additionally, each basin is located in a park area and is designed for dual function, serving both for recreation and stormwater detention/retention. Basin design allows stormwater to be discharged via infiltration into the groundwater basin, with treatment occurring at the bottom of each basin and within bio-swales located in park strips surrounding the Plan Area. Through the use of bio-swales, infiltration, inlets and conduits, storm water will be managed efficiently while adhering to adopted City standards. Each of the four major drainage sheds include minor tributaries to allow stormwater to be conveyed through a network of pipes via gravity for discharge to each basin. The storage within the conveyance system can be utilized for attenuation to the basins and additional storage. The ultimate design and construction of the CTSP’s stormwater drainage and flood control system are to be guided by the following measures:  To handle and properly store a NOAA 100-year storm event.  To design dual-use basins that function both during storm events and during non-storm timeframes.
 To limit basin depth to a maximum depth of 8-feet, with a maximum water depth of 9-feet with 1-foot of freeboard.
 To creates a network of linear parks that encircle and interconnect the Plan Area and to provide underground conveyance pipelines.  To utilize on-site retention as a means of stormwater storage and attenuation.
 To implement and comply with all applicable standards and guidelines of the LID Manual and Specifications, adopted by the City of Ceres in November 2021.  To comply with regulatory requirements of the City of Ceres MS4 Permit.

Because buildout of the Plan Area is planned to occur in a phased approach over time, construction of stormwater facilities within each drainage shed is anticipated to be directed by project demand and need. Because of this, temporary basins may be needed to handle stormwater flows until the permanent facilities in each shed area are constructed.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-9
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 7-4: STORM DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Stormwater Quality The planned storm drainage and flood control system for the CTSP utilizes Best Management Practices (BMPs), Low Impact Development (LID) measures, and other specifications to ensure better water quality, and recharging of ground water supplies where feasible to reduce community infrastructure costs. Additionally, the Ceres Municipal Code requires BMPs to be used consistent with the California Storm Water Quality Association (CASQA) Best Management Practice Handbooks or equivalent guidelines to prevent stormwater pollution or contamination due to discharge during construction. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for active construction projects to manage the release of on-site runoff. Stormwater management measures in the CTSP are to be implemented in a manner that cumulatively fulfill the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II General Permit, as issued by the State Water Resources Control Board. Stanislaus County’s approved Storm Water Management Program (SWMP) meets the terms of the General Permit through six control measures that contain BMPs. BMPs generally include erosion and sediment controls such as applying straw mulch to disturbed areas, the use of fiber rolls and silt fences, sedimentation basins, drain inlet protection, stabilized construction access, and material management. To manage stormwater quality and reduce post-development stormwater flows, development in the CTSP is planned to utilize various Low Impact Development (LID) strategies. LID strategies remove pollutants from runoff, attenuate peak flows, and reduce runoff volume. Example LID measures include the use of canopy trees and shrubs to absorb rainwater, permeable paving, bioswales and bioretention basins, and other techniques.

The use of BMPs and LID measures work in tandem with one another to address stormwater quality issues and hydrologic issues that newlydeveloping areas can generate. In light of this, the CTSP is responsible for implementing the following stormwater quality guidelines:  To conserve natural areas and drainages;  To minimize impervious surfaces, drain to pervious area;  To minimize soil compaction;  To mitigate peak runoff and associated erosion; and  To treat runoff in storm water BMP

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-11
UTILITIES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

7.6 ENERGY Electric Service Turlock Irrigation District (TID), the City’s electric utility, is the service provider to provide electric service to the Copper Trails Specific Plan Area. TID utilizes a diverse mix of generation facilities to meet electricity demand, including solar, hydroelectric, wind, geothermal, and natural gas. The Ceres General Plan encourages the use of renewable energy, including solar, hydroelectric, wind, and geothermal power. Additionally, the TID has an Energy Efficiency Rebate program to incentivize energy efficiency in the community. The CTSP’s electric facilities consist of main-line backbone feeder circuits that are planned for extension throughout the Plan Area. These facilities are planned in major roadways, with smaller feeder circuits to be extended and/or improved throughout the Plan Area as individual development projects are constructed. Natural Gas PG&E provides natural gas service to the City of Ceres, including the CTSP. As backbone infrastructure facilities are constructed, natural gas service lines area to be extended throughout the Plan Area as needed to service individual development projects. PG&E’s long-range plans provide for the accommodation of increased demand for gas services. Delivery of gas service to individual projects in the CTSP are to be reviewed by PG&E at the time service is requested.

7.7 VOICE & DATA

COMMUNICATIONS
The CTSP is located in the service areas of AT&T and Spectrum for voice and data communication services, including telecommunications, high speed internet, and cable television services. Distribution lines to individual parcels are to be extended from existing infrastructure adjacent to the Plan Area in accordance with the phasing plan for dry utilities. As individual development projects are constructed, the appropriate service providers are responsible for reviewing delivery requirements of their respective facilities at such time that service is requested. 7.8 SOLID WASTE Solid waste disposal services for the Plan Area are provided by Bertolotti Disposal, a franchised garbage collection company contracted with the City of Ceres. Bertolotti Disposal collects and delivers solid waste to the Fink Road Sanitary Landfill and Stanislaus Resource Recovery Facility (SRRF), which are located in Crows Landing, approximately 20 miles southwest of Ceres. The Fink Road Landfill is owned by Stanislaus County and operated by the Department of Environmental Resources. The landfill is open to private citizens, businesses, school districts, and local government agencies and serves the cities and unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County. The SRRF is a waste to energy facility located on the same site as the Fink Road Sanitary Landfill. The SRRF is operated by Covanta and reduces the amount of waste in landfills by converting it to electricity. Metal is also recovered and recycled. The landfill facility serves the entire County, and based on the Stanislaus Department of Environmental Resources 2019 Annual Report, is expected to have capacity to operate until the year 2052.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
7-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
PAGE

INTENTIONALLY
BLANK

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Public Services
Inside this Chapter 8.1 Overview 8.2 Schools 8.3 Library Services 8.4 Law Enforcement 8.5 Fire & Emergency Services

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-1
PUBLIC SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

8.1 OVERVIEW This chapter provides an overview of the key public services and facilities required to meet the needs of CTSP residents, in accordance with the City’s General Plan. Services addressed include schools, libraries, police/law enforcement, and fire protection/emergency services. Phasing and financing obligations relating to public services are outlined in Chapter 10 Implementation. Public service providers for the CTSP are summarized in Table 8-1.

TABLE 8-1: PUBLIC SERVICE PROVIDERS
Public Service Provider Schools Ceres Unified School District Library Services Stanislaus County Law Enforcement Ceres Police Department Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department California Highway Patrol Fire & Emergency Services Ceres Fire Department
Modesto Fire Department

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

8.2 SCHOOLS The Copper Trails Specific Plan area is located within the Ceres Unified School District (CUSD). The CUSD serves students in kindergarten through 12th grade. Two elementary schools and one high school were located within the Plan Area at the time of Specific Plan approval. These include Joe Hidahl Elementary School, located near the center of the Plan Area, and Walt Hanline Elementary School and Central Valley High School (CVHS), located in the northwest portion of the Plan Area. Additionally, Blaker-Kinser Junior High School is located approximately 1 mile northwest of the Plan Area. These facilities are identified on Figure 8-1. Assumed student enrollment capacities for the CUSD’s elementary, middle, and high schools are summarized in Table 8-2, below. Additionally, at the time of Specific Plan approval, Walt Hanline Elementary School was being utilized by the Ceres Adult School for adult education, but can be converted to an elementary school if the need arises. It has capacity for 600 students. Based on the assumed student generation factors outlined in Table 8-2, full residential buildout of the CTSP generates approximately 1,287 elementary, 339 middle, and 583 high school students. These students have the opportunity to attend Joe Hidahl Elementary School and Central Valley High School, both located within the Plan Area, as well as Blaker-Kinser Junior High School located just outside the Plan Area.

While some of the students generated by the CTSP can be accommodated at schools within the Plan Area, others may need to attend nearby schools elsewhere in the District that have reserve capacity. The CUSD is responsible for determining each school’s service boundaries and what schools CTSP students will ultimately attend.

TABLE 8-2: STUDENT GENERATION ESTIMATES
SingleFamily Factor 1
MultiFamily Factor 1
Students Generated 2
School Capacity 1
Schools Required
Ceres Unified School DistrictElementary School (Grades K-6) 0.506 0.611 1,287 500 2.57 Middle School (Grades 7-8) 0.135 0.157 339 900 0.38 High School (Grades 9-12) 0.258 0.211 583 1,500 0.39 Total Students 2,209 Notes: 1 Factors and school capacities per Ceres Unified School District School Facility Needs Analysis, dated August 2019 2 Student generation estimates assume 1,662 single-family units (LDR, MDR & MHDR) and 730 multi-family units (HDR)

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-3
PUBLIC SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 8-1: SCHOOL FACILITIES

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

8.3 LIBRARY SERVICES Library Services are provided by Stanislaus County, which operates 13 libraries throughout the County. Ceres Public Library, located in downtown Ceres, is approximately 1 mile north of the Plan Area. The Ceres Public Library provides both print and online services for the community. It is anticipated that library services for Copper Trails will be provided by this facility, however Plan Area residents have the opportunity to use libraries throughout the County’s system.

8.4 LAW ENFORCEMENT At the time of Specific Plan approval, the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department provided law enforcement services for the Plan Area. However, upon annexation of the Plan Area into the City’s boundaries, this service was shifted to the Ceres Police Department. City of Ceres Police Department The City of Ceres Police Department (CPD) is responsible for law enforcement services within the Plan Area. The nearest police station is located approximately 1 mile north of the Plan Area in Downtown Ceres. The CPD is composed of several departments and units, including patrol, code enforcement, school resources, a K-9 unit, S.W.A.T. team, traffic enforcement, detective services, and animal services. The CPD has a service ratio goal of 1.3 officers for every 1,000 residents. In 2015, there were 1.0 officers for every 1,000 residents, slightly below the department’s service ratio goal. Based on the CTSP’s estimated population of 6,755 people, full residential buildout of the CTSP generates the need for nearly 9 new officers.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-5
PUBLIC SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department Prior to annexation of the CTSP into the City of Ceres, the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department provided police protection to the Plan Area as part of its service throughout the County’s unincorporated areas. This service is provided in addition to contractual law enforcement services for the cities of Riverbank, Patterson, Waterford, and Hughson. The Sheriff’s Department is headquartered at 250 E. Hacket Road in Modesto, which is located approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the Plan Area. In addition to 911 operations, the Sheriff’s Department includes a patrol division with a K-9 and mounted unit, an investigations division, property and evidence unit, detention facilities, and other specialized teams. California Highway Patrol The California Highway Patrol (CHP) is responsible for the patrol of State highways, Federal interstate highways, and other major roadways in unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County. The CTSP Plan Area is located within the CHP Central Division, with State Route 99 and Interstate 5 the two most prominent freeways in the Division. In support of traffic-related enforcement, the CHP provides patrol services, an Air Operations Unit, the El Protector Program and Safety and Farm Labor Vehicle Education, an Investigative Services Unit, and a Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team (MAIT). The CHP’s Modesto Area Office located at 4030 Kiernan Avenue is the nearest Central Division CHP office to the Plan Area.

8.5 FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES The Plan Area is within the Ceres Fire Protection District and served by the Ceres Fire Department through a joint services agreement with the Modesto Fire Department. In 2021 the Ceres City Council approved a contract with Modesto for fire services within Ceres’ jurisdictional boundaries. Services provided by Modesto include fire protection, prevention and suppression, emergency medical response, emergency preparedness, mitigation of incidents with hazardous materials, and special operations, such as water rescue. Within Ceres’ jurisdiction, the fire staff operates out of the City’s fire stations and uses the Ceres logo. The agreement between Ceres and Modesto is effective through June 30, 2026, with the option of a two-year extension. There are four fire stations in Ceres. The nearest fire station to the Plan Area is Fire Station 15 (formerly #1), located approximately 1 mile north of the CTSP at 2755 3rd Street in downtown Ceres. Additionally, Fire Station 17 (formerly #3), is located approximately 1 mile west of the Plan Area at 420 Service Road, but functioned as a training facility and was not staffed at the time of Specific Plan approval. The CTSP Land Use Plan includes a Community Facilities site at the southeast of the intersection of E. Redwood Road and Moffett Road. This site can be used by the fire department for construction of an additional station should the development of the Plan Area result in the need for a new facility.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
8-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
PAGE

INTENTIONALLY
BLANK

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Design Guidelines
Inside this Chapter 9.1 Overview & Application 9.2 Residential Neighborhoods 9.3 Commercial Development

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-1
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

9.1 OVERVIEW & APPLICATION This chapter provides design direction for physical form and visual character of Copper Trails’ residential neighborhoods and commercial centers. The goal is that the application of these guidelines results in development that has a high-quality, enduring design with a built-over-time appearance. While imaginative design that incorporates these guidelines is encouraged, it is expected that architectural variation will occur. Regardless of any building’s individual architectural style, several important elements should be considered when composing the design for residential neighborhoods and commercial centers. The guidelines and images in this chapter should be interpreted with flexibility and not as strict standards, recognizing that modern adaptation of traditional design elements is expected. Merchant home builders and commercial developers should use these guidelines as inspiration for highquality design that will result in attractive, livable neighborhoods and lively commercial centers. The intent is to achieve the community vision described in Chapter 3.

9.2 RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS The purpose of this section is to provide design direction for residential subdivisions and homes in Copper Trails. The intent is to provide clear objectives to developers, home builders, and City staff regarding the level of design quality expected as the Plan Area builds out. Although the guidelines do not identify specific architectural styles, they provide sufficient design guidance to ensure that residential neighborhoods are well-connected, and that home design is architecturally harmonious in and of itself. By using the guidelines to orient living spaces towards the street, de-emphasize the appearance of garages, and encourage a variety of architectural details with a broad range of materials and colors, development of Copper Trails’ residential neighborhoods will result in a distinguishable community as envisioned.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Neighborhood Design Copper Trails residential areas are envisioned to build out as a collection of neighborhoods that are walkable and well-connected. As such, they should be designed to ensure that subdivisions have cross connectivity for automobiles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Design for street patterns and connectivity, lot orientation and block design, and interface with park/open space features is to be determined through the City’s small lot tentative subdivision map process. To achieve the intended neighborhood design throughout Copper Trails, the following provisions should be used to guide the physical design and layout of single-family residential neighborhoods. Street Patterns & Connectivity  Street networks shall provide a high degree of multi-directional connectivity within neighborhoods, which limit long, circuitous roads and provide drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians with multiple choices for transportation routes.  Within a subdivision, the layout of in-tract streets and blocks shall form a grid or modified grid development pattern that allows for an efficient dispersal of traffic, offers a high degree of pedestrian connectivity, and provides roadway/sidewalk connections between adjacent Specific Plan parcels.  The design and layout of individual tentative subdivision maps shall be consistent with the street hierarchy depicted in the Roadway Key Map illustrated in Chapter 5 with street design utilizing its associated street sections.
 To enhance connectivity on a community-wide level and facilitate walking and bicycling, street patterns within individual neighborhood units shall be designed to provide both on and off-street connections to adjacent neighborhoods, as well as non-residential areas such as schools, parks, and commercial centers.  Street patterns shall be encouraged that allow for connection points between neighboring subdivisions in order to minimize barriers between neighborhoods and to enhance connectivity.

Visible Edges Homes located along the outer edges of the Plan Area and individual CTSP neighborhoods, along major roads, and around parks have an impact on how residents and visitors view the community. Homes in these locations shall be designed to provide the following:  Main roof span shall have a variety between plans (front-to-rear, sideto-side, gables, and hipped roofs), as appropriate to a home’s architectural style.
 Single-story alternative massing and other massing offsets.  Color and material variety consistent with architectural style.  All visible edge windows shall have trim and/or other architecturally appropriate window enhancements.

Residential neighborhoods buffered from arterial roadways with landscape corridors while providing a high level of inter-connectivity from homes to parks, schools, and trails.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-3
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Lot Orientation & Block Design  Subdivision design shall incorporate block lengths that are appropriate for a neighborhood’s lot size while maintaining pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to schools, parks, and open space corridors. Excessively long, linear blocks shall be avoided.  The design of residential blocks shall incorporate breaks at regular intervals, either via streets, pedestrian paseos, or multi-use pathways, in an effort to enhance cross-connectivity between, and create access to, adjacent neighborhoods, parks, and open space features.  Blocks shall have a rhythm and cadence, created by regular crossconnections along a street, which provide visual relief to the streetscape edge, calm traffic, and enhance pedestrian walkability through neighborhoods.  As illustrated on the Land Use Plan in Chapter 4, local parks shall be centrally located within neighborhoods to provide a highly visible and accessible focal point and gathering space.

Park/Open Space Interfaces  Where applicable, neighborhood design shall incorporate pedestrian/bicycle access to parks and open space parcels located adjacent to a subdivision.  A subdivision’s internal street system shall be designed to allow residents to walk easily to nearby parks.
 Residential units shall be oriented toward (facing) parks, rather than backing up to them, with some exceptions as outlined herein.  Neighborhood parks shall have frontage on a minimum of two streets to provide visibility, create open access for residents, and incorporate the amenity into the surrounding neighborhood.  Residential streets shall provide views into open space corridors at regular intervals by providing opportunities for homes to front or side on to these features. This can be achieved through design techniques such as single-loaded streets, loop streets, or live end cul-de-sacs.

Homes oriented to public streets and sited on blocks with breaks at regular intervals Residential units oriented to park spaces to enhance their visibility and access to residents

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. Home Design Elements General Architectural Guidelines Home design is an important element of a neighborhood’s character. To create neighborhoods with well-composed residential streetscapes, the following general guidelines shall be followed:  Home design shall incorporate design features that are true to the selected architectural style, with doors, windows, and other design elements that appropriately reinforce its character.  Home design shall incorporate architecturally harmonious variations in building form and massing, roof forms, colors, and materials.  Materials used for siding, trim, decorative accents, and other exterior features shall be comprised of high-quality products that appropriately reflect a home’s architectural style.  Visually confusing or disordered facades, including a mixture of architecturally incompatible roof forms, window/door shapes, styles and sizes, shall be avoided.

Architectural Style Requirements These guidelines are intended to provide flexibility to create a variety of architectural styles and design characteristics throughout Copper Trails’ residential neighborhoods. To ensure that sufficient architectural diversity is created, and for consistency with the community vision described in Chapter 3, a minimum number of architectural home styles is required within each subdivision as noted below:  Up to 100 homes: Three (3) architectural styles  100-240 homes: Four (4) architectural styles  241- 600 homes: Six (6) architectural styles  601+ homes: Eight (8) architectural styles Collection of homes along a streetscape comprised of architecturally harmonious variations in building form and massing, roof forms, colors, and materials

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-5
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Building Form, Scale & Massing Form, scale, and massing are important elements in creating harmonious architectural design. To facilitate a proper balance of these elements, several design approaches should be employed to ensure that the overall form, scale, and appearance of homes collectively create visually desirable residential neighborhoods. To meet this intent, the following guidelines shall be encouraged:  The form and massing of homes shall be articulated with variations in building height, bulk, shape, and footprint. Two-story homes shall incorporate one-story elements to break up massing and provide visual relief.  A combination of single and multiple-story elements shall be incorporated into each neighborhood to create a varied streetscape skyline.  A variety of exterior home styles shall be encouraged in each neighborhood to help visually differentiate homes along a streetscape.

Building form and massing articulated into smaller modules via changes in height, bulk, shape, with one-story elements incorporated into design of two-story homes Garage Orientation & Design Garages should be well-integrated into home design and cohesive with its architectural style to help create an attractive streetscape appearance. The following guidelines shall be considered in the design and orientation of garages:  Garages shall be well-integrated into building massing to enhance the neighborhood streetscape.
 Garage placement should be recessed from front elevations to reduce the visual prominence of garage doors in relation to the streetscape.  The prominence of three-car garage configurations shall be reduced by utilizing off-set and/or separated bays, or tandem garage designs.  Garage doors shall have an exterior finish, appearance, and/or color scheme that is appropriate to a home’s architectural style.  Decorative trellises, brackets, architectural headers, or lights should be incorporated into garage design where appropriate to a home’s style.

Garages incorporated into home design to reduce prominence along streetscape with exterior design that complements the overall architectural style

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Roofs Forms & Materials In order to provide visual interest along the streetscape, home design should incorporate varying roof forms that are appropriate to its architectural style. This includes variations in roof lines, forms, ridge heights, materials, and the direction of gables. To help ensure that roof forms and materials are architecturally appropriate for a home’s design, the following guidelines shall be encouraged:  Roof forms shall be varied within neighborhoods, specific to each home’s architectural style, with changes in roof plane orientation, pitch, and direction.  Roof materials shall have a substantial, three-dimensional definition that creates deep shadow lines along roof planes.
 Roof colors shall be specified that are harmonious to each home’s color palette.
 Distinctive colors and materials shall be used on each home to collectively create variety along a neighborhood’s streetscape.

Roof forms designed to reinforce a home’s architectural style, with materials and colors that complement its visual character
Front Entries A home’s primary entrance is an important visual element along a neighborhood streetscape. Entryways should be a defining feature and focal element of a front elevation, a design technique that can be achieved through the appropriate use of several types of architectural elements. The following guidelines shall be considered in in the design of entries:  Home design shall incorporate architectural features that give visual prominence to a home’s primary entrance, consistent with its style.  Design features such as roof elements, columns, porticos, recesses or projections, windows, or other architectural features shall be incorporated to visually “announce” a home’s primary entrance.  Entryways shall be enhanced with landscaping, walkways, stairs, porches, or courtyards, as appropriate to a home’s architectural style.  A primary entrance shall be oriented to the front/street side of a home for visibility, or to a park/paseo/open space feature in instances where homes do not front a street (i.e. i-court & t-court lots).

Entries designed as prominent, focal elements that face public streets

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-7
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Window Treatments Window forms are an important component of a home’s architectural style. Typically the location of windows is determined by practical considerations such as room layout, views, and privacy. However their form and placement on a home’s exterior is an important consideration in creating high-quality design that reinforces a home’s architectural integrity. To ensure that windows create an appropriate, high-quality architectural appearance on the exterior of homes, the following guidelines shall be followed:  Windows shall include trim elements that are appropriate to each home’s architecture, which enhance their appearance and provide shadow relief along each building elevation.  Where appropriate to an architectural style, windows shall incorporate decorative or bracketed window heads, full trim surrounds, decorative shutters, or other features.  Groupings of smaller windows shall be unified into a single unit by incorporating a common trim surround, window heads, and/or sills.  Window glass shall be clear with no glazing. If glazing is used, it shall consist of a lightly-tinted, non-reflective material that reduces glare.  Transom or clerestory windows shall be considered as an element to break up large wall planes, if appropriate to a home’s architecture.  Windows frames shall consist of a color and finish that is harmonious to a home’s architectural style.
 Windows facing public streets, parks, and other public spaces shall be enhanced with trim elements or other features appropriate to the home’s architectural style.

Groupings of smaller windows clustered together with a common trim surround Ornamental shutters that complement a home’s architectural style Decorative awnings and window forms that reinforce building form and design

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Porches & Balconies Porches and balconies create opportunities to add semi-private outdoor living spaces to homes, which facilitate “eyes-on-the-street” neighborhood monitoring and encourage social interaction among homeowners. To ensure that porches and balconies are appropriately integrated into home design, the following guidelines shall be followed:  Front porches or balconies shall be designed as an integral element of a building’s form, with details, eaves, supports, and railings that are harmonious with a home’s architectural style.  Porches shall have a 6-foot minimum depth to allow space for an entry door, seating, side tables, potted plants, or other decorations.  A porch area shall incorporate a distinct roof form(s) that articulates a home’s massing.
 Wrap-around porches shall be encouraged on homes located on corner lots.
 Where feasible, porches shall be raised from the elevation of an adjacent sidewalk to visually distinguish between the public and private realm.  Front-yard living spaces, such as patios, courtyards, and/or second floor balconies, shall be integrated into home design or be designed as visually compatible independent spaces.  Low walls, fences, or hedges may be utilized to demarcate an outdoor living space to create a visual separation between the public and private realm. These spaces may have open or gated entries.

Porches defined with distinct roof forms and designed as integral element of a home Width and depth of porch area sized to accommodate outdoor furniture and plants Balconies incorporated into a home’s form and massing to complement its architecture

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-9
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Colors, Materials & Exterior Finishes Exterior building materials and finishes affect the perception of quality housing. An appropriate composition of material types, accents, and colors in home design enhances the visual character of neighborhoods and helps create a built-over-time appearance. The following guidelines shall be considered in home design:  If appropriate to its architectural style, homes shall incorporate accent materials such as natural/synthetic brick, stone, shingles, wood siding, and/or trim that enhance important architectural forms.  Exterior color palettes shall be selected that visually articulate a home’s exterior form and that highlight architectural features such as porches, support posts, fascia, trim, and other design details.
 Material changes shall be utilized in a logical and aestheticallypleasing manner such as at reverse corners or a return on a side-wall towards the privacy fence. Unless a material is being used to create a column effect, side-wall returns shall be no less than 3-feet.  Exterior materials, windows, and finishes shall not be reflective.  Exposed metals used for doors, windows, screens, roofs, and other detail elements shall be anodized in a color or consist of a factory finished color.

Siding materials and decorative finishes, such as stone or board & batten, added to reinforce a home’s architectural style
Color palettes designed to visually define a home’s architectural features and details Accent details such as columns, pilasters, arches, decorative brackets, fascia, trim, and other design features incorporated to strengthen a home’s visual character

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

9.3 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Several parcels in the eastern portion of the Plan Area are designated for non-residential uses, which comprise the Regional Commercial Core described in Chapter 3, Community Vision. In order to ensure that the development of these sites is appropriately designed to fit harmoniously with the context and identity of Ceres’ established character, the CTSP incorporates design guidelines for commercial development. These are intended to provide guidance for physical form and visual characteristics of all Regional Commercial (RC) Specific Plan parcels. To achieve the desired vision, the placement and orientation of buildings on each parcel, along with the design of buildings and structures, should be considered as part of a greater whole. The design guidelines in this section shall be applied to all RC parcels and shall be used in tandem with the permitted uses and development standards provided in Section 4.4, Commercial Uses & Development Regulations.

A. Site Planning Principles Site design is important element to ensure that the location and orientation of buildings, parking areas, drive aisles, pedestrian routes, and service areas properly function on a site and have appropriate relationships with adjacent uses. To address these elements, the following guidelines shall direct the site layout and design of RC parcels:  Buildings shall be oriented to and aligned along public streets where feasible, helping frame the public realm, create a pedestrian-friendly street edge, and allow parking areas to be sited on a site’s interior.  Appropriately-sized landscape planters shall be provided along parcel edges and street interfaces, capable of supporting shade trees, in order to enhance street edges and to create visual transitions between differing land uses.  Commercial centers shall provide clear pedestrian access routes throughout a site to enhance pedestrian walkability and facilitate a “park once” concept. Additionally, pedestrian routes shall have welldefined linkages between public sidewalks and building entrances.  Building siting shall provide view corridors into a commercial center’s interior, enhancing retailers’ visibility to passing automobile traffic.  Courtyards, patios, covered walkways, trellises, and outdoor rooms shall be encouraged in site design in order to create spaces for seating, eating, and casual gathering.  Large parking fields shall be located on a site’s interior, allowing buildings to front along public streets where possible. Where parking areas are located adjacent to public streets, they shall incorporate a landscaped planter that functions as a visual buffer.  Buildings, parking lots, service areas, and other site features shall be arranged in a manner that provide opportunities for automobile and pedestrian connectivity to adjacent land uses, strengthening internal linkages between commercial and residential areas.  Where non-residential buildings are located adjacent to residential uses, buildings shall be oriented in a manner that protect the privacy of residents, while not inhibiting connectivity between each use.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-11
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. General Architectural Character and Style To ensure that the visual appearance of commercial projects provides an appropriate character envisioned for Copper Trails’ Commercial Core, the following guidelines shall be employed:  The overall design of any commercial/office center shall function as a destination point with a clearly-identifiable style that is harmonious with the architectural context and visual character of Ceres.  Building features shall include design cues that evoke a modern, contemporary expression of Ceres’ heritage in the Central Valley. Architecture that is extremely unique and that appears “out of place” relative to the City’s established character shall be avoided.  The height, scale, fenestration, and architectural detailing of building design shall respond contextually to all non-residential development in the Commercial Core.  Building facades that are visible to the public realm shall be designed with sufficient architectural detail and features to create a visuallyinteresting streetscape and skyline.  The application of exterior colors, materials, and finishes shall be coordinated to achieve integral architectural harmony and design continuity.  Building forms, design elements, and other features shall clearly define both automobile and pedestrian entrance points to a commercial/office center.  Buildings shall be sited to provide functional outdoor spaces that create opportunities for informal gathering, seating, and eating.  Sign programs for retail/office developments shall create a uniform and attractive approach for identifying businesses, with sign materials, types, colors, and finishes that complement building architecture and that are appropriately scaled to the overall size, form, and massing of buildings.

Large building facades are articulated into smaller modules to define individual storefronts and businesses, with a coordinated palette of exterior colors, and finishes that create a cohesive, harmonious architectural appearance

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Building Scale and Massing To ensure that buildings have an appropriate scale for both pedestrians and drivers, and also have interesting forms as viewed from within a commercial center and public streets, the following guidelines shall be employed:  Building frontages that are oriented to public streets and/or spaces shall incorporate a combination of roof lines, building projections and recesses, arcades, display windows, and trim or belt courses.  The wall height, cornice, or parapet line between buildings shall be coordinated.
 Buildings with walls over 50 feet in length shall be visually divided into smaller architectural modules to reduce visual bulk by employing design techniques such as variations in roof forms and parapet heights, changes in wall planes, ground level arcades, recessed entries, vertical accents, pronounced projections, changes in wall textures and colors, and landscape planter areas.  Buildings shall incorporate design techniques that reduce their perceived height by dividing building mass into smaller scale components and/or by creating a well-defined base, middle and top into its design, via the following:
 Utilizing design treatments that create a visually “heavy” building base by incorporating elements such as low planters and walls, base planting, or a base architectural veneer banding and treatments defined by a different material, texture, or color (i.e. stone or brick).  Creating a well-defined building top by using features such as distinct and multiple architectural roof forms, clearly pronounced eaves, distinct parapet designs, and cornice treatments.  Towers, tall/rounded/chamfered building forms, plazas, or other architectural features shall be used at prominent building corners, particularly when building edges are aligned along public streets or are used to define important spaces within a commercial center.  Large buildings that have flat roofs shall incorporate pitched roof forms or other architectural elements, such as extended parapets or projecting cornices, integrated along facade edges in order to break up building mass and create visual interest.  Architectural projections such as overhangs, detail elements, columns, awnings, or other architectural features that create a change in wall plane shall be provided for large wall expanses, especially along public streets.  Rear and side facades that are visible from public streets or adjacent land uses shall be carefully designed with detailing similar to the front facade. Although the architectural treatment may be simplified and vary according to function, all elevations shall have a consistent architectural design and application of materials, details, and exterior finishes.  All site walls and screen walls shall be architecturally integrated with a building. Blank or unarticulated walls greater than 50 feet long shall be avoided or buffered with trees and landscaping.

Varied roof forms and facade articulation create pedestrian-scaled frontages Street-facing building facades maintain a cohesive architectural design

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-13
DESIGN GUIDELINES PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
D. Colors, Materials & Exterior Finishes The exterior finish of commercial/office buildings should complement the overall character of Ceres by utilizing the following techniques:  A complimentary palette of materials and colors shall be used on wall planes, roof forms, and the ground plane to help visually articulate a building’s bulk and massing.  Material or color changes shall occur at inside corners of a building or with different building forms/architectural elements.
 Building colors shall utilize an architecturally appropriate color palette with a flat finish. High gloss paints, vibrant, high-contrast or primary colors, or other materials that are highly reflective shall not be permitted.  Variations of compatible color hues and exterior finishes shall be used to reduce the apparent scale and mass of larger buildings.  Exterior finish materials shall utilize a natural-appearing palette of materials, such as masonry (brick and stone), siding (wood, synthetic wood composites), metal (reflective of an agrarian style), or plaster/stucco, which is visually harmonious with a building’s overall color palette.  Details and ornamentation may consist of pre-cast stone, concrete or synthetic materials, metal, wood, masonry, tile or glass, which incorporate material choices that are integral to a chosen architectural style.  Roof materials shall consist of a built-up or membrane type at parapet conditions, or shall consist of concrete tile or metal (flat, standing seam, or corrugated) on roof forms having a 3:12 or greater pitch.  Vents, gutters, downspouts, flashing, and similar shall be painted to match the color of the adjacent surface.
 Commercial buildings shall incorporate clear, transparent windows on ground floor elevations. Reflective, colored, or tinted glass shall be limited to buildings supporting office/hotel uses.

Building design comprised of a coordinated, complimentary palette of exterior materials, colors, finishes, and accent features that create a consistent architectural expression

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
9-14 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
E. Service, Storage & Refuse Areas The following techniques shall be utilized to screen the visual prominence of service, storage, and refuse areas from off-site view:  Storage areas, trash facilities, and refuse bins shall be located away and/or screened from off-site view to the extent practical, including public streets, pedestrian routes, and outdoor gathering spaces. Such areas and facilities shall be positioned in low-profile locations and surrounded by landscape planters while preserving access for maintenance vehicles.  Loading docks and service/maintenance areas shall be screened from off-site view through a combination of building design, masonry walls, grade separations, and/or landscaping. Screen walls for these areas shall be integral of a building’s design such that these features do not appear “tacked on” to a building’s form.  Noise generating equipment shall be sited and screened in a manner that considers adjacent uses, particularly where adjacent to residential uses.  Commercial/office complexes shall incorporate clustered service and refuse areas into site design.
 If applicable, shopping cart storage areas shall be incorporated within a building footprint or provided in a screened enclosure, with walls that are integral to the architectural design of an adjoining building.  Trash enclosures shall not be located near pedestrian routes and gathering areas such as project entries and plazas. Common use refuse and recycling containers shall be fully enclosed by a solid wall with gate that matches the architectural style, color, material, and exterior finish of an adjacent building. These elements shall incorporate landscape screening planting such as shrubs and vines.

Trash enclosures incorporate durable gates and are clad with exterior materials/finishes that match adjacent buildings
Loading docks and service/storage areas screened with walls and landscaping Utility access rooms designed as integral components of buildings

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
Implementation
Inside this Chapter 10.1 Overview 10.2 Regulatory Authority, Zoning & Severability 10.3 Relationship to City Plans & Policies 10.4 Specific Plan Related Documents 10.5 Public Facilities Financing 10.6 Infrastructure Phasing 10.7 Entitlements & Approvals 10.8 Specific Plan Fee 10.9 Amendments & Minor Modifications 10.10 Residential Unit Transfers & Density Blending 10.11 Parcel Modifications & Housing Diversity

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-1
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.1 OVERVIEW The Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP) is a regulatory document that helps implement the Ceres General Plan by establishing a framework to guide development activity within an identified planning area. It contains an overarching development program and regulatory structure to provide an intermediate level of detail between the General Plan and individual development projects. The CTSP is the primary land use, policy, and regulatory document used to guide long-term development in the Plan Area. Implementation of the CTSP is intended to result in the systematic and orderly development of the Plan Area, consistent with the community vision outlined in Chapter 3. To achieve this intent, this Specific Plan establishes a development framework for land use and circulation, with plans for public utilities, public services, and project implementation. This Implementation chapter embeds the “nuts and bolts” of Specific Plan administration. In addition to establishing the CTSP’s regulatory relationship with the Zoning Ordinance, it includes a conceptual infrastructure phasing program for development activity, a financing plan for construction and maintenance of public improvements, provisions for a Specific Plan Fee, and a process for Specific Plan amendments. All subsequent development projects and related activities within the Plan Area are required to be consistent with the CTSP.

10.2 REGULATORY AUTHORITY,

ZONING & SEVERABILITY
A. Regulatory Authority The City of Ceres is authorized to adopt this Specific Plan pursuant to the provisions of California Planning and Land Use Law (Title 7, Chapter 3, Article 8 [Sections 65450 – 65457], Planning and Zoning Law) of the California Government Code. More specifically, Government Code Section 65451 requires that a Specific Plan include a program of implementation measures necessary to carry out its proposed land uses, infrastructure, development standards, and criteria. Additionally, the City’s adoption of this Specific Plan is consistent with the process for “planned communities” described in Chapter 18.13, Planned Community Zone, of the Ceres Municipal Code. The CTSP serves as the “master plan” for Copper Trails, required for developments using the City’s planned community process. Implementation of the CTSP is to be administered by the City of Ceres. As a mechanism to implement the goals and policies of the Ceres General Plan, State law stipulates that a Specific Plan can only be adopted or amended if it is consistent with the jurisdiction’s adopted General Plan. This Specific Plan is consistent with the policies of the Ceres General Plan, as well as other applicable State and local regulations. B. Specific Plan Area Zoning Upon annexation of the CTSP area to the City of Ceres, the Planned Community (P-C) zoning district was applied to all properties within the Plan Area. As outlined in Chapter 18.13 of the Ceres Municipal Code, the purpose of the P-C zone district is to allow projects such as Copper Trails to be master-planned and to allow variations to the Zoning Ordinance’s typical standards. The intent is to custom-tailor the development plan’s regulatory structure in a manner that achieves the community vision and results in a built environment that is superior to what could be created under the application of the Zoning Ordinance’s typical regulations. As such, the CTSP functions as the Plan Area’s primary implementation and regulatory tool, as outlined in Sub-Section 10.3.B herein.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-2 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Severability If any regulation, condition, program, or portion of the CTSP is held invalid by a California State or Federal court of competent jurisdiction, such provisions shall be deemed separate, distinct, and independent provisions and the invalidity of such provisions shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. In accordance with Government Code Section 65457, subsequent residential development proposals within the Copper Trails Specific Plan area, if consistent with the Specific Plan and the mitigation measures contained in its associated EIR, may be exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA. Any property owner within the CTSP Plan Area may elect to pursue a Specific Plan Amendment subject to the requirements of this chapter.

10.3 RELATIONSHIP TO

CITY PLANS & POLICIES
A. General Plan The City of Ceres General Plan serves as the long-term policy guide for the physical and economic development of the City. The City’s core values are the foundation of the General Plan and the underlying basis for its vision and direction. Through its development plan and regulatory framework, the CTSP implements the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan by providing specific direction for development activity in the Plan Area. At the time of Specific Plan approval, the City’s General Plan and incorporated documents were amended to reflect Copper Trails land use plan and associated development program. The CTSP is consistent with the City’s General Plan and incorporated documents as amended. B. Municipal Code The Ceres Municipal Code is one of the primary tools for implementing the General Plan. For new development areas, the Municipal Code’s key components are Title 18 (Zoning) and Title 17 (Subdivisions), which are used in tandem with this Specific Plan to implement the development plan. Because the entire Plan Area was rezoned to a P-C (Planned Community Zone) district upon effectuation of its annexation to the City, this Specific Plan functions as the primary Zoning tool for development activity in the CTSP. As such, it embeds the permitted uses, development standards, and associated regulations for each land use designation, which have been custom-tailored for consistency with Copper Trail’s vision. For this reason, the zoning-type regulations provided in this Specific Plan supersede the City’s Zoning Ordinance. However, where this Specific Plan is silent, the Zoning Ordinance’s regulations prevail.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-3
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.4 SPECIFIC PLAN RELATED

DOCUMENTS
The Copper Trails Specific Plan is to be implemented by the City of Ceres with several supporting documents. These include a Public Facilities Financing Plan and an Environmental Impact Report, which includes an associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. These documents are used to help implement the Specific Plan to ensure full implementation of the General Plan’s goals and policies. A. Environmental Impact Report The Copper Trails Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified concurrently with approval of the CTSP. The EIR, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), examines the potential direct and indirect environmental effects associated with development of the CTSP. It also identifies appropriate mitigation measures to reduce impacts determined to be significant, which are administered through the EIR’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). The Copper Trails EIR serves as the base environmental document for purposes of evaluating subsequent entitlements and development projects within the Plan Area. B. Public Facilities Financing Plan A Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) has been prepared for the Copper Trails Specific Plan and it is hereby incorporated by reference. The CTSP PFFP outlines the cost for all planned backbone infrastructure needed to serve development of the Plan Area. It also incorporates a plan and associated funding mechanisms to construct public facilities. For specific details on the financing strategy, refer to the Copper Trails Public Facilities Financing Plan, on file with the City of Ceres.

10.5 PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING Construction and maintenance of backbone infrastructure and public facilities needed to serve Copper Trails is to be funded by a variety of mechanisms including, City and County Impact Fees, School Impact Fees, developer financing, Community Facilities District(s), Homeowners’ Association(s), and other methods. A Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) has been prepared for the CTSP, hereby incorporated by reference, which identifies the funding mechanisms that can be used to construct and maintain the Plan Area’s public facilities. These various financing mechanisms are summarized in general terms below. For specific details on the funding strategy, please refer to the Copper Trails PFFP, available at the City of Ceres Finance Department.  City Impact Fees: The City of Ceres has adopted various development impact fees to finance capital improvements and fund ongoing public services. The fee structure requires the payment of fees prior to issuance of a building permit. The City collects fees for services including police, fire protection, municipal facilities and equipment, wastewater, water, parks and recreation, community facilities, transportation, drainage, and information technology.  County Impact Fees: Stanislaus County has adopted various development impact fees to fund countywide public facilities and services including animal services, behavioral health, criminal justice, detention, emergency services, health, libraries, parks, sheriff, regional transportation, and countywide information technology. The City collects fees at time of Building Permit on behalf of the County.  School Impact Fees: The Ceres Unified School District serves the entire CTSP area and has established fees in accordance with Section 17620 of the California Education Code, to be used to construct, expand, and/or maintain school facilities. Pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, these school impact fees will be collected by the school district prior to issuance of a building permit.  Developer Financing: Direct developer/merchant builder financing may be used to contribute towards backbone improvements and facilities, shortfall financing, and for in-tract subdivision improvements.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-4 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
 Community Facilities District: Establishment and/or annexation into a Community Facilities District(s) may be utilized to help fund the construction, acquisition, or maintenance of backbone infrastructure and public facilities that have a direct public benefit to the CTSP area. The 1982 Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act enables cities and other entities to establish a CFD to fund various facilities and services. The proceeds of the Mello-Roos special tax can be used for direct funding of facilities and/or to service debt. Additionally, a separate Community Facilities District for Services can be established for maintenance of certain public facilities or services that benefit Copper Trails. Such facilities may include public landscape corridors and medians, parks and open space areas, trail corridors and multi-use paths, detention facilities, and similar facilities. In addition, a CFD for Services may be used to fund governmental services that directly benefit residents of Copper Trails, including police, fire, library, and other governmental services.  Homeowners’ Association: Homeowners’ Associations (HOAs) can be utilized to fund the maintenance of private facilities that provide a focused benefit to a particular project or neighborhood. Additionally, a Master HOA can be created to maintain larger shared common areas. They can fund maintenance and operations of private pools and clubhouses, in-tract landscaped common areas, residential front yards, landscape corridors, bikeways, or other facilities that benefit a private development. HOAs are established as non-profit public benefit corporations 501(c)(4) and have tax exempt status. They are generally funded by a monthly assessment fees charged to home owners, and are subject to certain limitations.

As noted, other financing mechanisms may be utilized, including creation of private districts or associations to fund maintenance of certain public facilities within Copper Trails. Specific financing requirements, improvement obligations, fees, reimbursements, land and easement dedications and conveyances, maintenance, and other financing and improvement-related obligations are detailed in applicable Development Agreements for the Plan Area.

10.6 INFRASTRUCTURE PHASING The CTSP provides for a comprehensively planned infrastructure system with coordinated construction of backbone facilities necessary to incrementally serve new development. A series of infrastructure construction phases are anticipated as the community builds out over time, which is intended to be implemented with flexibility to serve different areas of the CTSP based on market demand. A conceptual plan for infrastructure phasing boundaries is depicted on Figure 10-1. The preliminary phasing plan is structured such that infrastructure improvements in each phase can be constructed incrementally and with flexibility, subject to City review and approval. Phases are not required to proceed in any prescribed order, however improvements in each phase are required to support corresponding development projects and are required to comply with applicable City policies and standards. This includes the potential for the construction of off-site improvements needed to initiate development in a phase area. Additionally, infrastructure phases identified on the preliminary phasing plan may be modified at the discretion of the City, subject to any applicable criteria in approved Development Agreements. The infrastructure requirements for each phase of development include all on-site backbone infrastructure and off-site facilities necessary for the build out of each phase. These include roadways, water, sewer, non-potable water, storm drainage, dry utilities, parks and open spaces, and other public facilities and improvements. All in-tract water, sewer, storm drain, and dry utilities are to be installed as part of local project improvements.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-5
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
FIGURE 10-1: PRELIMINARY INFRASTRUCTURE PHASING

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-6 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.7 ENTITLEMENTS & APPROVALS A. Initial Entitlements Granted The City of Ceres took the following actions concurrent with the initial suite of entitlement approvals necessary to allow development activity in the Plan Area:  Copper Trails Specific Plan: Adopted the Copper Trails Specific Plan that provides the regulatory structure for development activity in the CTSP area, which included a Public Facilities Financing Plan as described herein.  Environmental Impact Report (EIR): Certified the Copper Trails Specific Plan EIR, which included adoption of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings, approval of a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant and unavoidable environmental effects, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).  Pre-Zone and Annexation: Submitted an application to the Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) to pre-zone the Copper Trails Plan Area (including the “pocket area” located north of Service Road) and annex it into the City of Ceres. At the time of Specific Plan approval, the entire CTSP area was located within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI) and General Plan planning area.  Planned Community Zone and Zoning Map: Following LAFCO’s approval of the annexation application, revised the City’s Zoning Map, to replace existing zoning and establish the Planned Community (P-C) zone district over the entire Copper Trails Specific Plan area.

B. Effectuation of Development Entitlements As noted in Section 10.8, Specific Plan Fee, the initial effort to secure approval of the Copper Trails Specific Plan and its associated suite of entitlements was financially sponsored by several participating property owners within the Plan Area. Upon annexation of the CTSP area into the City, the development entitlements for these participating property owners were immediately effectuated, allowing these properties to develop consistent with the provisions of this Specific Plan. However, many property owners in the Plan Area elected to not financially participate in this initial effort and did not receive this same benefit upon annexation. To ensure that non-participating property owners financially contribute their fairshare towards the cost of the CTSP’s initial entitlement effort, they shall be required to effectuate their development entitlements by conducting the actions listed below prior to development as allowed by the CTSP. 1. Apply for Development Permit: Submit an application to the Community Development Department for a development permit. This may consist of an entitlement(s) such as Architectural and Site Approval, Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Subdivision/Parcel Map, or other City-required permit to allow development of property per the CTSP.

2. Prepare CEQA Analysis: Conduct additional environmental analysis in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and as required by provisions in the Copper Trails EIR and MMRP. This may include, but is not limited to, additional technical studies (biological, traffic, etc.) that were not prepared for nonparticipating properties during the initial entitlement effort.

3. Pay Specific Plan Fee: Prior to approval of a development permit by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, and/or City Council, a non-participating property owner shall pay a Specific Plan Fee to the City, as outlined in Section 10.8 herein.

4. Secure Other Approvals : Subsequent approvals may be required by the City prior to commencement of individual development projects. These may include, but are not limited to, subsequent infrastructure or traffic studies, participation in financing programs outlined in the PFFP, and/or subsequent entitlements as outlined in Sub-Section 10.7.C.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-7
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Subsequent Entitlements & Approvals Applications for individual development projects are subject to review and approval by City of Ceres. Development entitlements for non-participating properties in the Plan Area are required to effectuate their development entitlements pursuant to Sub-Section 10.7.B herein, including payment of a Specific Plan Fee in addition to all other applicable development application/impact fees that are collected by the City. City Processing Individual development projects within the CTSP are subject to review and approval of subsequent permits applications by the City of Ceres. This includes permits for Architectural and Site Approval, Conditional Use Permits, Tentative Subdivision/Parcel Maps, Variances, and/or other permits as required by the Ceres Municipal Code. Approval of such permits shall not be granted until such time that a property owner has effectuated its development entitlements for a Specific Plan parcel, as outlined in SubSection 10.7.B herein. Application and processing requirements for subsequent development permits shall be in accordance with the City’s Zoning Ordinance and other regulations, unless otherwise modified by this Specific Plan. All subsequent development projects, public improvements, and other activities shall be consistent with this Specific Plan, pertinent Development Agreements, and all applicable City of Ceres policies, requirements, and standards. In acting to approve a subsequent project or permit, the City may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure that the project is in compliance with the Specific Plan, the EIR and MMRP, and all then applicable plans and regulations. Environmental Review Each subsequent development project shall be reviewed to ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Copper Trails EIR, which was certified concurrent with the CTSP’s adoption, serves as the base environmental document for subsequent entitlements within the Plan Area. The EIR includes a Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Plan (MMRP), which was adopted with the EIR in accordance with Public Resources Code 21081.6 to ensure implementation of any required mitigation measures. Subsequent development applications are to be reviewed on a project-by-project basis to determine consistency with the EIR and to impose required mitigation measures identified in the MMRP. In general, if it is determined that a subsequent project is consistent with the Specific Plan and within the scope of the EIR, further environmental review may not be necessary. Section 65457(a) of the California Government Code and Section 15182(a) of CEQA provide that no EIR or negative declaration is required for any residential project undertaken in conformity with an adopted Specific Plan for which an EIR has been certified. If it is determined that a development application is inconsistent with the Specific Plan and/or substantial evidence exists that supports the occurrence of any of the events set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the City shall determine the appropriate subsequent environmental clearance required.

Approvals from Other Agencies Appropriate Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), State, and Federal approvals and permits are required prior to any development activity within the Plan Area. Development Agreement(s) Subject to the provisions of the Specific Plan, a property owner and the City may enter into a Development Agreement in order to vest development rights. The purpose of a Development Agreement is to outline specific development rights, establish obligations for infrastructure improvements and land dedications, secure the timing and methods for financing improvements, determine funding mechanisms for long-term maintenance of public facilities, and specify other performance obligations. City approval of a Development Agreement is subject to Sections 65864-65869.5 of the California Government Code and Chapter 18.37, Development Agreements, of the Ceres Municipal Code. Once approved, a Development Agreement functions as a legal and binding contract between the City of Ceres, a property owner(s), and any successors-ininterest.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-8 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.8 SPECIFIC PLAN FEE The initial effort to secure approval of the Copper Trails Specific Plan and its associated suite of entitlements involved preparation of multiple technical studies, reports, a Specific Plan, and an Environmental Impact Report. The CTSP’s initial approval benefitted all property owners in the Plan Area by establishing new, developable land uses and by providing a process to effectuate individual development rights. However, not all property owners receiving this benefit participated in the initial approval process with the City. The costs of this effort were funded by several sponsoring property owners within the Plan Area, but not all property owners elected not to financially participate in this effort. In order to spread the up-front cost of securing project approval to all Plan Area properties on a fair-share basis, the City has established a Specific Plan Fee to account for the initial entitlement costs. The City is authorized to impose this fee pursuant to California Government Code Section 65456, which can be used to recover the costs of preparing and approving the CTSP, EIR, technical studies, and PFFP, including related work efforts such as the annexation. The basis for this fee shall be derived from the direct costs incurred by the project sponsors/applicants and approved as reimbursable expenses by the City. These expenses can then be reimbursed to the CTSP’s sponsoring property owners by collecting the Specific Plan Fees from non-participating property owners as the nonparticipants effectuate their entitlements and secure subsequent development permits. Reimbursement to sponsoring property owners may also be provided as fee credits. Details for administration of the Specific Plan Fee are to be outlined in a City-approved reimbursement agreement with the sponsoring property owners.

After effectuation of development entitlements as outlined in Sub-Section 10.7.B, non-participating property owners are required to pay the Specific Plan Fee upon submittal of an application requesting a subsequent entitlement/development permit, prior to the issuance of building permit, based on the number of acres included in the application or the size of the parcel, whichever is greater. This “fair-share” fee shall be calculated based on the following formula: Specific Plan Fee = (Total Specific Plan Cost ÷ Total Acres) x Parcel Acreage The items to be included in the Total Specific Plan Cost have been determined in coordination with the City of Ceres and may include, but are not limited to, the following:  Costs expended by the City to review or hire consultants to prepare and/or review the Specific Plan, EIR, technical studies, financing plans and district formation, project specific agreements, environmental studies, and/or any work associated with the annexation effort.  The Total Specific Plan Costs may be adjusted by a yearly interest rate or inflation factor, to fairly account for the passage of time.

Parcels owned by sponsoring property owners that financially participated in the preparation of the CTSP and all associated work efforts are not required to pay the Specific Plan Fee and are granted zoning or land use designations as illustrated and discussed in Chapter 4. Specific Plan Fees collected by the City shall be utilized to reimburse sponsoring property owners. Reimbursement to the sponsoring property owners shall be conducted in accordance with the City-approved reimbursement agreement.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-9
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.9 MINOR MODIFICATIONS &

MAJOR AMENDMENTS
Development of the Plan Area is anticipated to occur over several years and adjustments to the CTSP may be requested in order to accommodate evolving market conditions during the course of buildout. To provide a degree of flexibility to respond to changing conditions, the CTSP includes parameters to secure City approval of minor modifications and major amendments to the development plan. For the purposes of this section, a residential development utilizing a City-granted residential density bonus does not constitute a modification or amendment to this Specific Plan. Furthermore, amendments to the General Plan are not required for amendments that are consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan. All requests to amend the CTSP shall be made using the appropriate application forms, required documentation, and applicable fees as determined by the City. Any or all of the following information may be required:  Detailed justification statement explaining why an amendment to the Specific Plan is warranted, and any exhibits deemed necessary by the Community Development Director;  A statement of consistency with General Plan policies and Specific Plan land use designations;
 Analysis as required by CEQA; and  Identification of any required modifications of the public infrastructure improvements that are not currently mandated by the Specific Plan (description, location, timing, funding source, etc.).

Requested amendments to the Copper Trails Specific Plan shall be categorized as either minor modifications or major amendments, pursuant to the parameters below.

A. Minor Modifications Minor modifications to the CTSP are those that do not have a significant material effect on the project vision or expected character resulting from implementation of the development plan. Further, minor modifications are found to be consistent with the spirit and intent of the Specific Plan and are consistent with adopted General Plan goals and policies. Minor modifications shall be consistent with the following criteria:  Modifications do not have a significant impact on the overall intent, character or project vision described in Chapter 3 and/or consist of “administrative updates” such as correcting document typos, grammar or phrasing, adjusting exhibits, or updating acreage calculations resulting from more detailed mapping;  Alterations to the size/shape of Specific Plan parcels, or to the alignment of planned roadways, continue to maintain the land use pattern and/or provide an improved circulation system consistent with the Specific Plan’s intent and vision;  The addition of a new permitted use to any land use designation is found to respect the Specific Plan’s intent and is compatible with existing and planned surrounding uses;  Adjustments to the development standards, parking standards, or design guidelines are offset by the merits of the resulting design and do not substantially change the physical characteristics, objectives, and intent of the Specific Plan;  Changes do not result in any new or exacerbated environmental effects/impacts beyond what is identified in the Copper Trails EIR;  Modifications do not adversely impact the ability to construct planned infrastructure, roadways, or other public facilities;
 Minor text revisions that clarify the intent of the Specific Plan, remove ambiguities, and/or maintain consistency with other City-adopted planning and policy documents; and  Other modifications of a similar nature to those listed above that are deemed minor by the Community Development Director and are consistent with the purpose, objectives, and intent of the Specific Plan.

Minor amendments may be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director and appealed to the Planning Commission.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-10 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
B. Major Amendments A major amendment is any proposed change to the Specific Plan that could substantially alter one or more key elements of the development plan, increase environmental impacts beyond those contemplated in the EIR, or create other changes that the Community Development Director determines to be significant. A requested amendment is considered major if one or more of the following criteria are met:  Introduction of a new land use that is not specifically intended for the Specific Plan or identified on the Land Use Plan;
 Changes that increase the overall residential density or number of dwelling units allocated to the Plan Area;
 Alterations to the size/shape of a Specific Plan parcel that results in a substantial and significant change in the land use plan, circulation system, utility systems, or community vision;  Significant changes to the distribution of land uses or elimination of a major land use on the development plan, which would substantially alter the overall mix of land uses set forth in the CTSP’s Land Use chapter;  Changes or additions to development standards or design guidelines that would substantially change the physical or visual character expected with initial approval of the Specific Plan;  Proposed changes that would result in a new significant environmental effect, or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect, beyond that considered in the EIR; or  Other modifications of a similar nature to those listed above that are deemed major by the Community Development Director and are deemed inconsistent with the purpose, objectives, and intent of the Specific Plan.

A major amendment shall be processed in the same manner as the Specific Plan’s original adoption and may be approved without amending the City’s General Plan, provided that the amended CTSP remains consistent with the General Plan’s applicable goals and policies. Approval of a major amendment shall be consistent with the following findings:  The proposed amendment would benefit the Specific Pan Area and/or the City.
 The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.  The proposed amendment would not adversely affect adjacent properties and can be properly serviced.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-11
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026

10.10 RESIDENTIAL UNIT TRANSFERS & DENSITY BLENDING As subdivision maps are processed for residential Specific Plan parcels, it is expected that minor adjustments to assumed residential unit allocations and parcel densities may be needed to enhance housing product diversity. It is anticipated that this process may result in the need to reduce or increase the assumed unit allocation for parcels where residential development is permitted. It may also result in the need to “blend” densities between adjacent residential parcels. In order to streamline the City’s evaluation of minor adjustments during the subdivision map review process, the Specific Plan allows administrative approval of residential unit transfers and density blending as outlined below.

A. Residential Unit Transfers The CTSP permits the ability to adjust the assumed residential unit allocation on parcels throughout the Plan Area. The Land Use Summary (Table 4-1) indicates an assumed unit allocation for each land use designation that permits residential uses. This cumulative unit allocation for each residential designation was derived by applying each Specific Plan parcel’s assumed density (expressed in units per acre for each land use) to its size (in acres). Individually, this generates an “assumed” unit allocation for each parcel, which forms the baseline for each parcel’s ability to increase or decrease its allocation. Minor residential unit transfers are allowed between specific plan parcels with a residential land use designation. This includes the ability to transfer units from a parcel that does not utilize its entire unit allocation to another parcel, provided that the affected Specific Plan parcels fall within the allowable density range permitted by their land use designations and the transfers meet the Approval Criteria outlined in this section. These types of transfers shall be processed concurrently with (or subsequently to approval of) a Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM) and may be approved administratively if consistent with the approval criteria outlined in this section. Additionally, property owners of parcels subject to a unit transfer shall provide written concurrence of the transfer, even if their property is not subject to an associated TSM.

B. Density Blending The CTSP permits the ability to blend the assumed densities of some residential parcels in the Plan Area. This type of adjustment allows up to three adjacent LDR, MDR, and/or MHDR parcels totaling a maximum of 20.0 acres to be combined into a single parcel and their respective densities “blended” with no increase in their total shared unit allocation. The intent is to create neighborhood units with an allocation of approximately 100 similarly-sized lots to make their development economically viable. For instance, two adjacent parcels that have land use designations of LDR and MHDR, which have anticipated unit allocations of 50 units and 100 units respectively (150 units total), could be combined into a single parcel with a MDR designation while maintaining an allocation of 150 units. The resulting MDR parcel could accommodate different residential lot sizes allowed under its new density range while remaining consistent with the parcels’ original development assumptions. Density blending is allowed between specific plan parcels with a LDR, MDR, or MHDR land use designation, if consistent with the approval criteria outlined in this section.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-12 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Approval Criteria The Community Development Director may administratively approve residential unit transfers and density blending adjustments between the CTSP’s residential parcels provided the following conditions are satisfied: 1. That the affected Specific Plan parcels are owned by a single property owner or are located adjacent to one another in the case of multiple ownerships. For this provision, “adjacent” includes parcels that are separated by a street, greenbelt, or park.

2. That residential units transfers and density blending do not result in an increase in the total maximum number of approved dwelling units allocated to the Plan Area, as outlined in Chapter 4, Land Use;

3. That the transfer does not constitute an increase or decrease in the parcel’s estimated unit allocation by more than 20%. Transfers greater than 20% may be granted but must be processed as an amendment;

4. For unit transfers on parcels with a combined size greater than 20.0 acres, the resulting density does not change the original land use designation and the transfer does not: (a) reduce the number of units from the transfer parcel below the minimum number of units allowed by its assigned density range; or (b) increase the number of units to the receiving parcel above the maximum number of units allowed by its assigned density range;

5. For parcels subject to density blending, their cumulative size is no greater than 20.0 acres and the resulting parcel design and configuration substantially conforms to the Land Use Plan in Chapter 4.

6. That unit transfers or density blending are completed concurrent with, or subsequent to, approval of a Tentative Subdivision/Parcel Map or development permit, and prior to recordation of affected Final Map(s) or issuance of Building Permits for a development project; and

7. That the change does not result in increased impacts beyond those identified in the EIR or significantly affect planned infrastructure, roadways, schools or other public facilities, or financing districts.

Requests for residential unit transfers or density blending, if consistent with the above criteria, is consistent with the Specific Plan’s intent and may be processed as a Minor Modification as outlined in Section 10.9 herein. Requests that do not comply with the above criteria may be referred to the Planning Commission for consideration or may be processed as a Major Amendment as outlined in Section 10.9.

10.11 PARCEL MODIFICATIONS &

HOUSING DIVERSITY
As the CTSP builds out over time and subdivision maps are processed, it is expected that minor adjustments to boundaries of Specific Plan parcels and/or tentative subdivision maps may be needed to accommodate the final neighborhood design. To provide streamlined review of subsequent entitlements/ subdivision maps, the CTSP incorporates a level of flexibility to allow parcel boundaries, land use designations, and development allocations/densities to be adjusted with administrative approval. The purpose of these provisions is to provide a mechanism for minor modifications that are consistent with the CTSP’s design intent and that do not increase the development allocations for the Plan Area. To achieve this intent, the types of revisions illustrated within this section may be permitted, if deemed consistent with the approval criteria for Minor Modifications as outlined in Section 10.9.

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-13
IMPLEMENTATION PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
A. Specific Plan Parcel Reconfiguration This type of revision allows the shape of up to three Specific Plan parcels totaling a maximum of 25.0 acres to be reconfigured within the confines of their combined outer boundary, while maintaining existing land use designations and parcel sizes. As tentative subdivision maps are processed, the intent of this provision is to allow flexibility in the design of neighborhoods that exhibit consistency with the Specific Plan’s intent, thereby creating opportunities to incorporate a mix of housing types within a single neighborhood. For instance, two adjacent Specific Plan parcels could “flip” their land use designations while maintaining their original acreage. Alternatively, two adjacent Specific Plan parcels could be reconfigured such that one land use is aligned along the “box’s” outer edge and another land use is concentrated in the “box’s” center, while maintaining the original acreage of each designation. The conceptual application of these provisions is illustrated in Figure 10-2 below, however other reconfiguration designs may be permitted subject to City review.

FIGURE 10-2: PARCEL RECONFIGURATION
B. Specific Plan Parcel Realignment This type of revision allows a Specific Plan parcel’s boundaries to be realigned in response to a neighborhood’s street and lotting layout, provided that the resulting development pattern is maintained. As tentative subdivision maps are processed, the intent is to allow Specific Plan parcel boundaries to be modified in response to neighborhood design versus neighborhood design to be forced into pre-established “boxes.” This type of flexibility allows for thoughtful, creative design solutions that result in livable neighborhoods. For instance, the boundaries of a park and several residential Specific Plan parcels with different land use designations could be realigned in order to accommodate a certain mix of lot sizes, enhance park frontage, and/or improve local circulation patterns. In instances where a Large Lot Tentative Map (LLTM) has previously been approved and a Small Lot Tentative Map seeks to use these provisions to realign LLTM parcel boundaries, the City may require a substantial compliance determination to confirm consistency with the CTSP’s provisions. A conceptual example of parcel realignment is illustrated in Figure 10-3, below.

FIGURE 10-3: PARCEL REALIGNMENT

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13
10-14 City of Ceres
PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT | FEBRUARY 2026
C. Housing Product Diversity This type of revision allows different lot sizes/housing types to be included within a single Specific Plan/Large Lot parcel provided that the resulting unit allocation falls within the density permitted for the parcel’s land use designation. The intent is to facilitate the development of multiple housing types within single-family residential neighborhoods. For instance, on a MDR parcel designed to accommodate single-family housing, all or some of the neighborhood’s block ends could be designed to accommodate attached housing units, such as duets or four-plexes, provided that the total unit allocation falls within the density range permitted for MDR uses. A conceptual example illustrating how multiple housing types can be accommodated within a single Specific Plan/Large Lot parcel is provided in Figure 10-4, below.

FIGURE 10-4: HOUSING PRODUCT DIVERSITY

EXHIBIT A
ITEM 13

COPPER TRAILS SPECIFIC

PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES

FINANCING PLAN

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT REPORT
Prepared for: Prepared by:

City of Ceres Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.

November 2025
EPS #222100
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table of Contents

1. Introduction and Executive Summary 1
Project Description and Proposed Land Uses .................................................................................................................. 1 Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities ................................................................................................................. 3 Financing Strategy Summary................................................................................................................................................... 4 Supporting Documents .............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Organization of Report.............................................................................................................................................................. 6

2. CTSP Development, Population, and Employees 8
Land Use Summary....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Population Summary................................................................................................................................................................11

3. Policy and Financing Framework 13
Overview.......................................................................................................................................................................................13 Financing Plan Requirements...............................................................................................................................................13 Financing Policies ......................................................................................................................................................................14 Financing Plan Goals ................................................................................................................................................................16

4. Facility Cost Estimates 17
Backbone Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................................................17 Public Facilities...........................................................................................................................................................................23

5. Financing Strategy and Funding Sources 24
Financing Strategy Overview...............................................................................................................................................24 Project-Specific Improvements Funding Overview....................................................................................................26 Sources of Funding....................................................................................................................................................................26 Proposed Operating and Maintenance Funding ..........................................................................................................34

6. Proposed CTSP Fee Program and Cost Allocation 36
Cost Allocation Methodology...............................................................................................................................................37

7. Financial Feasibility 38
Description of Static Feasibility Analyses .......................................................................................................................38 Total Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities Cost Burden........................................................................38 Total Taxes and Assessments as a Percentage of Sales Price.................................................................................42

8. Financing Plan Implementation 44
Implementation Summary .....................................................................................................................................................44 Financing Plan Updates...........................................................................................................................................................45 EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Appendices
Appendix A: Detailed Land Uses
Appendix B: Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost
Appendix C: Estimated Fee Revenue from Existing and Proposed fee Programs Appendix D: Proposed CTSP Fee Program Public Improvements Cost Allocation Appendix E: Proposed CTSP Fee Program Cost Burden Shift List of Tables
Table 1. Copper Trails Specific Plan Developable Land Use Summary...................................................................10 Table 2. Estimated Project Residential and Employee Populations.........................................................................12 Table 3. Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities Cost Summary (2025$)................................................18 Table 4. Sources and Uses Summary (2025$)....................................................................................................................27 Table 5. Preliminary CTSP Fee Program Cost Allocation Summary (2025$).......................................................29 Table 6. Summary of Fee Revenue from Existing and Proposed Development Fees (2025$)......................31 Table 7. Maximum Annual Special Tax Revenue for Infrastructure CFD (2025$) ............................................32 Table 8. Estimated Bond Sizing (2025$)..............................................................................................................................33 Table 9. Summary of Infrastructure Cost Burden Analysis (2025$)........................................................................41 Table 10. Estimated Annual Taxes/Assessments as a Percentage of Sales Price (2025$)................................43 List of Maps
Map 1. Plan Area Location.......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Map 2. Development Areas........................................................................................................................................................ 9 EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

1. Introduction and Executive Summary
This Public Facilities Financing Plan (Financing Plan) presents a strategy to finance backbone infrastructure and other public facilities required to serve the proposed land uses in the Copper Trails Specific Plan (CTSP or Project). The financing strategy is designed to be flexible enough to accommodate the development plans of different CTSP property owners while assuring the City of Ceres (City) that the required facilities are constructed when necessary. The Financing Plan includes the use of the following funding mechanisms: existing development impact fee programs, a new CTSP Development Impact Fee Program (CTSP Fee Program), land-secured debt financing, and other sources such as private developer funding.

Project Description and Proposed Land Uses
Map 1 shows the CTSP location in relation to the City. The Project encompasses approximately 535 acres and is currently located in unincorporated Stanislaus County (County), south of the City boundary along California State Route 99 (SR99). Adjacent land uses include primarily built out urbanized development and agricultural uses.

The Project is included in the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) and General Plan planning area and is anticipated to be annexed into the City as part of Project approval.

The City’s General Plan includes preliminary land use designations for areas outside of the City limits but within the SOI. The Project development plan was designed to be consistent with these preliminary land uses, including regional commercial uses, residential uses around schools, a park system, and supporting uses. As stated in the November 6, 2024 Draft CTSP document (Specific Plan) prepared by Wood Rodgers, the development plan for the CTSP “was designed to implement applicable General Plan goals and policies that seek to prioritize growth in the City’s SOI, to provide a range of housing types and densities, to utilize mechanisms such as a Specific Plan to comprehensively plan for new neighborhood developments, and to ensure that new development be implemented with fiscal responsibility.”
The land use plan included in the Specific Plan proposes a mix of new residential development, nonresidential development, and public and quasi-public land uses, and is divided into four different development phases, or areas. The areas are not required to develop in any particular order, but it is required that backbone infrastructure and public facilities be designed and constructed to support the development in each area.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Map 1. Plan Area Location
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Planned development at buildout and estimated Project residents and employees are summarized below. Further details on the proposed development and residential and employee populations by area are provided in Chapter 2. • 2,392 residential units. Residential units consist of approximately 1,326 single family units (55 percent of total units) and 1,066 multifamily units (45 percent of total units).
• Nearly 1.2 million nonresidential building square feet. One-half of the nonresidential development is assumed to be a regional commercial center comprising approximately 585,000 square feet. The remaining one-half of the nonresidential development is split equally between commercial mixed-use, drive-through commercial, hotel, and office uses.
• 167 public and quasi-public acres. Planned uses consist of parks and open space, elementary and high schools, community facilities, major roadways, and landscape corridors.
• 6,756 residents and 2,338 employees. Projected population and employees are estimated using average persons per household factors applied to projected housing units and square feet per employee factors applied to projected building square feet, respectively. The persons per household and square feet per employee factors are obtained from the Specific Plan. The population and employees at buildout represent maximum amounts and do not assume vacancy factors1.

Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities
Definitions of Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities This Financing Plan uses the following definitions to more precisely define backbone infrastructure and public facilities.
• Backbone Infrastructure: This term includes most of the essential public servicebased items that are underground or part of the roadway network. These items include storm drainage, water, reclaimed water, sewer, and major roads.

Backbone infrastructure in the CTSP includes the following types of facilities:
- Transportation
- Sewer
- Storm Drainage
- Water
- Non-Potable Water
1 The buildout population and employees in this Financing Plan are greater than the buildout population and employees in the CTSP Fiscal Impact Analysis because the CTSP Fiscal Impact Analysis incorporates vacancy factors by land use.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
• Public Facilities: This group of items provides amenities to the CTSP (e.g., park facilities and libraries) or houses employees providing services to the area (e.g., fire facilities). The following types of public facilities are included in the CTSP:
- Parks and Open Space
- Police
- Fire
- Schools
• Public Improvements: This term is used generically in the Financing Plan to include a combination of backbone infrastructure and public facilities when a precise breakdown is not required.

This report excludes the cost of Subdivision Infrastructure. This group of improvements includes in-tract improvements (e.g., mass grading, sewer, storm drainage, water, and roads) in an individual subdivision, commercial project, or multifamily project. These costs are assumed to be the responsibility of the developer who is moving forward with specific onsite development improvements.

Total Public Improvements Cost Estimates
This Financing Plan includes approximately $193.4 million in public improvement requirements associated with CTSP Buildout. The public improvements consist of the onsite and offsite improvements specifically required to serve the CTSP that are included in the Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost (Cost Estimate) prepared by NorthStar Engineering Group (NorthStar), as well as additional City police, City fire, and school district public facilities toward which the CTSP must contribute.

The Cost Estimate includes transportation, sewer, water, non-potable water, and parks and open space improvement requirements and costs for each of the four development areas. In addition, Project development will contribute to police, fire, and school facilities through the payment of City and school district development impact fees. For each area, the costs for these public facilities are estimated to equal the fee revenue generated by private development in the Project. The Project public improvement requirements and costs by area are detailed in Chapter 4.

Financing Strategy Summary
The purpose of this Financing Plan is to propose a financing strategy to fund the necessary public improvements required to serve the CTSP. The elements of the Financing Plan must work together to provide the optimal balance of fee, bond, and private financing to not overly burden undeveloped land, while assuring necessary public improvements are constructed when needed.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
A combination of funding sources and mechanisms are recommended to fund the costs of the public improvements, as summarized below.
• Fund improvements through existing City, Stanislaus County (County), and school district development impact fee programs. Existing fee programs will fund public improvements that benefit the CTSP as well as other developments.

The CTSP will contribute to the construction of these public improvements through participation in the existing fee programs. The existing fee programs in which the CTSP will participate are the City Public Facilities Fee Program, the County Public Facilities Fee Program, and the Ceres Unified School District Facilities Fee Program.
• Fund Project-specific improvements not currently funded through existing fee programs through a new plan area development impact fee program, referred to as the CTSP Fee Program. The CTSP Fee Program will fund those backbone infrastructure and public facilities costs that are not funded by existing fee programs or other funding sources, as identified below. Facilities included in the CTSP Fee Program include those facilities with plan-wide benefits (i.e. serve multiple individual subdivisions), the costs of which should be distributed among CTSP land uses and ownership interests.
• Use land-secured financing to provide upfront funding or reimburse Project developers. It is likely that land-secured debt financing, if used, would be provided through a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD). The MelloRoos Community Facilities Act of 1982 enables public agencies to form CFDs and levy a special tax on property owners in those CFDs. The special taxes may be used to pay debt service on CFD bonds, to reimburse Project developers for advance-funding, or to finance public improvements directly on a pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) basis.
• Make maximum use of pay-as-you-go mechanisms. Use PAYGO revenue to the extent possible while still allowing for timely construction of public improvements. PAYGO funds may be available from fee revenue, CFD special tax revenue not used to pay bond debt, private funding, and grant funding. • Provide private financing as needed. Private funding will be required to fund improvements when needed to serve the Project. Many improvements will be needed before adequate plan area fee program revenue has been collected. In addition, if a Mello-Roos CFD is implemented, the initial bond issuance capacity will be limited. Developers who provide private funding can be reimbursed as other funding becomes available. To the extent revenue generated by existing fee programs, the proposed CTSP Fee Program, and other funding programs is insufficient to reimburse the Project developers, the developers will be required to cover the estimated shortfalls.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
• Use grant funding where available. Of the estimated total school costs for the Project, a significant portion is anticipated to be funded through grants from the State for school facilities (i.e., State School Facilities Program). Other grantfunding opportunities also may be pursued. However, grant and other external funding are not quantified in this Financing Plan given the competitive nature of awards and uncertainty of future funding cycles.

The Project funding strategy needs to be flexible enough to accommodate development plans of different property owners and to assure that required improvements are constructed when needed. The financing mechanisms used will depend on the types and timing of the required facilities and will be guided by objectives and policies established in the Specific Plan.

Supporting Documents
This Financing Plan relies on the following documents that have been prepared for the City or are being prepared in conjunction with this analysis:
• Draft CTSP Specific Plan prepared by Wood Rodgers (November 6, 2024) • Draft CTSP Environmental Impact Analysis prepared by BaseCamp Environmental, Inc. (November 2024)
• CTSP Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by EPS (May 5, 2025) • CTSP Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost prepared by NorthStar Engineering (March 3, 2025)
• City Public Facilities Impact Fee Nexus Study (May 2025) Organization of Report
Following this initial chapter, the Financing Plan is organized into the following chapters:
• Chapter 2 details the CTSP development, population, and employee estimates. • Chapter 3 details the policy and financing framework for the Financing Plan established in the CTSP Specific Plan.
• Chapter 4 details the required backbone infrastructure and public facility requirements and associated costs.
• Chapter 5 describes the overall financing strategy and funding sources. • Chapter 6 summarizes the proposed CTSP Fee Program and cost allocation. • Chapter 7 examines the feasibility of the CTSP Financing Plan. • Chapter 8 summarizes the Financing Plan implementation and administration.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
In addition, the Financing Plan contains the following appendices:

Appendix A: Detailed Land Uses
Appendix B: Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost
Appendix C: Estimated Fee Revenue from Existing and Proposed Fee Programs Appendix D: Proposed CTSP Fee Program Public Improvements Cost Allocation Appendix E: Proposed CTSP Fee Program Cost Burden Shift EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

2. CTSP Development, Population, and
Employees
The CTSP is located in unincorporated County but is included in the City’s SOI and General Plan planning area and is anticipated to be annexed into the City as part of Project approval. The City’s General Plan includes preliminary land use designations for areas outside of the City limits but within the SOI. The Project development plan was designed to be consistent with these preliminary land uses, including regional commercial uses, residential uses around schools, a park system, and supporting uses.

As stated in the Draft Specific Plan, the development plan for the CTSP “was designed to implement applicable General Plan goals and policies that seek to prioritize growth in the City’s SOI, to provide a range of housing types and densities, to utilize mechanisms such as a Specific Plan to comprehensively plan for new neighborhood developments, and to ensure that new development be implemented with fiscal responsibility.”
Land Use Summary
The CTSP is located on approximately 535 gross acres, with an estimated 260 acres planned for residential development and an estimated 107 acres planned for nonresidential commercial, hotel, and office development. The remaining CTSP acres are planned for public uses, including parks and open space, community facilities, schools (already existing), and major roadways.

The Project is divided into four different development phases, or areas, as depicted in Map 2. The areas are not required to develop in any particular order, but it is required that backbone infrastructure and public facilities be designed and constructed to support the development in each area.

Table 1 summarizes the planned acres, dwelling units, and developable nonresidential building square feet by land use by area and at buildout of the Project. It also includes the assumed dwelling units per acre for each residential land use and the assumed floor area ratios for each nonresidential land use. All nonresidential development is planned in Area 4, so nonresidential building square feet are included for this area only. Appendix A provides further detail on the acres, dwelling units, and building square feet by area and land use.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Map 2. Development Areas
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 1. Copper Trails Specific Plan Developable Land Use Summary Item
Density
[1]
Acres
[2]
Dwelling
Units [3]
Acres
[2]
Dwelling
Units [3]
Acres
[2]
Dwelling
Units [3]
Acres
[2]
Dwelling
Units [3]
Nonres. Bldg.

Sq. Ft. [3]
Acres
[2]
Dwelling
Units [3]
Nonres. Bldg.

Sq. Ft. [3]
Residential
Single Family
Low Density 5.5 75.7 421 47.7 265 54.2 302 - - - 177.6 988 - Medium Density 9.0 17.2 155 11.6 104 8.8 79 - - - 37.6 338 - Total Single Family 92.9 576 59.3 369 63.0 381 0.0 - - 215.2 1,326 - Multifamily
Medium-High Density 20.0 - - - - 7.7 154 9.1 182 - 16.8 336 - High Density 25.0 7.1 179 8.8 222 - - 13.0 329 - 28.9 730 - Total Multifamily 7.1 179 8.8 222 7.7 154 22.1 511 - 45.7 1,066 - Total Residential 100.0 755 68.1 591 70.7 535 22.1 511 - 260.9 2,392 - Nonresidential
Commercial [4] 0.25 - - - - - - 80.6 - 877,190 80.6 - 877,190 Hotel 0.25 - - - - - - 13.4 - 146,198 13.4 146,198
Office 0.25 - - - - - - 13.4 - 146,198 13.4 - 146,198
Total Nonresidential - - - - - - 107.4 - 1,169,586 107.4 - 1,169,586 Total Planned Developable Land Uses 100.0 755 68.1 591 70.7 535 129.5 511 1,169,586 368.3 2,392 1,169,586 Source: Wood Rodgers; NorthStar Engineering; City of Ceres; EPS [1] Densities are from the Draft Copper Trails Specific Plan (11/06/2024). Densities are averages and may differ slightly from planned densities calculated from total acres, dwelling units, and building square feet.
[2] Acres are from Figure 4-1 of the Draft Copper Trails Specific Plan (11/06/2024). [3] Total dwelling units and building square feet are from the Draft Copper Trails Specific Plan (11/06/2024). See Appendix A for details. [4] Sum of Regional Commercial, Commercial Mixed Use, and Drive-Through Commercial. See Appendix A for details.

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Buildout
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Population Summary
Table 2 summarizes the estimated residential and employee populations by area and at buildout of the Project. Projected residents and employees are estimated using persons per household factors applied to projected housing units and square feet per employee factors applied to projected building square feet, respectively.

The persons per household and square feet per employee factors are obtained from the Specific Plan. The residential and employee populations at buildout represent maximum totals and do not account for frictional or market-based vacancy factors2.
2 The buildout population and employees in this Financing Plan are greater than the buildout population and employees in the CTSP Fiscal Impact Analysis because the CTSP Fiscal Impact Analysis incorporates vacancy factors by land use.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 2. Estimated Project Residential and Employee Populations Land Use
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Population/
Employees
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Population/
Employees
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Population/
Employees
Dwelling Units/
Bldg. Sq. Ft.

Population/
Employees
Residential Land Uses pph units population units population units population units population population Low Density 3.20 421 1,347 265 848 302 966 - - 3,161
Medium Density 2.75 155 426 104 286 79 217 - - 929
Medium-High Density 2.50 - - - - 154 385 182 455 840
High Density 2.50 179 448 222 555 - - 329 823 1,826
Total Residential 755 2,221 591 1,689 535 1,568 511 1,278 6,756 Nonresidential Land Uses sq. ft. per emp sq. ft. employees sq. ft. employees sq. ft. employees sq. ft. employees employees Commercial 500 - - - - - - 877,190 1,754 1,754
Hotel 500 - - - - - - 146,198 292 292
Office 500 - - - - - - 146,198 292 292
Total Nonresidential - - - - - - 1,169,586 2,338 2,338
Source: Wood Rodgers; NorthStar Engineering; City of Ceres; EPS [1] Population/employee factors are from the Draft Copper Trails Specific Plan (11/06/2024) and are applied to units and nonresidential building square feet from Table 1. The resulting population and employees are maximum numbers and do not account for a vacancy factor as in the Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by EPS.

Buildout
Population/
Employees
Population/
Employee
Factor [1]
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

3. Policy and Financing Framework
Overview
This chapter provides an overview of the CTSP policy framework related to the Financing Plan. The Financing Plan must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Specific Plan, development agreements (DAs), and a Master Reimbursement Agreement. The purpose of each of these documents is described briefly below:
• Specific Plan. The Specific Plan establishes the land use plan and zoning regulations for development within the CTSP. The Specific Plan governs the development of the CTSP and requires completion of this Financing Plan to describe the financing strategy and mechanisms to fund the backbone infrastructure and public facilities needed for the CTSP development. • DA. Each property owner will enter into a DA with the City that allows the property owner vested rights to develop their property in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Specific Plan. The DAs detail the specific requirements for the property owners to be allowed to develop, including requirements for the construction of certain backbone infrastructure and public facilities. • Master Reimbursement Agreement. The Master Reimbursement Agreement is an agreement between all of the developers and the City that will detail the procedures and requirements for the developers to receive CTSP Fee Program credits and reimbursements for the dedication of land and construction of backbone infrastructure and public facilities.

Financing Plan Requirements
As stated in the Specific Plan, one of the Project objectives is to “implement a public facilities financing plan with logical development phases that enables the Plan Area to develop in an economically feasible manner.” This Financing Plan provides the estimated costs to construct identified public improvements needed to facilitate development in each of the four development areas identified in the Specific Plan and describes the proposed funding mechanisms to fund those costs.

The overall costs and funding sources in the Financing Plan have been estimated for the purpose of providing feasible financing strategies and mechanisms to construct the backbone infrastructure and public facilities required for CTSP development. The development, costs, and funding sources in this Financing Plan are based on the best information available at this time and may need to be updated as development progresses.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
For each area and at buildout of the Project, the Financing Plan includes the following elements:
• Summary of the public improvement requirements to serve future development within the CTSP.
• Cost estimate summaries for the required public improvements. • Analysis of existing fees, taxes and assessments which may be applicable to new development in the CTSP.
• Potential existing and new funding sources for the construction of the required public improvements.
• Overall public improvements cost burden by land use on a per dwelling unit and per nonresidential building square foot basis.
• Recommended steps for implementation of the public improvements financing.

Financing Policies
The following financing policies have been included in previous financing plans for the City. These policies have guided preparation of this Financing Plan and may assist the City in making future decisions regarding forming financing entities, adopting financing mechanisms, and approving the Project. Note that not all policies may be applicable to the Project:
• Financial analysis should be conducted that encompasses all proposed development, all identified infrastructure costs, and proposed financing mechanisms. Such financial analysis should account for Project-specific circumstances, changing market conditions, and more refined facility and cost data that will become available over time.
• Existing residents should not be burdened with assessments or taxes to pay for new public facilities if no benefit is received by existing residents. • As part of the Financing Plan, evaluate existing City development impact fees to determine their relation with backbone infrastructure and other public facilities required for the CTSP.
• If any properties outside the CTSP benefit from backbone infrastructure and other public facilities provided by the CTSP, the benefiting properties should contribute to infrastructure financing to the extent possible. • If necessary, adopt an area-specific development impact fee ordinance that establishes a fair-share cost allocation for required backbone infrastructure to be borne by all benefiting new development in the CTSP. These costs either can be paid “in kind” as per-unit impact fees or can be included in a land-secured financing district.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
• Encourage measures that minimize the infrastructure costs borne by new development in the CTSP. Such measures could include construction and reimbursement agreements with developers, which can lower costs generally associated with public construction projects.
• Actively pursue outside funding for infrastructure improvements in the CTSP area (e.g., regional, State, and federal grant funding sources). • Develop an infrastructure phasing schedule that links the timing of backbone infrastructure and other public facility construction to the timing of new CTSP residential and other (e.g., commercial) development to the extent possible. • Use pay-as-you-go financing to the extent possible. Consider specifically targeting debt financing to circumstances where other methods are unavailable or inappropriate for infrastructure financing.
• The City should assume responsibility for coordinating landowners and developers in establishing the appropriate financing mechanisms. This policy should be interpreted broadly to include such actions as establishing jointexercise-of-powers entities with other jurisdictions (e.g., Joint Powers Agreements with special districts, the State, or any other appropriate government agency that will facilitate financing of necessary infrastructure improvements). • To ensure timely funding of infrastructure development, the City reserves the option to establish standardized Development Agreements, consistent with existing City ordinances, to confer development entitlements. The agreements should enable establishing needed infrastructure financing mechanisms. • Facilitate discussions with school districts regarding school facility requirements and planning and seek outcomes that facilitate timely development of the CTSP.
• Establish a financing district or districts (e.g., Mello-Roos CFDs or Assessment Districts [ADs]) when appropriate to provide necessary land-secured debt financing.
• As appropriate, require dedication of land for road improvements and construction of public improvements consistent with City policies. • Require development projects in the CTSP to fund or support financing for oversizing of facilities if required by the City.
• Establish mechanisms for future development to reimburse developers who oversize infrastructure or dedicate excess land, possibly as part of a development impact fee ordinance.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
• The City should provide credits against City fees to the extent that CTSP properties build infrastructure of broader citywide benefit or build public facilities that would otherwise be funded by City fees:
a. For improvements that are part of the City PFF Program and that are required to be developer-constructed to enable development, the City will allow a credit against the applicable segment of the PFF Program up to the lesser of the actual cost of the improvement or the amount of the applicable fee segment.
b. Where the developer has remaining costs not covered by fee credits, reimbursements from fee revenue will occur as subsequent projects develop within the CTSP and pay the PFF.
c. Reimbursements will be granted on a first-in first-out basis. d. For projects participating in the proposed CTSP Fee Program, credits and reimbursements will be subject to the same policies described in the previous principles a through c.
• CTSP development will be subject to existing City development impact fees and additional offsite mitigation requirements as specified in the CTSP Final EIR. • Developers should participate in duly established financing mechanisms to assure adequate funding for maintaining backbone infrastructure and other public facilities or otherwise be required to provide a comparable funding source.

Financing Plan Goals
The elements of the Financing Plan must work together to provide the optimal balance of fees, private, and other financing to not overly burden undeveloped land, while assuring that necessary facilities are constructed when needed. The goals of the Financing Plan are summarized below:
• Fully fund all facility and infrastructure improvements when the improvements are needed to serve the Project.
• Use existing fee programs to the extent possible.
• Identify potential new fee programs or increases in existing fee programs to the extent required.
• Identify the potential for land secured financing through the issuance of CFDbonds. • Make use of “pay-as-you-go” mechanisms, while allowing for timely construction of public improvements.
• Make appropriate use of private financing, existing fee programs, new fee programs, CFD bonds, and credit/reimbursement agreements to fund improvements when needed.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

4. Facility Cost Estimates
This chapter summarizes the backbone infrastructure and public facilities (Public Improvements) that are required to serve the Project. The backbone infrastructure and public facilities consist of the improvements specifically required to serve the CTSP that are included in the Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost (Cost Estimate) prepared by NorthStar in March 2025, as well as additional City police and fire facilities and school district facilities toward which the CTSP must contribute.

Table 3 summarizes the estimated public improvements by type and area and the Project’s estimated cost obligation for these improvements.

Appendix B contains both a summary of the Cost Estimate and the detailed Cost Estimate document. The Cost Estimate includes cost estimates for all backbone infrastructure and parks and open space needed to support new development in the Project. The cost estimates, presented in 2025 dollars, include construction costs, soft costs (e.g., design and engineering, legal, construction management), and a cost contingency factor.

The police, fire, and school district improvements not included in the Cost Estimate are funded through payment of existing development impact fees. The Project’s fair share cost obligation of these facilities is estimated as the fee revenue generated by Project development. The facilities proposed for the CTSP may be refined as part of subsequent implementation efforts.

Backbone Infrastructure
Summary
As shown in Table 3, the Project has a backbone infrastructure cost obligation of approximately $130.3 million. The improvements consist of the following areaspecific improvements and regional improvements, as detailed further in the following sections.
• Transportation
• Sewer
• Storm Drainage
• Water
• Non-potable Water
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 3. Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities Cost Summary (2025$) Item Source Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Total
Backbone Infrastructure [1]
Transportation [2] Table B-1 $19,281,177 $18,501,101 $16,838,913 $27,595,304 $82,216,495 Sewer Table B-1 $2,133,235 $1,451,883 $1,460,402 $1,887,431 $6,932,951 Storm Drainage Table B-1 $3,287,791 $1,189,250 $3,136,233 $4,888,189 $12,501,463 Water Table B-1 7,833,980 4,759,560 5,266,325 8,357,359 $26,217,224 Non-Potable Water Table B-1 $970,171 $609,048 $340,819 $535,421 $2,455,459 Subtotal Backbone Infrastructure $33,506,354 $26,510,842 $27,042,692 $43,263,704 $130,323,592 Public Facilities
Parks [1] Table B-1 $12,227,873 $4,473,271 $7,352,687 $12,369,527 $36,423,358 Police [3] Table 8 $929,204 $666,994 $666,086 $654,807 $2,917,091 Fire [3] Table 8 $816,678 $585,398 $584,926 $568,952 $2,555,954 Schools [4] Table 8 $7,156,314 $5,129,674 $5,125,538 $3,812,510 $21,224,036 Subtotal Public Facilities $21,130,069 $10,855,337 $13,729,237 $17,405,796 $63,120,439 Total Improvements $54,636,423 $37,366,179 $40,771,929 $60,669,500 $193,444,031 Source: NorthStar Engineering; City of Ceres; CUSD; EPS. [1] Backbone infrastructure and Parks costs from Copper Trails Engineer's Estimate of Probable Costs prepared by NorthStar Engineering Group, Inc. (03/03/2025). See Appendix B for detailed cost estimates. [2] Transportation improvements include: demolition, joint trench, rough grading, erosion control, street fine grading, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, ADA ramps, street pavement, landscaping, and walls. [3] Costs set equal to the fee revenue generated by CTSP payment of the police and fire components of the City PFF. [4] Costs set equal to Ceres Unified School District (CUSD) development fee revenue generated by CTSP.

Costs by Area
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Area-Specific Onsite Improvements
For each Project area, the onsite backbone infrastructure improvements are divided into segment improvements and overall area improvements. The segment improvements are associated with each individual roadway segment, whereas the area improvements are needed by the entire area to facilitate construction of the particular improvement type in that area, as described further below.

Segment Improvements
Each roadway segment serves either one or two of the four Project areas, and thus the particular segment improvement costs are assigned to those Project areas.

Each segment serves the Project area that it borders. In the case that a segment borders two Project areas, the improvement costs are split equally between the two areas.

Area Improvements
In addition to the improvements related to each particular roadway segment, other improvements are needed to serve an entire area and facilitate development in that area. Examples are a storm drainage lift station needed to serve an entire area and the removal of existing orchards in order to facilitate the construction of roadways.

Regional Improvements
The Project must contribute toward regional improvements. These improvements consist of both onsite and offsite improvements needed to serve the entire Project and sometimes other development projects in the region. The Project has full responsibility for some of these improvements, whereas in other cases, the Project shares responsibility with other developments in the region and has a percentage share of the cost obligation. The regional improvements consist of a sewer pump station, a water well and tank, and roadway intersection improvements.

Transportation
Roadways in the Project are envisioned to accommodate all modes of travel and balance the efficient movement of vehicular traffic with the provision of safe and easily accessible facilities for walking, biking, and public transit. New roadways and design improvements to existing roadways will be necessary to meet these objectives. In addition, the Project will also be required to contribute toward regional transportation improvements.

The Project roadway system is depicted in Exhibit 1.1 of the Cost Estimate in Appendix B.

Area- Specific Onsite Improvements
The Project’s planned onsite roadway system consists of arterial and collector streets that provide access to all areas of the CTSP. In addition to improving EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
existing roadways that border or run through the Project, several new interior roads will also be required. As described above, the Cost Estimate identifies the required area-specific improvements for each Project area.

Existing Roadways
The existing arterial and collector roadways summarized below border or run through the Project. These roadways provide access to the Project and require varying levels of improvements to adequately serve development in the Project.

The required improvements are detailed in the Appendix B Cost Estimate. • Service Road, an east-west roadway that connects the Project with SR-99. • Blaker Road, a north-south roadway on the western edge of the Project that extends north to Whitmore Avenue in Ceres and south to East Keyes Road in Stanislaus County.
• Central Avenue, a north-south roadway that provides access to the center of the Project and extends north to SR-99 and south to areas in unincorporated Stanislaus County.
• Lucas Road and Mitchell Road, roadways located adjacent to SR-99 that form the eastern boundary of the Project
• Moffet Road, a north-south roadway located between Central Avenue and the eastern boundary of the Project that extends north to SR-99 and south to East Redwood Road, located within the Project.
• East Redwood Road, an east-west roadway located entirely within the CTSP between Mitchel Road and Central Avenue.

New Roadways
Several new onsite collector roads will be required. These roads will generally provide for two travel lanes and sidewalks, a center turn lane, and, in some cases on-street curbside parking.

Regional Improvements
The Project must contribute to regional “intersection level of service” improvements. These intersection improvements consist of both onsite and offsite improvements needed to keep the traffic flow at acceptable service levels as development occurs in the region. The Project has full responsibility for some of these improvements, whereas for other improvements, it shares responsibility with other developments in the region and has a percentage share of the cost obligation. Examples of the intersection level of service improvements are the installation of traffic signals at intersections and SR-99 interchanges. The Project’s total cost for these improvements is spread among the four areas in proportion to each area’s level of development and relative impact on the improvements, as detailed in the next chapter and Appendix D.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Sewer
Wastewater generated by the Project first will be directed through onsite existing and new sewer lines to an existing 42-inch trunk line in Service Road and then will flow to the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plan (WWTP) west of the Project for treatment. The wastewater from some of the Project will flow through existing and new lines directly to the Service Road trunk line via gravity, where it will then flow to the WWTP. The wastewater from the remainder of the Project first will flow through existing and new lines to a planned regional sewer lift station at Central Avenue and Redwood Road, then to Service Road and the WWTP.

The Project onsite sewer system is depicted in Figure 7-2 of the Specific Plan.

Area-Specific Onsite Improvements
Area-specific onsite backbone sewer infrastructure consists of a network of existing and planned sewer lines ranging in size from 8 to 42 inches in diameter that will be used to transport sewage to the WWTP.

Regional Improvements
The planned new lift station will be utilized to discharge sewage generated by the Project through a force main to the Project sewer lines and then to the WWTP. The total cost for the lift station improvements is spread among the four areas in proportion to each area’s level of development and relative impact on the improvements, as detailed in the next chapter and Appendix D.

Water
A combination of existing and planned backbone water infrastructure will provide water for the Project. Onsite improvements include a planned water well, storage tank and booster pump and a network of existing and planned water mains to distribute the water throughout the Project. Additionally, an existing water well, storage tank, and booster pump located at the Ceres WWTP also will provide water to the Project.

The Project onsite water system is depicted in Figure 7-1 of the Specific Plan.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Area-Specific Onsite Improvements
Area-specific onsite backbone water infrastructure consists of a network or water mains used to distribute water throughout the Project. The water main costs are allocated to each area depending on where in the Project they are located and to which areas they will distribute water.

Regional Improvements
The new onsite water well, storage tank, and booster pump will provide water for the entire Project. The total cost of these improvements is allocated to the four areas in proportion to each area’s level of development and relative demand for water, as detailed in the next chapter and Appendix D.

Non-Potable Water
Currently, there is no non-potable water infrastructure in the CTSP. The planned non-potable water system consists of a combination of three new groundwater wells and distribution lines to provide irrigation water throughout the Project.

There is the opportunity to receive irrigation water from the WWTP in the future if upgrades are made to the WWTP to provide raw water, but such WWTP improvements are not included in the planned non-potable water infrastructure.

All of the planned non-potable water improvements are area-specific improvements. There are no planned regional or Project-wide non-potable water improvements. The Project onsite non-potable water system is depicted in Figure 7-3 of the Specific Plan.

Storm Drainage
The Project’s planned storm drainage infrastructure consists of a system of storm drainage basins and conveyance pipes. Storm water will be conveyed through the pipes to the storm drainage basins. There will be four major drainage basins, one in each of the four project areas. Each drainage basin will be located in a park to allow the basins to serve both recreational and stormwater detention uses.

All of the planned storm drainage improvements are area-specific improvements. There are no planned regional or Project-wide storm drainage improvements. The Project onsite non-potable water system is depicted in Figure 7-4of the Specific Plan.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Public Facilities
Summary
As shown in Table 3, the Project has a public facilities cost obligation of approximately $63.1 million across all areas. The improvements required for each area and improvement type are detailed below. The following types of public facilities are included:
• Parks and Open Space
• Police
• Fire
• Schools
Parks and Open Space
The planned parks and open space in the Project consist of five neighborhood parks and a series of linear parks and greenbelt corridors. There are a total of 42.4 planned parks and open space acres in the Project, spread throughout the four areas of the Project. The Project parks and open space system is depicted in Exhibit

2.2 of the Cost Estimate.

Police
There are no planned police facilities in the Project. However, the CTSP development will require City police services and have an impact on new City police facilities and equipment needed to provide services. The cost of police facilities and equipment is estimated as the total City police impact fee revenue generated by development in the Project.

Fire
There are no planned fire facilities in the Project. However, the CTSP development will require City fire services and have an impact on new City fire facilities and equipment needed to provide services. The cost of fire facilities and equipment is estimated as the total City fire impact fee revenue generated by development in the Project.

Schools
There are two existing schools in the Project, but there are no new planned schools. However, children of CTSP residents will attend Ceres Unified School District (CUSD) schools and have an impact on school facilities in the district. The schools cost is estimated as the total CUSD facilities fee revenue generated by development in the Project.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

5. Financing Strategy and Funding Sources
This chapter outlines the Project’s financing strategy and describes how a combination of private and public funding sources may be used to fund the backbone infrastructure and public facilities required to serve the Project. Funding sources are identified for discussion purposes and to guide subsequent analytical efforts.

The public improvements that must be funded include Project-specific public improvements, Citywide improvements funded through City development impact fee program, and County improvements funded through the County development impact fee program.

Financing Strategy Overview
The elements of the Financing Plan must work together to provide the optimal balance of fee, bond, and private financing to not overly burden undeveloped land, while assuring necessary public improvements are constructed when needed. The following financing strategies are recommended:
• Fund improvements through existing City, County, and special district fee programs. A portion of the required public improvements will be funded through existing City, County, and school district fee programs.

The existing fee programs are described below:
- City Public Facilities Fee (PFF) Program. The PFF Program funds the following types of improvements in the City: police, fire protection, municipal facilities and equipment, wastewater, water, parks and recreation, community facilities, transportation, drainage, and information technology.

For each PFF component for which corresponding CTSP improvements (i.e., transportation, wastewater, water, drainage, and parks) are included in the Cost Estimate, it is assumed that all revenue generated by payment of the applicable PFF component, up to the CTSP cost, will be available to fund the CTSP improvements.
- County PFF Program. The County PFF Program funds the following countywide facilities and services: animal services, behavioral health, criminal justice, detention, emergency services, health, libraries, other County facilities, regional parks, regional transportation, and countywide information technology.
- Ceres Unified School District (CUSD) Fee. The CUSD fee funds school facilities in the CUSD.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
• Fund Project-specific improvements not currently funded through existing fee programs through a proposed privately or publicly administered CTSP Fee Program. For those facilities not funded by existing or proposed fee programs, the Financing Plan proposes establishing a new privately or publicly administered CTSP Fee Program applicable to CTSP development only. For each improvement type, the required CTSP Fee Program funding amount is calculated as the total cost less the amount to be funded by the City and CUSD fees • Use land-secured financing to provide upfront funding or reimburse Project developers. It is likely that land-secured debt financing, if used, would be provided through a Mello-Roos CFD. The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 enables public agencies to form CFDs and levy a special tax on property owners in those CFDs. The special taxes may be used to pay debt service on CFD bonds, to reimburse Project developers for advance-funding, or to finance public improvements directly on a pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) basis. • Make maximum use of pay-as-you-go mechanisms. Use PAYGO revenue to the extent possible while still allowing for timely construction of public improvements. PAYGO funds may be available from fee revenue, CFD special tax revenue not used to pay bond debt, private funding, and grant funding. • Provide private financing as needed. Private funding will be required to fund improvements when needed to serve the Project. Many improvements will be needed before adequate plan area fee program revenue has been collected. In addition, if a Mello-Roos CFD is implemented, the initial bond issuance capacity will be limited. Developers who provide private funding can be reimbursed as other funding becomes available. To the extent revenue generated by existing fee programs, the proposed CTSP Fee Program, and other funding programs is insufficient to reimburse the Project developers, the developers will be required to cover the estimated shortfalls.
• Use grant funding where available. Of the estimated total school costs for the Project, a significant portion is anticipated to be funded through grants from the State for school facilities (i.e., State School Facilities Program). Other grantfunding opportunities also may be pursued. However, grant and other external funding are not quantified in this Financing Plan given the competitive nature of awards and uncertainty of future funding cycles
The Project funding strategy needs to be flexible enough to accommodate development plans of different property owners and to assure that required improvements are constructed when needed. The financing mechanisms used will depend on the types and timing of the required facilities and will be guided by objectives and policies established in the Specific Plan.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Project-Specific Improvements Funding Overview
For each of the Project’s four development areas, the developers in that area will be responsible for funding or constructing all backbone infrastructure and public facilities needed to support the area’s development. In many cases, particularly in the early stages of each development, the developers will be required to construct or fund more than their proportionate share of improvements. Reimbursement mechanisms will allow for repayment to Project developers who advance-fund facilities included in City and other public fee programs, subject to the City and special district fee credit and reimbursement policies. Subdivision infrastructure costs will be funded privately by developers and are not included in this Financing Plan.

Backbone infrastructure and public facilities required for development to proceed in the Project are anticipated to be funded through a variety of sources, including private capital, existing City and regional fees, and a proposed CTSP plan area fee program (CTSP Fee Program). Table 4 summarizes the estimated CTSP public improvement costs and potential funding sources at Project buildout.

Sources of Funding
As summarized above, several funding mechanisms will be used to fund the backbone infrastructure and public facilities required to serve the Project. These public improvements include Project-specific improvements summarized in Table 4 and detailed in the previous chapter, as well as City and County improvements to which the Project will be required to contribute but that are not specifically needed for development in the Project to proceed.

The actual funding sources and financing mechanisms used will depend on the type of facility, when the facility is needed, and the phasing of facility construction. Each funding source is detailed in the remainder of this section.

Development Fee Programs
The Project will be required to pay existing City, County, and regional development fees. In addition, this Financing Plan proposes adoption of a new plan area development impact fee program, the CTSP Fee Program, to pay for Projectspecific public improvement costs not funded by other sources.

Existing City, County, and Regional Fees
The City, County, and CUSD have existing ordinance-based building and development impact fees. These fees and charges will be fully applicable in the CTSP. In some instances, some or all of the revenue generated by Project development through the Citywide PFF Program will be used to fund Projectspecific improvements (as discussed earlier and summarized in Table 4).

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 4. Sources and Uses Summary (2025$)
Item Cost [1]
City Public
Facilities Fee
(PFF) [2]
Ceres Unified
School District
Dev. Fees
Proposed
CTSP
Fee Program
Other
(e.g. Private
Developer) Total
CFD
Funding [3]
Backbone Infrastructure
Transportation $82,216,495 $21,344,208 - $60,872,287 - $82,216,495 X Sewer $6,932,951 $6,932,951 - - - $6,932,951 X
Storm Drainage $12,501,463 - - $12,501,463 - $12,501,463 X Water $26,217,224 $23,413,235 - $2,803,989 - $26,217,224 X Non-Potable Water $2,455,459 - - $2,455,459 - $2,455,459 X Subtotal Backbone Infrastructure $130,323,592 $51,690,394 - $78,633,198 - $130,323,592 - Public Facilities
Parks $36,423,358 $35,031,866 - $1,391,492 - $36,423,358 X Police $2,917,091 $2,917,091 - - - $2,917,091 -
Fire $2,555,954 $2,555,954 - - - $2,555,954 -
Schools $21,224,036 - $21,224,036 - - $21,224,036 -
Subtotal Public Facilities $63,120,439 $40,504,911 $21,224,036 $1,391,492 - $63,120,439 - Total Improvements $193,444,031 $92,195,305 $21,224,036 $80,024,690 - $193,444,031 - Source: NorthStar Engineering; City of Ceres; CUSD; EPS. [1] See Table 3.
[2] For backbone infrastructure and parks, assumes all of the City PFF revenue generated by the Project is available to offset costs for each applicable PFF component. Police and Fire costs are set equal to the PFF revenue generated by Project development. School costs are set equal to the CUSD fee revenue generated by Project development. [3] Reflects costs that are eligible for CFD funding. CFD bond proceeds may fund all or a portion of these facility costs.

Funding Sources [1]
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
The remainder of the City PFF revenue generated by the Project will be used to fund Citywide improvements. The County and CUSD fees will be used to fund County and CUSD facilities, respectively.

Proposed CTSP Fee Program
This Financing Plan proposes use of a plan area development impact fee program, the CTSP Fee Program, that will fund backbone infrastructure and public facilities needed to serve the Project. The CTSP Fee Program is proposed to fund construction of backbone infrastructure and public facilities necessary to accommodate new residents and employees generated by CTSP development after taking into consideration a variety of other funding sources for the improvements. The costs to be funded through the CTSP Fee Program are summarized in Table 4.

The proposed CTSP Fee Program, if formed, could be either privately or publicly administered and would include fees that would need to be established in accordance with the procedural requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, as codified in California Government Section 66000 et seq. If the CTSP Fee Program is publicly-administered, it would include an additional cost and fee component for fee program administration and implementation.

Note that this Financing Plan does not calculate or provide legal justification for development impact fees in accordance with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act but rather provides cost allocations that are used to estimate the CTSP Fee Program cost burden for each land use and improvement type. These cost allocations approximate CTSP Fee Program rates and are used in an overall financial feasibility analysis of the total cost burden on CTSP residential and commercial development. The proposed CTSP Fee Program cost allocations are summarized in Table 5 and detailed in the next chapter.

The CTSP Fee Program would provide a flexible framework for infrastructure financing that must be updated periodically to ensure anticipated cost increases for items in the Project are properly reflected. The update process would include an annual indexing to reflect cost inflation, as well as periodic review of the entire program at least every 8 years. The update process also would need to reflect changes in the land use program as development proceeds in the Project.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 5. Preliminary CTSP Fee Program Cost Allocation Summary (2025$) Item LDR MDR MHDR HDR Commercial Hotel Office
Transportation $60,872,287 $15,298 $15,298 $8,300 $8,300 $27,666 $27,666 $23,435 Sewer - - - - - - - -
Storm Drainage $12,501,463 $5,140 $3,181 $1,906 $1,509 $3,938 $3,938 $3,938 Water $2,803,989 $1,442 $881 $496 $396 $535 $535 $535
Non-Potable Water $2,455,459 $1,262 $772 $434 $347 $469 $469 $469 Parks $1,391,492 $633 $544 $495 $495 $47 $47 $47
Subtotal Improvements $80,024,690 $23,775 $20,676 $11,631 $11,047 $32,655 $32,655 $28,424 Administration (2%) $1,600,494 $476 $414 $233 $221 $653 $653 $568 Total Improvements $81,625,184 $24,251 $21,090 $11,864 $11,268 $33,308 $33,308 $28,992 Source: NorthStar Engineering; EPS.
[1] See Table 4 for proposed CTSP fee program costs.
[2] See Appendix C for proposed CTSP fee program cost allocations by improvement type. per unit per 1,000 bldg. sq. ft.

Fee-Funded
Cost [1]
Cost Allocation [2]
Single-Family Multifamily Nonresidential
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Estimated Fee Revenue at Buildout
Table 6 summarizes the estimated development fee revenue generated in each Project area at Project buildout. The fee revenue includes revenue generated from CTSP payment of both the existing City, County, and regional development fees at existing rates and the proposed CTSP Fees. The CTSP is estimated to generate approximately $253.8 million in development fee revenue across all areas, with $172.1 from payment of existing fees and $81.6 from payment of the proposed CTSP Fees. Further details are provided in Appendix C.Credit and Reimbursement Agreements
The CTSP Fee Program (as well as the City’s other existing fee programs) provides for private construction of infrastructure items and a source of reimbursements for any related oversizing that may be completed by a particular developer (i.e., construction of improvements above and beyond the developer’s allocated proportional share). Refer to specific policies in Chapter 3 for City preferences regarding reimbursements.

Mello-Roos CFD
The City may be amenable to forming a Mello-Roos CFD, which would provide for the issuance of debt supported by special taxes charged in the Project.

Together with the CTSP Fee Program, an infrastructure CFD would offer flexibility to developers, individually or as a whole, to obtain public financing for infrastructure. Developers could receive CTSP Fee Program credits or reimbursements for any improvements funded by the CFD.

CFD debt is supported by annual special taxes charged to development in the CFD. In the early years of Project development, debt capacity will be limited, but as development progresses, more debt capacity will be created. It will be imperative to prioritize infrastructure funded through bond financing so that critical improvements needed at the beginning of development can be funded through CFD bond proceeds. In addition to funding critical infrastructure, the CFD also may be used to repay costs invested by developers or the City to initiate development.

Table 7 estimates the total maximum annual special tax (MAST) revenue that could be generated by Project development through a CFD, and Table 8 estimates the corresponding bonding capacity for the Project. These estimates are based on preliminary maximum special tax rates ranging from $900 for high density multifamily units to $2,600 for low density single-family units, as well as a maximum special tax rate of $5,000 per acre for commercial, hotel, and office development. The preliminary tax rates are estimated so that the total annual property tax burden for Project development does not exceed 1.8 percent of the residential unit or commercial building finished value, as discussed further in Chapter 7. Assuming the estimated preliminary tax rates EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 6. Summary of Fee Revenue from Existing and Proposed Development Fees (2025$) Item Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Total
Source Table C-4 Table C-5 Table C-6 Table C-7
Existing Fees
City Building Permit Processing Fees $3,477,501 $2,545,364 $2,463,888 $4,840,490 $13,327,243 City Development Impact Fees
Police $929,204 $666,994 $666,086 $654,807 $2,917,091
Fire $816,678 $585,398 $584,926 $568,952 $2,555,954
General Government Facilities $1,481,094 $1,061,654 $1,060,798 $1,033,142 $4,636,688 Parks and Recreation $11,973,330 $8,582,530 $8,575,610 $5,900,396 $35,031,866 Wastewater $9,176,188 $6,750,858 $6,676,926 $5,808,356 $28,412,328 Water $7,444,875 $5,369,707 $5,123,595 $5,475,058 $23,413,235 Transportation $3,965,728 $2,788,308 $2,807,532 $11,782,640 $21,344,208 Total City Development Impact Fees $35,787,097 $25,805,449 $25,495,473 $31,223,351 $118,311,370 County/Special District Fees
Ceres Unified School District Facilities Fee $7,156,314 $5,129,674 $5,125,538 $3,812,510 $21,224,036 County Impact Fee $5,074,235 $3,768,540 $3,528,160 $6,894,719 $19,265,654 Total Other/Special District Fees $12,230,549 $8,898,214 $8,653,698 $10,707,229 $40,489,690 Subtotal Existing Fees $51,495,147 $37,249,027 $36,613,059 $46,771,070 $172,128,303 Proposed CTSP Fee Program [1] $15,495,593 $11,121,371 $10,816,968 $44,191,999 $81,625,931 Total Fees $66,990,740 $48,370,398 $47,430,027 $90,963,069 $253,754,234 Source: Wood Rodgers; NorthStar Engineering; City of Ceres; County of Stanislaus; Ceres Unified School District; EPS. [1] Includes the proposed 2% administration component.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 7. Maximum Annual Special Tax Revenue for Infrastructure CFD (2025$) Item
Dwelling
Units/Acres
MAST
Revenue
Dwelling
Units/Acres
MAST
Revenue
Dwelling
Units/Acres
MAST
Revenue
Dwelling
Units/Acres
MAST
Revenue
Dwelling
Units/Acres
MAST
Revenue
Source Table 10 Table 1 Table 1 Table 1 Table 1
Residential
Single Family per unit Units Units Units Units Units
Low Density $2,600 421 $1,094,600 265 $689,000 302 $785,200 - - 988 $2,568,800 Medium Density $2,400 155 $372,000 104 $249,600 79 $189,600 - - 338 $811,200 Total Single Family 576 $1,466,600 369 $938,600 381 $974,800 - - 1,326 $3,380,000 Multifamily
Medium-High Density $2,100 - - - - 154 $323,400 182 $382,200 336 $705,600 High Density $900 179 $161,100 222 $199,800 - - 329 $296,100 730 $657,000 Total Multifamily 179 $161,100 222 $199,800 154 $323,400 511 $678,300 1,066 $1,362,600 Total Residential 755 $1,627,700 591 $1,138,400 535 $1,298,200 511 $678,300 2,392 $4,742,600 Nonresidential per acre [1] Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Commercial $5,000 - - - - - - 80.6 $402,750 80.6 $402,750 Hotel $5,000 - - - - - - 13.4 $67,125 13.4 $67,125
Office $5,000 - - - - - - 13.4 $67,125 13.4 $67,125
Total Nonresidential - - - - - - 107.4 $537,000 107.4 $537,000 Total $1,627,700 $1,138,400 $1,298,200 $1,215,300 $5,279,600 Source: Wood Rodgers; NorthStar Engineering; EPS.
[1] MAST rates for commercial uses estimated by EPS based on rates for other comparable areas.

Buildout
MAST
Rate
Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 8. Estimated Bond Sizing (2025$)
Item Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Buildout
Assumptions
Interest Rate 6.00%
Term 30 years
Annual Escalation 2%
Maximum Special Taxes Available for Debt Service
Estimated Annual Maximum Special Taxes [2] $1,627,700 $1,138,400 $1,298,200 $1,215,300 $5,279,600 Less Estimated Administration Costs 4.00% ($65,108) ($45,536) ($51,928) ($48,612) ($211,184) Less Delinquency Coverage 10.00% ($162,770) ($113,840) ($129,820) ($121,530) ($527,960) Adjustment for Rounding $178 $976 $3,548 $4,842 $9,544
Estimated Gross Debt Service (Rounded) $1,400,000 $980,000 $1,120,000 $1,050,000 $4,550,000 Total Bond Size
Total Bond Size without Tax Escalation (Rounded) $23,300,000 $16,300,000 $18,700,000 $17,500,000 $75,800,000 Increase for Annual Escalation [3] 20.00% $4,660,000 $3,260,000 $3,740,000 $3,500,000 $15,160,000 Total Bond Size (Rounded) $27,960,000 $19,560,000 $22,440,000 $21,000,000 $90,960,000 Estimated Bond Proceeds
Total Bond Size (Rounded) $27,960,000 $19,560,000 $22,440,000 $21,000,000 $90,960,000 Less Capitalized Interest 12 months ($1,677,600) ($1,173,600) ($1,346,400) ($1,260,000) ($5,457,600) Less Bond Reserve Fund 1 yr. debt service ($1,400,000) ($980,000) ($1,120,000) ($1,050,000) ($4,550,000) Less Issuance Cost 5.00% ($1,398,000) ($978,000) ($1,122,000) ($1,050,000) ($4,548,000) Estimated Bond Proceeds (Rounded) $23,484,000 $16,428,000 $18,852,000 $17,640,000 $76,404,000 Source: EPS.
[1] Estimated bond sizing based on conservative assumptions. The interest rate will be determined at the time of bond sale; the bond term could be 25 to 30 years or more. This analysis assumes 30 years. [2] See Table 10.
[3] Assumes special taxes are escalated 2.0% annually for 30 years, which increases total Bond Size by approximately 20 percent.

Estimated Bond Sizing [1]
Assumption
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
by residential and nonresidential development type, the Project may be able to support bond construction proceeds of $76.4 million at buildout.

Although this Financing Plan includes a nonresidential special tax rate of $5,000 per acre, an option at implementation would be to exempt nonresidential development from being taxed. This option would reduce the bonding capacity to approximately $68.5 million at buildout but would assist in improving the feasibility of the nonresidential development because it would eliminate the ongoing special tax carry for infrastructure.

It is important to note that any initial bond issues will be constrained by various factors, including the appraised value of land in the CFD at the time bonds are sold.

Several bond sales would occur as development of the Project progresses and security can be demonstrated for the bonds. The bonding capacity estimates are preliminary, based on current financing assumptions, and are subject to revision once a land-secured financing mechanism is implemented. Reimbursements for oversizing will be handled through the appropriate fee program, reimbursement agreement, or developer cost-sharing agreement.

Map Conditions (Private Financing)
Key improvements required to realize the Project will be included as “project requirements” (e.g., subdivision map conditions) and paid for privately by developers. These individual project requirements may include the “foot frontage” share of streetscape improvements located in the privately held portions of roadway plan lines and other “in tract” improvements such as interior roads deemed to solely benefit a particular Project subdivision. Many of these improvements are not included in this Financing Plan, as they are not shared improvements that benefit all development in the Project. In addition to map conditions of approval, it is possible that certain improvements will become Project responsibilities through terms of DAs.

State School Funding
In addition to the CUSD development impact fee revenue generated by the Project and shown in Table 4, additional funding for school facilities will be provided through State grants (i.e., State Schools Facilities Program), both for land and for school construction.

Proposed Operating and Maintenance Funding
This Financing Plan addresses funding for construction of backbone infrastructure and public facilities with the purpose of ensuring sufficient funding is available to cover the cost of facilities required to serve the Project. Similarly, the constructed facilities also will require a source of ongoing operations and maintenance funding.

A separate Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared for the Project provides a detailed discussion of the costs and potential funding sources for operations and maintenance of the Project facilities, as well as public services (e.g., parks EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
programming). The purpose of the Fiscal Impact Analysis is to ensure the Project has a fiscally neutral impact on the City’s General Fund. It is assumed in the Fiscal Impact Analysis that any annual net fiscal deficits will be fully mitigated through a funding mechanism such as a CFD for municipal services. It is further assumed that the Project will be required to annex into the existing Citywide services CFD3, which will result in any deficits being mitigated. CFD- 3 was established for all new non-infill residential development to fund ongoing operations and maintenance services for police, fire, and parks. The special tax rate for CFD-3 is approximately $1,200 per unit.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

6. Proposed CTSP Fee Program and Cost
Allocation
This Financing Plan proposes use of a plan area development impact fee program, the CTSP Fee Program, that will fund backbone infrastructure and public facilities needed to serve the Project. The CTSP Fee Program is proposed to fund construction of backbone infrastructure and public facilities necessary to accommodate new residents and employees generated by CTSP development after taking into consideration a variety of other funding sources for the improvements.

The costs to be funded through the CTSP Fee Program were summarized in Table 4.

The proposed Campus Fee Program, if formed, would include fees that would need to be established in accordance with the procedural requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, as codified in California Government Section 66000 et seq. This Financing Plan does not calculate or provide legal justification for development impact fees in accordance with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act but rather provides cost allocations that are used to estimate the CTSP Fee Program cost burden for each land use and improvement type. These cost allocations approximate CTSP Fees and are used in an overall financial feasibility analysis of the total cost burden on residential and commercial development, after accounting for existing development fees and the new proposed CTSP Fee Program cost allocations.

It is proposed that the CTSP Fee Program include fees for the following categories of backbone infrastructure and public facilities.
• Transportation
• Storm Drainage
• Water
• Non-Potable Water
• Parks and Open Space
Table 5 in the previous chapter summarizes the estimated cost allocations for each of these improvement types. It includes the total fee-funded cost by improvement type and the cost allocation per dwelling unit and per 1,000 nonresidential building square feet. A fee program administration component is estimated for each land use as two percent of the sum of the cost allocations across all improvement types.

Appendix D provides the detailed cost allocations for each improvement type. The cost allocation methodology is summarized in the following section.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Cost Allocation Methodology
To ensure developed land uses fund their pro-rata share of backbone infrastructure, the cost of each of the above improvement types is allocated across all land uses, based on the relative need for the improvements generated by each land use as measured by appropriate measures of benefit for each improvement type (e.g., impervious surface for Storm Drainage).

The purpose of allocating certain improvement costs among the various land uses is to provide an equitable method of funding required infrastructure. The key to apportioning the cost of improvements to different land uses is the assumption that the demands placed on backbone infrastructure improvements are related to land use types and that such demands can be stated in relative terms for all land uses.

For each improvement type, the costs are allocated to the different land uses using appropriate cost allocation factors as measures of demand, as detailed in the cost allocation tables in Appendix D. The factors for all improvement types proposed for the CTSP Fee Program are summarized below and are based on the factors used in the 2025 City Public Facilities Impact Fee Nexus Study and other City documents.

Improvement Cost Allocation Basis
Transportation PM Peak Hour Trips
Sewer Sewage Gallons per Day
Storm Drainage Impervious Acres
Water Annual Acre Feet of Water
Non-Potable Water Annual Acre Feet of Water
Parks Persons Served
EXHIBIT B ITEM 13

7. Financial Feasibility
This chapter quantifies and evaluates the total estimated infrastructure cost burden and total effective annual tax rate anticipated for new CTSP development and makes observations regarding the financial feasibility of the Financing Plan.

The financial feasibility is addressed by reviewing a total infrastructure burden analysis, as well as bond issuance guidelines, to ensure the Financing Plan will meet the required financial tests.

Description of Static Feasibility Analyses
This analysis includes the following static methods for evaluating the financial feasibility of the CTSP.
• Total Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities Cost Burden. • Total Taxes and Assessments as a Percentage of Sales Price.

Each of these methods is based on a static financial feasibility evaluation. To be considered financially feasible, the Project should meet each of the static feasibility tests.

It is important to note that these feasibility metrics, described in detail below, should be considered initial diagnostics, offering a general indicator of whether or not a project is likely to meet financial feasibility criteria or whether measures should be taken to improve viability, either through a reduction in cost burdens, identification of other funding sources, or other approaches. None of the indicators, by themselves, should be considered absolute determinations regarding Project feasibility.

Total Backbone Infrastructure and Public Facilities
Cost Burden
It is common for developers of major development projects to advance-fund and carry infrastructure costs for some timeframe. The impact of the land developer’s cost burden depends on several factors, including the timeframe for the reimbursements and the extent to which full reimbursement is received, either through public funding programs or through adjustments in land sales prices.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
The purpose of the total backbone infrastructure and public facilities cost burden feasibility test is to assess the financial feasibility of the CTSP, given all current and proposed fees and the additional burden of CTSP-specific infrastructure costs. This feasibility test assesses the total fee burden on residential dwelling units associated with the proposed backbone infrastructure and public facilities.

The total backbone infrastructure and public facilities cost burden feasibility test provides a performance indicator of a residential project’s feasibility Note that this test is typically not used to assess the feasibility of nonresidential development. However, this chapter includes a nonresidential analysis to provide a general idea about the overall cost burden on nonresidential development relative to its sales value.

For each land use, the total cost burden per dwelling unit or per 1,000 nonresidential building square feet is expressed as a percentage of the finished sales price. Project feasibility for residential development is evaluated based on the following general guidelines or benchmarks:
• Burdens below 15 percent generally are considered financially feasible. • Burdens between 15 and 20 percent may be feasible depending on the specific circumstances of the project.
• Burdens above 20 percent suggest a project may not be financially feasible unless other components of the project pro forma are particularly advantageous to the developer, thus allowing the project to bear unusually high backbone infrastructure and public facilities costs.3
The static feasibility benchmarks are based on EPS’s experience conducting financial feasibility analyses for numerous projects throughout the Sacramento Region and Central Valley over the last 3 decades. This feasibility diagnostic is merely a tool that can be used—along with other tools—as a general measure of financial feasibility. This measure should not automatically be interpreted to mean that if one land use type exceeds the threshold, the project definitely is infeasible.

In certain circumstances, there are ways in which a development project can mitigate against a high cost burden. In addition, the backbone infrastructure and public facilities costs will be fine-tuned and possibly reduced as engineering studies are completed closer to actual construction.
3 Such other components may include extraordinarily low land basis (e.g., land has been in the family for a long time, land acquired during severe real estate market downturn, etc.), development phasing (e.g., fast early absorption ahead of a major infrastructure cost such as a new water treatment plant), or low or no environmental mitigation requirements (e.g., through avoidance or on-site preservation).

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
As summarized in Table 9 (and further detailed in Appendix C), the total backbone infrastructure and public facilities cost burden accounts for approximately

12.1 percent to 19.4 percent of the estimated sales price of residential units in the CTSP, with the burdens for single-family units at the higher end of this range, indicating that the Project may be financially feasible if home sales values do not taper or if infrastructure costs don’t continue to escalate rapidly. Other factors such as the magnitude of advance funding requirements within each development phase, anticipated reimbursement timeframes, and development absorption would also factor into the feasibility of individual development phases.

The infrastructure cost burden could change for several reasons, including a reallocation of costs among land uses and cost reductions resulting from fine-tuning the estimates as engineering studies are completed and the CTSP development becomes closer to implementation. The cost burden estimates will continue to be examined and may be refined as the CTSP development is implemented.

Nonresidential Development and Cost Burden Shift
Although the infrastructure cost burden test is generally not used to assess nonresidential development feasibility (as noted above), Table 9 includes the nonresidential development cost burdens as well as the residential cost burdens.

The cost burdens for all nonresidential development categories as a percentage of estimated sales price are over 20 percent, with the percentage for commercial development estimated at nearly 35%, assuming current (2025) market values.

This particularly high commercial percentage suggests commercial development in the CTSP may be infeasible. To incentivize commercial development and improve its feasibility, the Project proponent anticipates engaging in an agreement with remaining Project landowners to shift the infrastructure cost burden from the proposed CTSP Fee Program from commercial development to other nonresidential and residential development categories. This shift will be achieved by adjusting CTSP Fee Program fees through a development agreement concurrent with adoption of a CTSP Fee Program. Commercial fees are anticipated to be adjusted downward, while residential fees would be increased, and the hotel and office fees would have minor adjustments in either direction. The proposed infrastructure cost burden and potential CTSP fee shift is detailed in Appendix E.

However, the actual fee shift may vary based on market conditions at the time this shift is negotiated and implemented.

EXHIBIT B ITEM 13
Table 9. Summary of Infrastructure Cost Burden Analysis (2025$) Item LDR MDR MHDR HDR Commercial Hotel Office
Finished Unit Sales Price $550,000 $520,000 $490,000 $310,000 - - - Nonresidential Value per 1,000 Building Sq. Ft. - - - - $160,000 $250,000 $220,000 Existing Fees [1]
City Building Permit Processing Fees $5,274 $4,663 $3,265 $2,986 $2,594 $3,389 $3,369 City Public Facilities Fees $58,662 $50,132 $33,076 $28,542 $14,576 $14,576 $16,805 Ceres Unified School District Facilities Fee $11,374 $9,306 $6,204 $5,170 $840 $840 $840 County Impact Fee $7,310 $7,310 $4,825 $4,825 $4,050 $886 $5,109 Total Existing Fees $82,620 $71,411 $47,371 $41,523 $22,061 $19,692 $26,123 Preliminary CTSP Fee Program $24,251 $21,090 $11,864 $11,268 $33,308 $33,308 $28,992 Total Infrastructure Burden $106,871 $92,501 $59,235 $52,791 $55,369 $53,000 $55,115 Total Infrastructure Burden as Percentage of
Estimated Sales Price or Value 19.4% 17.8% 12.1% 17.0% 34.6% 21.2% 25.1% Source: City of Ceres; County of Stanislaus; Ceres Unified School District; The Gregory Group; CoStar; EPS. [1] Fees current as of July 1, 2025.

← All documents from this meeting