MEETING DATE: March 20, 2025
PROJECT NAME: Union Ranch North Annexation Project
PROJECT LOCATION: Multiple Parcels
Development Area:
Addresses
APNs
13898 S UNION RD
13836 S UNION RD
13764 S UNION RD
NO SITUS ADDRESS
13508 S UNION RD
NO SITUS ADDRESS
197-020-21
197-020-22
197-020-23
197-020-41
197-020-46
197-020-47
Non-Development Area:
Annexation & Pre-zoning Only
13990 S UNION RD
13510 S UNION RD
13588 S UNION RD
13640 S UNION RD
13602 S UNION RD
197-020-20
197-020-29
197-020-30
197-020-35
197-020-36
APPLICATION NUMBERS: ANX 21-034, PRZ 21-035, SDJ 20-142, GPA 25-01, DAA 25-01 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and adopt the following:
A Resolution recommending that City Council make the necessary findings and certify the Union Ranch North Final EIR (SCH # 2023110668) and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Union Ranch North Annexation Project; and A Resolution recommending that City Council initiate annexation proceedings for 11 parcels including a segment of Union Road encompassing approximately 123.30 acres and adopt an Ordinance to pre-zone the 11 parcels for the Union Ranch North Annexation Project; and A Resolution recommending that City Council approve General Plan Amendment 25-01, Tentative Subdivision Map 20-142, and adopt an Ordinance for Development Agreement 25-01 for the Union Ranch North Annexation Project parcels APNs: 197-020-21, -22, -23, -41, -46, and -47.
Project InFORMATION
Applicant:
Pillsbury Road Partners, LLC
Property Owners:
Casey E. Kooyman and Phyllis L. Kooyman Trust
Anita Barboza Trust
Christopher M. and Nicole M. Faix
Betty J. Tripp Trust
General Plan
Designation:
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Park (P)
Zoning Designation:
No City Zoning Designations
County Zoning: AU-40 : General Agriculture
Proposed
Pre-Zoning:
R-1 One Family Dwelling
P Park
Existing Use:
Non-Development Area: Single-Family Residential and Agriculture Development Area: Agriculture and Single-family Residential Proposed Use:
Non-Development Area: No Change
Development Area: Single-Family Residential and Park/Trail use Parcel Size
Total Annexation Area: 123.30 Acres
Non-Development Areas 1 and 2: 20.41 Acres
Development Area: Union Ranch North: 102.89 Acres
Proposed Use
455-lot Single-Family Residential subdivision
Adjacent Uses:
North: Agriculture
South: Single-Family Residential (Union Ranch)
East: Agriculture
West: Single-Family Residential
CEQA Determination
Union Ranch North Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2023110668) Project DescriptioN & LOCATION
The Union Ranch North Annexation Project is a request for the Annexation of 123.30 acres of unincorporated land in San Joaquin County into the City of Manteca, the Pre-zoning of all 123.30 acres, a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and a Tentative Subdivision Map (SDJ) encompassing an approximate 102-acre portion of the annexation area, and a Development Agreement (DAA) for the SDJ. The proposed SDJ includes 455 single-family residential (SFR) lots, public improvements, and expansion of the Tidewater Bike Path. The Tentative Map area is referred to throughout the staff report as the “Development Area”. The remaining 20.41 acres is referred to as the “Non-Development Area”. Figure 1 is a map that identifies the annexation boundary in red, which included two Non-Development areas are in orange. The existing City is identified in yellow.
Figure 1: Annexation AreaFigure 1: Annexation Area
Figure 1: Annexation Area
Figure 1: Annexation Area
The annexation includes only the properties listed below:
The entire 123.30-acre annexation area is located in the northern portion of the City’s Sphere of Influence, immediately north of the city limit line. Generally, the site is bounded by agricultural land to the east, agricultural uses to the north, single-family residential uses to the south (Union Ranch subdivision), and Union Road, rural residential (County parcels), and single-family residential uses (Del Webb subdivision) to the west. There is no development proposed on the annexation non-development area parcels. These parcels will be allowed to remain as-is, all existing uses may continue. These parcels will be pre-zoned as it is a requirement to give parcels that are being annexed into the City a City zoning designation. These parcels are being included in the overall annexation due to the Local Agency Formation Commission’s (LAFCo) requirements related to orderly development with regard to annexation. Without the inclusion of these parcels, a county island would be created which conflicts with LAFCo’s annexation rules and prohibits consistent street improvements and connectivity along North Union Road. As such, it is both practical and mandatory for the annexation to proceed with the 11 parcels along with the street segment of North Union Road that fronts the Annexation.
The remainder of this staff report will primarily focus on the six (6) project-specific or “development area” parcels. These parcels are part of the proposed Union Rach North Tentative Subdivision Map being considered by the Planning Commission and Council.
Figure 2: Union Ranch Tentative MapFigure 2: Union Ranch Tentative MapUnion Ranch North consists of parcels 197-020-21, -22, -23, -41, -46, and -47. The total acreage of this Tentative Subdivision Map is 102 acres and includes 455 single-family lots. This map also includes approximately 4.75 acres dedicated to the Tidewater Bike Path which will meander throughout the subdivision over a 0.65 linear mile path. The bike path will be constructed by the developer. The subdivision will not include an upland park basin, traditional of other subdivisions but does have a pocket park of 0.55 acres along the Tidewater Bike Path. As part of the Development Agreement (DAA 25-01), the developer will be allowed to construct a 4.57-acre temporary basin in order to guarantee runoff and water retention as a result of the project. The temporary basin will be in place until such time as a permanent basin is constructed for SDJ 20-142 and other tributary sites that will be part of a large regional park just outside of the project area. If a permanent basin location does not materialize before Phase IV of the SDJ 20-142, the Project will develop the temporary basin into a permanent upland park basin. Development of the Project is being proposed in eight (8) phases, however all public improvements (e.g. streets, utility) will be in place and available to serve phase one (1) pf the Project. The subdivision will include three ranges of lots sizes as show in the table below. Union Ranch North Tentative Map is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Union Ranch Tentative Map
Figure 2: Union Ranch Tentative Map
Lot Types
Dimensions
Square Feet
No. of Lots
Small Lots
50’ x 80’
4,000 sq. ft.
32 Medium Lots
50’ x 105’
5,250 sq. ft.
305
Large Lots
70’ x 110’
7,700 sq. ft.
118
PRoject SitE Existing COnditioNS
The development area (URN) primarily contains farmland, with a few existing homes and outbuildings. The outbuildings include barns, sheds, livestock/farm animal pens, beehives, equipment yards, dirt/gravel roadways, irrigation ditches, and overhead power lines. The majority of the Development Area is in active agricultural use (orchards), with all existing homes and outbuildings clustered on each parcel. The non-development areas contain farmland and existing ranchettes. Each sub-area is described in detail below:
Figure 3: Existing ConditionsFigure 3: Existing ConditionsAnnexation sub-area 1 includes mostly active agricultural use (orchards), with a cluster of existing structures along Union Road. The cluster of structures in this sub-area includes existing homes, barns, sheds, livestock/farm animal pens, equipment yards, dirt/gravel roadways, irrigation ditches, and overhead power lines. Union Road is located along the western side of this sub-area and is fully improved on the southbound portion of the roadway. The east side of Union Road functions as an unimproved County roadway with one northbound lane and no pedestrian sidewalk, curb/gutter, or landscaping.
Figure 3: Existing Conditions
Figure 3: Existing Conditions
Annexation sub-area 2 is characterized as existing ranchettes, with homes, barns, sheds, livestock/farm animal pens, equipment yards, dirt/gravel roadways, irrigation ditches, and overhead power lines. The agricultural land within this sub-area is pasture and/or cropland. Union Road is located along the western side of this sub-area and is an unimproved 2-lane County roadway without any landscaping or pedestrian facilities in either the northbound or southbound direction.
ANNEXATION
The San Joaquin County LAFCo controls the process of annexation. LAFCo is a regulatory agency with countywide jurisdiction, established by state law (the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act) to coordinate logical and timely changes in local city boundaries and to ensure that services are provided efficiently while agricultural lands are protected. When an applicant requests annexation of the City, it is the applicant asking the City to apply for annexation approval from LAFCo. Before the City is willing to consider applying for annexation on the applicant’s behalf, the City must ensure that the annexation can be supported by the General Plan. General Plan Land Use Policy LU-2.6 states that the City will only consider applications for annexation that meet specific criteria below:
The project shall mitigate its impacts through consistency with the General Plan goals and policies and shall provide a positive benefit to Manteca; Analysis: The Project addresses numerous General Plan goals and policies related to sustainable growth, infrastructure improvements, and community design. The project proposes 455 single-family homes, public improvements, and the expansion of the Tidewater Bike Path, which supports the City's focus on enhancing connectivity and alternative modes of transportation. The Project’s impacts on traffic, utilities, and the environment, will be mitigated either with conditions of approval and/or an MMRP which directly or indirectly implements the General Plan's goals and policies. Overall, the project will contribute positively to Manteca's housing supply, public amenities, and property tax base economic growth.
The project area is contiguous with city boundaries and provides for logical expansion and development; Analysis: The proposed annexation area is immediately north of existing City limit lines. This annexation will help capture right-of-way on North Union Road and land that should be within the City limits. Based on the annexation map above, this annexation creates a clean northern boundary for the City. Under the 2043 General Plan, the annexation area is located within the 10-year Planning Horizon of Manteca’s Sphere of Influence, which is a LAFCo-approved boundary. Projects within the 10-year planning horizon are expected to develop between the years of 2020 to 2030, per the Municipal Service Review (MSR) report approved by LAFCo in May 2022. If this project is annexed by the end of the year, this falls within this timeline.
The project area creates clear and reasonable boundaries for the City and service providers; Analysis: The proposed northern boundary of the annexation will bring the City limit line north along North Union Road to be generally in line with the northern limit of the Del Webb community. Overall, the annexation will not create any County islands.
The project area will be adequately served by municipal services; Analysis: The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the proposed project indicates that there are adequate municipal services for the proposed annexation area.
The project area will be adequately served by schools;
Analysis: The project area is located within the Manteca Unified School District. The project area will be served by K-12 school facilities located within a 1.25-mile radius.
The project when reviewed cumulatively with other annexations and projects, provides a long-term discal balance for the City and its residents; Analysis: The City has completed a 60/40 tax-sharing split with San Joaquin County. With this new tax split in place, the fiscal benefits of an annexation of this size will reflect a long-term fiscal balance for the City. Additionally, the Tentative Subdivision Map has been conditioned to participate in the City’s city-wide Community Facilities District which will assess a yearly tax on all of the new homes which will help pay for public safety and street maintenance these units will require. The project has also entered into a Development Agreement with the City to help offset costs associated with providing services to the Project area and financial benefit to the City through the collection of additional Community Benefit Contributions. Further, the project will be conditioned to join the City’s Citywide Public Safety and Street Maintenance CFD (2022-1).
The project is consistent with State law and San Joaquin LAFCo standards; Analysis: The proposed annexation is consistent with all State and LAFCo laws in that the annexation is following correct city procedures, it is consistent with the City’s General Plan, and the appropriate actions for annexation will be completed by the Council prior to an annexation application is made to LAFCo by the City.
The project is consistent with the General Plan;
Analysis: Based on the analysis of the above seven (7) items, this annexation is consistent with Land Use Policy LU-2.6. In addition to this policy, this annexation is consistent with the overall intent of growth expressed in the General Plan. The General Plan regulates development to preserve Manteca’s roots as an agricultural center and to ensure balanced growth. The General Plan acknowledges that agriculture plays an important role in Manteca’s economy but also understands that metered development will ensure economic growth and will allow the city to continue to provide a quality of life for its current and future residents. Land Use Implementation Program LU-3b requires that residential developments meet the minimum density required for land use designations to ensure that Manteca has ample housing units to meet all its housing needs. This annexation will allow for the construction of 455 new single-family homes in a variety of lot sizes and home sizes in an area that lacks housing, creating more housing opportunities for current and future residents of Manteca. Without this annexation, these homes would not be constructed in the City. Further, as noted in the FEIR, the City can provide the necessary services to accommodate these new housing units, making this annexation a logical expansion for the City.
The project contributes its fair share to applicable infrastructure and public service’s needs, including facilities identified in the Regional Transportation Plan, Public Facilities Implementation Plan, and Capital Improvement Program; The Project will be required to pay development impact fees during the building permit process, enter into two Community Facility Districts, and pay additional funds per unit as memorialized in the Development Agreement. By paying said fees, the Project ensures it supports the City’s necessary improvements to transportation, public facilities, and other infrastructure. These contributions align with the requirements outlined in the Development Impact Fee Program, Public Facilities Improvement Plan, and Capital Improvement Program, helping to fund vital services and infrastructure upgrades. Additionally, there is a long-term fiscal benefit of the annexation with a 60/40 tax sharing split with the County for the Development Area and a 90/10 tax sharing split with the County for the Non-development area as detailed in the Second Addendum to the Master Agreement entered into by the City of Manteca and San Joaquin County on February 27, 2024. These instruments ensure that the project mitigates its impact on the community and contributes to the long-term sustainability and growth of the area.
The effect of the project on maintaining the physical and economic integrity of agricultural lands and achievement of Resource Conservation and Community Design Elements goals.
Analysis: The Project’s physical removal of existing agricultural land may result in potential conflicts with adjacent agricultural lands or indirectly cause conversion of agricultural lands. Consequently, the Project will be conditioned to provide sound walls and perimeter fencing to buffer new urban uses from agricultural uses. The City will also regularly monitor surrounding development to ensure future urban uses are compatible with the proposed Project and adjoining agricultural uses by requiring natural buffers e.g. landscaping strips, parks, streets, draining basins, etc. Said natural buffers will be required to integrate design elements consistent with the General Plan’s Resource Conservation and Community Design goals and policies. Additionally, the Project proponent must record a “Right to Farm” covenant on the project area to ensure the commercial and economic integrity of agricultural lands are protected from nuisance complaints, lawsuits, or restrictive regulations.
The extent to which the project will assist the City in achieving the adopted fair share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment as determined by the San Joaquin Council of Governments; Analysis: Though the project is not identified within the Vacant Sites Inventory of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, this Project will contribute to the overall unit count for the City.
The extent to which the project will promote environmental justice. As used in this policy, “environmental justice” means the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the location of public facilities and the provision of public services; Analysis: The development of the Project will provide access to public facilities and public services upon annexation to those county residents who are part of the annexation but not part of the subdivision. Additionally, nearby current county residents will benefit proportionately from improved streets, sidewalks, parks, and trails as a result of the Project.
The extent to which the project facilitates achievement of the City’s jobs/housing balance goal of a 1:1 ratio; Analysis: Though the Project does not directly generate jobs, it does assist with business attraction and retention as a result of population growth due to housing. Additionally, with additional housing units, it is expected that the demand for retail goods and services will increase, resulting in a need for more jobs within the City.
Based on the analysis of the above findings, the Planning Commission should recommend approval of the Annexation to the City Council.
PRE-ZONING
Figure 4: Pre-Zoning DesignationsFigure 4: Pre-Zoning DesignationsUnincorporated land outside the City’s limits does not have a City Zoning District designation. Rather, the unincorporated land has a San Joaquin County zoning designation. Per section 17.10.180 of the Manteca Municipal Code, unincorporated property adjoining the city, within the Sphere of Influence, when the Annexation is brought before the City Council consistent with California Government Code Section 65859, is required to be pre-zoned. The procedure, review, and action for pre-zoning are the same as that established for a Zoning Amendment pursuant to Section 17.10.190 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed pre-zoning designations for the parcels in the annexation area are shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Pre-Zoning Designations
Figure 4: Pre-Zoning Designations
Table 1 below identifies the parcels and their proposed pre-zoning designations:
Area
APNs
Pre-zoning
Development Area:
197-020-21
197-020-22
197-020-23
197-020-41
197-020-46
197-020-47
One-Family Dwelling (R-1)
&
Park (P) (Trail area)
Non-Development Area:
197-020-20
197-020-29
197-020-30
197-020-35
197-020-36
One-Family Dwelling (R-1)
Table 1: Proposed Pre-zoning Map
In order to recommend approval of the Pre-zoning to the City Council, the Planning Commission must make the following findings.
The proposed Zoning Amendment (text or map) is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.
Analysis: The Pre-Zoning designations of the ten Non-Development parcels and the seven Development parcels match the land use designations for the 2043 General Plan Update. These districts are consistent with the intent of the General Plan land use designations for Low-Density and Park. The non-development parcels will be pre-zoned to conform to the land use designation, however non-conforming uses at the time of annexation will be considered legal non-conforming uses. However, it is anticipated that these sites could be redeveloped with uses that are consistent with the existing land use designations. Future redevelopment is facilitated by giving these sites corresponding zoning designation to the General Plan land use designation.
The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
Analysis: The proposed pre-zoning designations will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, in that any future development of these sites will be required to conform to the zoning district development standards and all performance standards established by the City’s Municipal Code, as well as the goals and policies of the General Plan.
The amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Equality Act (CEQA).
Analysis: The proposed Pre-zoning has been analyzed in the Union Ranch North Annexation Project FEIR (SCH# 2023110668). The FEIR identified one or more significant and unavoidable environmental effects of the project. However, the City Council will be asked to make certain findings regarding these effects and adopt a mitigation and monitoring program and a statement of overriding consideration for any impact that may not be reduced to a less than significant level.
If a map amendment, the site is physically suitable (including the absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provisions of utilities) for the requested zoning designations and anticipated land uses/development.
Analysis: The Project parcels that are being pre-zoned to R-1 and P currently have rural residential/agriculture uses on them; however, approval of a tentative subdivision map will ensure compatibility for that zoning designation. As they exist today, the non-development parcels that are not part of the subdivision are still rural and will require future site planning to ensure that they can accommodate future development projects should those owners wish to pursue development.
If a text amendment, the amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of this Zoning Code.
Analysis: This project does not include a text amendment.
Based on the analysis of the above findings, the Planning Commission can recommend approval of the Pre-zoning designations of the Non-Development Parcels as well as the Development parcels to the City Council.
UNION RANCH NORTH SUBDIVISION ANALYSIS
The remaining analysis in this staff report mainly focuses on the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Development Area. The General Plan conformance discussion below will include some analysis for the Non-Development parcels as well. The Union Ranch North Tentative Subdivision map has been analyzed with respect to conformance with:
Manteca 2043 General Plan
Manteca Title 16: Subdivision Ordinance
Manteca Title 17: Zoning Ordinance
Manteca Climate Action Plan
The Environmental Analysis for the complete project entitlements will be discussed together in the Environmental Clearance section below.
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
Figure 5 depicts the proposed land use designations for the Project site and the surrounding areas under the Manteca General Plan 2043 Update.
Figure 5: Proposed Land Use Designation Figure 5: Proposed Land Use Designation The land use designations depicted in Figure 5 correspond to the pre-zoning designations that the City has assigned to all of the annexed parcels. The uses in Non-Development areas 1 and 2 meet the use and density requirements for the LDR land use designation. Given the location of these parcels, it is expected that there will be development on the non-development parcels in the future that will conform to the LDR land use designation.
Figure 5: Proposed Land Use Designation
Figure 5: Proposed Land Use Designation
For the Development Area, the majority of the land use designation is LDR. The LDR land use designation requires a density range of 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. The Union Ranch North Subdivision has a density of 4.4 units per acre, conforming to the density requirements of LDR land use designation.
The General Plan’s LDR land use designation allows substantial flexibility in selecting dwelling unit types and parcel configurations to suit particular site conditions and housing needs. The types of development anticipated in LDR include small and clustered residential lots, as well as conventional large-lot detached homes. The Union Ranch North subdivision proposes detached traditional single-family lots that vary in lot size between 4,000 and 7,700 square feet. These lot sizes make the subdivision consistent with the intent of the LDR land use designation.
The Development Area also has a P Park land use designation. The Park land use designation provides for neighborhood, community, and regional parks, golf courses, and other outdoor recreational facilities within urban development. The specific uses within the park can vary but can include items like ball fields, tot lots, play apparatus’, community centers, meeting facilities, trails, benches, interpretive markers, picnic areas, and other amenities typically found in a park. The proposed Park in the Union Ranch North Subdivision project will have a small 0.55-acre pocket park, 4.75 acres dedicated to the Tidewater Bike Path that will meander through the subdivision. The pocket park and bike trail amenity meets the intent of the Park land use designation as defined in the General Plan.
In addition to complying with the LDR and P land use designations regarding density and use, they will directly or indirectly provide compliance with the 2043 General Plan’s goals and policies. Below is an excerpt from the 2043 General Plan that is relevant to this Project:
Land Use Policy LU-1.3: Ensure consistency and compatibility between the Land Use Map and implementing plans, ordinances, and regulations.
Analysis: The Project includes a General Plan Amendment along with a Pre-zone intended to ensure compatibility and consistency for the proposed Project and future development that may be proposed within the annexation area.
Land Use Policy LU-3.12: Encourage and support development patterns at the highest limits permitted within each General Plan land use designation consistent with the policies of all other General Plan elements.
Analysis. The LDR density allows for a density between 2.1 and 8 units per acre. The subdivision is proposing 455 units over a 102-acre area which equates to 4.5 units per acre. Even though the development is not at the top end of the density scale, it does provide a density that is suitable in scale and compatible with surrounding residential uses as required by other applicable goals and policies.
Community Design Policy CD-1.2: Maintain and enhance the city’s compact and cohesive urban form.
Analysis: The conditions of this Project require that the proposed subdivision have elements that ensure a cohesive and enhanced visible edge, enhanced project entries, ample community open space, and well-planned circulation for both pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed subdivision has appropriate vehicular and pedestrian connections internally, and there are stubbed streets for future connections to those areas that are in the Non-Development areas within the subdivision. Required compliance with the City’s landscaping and lighting requirements will ensure a safe pedestrian experience in the neighborhood. The subdivision is also adding to the existing Tidewater Bike Trail, providing over 4 acres of new trail area.
Community Design Policy CD-4.3: Strengthen the identity of individual neighborhoods, districts, and centers, including underserved areas, through the use of entry monuments, flags, street signs, themed streets, natural features, native landscaping, and lighting.
Analysis: Future development on the subdivision will be required to provide a variety of architectural styles to create attractive streetscapes and develop an identity for this area of the city. Through cohesive, unique, and visually pleasing architecture, the project will be an inviting entrance into the northern area of the City. Detailed visual edges through varied roof design and rear elevation architecture will ensure that there is no “back” to this subdivision. The project entries will have entry signage features, enhanced landscaping, and defined entry features like trellis’ and pilasters to indicate when individuals have entered the community.
Circulation Policy C-4.5: Expand the existing network of off-street bicycle facilities as shown in the City’s Active Transportation Plan to accommodate cyclists who prefer to travel on dedicated trails. […] and 2) an off-street bicycle trail extension between the Tidewater Bike Trail near the intersection of Moffat Boulevard and Industrial Park Drive.
Analysis: The new subdivision will continue the connectivity of Finchwood Landing Ln and Sugar Creek Ln which will include the extension of the Tidewater Bike Path north of the Project area. Further, the project will also provide roadway improvements that will facilitate the expansion of a Class II bicycle lane along North Union Road, with a connection to Brunswick Road.
Based on the analysis of the above goals and policies, the Planning Commission can recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment to the City Council.
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE CONFORMANCE
Tentative Subdivision Map
The subdivision of land is governed by the Subdivision Map Act and Title 16 of the Manteca Municipal Code. The Planning Commission may recommend approval for a Tentative Subdivision Map if the Subdivision Map Act findings from Section 66474 of the Map Act can’t be made. In addition to the Title 16 findings, four more findings found in Chapter 16.09.040 of the Municipal Code must be made. The Subdivision Map Act findings and the additional findings in Chapter 16.09.040 of the Municipal Code are discussed below:
Subdivision Map Act (66474)
A legislative body of a city or county shall deny approval of a tentative map if it makes any of the following findings:
The proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.
Analysis: This project is consistent with the General Plan land use designations of LDR and Park as discussed above. The Conditions of approval will ensure that future homes will comply with the LDR land use regulations. This project is not a part of a Specific Plan.
That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
Analysis: The design of the subdivision complies with the intent of the General Plan to allow a variety of housing types in the LDR land use designation. The range in lot sizes is exactly what the General Plan encourages in the LDR land use category. This project is not part of a Specific Plan.
That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
Analysis: The site for the subdivision is physically suitable for this type of development. The area is relatively flat with no physical impediments or restrictive easements. Road infrastructure and services are adjacent to the project area making it feasible for the Project to connect to road infrastructure and services.
That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
Analysis: The required density of the LDR land use designation is 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivisions fall within this density range as discussed above. There is sufficient land to install the necessary infrastructure for utilities and circulation to accommodate the proposed project density. Therefore, the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development.
That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Analysis: As the lead agency for the Union Ranch North Annexation project, the City prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2023110668) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While some impacts were identified, through the implementation of specific mitigation measures, those impacts can be mitigated to less than significant. Those that can’t be mitigated will be reviewed by Council who will be asked to make the necessary findings to override these impacts. There will be no injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems.
Analysis: As approved and conditioned, the design of the subdivision will not cause serious health problems. The Tentative Subdivision Map is conditioned to comply with all standards, including performance standards, and regulations pertaining to health and safety found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
Analysis: This site has been found to have no conflicting easements on site.
Manteca Municipal Code Section 16.09.040
In addition to the requirements governing approval of the tentative subdivision map set forth in the Subdivision Map Act, the following considerations and findings shall be made:
Subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council shall review and consider any applicable environmental documents.
Analysis: As the lead agency for the Union Ranch North Annexation project, the City prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2023110668) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). While some impacts were identified, through the implementation of specific mitigation measures, those impacts can be mitigated to less than significant. Those that can’t be mitigated will be reviewed by Council who will be asked to make the necessary findings to override these impacts. There will be no injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat.
In reaching a decision upon the tentative subdivision map, the City Council shall consider the effect of that decision on the housing needs of the region and balance these needs against the public service needs of its residences and available fiscal and environmental resources.
Analysis: The new subdivision will provide the opportunity to create new housing in the City of Manteca. The future 455 single-family homes will provide a variety of lot sizes and housing types to ensure full access to housing for the public. While the site is technically outside of City limits until the annexation is approved, City services are near the project site and can be easily accessed by the new community. The project is estimated to generate a surplus for the General Fund at buildout and the project will be required to supplement any additional public safety costs through participation in the City’s CFD.
In reaching a decision upon the tentative subdivision map, the City Council shall consider the design of the subdivision as it provides for future passive and natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, as required by Government Code Section 66473.1.
Analysis: Future buildings will have windows on all facades on both stories, to optimize the potential for passive cooling. This project will also be required to comply with any applicable California Building Code requirements that may promote passive and natural heating or cooling.
The tentative subdivision map may be approved or conditionally approved by the City Council if it finds that the proposed land division, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan, any applicable specific plan, and all applicable provisions of this code.
Analysis: As discussed in this staff report, the project is consistent with the General Plan land use designations of LDR and P, and supports many General Plan goals and policies. The project will also be required to be consistent with the Zoning Code Requirements for small-lot development.
Based on the above findings, the Planning Commission can recommend approval of the Union Ranch North Tentative Subdivision Map to the City Council.
ZONING ORDINANCE CONFORMANCE
Development Agreement
In order to recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Council, the Planning Commission must make the following findings:
The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan.
Analysis: The proposed Union Ranch North subdivision is consistent with the land use goals and policies of the General Plan, and the terms of the Development Agreement do not alter these findings of consistency. Further, as discussed above, the Development Agreement itself helps achieve a plethora of General Plan Policies through the $24,550 per unit fee that is secured by the agreement. With this money, the City will be able to improve public infrastructure that will aid in maintaining and increasing the public health, safety, and welfare of the overall Manteca community. The Union Ranch North Annexation Project and Development Agreement are not subject to a Specific Plan.
The Development Agreement is compatible and in conformity with public convenience, general welfare, and good land uses and zoning practices.
Analysis: The development as a whole essentially mimics the R-1 development standards, and meets all necessary General Plan requirements for the LDR and P land use designations. The Development Agreement does not change any of these development standards. The purpose of the Development Agreement is to ensure a longer map life and to secure future sewer connections for the project. These two items do not create an impact on public convenience, and the Development Agreement fee promised per unit will provide over $11 million to go toward public infrastructure improvements that will benefit the general welfare of the City.
The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to health, safety, and general welfare of the City.
Analysis: The Development Agreement requires the applicant to pay $24,550 per home which will be allocated toward future sewer upgrades, public infrastructure improvements, a solid waste vehicle, a fire truck, affordable housing, electric vehicles, and other funds distributed per the discretion of City Council. This additional per-home fee will only improve the health, safety, and general welfare of the City.
The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.
Analysis: This Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values, in that this agreement only pertains to the Union Ranch North subdivision, and no terms of the agreement are meant to bind surrounding development in any way. By entering into a Development Agreement, the applicant will be able to extend the map life of the project ensuring that there is ample time for the project to develop and install all necessary green space, public right of way improvements, sewer improvements, and ultimately the build-out of an attractive neighborhood, which all will aid in the preservation of property values of surrounding neighborhoods. The Development Agreement may only govern the Union Ranch North subdivision, but the benefits of the Agreement have far-reaching effects on the community as a whole.
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONFORMANCE
On October 15, 2013, the Manteca City Council approved and adopted the Air Quality Element Update and Climate Action Plan (CAP) in response to the passing of Assembly Bill AB32. The intent of the CAP is to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in both private and public sector development.
The project complies with the following Climate Action Plan strategies:
CAP Strategy: Compact Development CD-1: The City shall encourage projects consistent with the development densities allowed by the General Plan and are contiguous to existing development meet compact development criteria.
Analysis: The subdivision is consistent with the development density allowed in the LDR land use designation. The site is contiguous to existing residential development to the south and west. The subdivision is thoughtfully laid out to provide appropriate connectivity to the existing area and to those Non-Development parcels that could develop in the future.
CAP Strategy: Pedestrian Oriented Development POD-2: The City shall require sidewalks and/or pedestrian paths in all residential projects. The sidewalks should be wide enough to allow side-by-side walking and room for passing to increase comfort and convenience for walkers (5 to 6 feet).
Analysis: The subdivisions will have five-foot sidewalks throughout the development and there will be enhanced landscaping on the collector streets. The five-foot sidewalks will allow for side-by-side walking and room for passing. The project will also be providing public improvements on North Union Road which will provide sidewalks and also help reduce speeding and accidents.
CAP Strategy: Water Conservation (WC) WC-1: The City shall continue to implement water conservation measures to comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape requirements that implement the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 1881, Laird).
Analysis: The front yards of the homes and landscape areas along the streets will utilize low-water-use planting. This project is required to comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, per Assembly Bill 1881.
Municipal Strategies - Urban Forestry (UF) UF-2: The City of Manteca will consider the following goals and actions when revising its urban forestry program:
Increase public and private tree plantings citywide
Use canopy trees along new major roadways and in new developments Analysis: This subdivision will increase the amount of both public and private tree plantings and will use flowering trees throughout the area. The project will require all front yards to have landscaping, including a tree, which will significantly cut down on the heat-island effect.
ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE
As the lead agency for the Union Ranch North Annexation project, the City prepared a Project-level EIR pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Project EIR is an EIR that examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR focuses primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the project. A Project EIR examines all phases of a project including planning, construction, and operation. The Project EIR allows for comprehensive consideration of the reasonably anticipated scope of the Project, including the development and operation of the Project. The Final EIR is available for review on the City’s website here:
https://www.manteca.gov/departments/development-services/planning/planning-division-documents/-folder-370 The EIR was circulated for a public review period from March 1, 2024, to April 15, 2024. The City received one (1) comment letter. The comments received on the environmental document were generally related to Biological Resources discussed within the Draft EIR. This comment letter is identified in Table 2.0-1 of the Final EIR and is addressed within the FEIR. The comments provided on the Draft EIR did not warrant revisions to the text of the document that required recirculation of the Draft EIR.
The EIR determined that there were several significant and unavoidable environmental impacts produced by the project. CEQA Guidelines § 15091 states that 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. As such, along with the certification of the EIR, the Council is being asked to make specific findings of overriding considerations. The statement of overriding considerations attached to the EIR resolution identifies the economic, social, technical, and other benefits of the Project that the City Council can consider if they choose to override these significant environmental impacts that would result from the Project.
The significant and unavoidable impacts of the project are identified below:
• Impact 3.1-1: Project implementation could result in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas and resources or substantial degradation of visual character; • Impact 3.2-1: The proposed Project has the potential to result in the conversion of Farmlands, including Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural uses; • Impact 3.7-1: Project implementation could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. • Impact 3.7-2: Project implementation could conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. • Impact 3.13-1: Project implementation could result in VMT increases that are greater than 85 percent of Baseline conditions; • Impact 4.2: Cumulative Degradation of the Existing Visual Character of the Region; • Impact 4.4: Cumulative Impact on Agricultural Resources; • Impact 4.9: Cumulative Impact on Climate Change from Increased Project-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions; and • Impact 4.19: Under Cumulative conditions, Project implementation would result in VMT increases that are greater than 85 percent of Baseline conditions.
The adverse effects listed above are substantive issues of concern to the City. However, the Manteca General Plan provides for an array of land uses throughout the City that are intended to accommodate the City’s needs for growth over the foreseeable future. In addition, the identified impacts above are typical of all new suburban development. The CEQA EIR process allows the City to examine these impacts against the benefits the Project provides to the City and determine if the benefits outweigh the impacts.
Rewards of the Project include, but are not necessarily limited to, additional tax revenue for the City, while providing recreational facilities and housing opportunities for current and future Manteca residents. Implementation of the Project would increase and diversify the housing supply in the City, which could spur development, economic growth, and property tax generation within the area. Moreover, the increased housing supply helps meet the ever-growing demand for housing within California. The Project also helps the City meet mandated housing production by the State of California.
Based on the entire record and the FEIR, the Planning Commission and City Council should determine that the economic and social benefits of the Project outweigh and override the significant unavoidable environmental effects that would result from the Project. Any environmental detriment caused by the proposed Project has been minimized to the extent feasible through the mitigation measures identified in the EIR and, where mitigation is not feasible, the impact can be outweighed and counterbalanced by the significant social, environmental, and land use benefits to be generated within the region.
A Notice of Preparation for the EIR was circulated on November 28, 2023, to the State Clearinghouse, State Responsible Agencies, State Trustee Agencies, other public agencies, and interested parties around the project site. Concerns raised during the NOP period were related to traffic on North Union Road, the width of North Union Road, the conflict between agricultural uses and residential uses, and the uses allowed on the Non-Development parcels after annexation.
Based on the facts and findings presented in this staff report, the Planning Commission can recommend that the City Council certify the Union Ranch North FEIR and adopt the MMPR and statement of Overriding Considerations prepared in support of a development application for an Annexation, Pre-zoning, General Plan Amendment, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Development Agreement for the Union Ranch North Annexation Project.
Report prepared by: Jesus R. Orozco, Deputy Director – Planning Original staff report attachments are available for review via the following link. https://manteca-ca.legistar1.com/manteca-ca/meetings/2025/3/1787_A_Planning_Commission_25-03-20_REGULAR_MEETING_AGENDA.pdf Attachments:
Attachment 2 – CEQA Resolution
Attachment 3 – Exhibit A-1 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program Attachment 4 – Exhibit A-2 Statement of Overriding Considerations Attachment 5 – Annexation & Pre-zoning Resolution
Attachment 6 – Exhibit B-1 Annexation Map
Attachment 7 – Exhibit B-2 Pre-zoning Ordinance
Attachment 8 – Exhibit B-2-1 Pre-zoning Map
Attachment 9 – Entitlements Resolution
Attachment 10 – Exhibit C-1 General Plan Amendment Map
Attachment 11 – Exhibit C-2 Tentative Subdivision Map
Attachment 12 – Exhibit C-2-1 Conditions of Approval
Attachment 13 – Exhibit C-3 Development Agreement Ordinance Attachment 14 – Exhibit C-3-1 Development Agreement
Attachment 15 – Project PowerPoint
Reviewed and Approved by:
Brad Wungluck, Interim Development Services Director Date
Attachment 1Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1Attachment 1City of Manteca Planning Commission Attachment 1
Attachment 1
AGENDA REPORT