CITY OF MERCED
PLANNING & PERMITTING DIVISION
TYPE OF PROPOSAL: General Plan Amendment #24-01/ Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan Amendment #6/Tentative Subdivision Map #1329
INITIAL STUDY: #24-07
DATE RECEIVED: March 19, 2025 (date application determined to be complete) LOCATION: 800 E. Cardella Road
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS: 231-010-021(SEE ATTACHED MAP AT ATTACHMENT A) Please forward any written comments by May 7, 2025 to:
Francisco Mendoza-Gonzalez, Senior Planner
City of Merced Planning & Permitting Division
678 West 18
th Street
Merced, CA 95340
209-385-6929
[email protected]
Applicant Contact Information:
Attn: Stonefield Home, Inc.
923 E. Pacheco Blvd., Suite C
Los Banos, CA 90071
(559) 970-6718
[email protected]
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject site is an approximate 39.12-acre undeveloped parcel (APN: 231-010-021) located in northeast Merced at 800 E. Cardella Road (Attachment A). The subject site is generally located on the south side of E. Cardella Road, approximately 1,900 feet east of G Street. The subject site has a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD), and Zoning classifications of Low Density Residential (R-1-6) and Medium Density Residential (R-3-2). The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes, to the west, Cruickshank Middle School/agricultural land, to the south, single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across E. Cardella Road) by agricultural land.
The applicant is requesting approval to develop the Paulson Ranch Subdivision, 104 single-family homes constructed over se ven phases (Attachment E). These lots would generally range in size between 6,000 square feet and 14,2 50 square feet, with the major ity of the lots being between 6,000 square feet and 7,000 square feet. The General Plan designations of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD) are primarily intended for residential uses.
The LD designation allows for residential density between 2 and 6 units per acre, and the HMD designation allows a residentia l density between 12 and 24 dwelling units per acre. The HMD portion of the Project has a density of approximately 4 dwelling units per acre and the LD portion ATTACHMENT 10
Initial Study #24-07
has a density of approximately 3 units per acre, both below the allowable density range for each designation.
Generally, the proposal is consistent with the Ge neral Plan land use desi gnations for this site.
However, the applicant is requesting a General Plan amendment to amend the City’s General Plan Circulation Element (Figure 4.1) to eliminate the collector road of Destiny Drive going through the subject site (see Atta chments B and C). Destiny Drive woul d retain it’s Circulation Element designation as a collector road west of the proj ect site to G Street. However, due to wetland constraints on the eastern portion of the subject s ite, Destiny Drive would not be able to extend through the subject site to Paulson Road based on a field survey conducted by Galloway Enterprises for the applicant (Attachment D).
Development Standards and Elevations
The developer has yet to submit building designs for the 104 lots . Because the subject site does not have a Zoning classification of Planned Development, the building design/elevations would be reviewed and approved by Planning staff prior to issuance of a building permit for these homes.
These homes would have to comply with the Ci ty’s minimum design standards for single-family homes as required under Merced Municipal Code Section 20.46.020 - Design Standards for Single- Family Dwellings and Mobile Homes.
Subdivision Layout
The Paulson Ranch subdivision includes a north/south collector road (Paulson Road) located on the eastern portion of the subject site which would provide direct ve hicle access from the subdivision to Yosemite Avenue (to the south) and Cardella Road (to the north), both arterial roads.
The proposal includes 6 cul-de-s acs throughout the subdivision, and planned connections to the west with the construction of Street A and Street G (both local streets) shown on the proposed site plan (Attachment E). The proposal also includes a storm basin/open space lot (0.89 acres) within the southwest portion of the subdivision, and additional open space on Lot A (approximately 5.18 acres) that would remain undeveloped due to wetland constraints within this area.
Project Location
The subject site is located within the northeast quadrant of Merced. The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes, to the west by Cruickshank Middle School/agricultural land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across from E. Cardella Road) by agricultural land. The table below identifies the surrounding uses:
Table 1 Surrounding Uses (Refer to Attachment A)
Surrounding
Land
Existing Use
of Land
Zoning
Designation
City General Plan
Land Use Designation
North Agriculture
(across Cardella Road)
Planned
Development
(P-D) #53
Neighborhood
Commercial (CN)
South Single-Family Homes
Low Density
Residential
(R-1-6)
Low Density Residential
(LD)
East Undeveloped Land Low Density
Residential
Low Density Residential
(LD)
Initial Study #24-07
(R-1-6)
and Commercial
Office (C-O)
and Commercial Office
(CO)
West Undeveloped Land and
Cruickshank Middle School
Low Density
Residential
(R-1-6)
Low Density Residential
(LD),
Parks and Open Space
(P-OS), and School
(SCH)
1. INITIAL FINDINGS
A. The proposal is a project as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.
B. The Project is not a ministerial or emergency project as defined under CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15369 and 15369).
C. The Project is therefore discretionary and subject to CEQA (Section 15357).
D. The Project is not Categorically Exempt.
E. The Project is not Statutorily Exempt.
F. Therefore, an Environmental Checklist has been required and filed.
2. CHECKLIST FINDINGS
A. An on-site inspection was made by this reviewer on March 26, 2025.
B. The checklist was prepared on April 9, 2025.
C. The Merced Vision 2030 General Plan and its associated Environmental Impact Report [EIR (SCH# 2008071069)] were certified in January 2012. The document comprehensively examined the potential environmental impacts that may occur as a result of build-out of the 28,576-acre Merced (SUDP/SOI). For those significant environmental impacts (Loss of Agricultural Soils and Air Quality) for which no mitigation measures were available, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations (City C ouncil Resolution #2011-63). This document herein incorporates by reference the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan, the General Plan Program EIR (SCH# 2008071069), and Resolution #2011-63.
As a subsequent development project within the SUDP/SOI, many potential environmental effects of the Project have been previously considered at the program level and addressed within the General Plan and associated EIR. (Copies of the General Plan and its EIR are available for review at the City of Merced Planning and Permitting Division, 678 West 18th Street, Merced, CA 95340.) As a second-tier environmental document, Initial Study #24-07 plan s to incorporate goals and policies to implement actions of the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan, along with mitigation measur es from the General Plan EIR, as mitigation for potential impacts of the Project.
Initial Study #24-07
Project-level environmental impacts and mit igation measures (if applicable) have been identified through site-specific review by City staff. This study also utilizes existing technical information contained in prior documen ts and incorporates this information into this study.
3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Will the proposed project result in significant impacts in any of the listed categories? Significant impacts are those that are substantial, or potentially substantial, changes that may adversely affect the physical conditions within the area affected by the Project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be c onsidered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a phys ical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significan t. (Section 15372, State CEQA Gu idelines. Appendix G of the Guidelines contains examples of possible significant effects.) A narrative description of all “potentially si gnificant,” “negative decl aration: potentially significant unless mitigation inco rporated,” and “less than si gnificant impact” answers are provided within this Initial Study.
A. Aesthetics
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is located in northeast Merce d, approximately two and a half miles northeast of Downtown and three and three-quarter miles north of Highway 99. The project site consists of an undeveloped lot totaling approximately 39.12 acres. The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes to the west by Cruickshank Middle School and agricultural land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by undeveloped land, and to the north (across from E. Cardella Road) by agricultural land. These buildings and structures range in height, between 15 and 30 feet with the middle school having structures over 30 feet and the nearby hosp ital (Dignity Health Hospital) having multiple stories (8).
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
A. Aesthetics. Will the Project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
2) Substantially damage scenic resources including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
3) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
Initial Study #24-07
1) Less Than Significant Impact
No designated scenic vistas exist on the project site or in the project area. Additionally, the heights allowed for single-family homes are su ch that they would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
2) No Impact
There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways or Routes in the project vicinity.
Therefore, the Project would have no impac t on scenic resources, such as rock outcroppings, trees, or historic buildings within a scenic highway. 3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The proposed Project would transform the site from an undeveloped site to a mostly fully developed site. Undeveloped lots tend to lead to concerns about weed abatement, waste drop-off, and general dilapidation. The proposed homes, and streets would mostly develop the site. The homes would add architectural interest with the use of stucco, and board and batten. Based on these factors, this impact is considered to be less than significant. 4) Less Than Significant
Construction of the proposed project and off-site improvements include new lighting on the homes and throughout the site. This new lighting could be a source of light or glare that would affect the views in the area. However, the City of Merced has adopted the California Green Building Standards Code (CGBSC) as Section 17.07 of the Merced Municipal Code.
As administered by the City, the Green Building Standards Code prohibits the spillage of light from one lot to another. This would prevent new glare effects on the existing buildings surrounding the project site.
B. Agriculture Resources
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Merced County is among the largest agriculture producing Counties in California, with a gross income of more than $4.4 bil lion. The County’s leading agriculture commodities include milk, almonds, cattle and calves, chickens, sweet potatoes, and tomatoes.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
4) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Initial Study #24-07
1) Less than Significant Impact
The project site is located within the City Limits of Merced. The California Department of Conservation prepares Important Farm land Maps through its Farmlands Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The system of classifying areas is based on soil type and use. According to the Merced County Impo rtant Farmlands Map, th e project site is classified as “Farmland of Local of Importa nce.” The conversion of this land from an undeveloped lot to a developed urban parcel was analyzed as part of the Environmental Review for the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan . The development of housing on “Farmland of Local Importance” that is not “Prime Farmland Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland)” is considered to have less than significant impact. Therefore, CEQA requires no further review.
2) No Impact
There are no Williamson Act contract lands in this area and the land is not being used for agricultural uses. Therefore, there is no impact.
3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Refer to Item #1 above.
Potenti
ally
Signifi
cant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt with
Mitigati
on
Incorpor
ated
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact
B. Agriculture Resources. Will the Project:
1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
a
griculture?
2) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
3) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-a
gricultural use?
4) Cause development of non-agricultural
uses within 1,000 feet of agriculturally
zoned propert
y (Right-to-Farm)?
Initial Study #24-07
4) No Impact
The nearest land being used for farming is lo cated approximately one hundred feet north of the subject site, across Cardella Road. However, final maps have recently been approved to construct homes here. The proposed development would not affect farming operations.
C. Air Quality
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB), which includes the southern half of the Central Valley and is approximately 250 miles long and an averag e of 35 miles wide. The Coast Ranges, which have an average height of 3,000 feet, serve as the western border of the SJVAB. The San Emigdio Mountains, part of the Coast Ranges, and the Tehachapi Mountains, part of the Sierra Nevada, are both south of the SJVAB. The Sierra Nevada extends in a northwesterly direction and forms the air basi n’s eastern boundary. The SJVAB is mostly flat with a downward gradient to the northwest.
The climate of the SJVAB is heavily influenced by the presence of these mountain ranges. The mountain ranges to the west and south induce winter storms from the Pacific Ocean to release precipitation on the western slopes, producing a partial rain shadow over the valley. A rain shadow is defined as the region on the leeward side of a mountain where noticeably less precipitation occurs because clouds and precipitation on the windward side remove moisture from the air. In addition, the mountain ranges block the free circulation of air to the east and entrap stable air in the Central Valley for extended periods during the cooler months.
Winters in the SJVAB are mild and fairly humid, and summers are hot, dry, and typically cloudless.
During the summer, a high-pressure cell is centered over the northeastern Pacific, resulting in stable meteorological conditions and steady northwesterly winds.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
C. Air Quality. Would the project:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
2) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for O
3 precursors)?
3) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
4) Create objectionabl e odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Initial Study #24-07
Impacts are evaluated below on the basis of both State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G criteria and SJVAPCD significance criteria.
SJVAPCD’s thresholds for determining environmental significance separate a project’s short-term emissions from long-term emissions. The shor t-term emissions are re lated mainly to the construction phase of a project. For this project, the l ong-term emissions are related primarily to household trips.
1) Less-than-Significant Impact
Thresholds of significance applied in this report are from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is “Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts” (GAMAQI) (San Joaquin Va lley Air Pollution Control District 2015).
These thresholds define an identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level of a particular environmental eff ect. Project-related emission le vels which exceed any of the thresholds of significance means the project-related effect will normally be considered significant. Project related emissions at or below the thresholds of significance means the project-related effect normally will be considered to be less than significant.
The SJVAPCD has established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions generated during construction and operation of projects. Th e significance thresholds presented in the SJVAPCD GAMAQI are based on the attainment status of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin in regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the air quality standards are set at concentrations that protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission threshol ds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks.
For a project to be consistent with SJVAPCD air quality plans, the pollutants emitted from a project should not exceed the SJVAPCD emission thresholds or cause a significant impact on air quality.
The Merced Vision 2030 General Plan (City of Merced, 2012) is the applicable general plan.
However, the population projections used in the previous general plan, the Merced Vision 2015 General Plan (City of Merced 1997), included projects through 2035 and were higher than those used in the 2030 General Plan (see Table C-4). The project site has a residential land use designation in the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan. The project site is currently designated for residential. The proposed General Plan Amendment is to modify the City’s Circulation Element, and does not include any changes to the existing General Plan land use designations for the subject site. The proposed 104 dwelling units for this project are within the allowed range within the General Plan (would allow a maximum of 655 dwelling units).
Therefore, implementation of the project woul d not exceed the assumptions used to develop the air quality plans and would neither obstruct nor conflict with implementation strategies.
The impact would be less than significant.
Initial Study #24-07
2) Less-than-Significant Impact
As part of the building permit review process, the applicant is required to consult with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Di strict (SJVAPCD). The developer is responsible for adhering to all air quality mitigation measures during the construction phase as required by the SJVAPCD and the Californi a Building Code. Due to these permitting requirements, the impact would be less than significant.
3) Less-than-Significant Impact
Sensitive receptors are facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses, or other people who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants.
Examples of sensitive recepto rs include hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residential areas. The project is on undevelope d land in an area partly developed with residential uses.
The greatest potential for proj ect-related emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) is related to the diesel PM emissions that would be generated by heavy-duty construction equipment. Off-road construction equipment us ed for the project would generate diesel exhaust PM emissions. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health risk assessments that de termine the health risks associated with exposure of residential receptors to TAC emissions should be based on a 30-year exposure period (OEHHA 2015). However, health risk assessments should be limited to the period/duration of emissions -generating activity. Projec t construction would last
Initial Study #24-07
approximately 6 months to build a home, less than 2 percent of the required exposure period for health risk assessments.
Neither construction-related nor operational emissions for the project would exceed the thresholds of significance. Therefore, the project would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentr ations. This impact would be less than significant.
4) Less-than-Significant Impact
Given the use of heavy equipment during construction, the time- of-day heavy equipment would be operated, the project would not emit objectionable odors that would be adversely affect a substantial number of people. Oper ation of the project would not emit odors.
Therefore, construction and operation of the project would have a less-than-significant impact associated with odors. This impact would be less than significant.
D. Biological Resources
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The project site is located in northeast Merce d, approximately two and a half miles northeast of Downtown and three and three-quarter miles north of Highway 99. The project site consists of an undeveloped lot totaling approximately 39.12 acres. The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses which includes to the west by Cruickshank Middle School and undeveloped land, to the south by single-family homes, to the east by agricultural land, and to the north (across from E. Cardella Road) by agricultural land. The buildings and structur es in this area generally range in height between 15 and 30 feet with the middle school having structures over 30 feet and the nearby hospital (Dignity Health Hospital) having multiple stories (8).
The general project area is located in the Cent ral California Valley eco-r egion (Omernik 1987).
This eco-region is characterized by flat, intensively farmed plains with long, hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters (14-20 inches of precipitation per year). The Central California Valley eco- region includes the Sacramento Valley to the nor th, the San Joaquin Valley to the south, and it ranges between the Sierra Nevada Foothills to the east and the Coastal Range foothills to the west.
Nearly half of the eco-region is actively farmed, and about three -fourths of that farmed land is irrigated.
The biological resources evaluatio n, prepared as part of the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), does not identify the project area as containing any seasonal or non-seasonal wetland or vernal pool areas. However, Gallaway Enterprises conducted a field survey of the project s ite and identified ar eas where historical flooding from adjacent waterways created wetlands. The map at Attachment D identifies the wetland areas. The proposed subdivision (Paulson Ranch) is being designed avoid these areas.
Initial Study #24-07
1) No Impact
The proposed project would not have any dir ect effects on animal life by changing the diversity of species, number of species, re ducing the range of any rare or endangered species, introducing any new species, or leading to deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat. Although the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan identifies several species of plant and animal life that exist with in the City’s urban boundaries, the subject site does not contain any rare or endangered species of plant or animal life.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
D. Biological Resources. Would the Project:
1) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modification, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
3) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
4) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
5) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Initial Study #24-07
2) Less-than -Significant Impact
The proposed project would not have any direct effects on riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community. The City Gene ral Plan identifies Bear, Black Rascal, Cottonwood, Miles, Fahrens, and Owens Creeks within the City’s growth area. The subject site is approximately 2.20 miles north of Bear Creek and 1.20 miles north of Black Rascal Creek. These creeks are Waters of the U.S. under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), the California Departme nt of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
However, Cottonwood Creek is located southw est (adjacent) of the subject site. The proposal would have to comply with Me rced Municipal Code Chapter 20.34 – Creek Buffers, which is intended to reduce the ri sks to property owners and the public from erosion and flooding, protect and enhance che mical, physical, and biol ogical integrity of water resources in the City, minimize pollu tants entering water bodies from urban stormwater runoff, and preser ve riparian vegetation and pr otect vegetation fand protect wildlife habitats and wildlife corridors along natural drainage ways.
As previously mentioned, Gallaway Enterprise s conducted a field surv ey and identified wetland areas that should be avoided within th is site (Attachment D). The subdivision is being designed so that all development, including right-of-way development such as roads and sidewalks, along with the proposed homes are located outside of the identified wetland areas.
Additionally, any proposed “fill” of waterways would be subj ect to permits from ACOE, CDFW, and the Regional Water Quality Control Bo ard. No such “fill” or disturbance of the waterway is proposed as part of this deve lopment. The City’s General Plan requires the preservation of creek in its natural state. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than- significant impact on riparian habitat.
3) No Impact
The project site would not have any direct ef fect on wetlands as the subdivision is being built around the wetland areas identified at Attachment D. 4) No Impact
The Project would not have any adverse effects on any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridor or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
5) Less Than Significant Impact
The Project would not interfere with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as tree preservation policy or ordinance. The City requires the planting and maintenance of street trees along all streets and parking lot trees in parking lots, but has no other tree preservation ordinances.
6) No Impact
The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of a habitat conservation plan.
There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Conservation Community Plan, Initial Study #24-07
or other approved local, regional, or state Habitat Conservation Plan for the City of Merced or Merced County.
E. Cultural Resources
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The City of Merced area lies within the ethnographic territory of the Yokuts people. The Yokuts were members of the Penutian language family which held all of the Central Valley, San Francisco Bay Area, and the Pacific Coast from Marin County to near Point Sur.
Merced County was first explored by Gabriel Moraga in 1806, when he named the Merced River, “El Rio de Nuestra Senora de la Merced.” Mora ga’s explorations were designed to locate appropriate sites for an inland ch ain of missions. Moraga expl ored the region again in 1808 and 1810.
Archaeology
Archaeological sites are defined as locations containing significant levels of resources that identify human activity. Very little archaeological survey work has been conducted within the City or its surrounding areas. Creeks, drainage, and sloughs exist in the northern expansion area of the City, and Bear Creek and Cottonwood Creek pass through th e developed area. Archaeological sites in the Central Valley are commonly located adjacen t to waterways and represent potential for significant archaeological resources.
Paleontological sites are those that show eviden ce of pre-human existence. They are small outcroppings visible on the earth’s surface. While the surface outcroppings are important indications of paleontological resources, it is the geological formations that are the most important.
There are no known sites within the project area known to contain paleontological resources of significance.
Historic Resources
In 1985, in response to community concerns over the loss of some of the City’s historic resources, and the perceived threats to many remaining re sources, a survey of historic buildings was undertaken in the City. The survey focused on pre-1941 districts, buildings, structures, and objects of historical, architectural, a nd cultural significance. The su rvey area included a roughly four square-mile area of the central portion of the City.
The National Register of Historic Places, the California Historical Landmarks List, and the California Inventory of Historic Resources identify several sites within the City of Merced. These sites are listed on the Merced Historical Site Survey and are maintained by the Merced Historical Society. There are no listed historical sites on the project site.
According to the environmenta l review conducted for the Ge neral Plan, there are no listed historical sites and no known locations within the project area that contain sites of paleontologic or archeological significance. The General Pl an (Implementation Action SD-2.1.a) requires that the City utilize standard practices for preserving archeological materials that are unearthed during construction, as prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation.
Initial Study #24-07
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
E. Cultural Resources. Would the Project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
in §15064.5?
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
3) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
4) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
1) Less-than-Significant Impact
The Project would not alter or destroy any known historic or archaeological site, building, structure, or object; nor would it alter or affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict religious or sacred uses. According to the environmental review conducted for the General Plan, there are no listed historical sites and no known locations within the project area that contain sites of historical or archeological significance. The General Plan (Implementation Action SD-2.1.a) requires that the City utilize standard practices for preserving archeological materials that are unearthed dur ing construction, as prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation.
2) Less-than-Significant Impact
The Project would not alter or destroy any known prehistoric or archaeological site, building, structure, or object; nor would it alte r or affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict religious or sacred uses. According to the environmental review conducted for the General Plan, there are no listed historical sites and no known locations within the project area that contain sites of historical or ar cheological significance. The General Plan (Implementation Action SD-2.1.a) requires that the City utilize sta ndard practices for preserving archeological materials that are unearthed during construction, as prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation.
3) Less-than-Significant Impact
The Project would not alter or destroy any paleontological resource, site, or unique geological feature. According to the environmental review conducted for the General Plan, there are no listed historical sites and no know n locations within the project area that contain sites of paleontological significance. The General Plan (Implementation Action SD-2.1.a) requires that the City utilize standa rd practices for preserving archeological materials that are unearthed during construction, as prescr ibed by the State Office of Historic Preservation.
Initial Study #24-07
4) Less-than-Significant Impact
The proposed project would not disturb any known human remains, including those interred outside of formal ceme teries; nor would it alter or affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict religious or sacred uses. There are no known cemeteries in the project area. Excavation of the site would be needed to construct the proposed project, so it is possible that human remains would be di scovered. However, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that if human remains are discovered during the construction phase of a development, all work must stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and the County Coroner must be notif ied. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which in turn will inform a most likely descendant. The descendant will then recommend to the landowner the appropr iate method for the disposi tion of the remains and any associated grave goods. Additionally, the City ’s General Plan (Implementing Action SD-
2.1.a) requires that the City utilize standard practices for preserving archeological materials that are unearthed during construction, as prescribed by the State Office of Historic Preservation. By following the requirement s of the Health and Safety Code and Compliance with the City’s General Plan, this potential impact would be less than significant.
F. Geology and Soils
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The City of Merced is located approximately 150 miles southeast of San Francisco along the east side of the southern portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Pr ovince, more commonly referred to as the San Joaquin Valley. The valley is a broad lowland bounded by the Sierra Nevada to the east and Coastal Ranges to the west. The San Joaquin Valley has been filled with a thick sequence of sedimentary deposits from Jurassic to recent age. A review of the geological map indicates that the area around Merced is prima rily underlain by the Pleisto cene Modesto and Riverbank Formations with Holocene alluvial deposits in the drainages. Miocene-Pliocene Mehrten and Pliocene Laguna Formation material s are present in outcrops on th e east side of the SUDP/SOI.
Modesto and Riverbank Formation deposits are characterized by sa nd and silt alluvium derived from weathering of rocks deposited east of the SUDP/SOI. The Laguna Formation is made up of consolidated gravel sand and silt alluvium an d the Mehrten Formation is generally a well consolidated andesitic mudflow breccia conglomerate.
Faults and Seismicity
A fault, or a fracture in the crust of the earth along which rocks on one si de have moved relative to those on the other side, are an indication of past seismic activity. It is assumed that those that have been active recently are the most likely to be active in the future, although even inactive faults may not be “dead.” “Potentially Active” faults are those that have been active during the past two million years or during the Quaternary Period. “A ctive” faults are those that have been active within the past 11,000 years. Earthquakes originate where movement or slippage occurs along an active fault. These movements generate shock waves that result in ground shaking.
Based on review of geologic maps and reports for the area, there are no known “active” or “potentially active” faults, or Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Z ones (formerly referred to as a Initial Study #24-07
Special Studies Zone) in the SUDP/SOI. In order to determine the distance of known active faults within 50 miles of the Site, the computer program EZ-FRISK was used in the General Plan update.
Soils
Soil properties can influence the development of building sites, including site selection, structural design, construction, performance after construction, and maintenance. Soil properties that affect the load-supporting cap acity of an area include dept h to groundwater, ponding, flooding, subsidence, shrink-swell potential, and compressibility.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
F. Geology and Soils. Would the Project:
1) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
a) Rupture of a known ea rthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known
fault?
b) Strong seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
d) Landslides?
2) Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of
topsoil?
3) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
4) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
Initial Study #24-07
1) Less than Significant Impact
The project site is not located within a mapped fault hazard zone, and there is no record or evidence of faulting on the project site (Cit y of Merced General Plan Figure 11.1).
Because no faults underlie the project site, no people or structures would be exposed to substantial adverse effects related to earthquake rupture.
According to the City’s Merced Vision 2030 General Plan EIR, the probability of soil liquefaction occurring within the City of Mer ced is considered to be a low to moderate hazard; however, a detailed geotechnical engi neering investigation would be required for the project in compliance with the California Building Code (CBC).
There would be no exposure to any geological hazards in the project area.
Ground shaking of moderate severity may be expected to be experienced on the project site during a large seismic event. All building permits are reviewed to ensure compliance with the California Building Code (CBC). In additi on, the City enforces the provisions of the Alquist Priolo Special Study Zones Act that limit development in areas identified as having special seismic hazards. All new structures shall be designed and built-in accordance with the standards of the California Building Code.
APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
The City’s Merced Vision 2030 General Plan contains policies that address seismic safety.
Goal Area S-2: Seismic Safety:
Goal: Reasonable Safety for City Residents from the Hazards of Earthquake and Other Geologic Activity
Policies
S-2.1 Restrict urban development in all areas with potential ground failure characteristics.
The Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides.
Landslides generally occur on slopes of 15 percent or greater. The project site’s topography is generally of slopes between 0 and 3 percent, which are considered insufficient to produce hazards other than minor sliding during seismic activity.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
Initial Study #24-07
Therefore, no hazardous conditions related to seismic ground shaking would occur with the implementation of the Project. Additiona lly, the implementation of the project would not lead to offsite effects related to hazar ds related to seismic groundshaking, nor would any existing off-site hazards be exacerbated.
2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Construction associated with the proposed pr oject could result in te mporary soil erosion and the loss of topsoil due to construction activities, incl uding clearing, grading, site preparation activities, and installation of th e proposed buildings and other improvements.
The City of Merced enforces a Storm Water Management Program in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act. All construction activities are required to comply with the City’s Erosion and Sediment Control Ordi nance (MMC §15.50.120.B), including the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to limit the discharge of sediment. 3) Less Than Significant Impact
The City of Merced is located in the Valley area of Merced County and is, therefore, less likely to experience landslides than other areas in the County. The probability of soil liquefaction actually taking place anywhere in the City of Merced is considered to be a low hazard. Soil types in the area are not conducive to liquefaction because they are either too coarse or too high in clay content. According to the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan EIR, no significant free face failures were obser ved within this area and the potential for lurch cracking and lateral spreading is, therefore, very low within this area. 4) Less-Than-Significant
Expansive soils are those possessing clay pa rticles that react to moisture changes by shrinking (when they dry) or swelling (when they become wet). Expansive soils can also consist of silty to sandy cla y. The extent of shrinking and sw elling is influenced by the environment, extent of wet or dry cycles, a nd by the amount of clay in the soil. This physical change in the soils can react unfa vorably with building foundations, concrete walkways, swimming pools, roadways, and masonry walls.
Implementation of General Plan Policies, adherence to the Alquist-Priolo Act, and enforcement of the California Building Code (CBC) Standards would reduce the effect of this hazard on new buildings and infrastructure associated with the proposed development.
This would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. 5) No Impact
The Project site would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal sy stems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater . However, the proposed project would be served by the City’s sewer system. No new septic systems are allowed within the City Limits and any existing systems will need to be removed upon demolition of the current home on the site.
Initial Study #24-07
G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Hazardous Materials
A substance may be considered hazardous due to a number of criteria , including toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, or react ivity. The term “hazardous materi al” is defined in law as any material that, because of quantity, concentration, or physical, or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment.
Wildland and Urban Fire Hazards
Both urban and wildland fire hazard potential exists in the City of Merced and surrounding areas, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commerci al, or industrial stru ctures due to human activities. Wildland fires affect grassland, brush or woodlands, and any structures on or near these fires. Such fires can result from either human made or natural causes.
Urban fires comprise the majority of fires in the City of Merced. The site is adjacent to undeveloped ag land which could be a source for a wildland fire. However, the City of Merced Fire Department has procedures in place to addre ss the issue of wildland fires, so no additional mitigation would be necessary.
Airport Safety
The City of Merced is impacted by the presence of two airports; the Mer ced Regional Airport, which is in the southwest corner of the City, and Castle Airport (the former Castle Air Force Base), located approximately six miles northwest of the subject site.
The continued operation of the Merced Regional Airport involves various hazards to both flight (physical obstructions in the airspace or land use characteristics which affe ct flight safety) and safety on the ground (damage due to an aircraft accident). Growth is restricted around the Regional Airport in the southwest corner of the City due to the noise and safety hazards associated with the flight path.
Castle Airport also impacts the City. Portions of the northwest part of the City’s SUDP/SOI and the incorporated City are within Castle’s safety zones. The primary impact is due to noise (Zones C and D), though small areas have density restrictions (Zone B2). The military discontinued operations at Castle in 1995. One important criterion for determining the various zones is the noise factor. Military aircraft are designed solely for performance, whereas civilian aircraft have extensive design features to control noise.
Potential hazards to flight include physical obstructions and other land use characteristics that can affect flight safety, which include: visual hazards such as distracting lights, glare, and sources of smoke; electronic interference with aircraft instruments or radio communications; and uses which may attract flocks of birds. In order to safe guard an airport's long-term usability, preventing encroachment of objects into the surrounding airspace is imperative.
According to the Merced County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the project site is not located in any restricted safety zones for either airport, and no aircraft ov erflight, air safety, or noise concerns are identified.
Initial Study #24-07
Railroad
Hazardous materials are regularly shipped on the BNSF and SP/UP Railroad lines that pass through the City. While unlikely, an incident involving the derailment of a train could result in the spillage of cargo from the train in transporting. The spillage of hazardous materials could have devastating results. The City has little to no control over the types of materials shipped via the rail lines. There is also a safety concern for pedestrians along the tracks and vehicles utilizing at-grade crossings. The design and operation of at-grade crossings allows the City some control over rail- related hazards. Ensuring proper gate operation at the crossings is the most effective strategy to avoid collision and possible derailments. Th e Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad is approximately 2.50 miles south of the site and Un ion Pacific Railroad is over 3.0 miles south of the site.
Public Protection and Disaster Planning
Hospitals, ambulance companies, and fire dist ricts provide medical emergency services.
Considerable thought and planning have gone into efforts to imp rove responses to day-to-day emergencies and planning for a general disaster response capability.
The City’s Emergency Plan and the County Hazardous Waste Manage ment Plan both deal with detailed emergency response procedures under va rious conditions for hazardous material spills.
The City also works with the State Department of Health Services to establish cleanup plans and to monitor the cleanup of known hazardous waste sites within the City.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Would the Project:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environmen
t?
3) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
Initial Study #24-07
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
4) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
5) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
6) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
7) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
8) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
1) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve the use, storage, transport, and disposal of oil, gasoline, di esel fuel, paints, solv ents, and other hazardous materials. The Project would be required to adhere to all applicable federal and state health and safety standards. Construction activity must also be in compliance with the California Occupational Safety and Health Administra tion regulations (Occ upational Safety and Health Act of 1970). Compliance with these requirements would reduce the risk of hazards to the public to a less-than-significant level.
2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Construction on the project site would be reviewed for the us e of hazardous materials at the building permit stage. Implementation of Fire Department and Building Code regulations for hazardous materials, as we ll as implementation of federal and state requirements, would reduce any risk caused by a future use on the site from hazardous materials to a less than-significant-level.
APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES
The City of Merced Vision 2030 General Plan contains policies that address hazardous materials.
Initial Study #24-07
Goal Area S-7: Hazardous Materials
Goal: Hazardous Materials Safety for City Residents
Policies
S-2.1
Prevent injuries and environmental contamination due to the uncontrolled release of hazardous materials.
Implementing Actions:
7.1.a
Support Merced County in carrying out and enforcing the Merced County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
7.1.b
Continue to update and enforce local ordinances regulating the permitted use and storage of hazardous gases, liquids, and solids.
7.1.d Provide continuing training for hazardous materials enforcement and response personnel.
3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The nearest school is Cruiksha nk Middle School, located direct ly adjacent/southwest of the subject site at 601 Mercy Avenue. Merced Community College is located ½ a mile west of the subject site, at the southwest corner G Street and Community College East Drive.
There is land with a General Plan designation for a school directly southeast of the subject site, but this site remains undeveloped. Give n the California Build ing Code protective measures required during the c onstruction process, this deve lopments impacts would be less than significant. Post-construction the site would be used for dwelling purposes only. 4) Less-Than-Significant Impact
No project actions or operations would result in the re lease of hazardous materials that could affect the pub lic or the environment, and no significant hazard to the public or the environment would result with project implementation. This potential impact is less than significant.
5) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The project site is located about 4.50 miles northeast from the Merced Regional Airport.
The approximate 39.12-acre site is surrounded by existing resident ial uses, undeveloped land, or agricultural uses. Given the land us e designation and surr ounding land use, the potential impact is less than significant.
6) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The closest private airstrip to the site is approximately 8 miles northeast of the subject site (Flying M Airport). There woul d be no hazard to people livi ng or working on the project site.
7) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The proposed project will not adversely affect any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No additional impacts would result from the development of Initial Study #24-07
the project area over and above those already evaluated by the EIR prepared for the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan.
APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES:
The Merced Vision 2030 General Plan contains policies that address disaster preparedness.
Goal Area S-1: Disaster Preparedness
Goal: General Disaster Preparedness
Policies
S-1.1
Develop and maintain emergency preparedness procedures for the City.
Implementing Actions:
1.1.a
Keep up-to-date through annual review the City’s existing Emergency Plan and coordinate with the countywide Emergency Plan.
1.1.b
Prepare route capacity studies and determine evacuation procedures and routes for different types of disasters, including means for notifying residents of a need to evacuate because of a severe hazard as soon as possible.
7.1.d Provide continuing training for hazardous materials enforcement and response personnel.
8) Less-Than-Significant Impact
According to the EIR prepared for the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan , the risk for wildland fire within the City of Merced is minimal. According to the Cal Fire website, the Merced County Fire Hazard Severity Zone Ma p shows the project site is designated as a “Local Responsibility Area” (LRA) with a Hazard Classification of “LRA Unzoned.” The City of Merced Fire Department is the responsible agency for responding to fires at the subject site. The project site is serv ed by Station #55 located at 3520 Parsons Drive (approximately 0.75 miles southeast from the project site).
Even though there are some surrounding undeveloped lands and agricultural lands, the City of Merced Fire Department has procedures in place to address the issue of wildland fires, so no additional mitigation woul d be necessary. This potent ial impact is less than significant.
H. Hydrology and Water Quality
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Water Supplies and Facilities
The City’s water supply system consists of 22 wells and 14 pumping stations equipped with variable speed pumps that attempt to maintain 45 to 50 psi (pounds per square inch) nominal water pressure. The City is required to meet State Health pressure requirements, which call for a minimum of 20 psi at every service connec tion under the annual peak hour condition and Initial Study #24-07
maintenance of the annual average day demand plus fire flow, whic hever is stricter. The project site would be serviced by the utilities to the south within Paulson Road.
Storm Drainage/Flooding
In accordance with the adopted City of Merced Standard Desi gns of Common Engineering Structures, percolation/detention basins are designed to temporarily collect runoff so that it can be metered at acceptable rates into canals and stream s that have limited capacity. The project would be required to adhere to the Post Construction Standards for compliance with the City’s Phase II MS4 permit issued by the state of California.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
H. Hydrology and Water Quality.
Would the Project:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
2) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:
a) result in a substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site;
b) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
c) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; o
rPles
d) impede or redirect flood flows?
4) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
of pollutants due to project inundation?
5) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Initial Study #24-07
1) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The Project is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction or operation. In addition to compli ance with standard construction provisions, the Project shall be required to comply with the Merced Storm Water Master Plan and the Storm Water Management Plan, and obtain all required permits for water discharge. During project operations , the City has developed requirements to minimize the impact to storm water quality caused by development and redevelopment.
The increase in impervious areas caused by development can cause an increase in the type and quantity of pollutants in storm water r unoff. Prior planning a nd design to minimize pollutants in runoff from these areas is an important component to storm water quality management. These standards are set forth in the City’s Post-Construction Standards Plan and provide guidance for post-c onstruction design measures to ensure that storm water quality is maintained. Compliance with thes e requirements and permits would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
A
PPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES:
The Merced Vision 2030 General Plan contains policies that a ddress Water Quality and Storm Drainage.
Goal Area P-5: Storm Drainage and Flood Control
Goal: An Adequate Storm Drainage Collection and Disposal System in Merced Policies
P-5.1
Provide effective storm drainage facilities for future development.
P-5.2 Integrate drainage facilities with bike paths, sidewalks, recreation facilities, agricultural activities, groundwater recharge, and landscaping.
Implementing Actions:
5.1.a
Continue to implement the City’s Storm Water Master Plan and the Storm Water Management Plan and its control measures.
5.1.c Continue to require all development to comply with the Storm Water Master Plan and any subsequent updates.
2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The City of Merced is primarily dependent on groundwater sources that draw from the San Joaquin aquifer. The City has 22 active we ll sites with one under construction, and 14 pumping stations, which provide service to meet peak hour urban level conditions and the average daily demand plus fire flows.
According to the City of Merced Water Mast er Plan, the estimated average peak water demand is 23.1 mgd.
The proposed project is estima ted to use approxima tely 6,400 gallons of water per day.
This would represent appr oximately 0.0027706 % of the est imated average daily water consumption. Although development of the site would restrict onsite recharge where new Initial Study #24-07
impervious surface areas are created, all alterations to groundwater flow would be captured and routed to the storm wate r percolation ponds or pervious surfaces with no substantial net loss in recharge potential anticipated. This reduces this impact to a less-than-significant level.
3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The proposed project would result in modifications to the existing drainage pattern on the site. If required by the City’s Engineering Depa rtment, the project w ill be designed to capture all surface water runoff onsite and then drain into the City’s existing storm drainage system.
The project site is currently vacant and consists of pervious surfaces. The proposed project would create impervious surfaces over a large portion of the project site, thereby preventing precipitation from infiltrating and causing it to pond or runoff. However, stormwater flows would be contained onsite and piped or conveyed to the City ’s stormwater system, there would be no potential for increased erosion or sedimentation.
Developed storm drainage facilities in the area are adequate to handle this minor increase in flows. The Project would not result in a substantial alteration of drainage in the area, and no offsite uses would be affected by the proposed changes. All potential impacts are less than significant.
4) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The proposed Project is located approximate ly 80 miles from the Pacific Ocean, distant from any large lakes, and are within the inundation zones fo r Lake Yosemite or Bear Reservoir at an elevation ranging from approximately 173 feet above MSL. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, the City of Merced is not subject to inundation by tsunami, seiche, or mudflow. This potential impact is less than significant. 5) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The proposed project would not obstruct or c onflict with the impleme ntation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwat er management plan. The project would be required to comply with all City of Merced standards and Master Plan requirements for groundwater and water quality control. This impact is less than significant.
I. Land Use and Planning
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located within the City Li mits of Merced and within its Specific Urban Development Plan and Sphere of Influence (SUDP/SOI).
SURROUNDING USES
Refer to Page 2 of this Initial Study and the map at Attachment A for the surrounding land uses.
Current Use
The subject site is approximately 39.12 acres of undeveloped land located at the northwest corner of Paulson Road and Dunn Road.
Initial Study #24-07
The subject site has a Zoning cl assification of Low Density Re sidential (R-1-6) and Medium Density Residential (R-3-2), and a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD). The existing land use designations for this site allows for low density residential uses such as sing le-family homes and duplexes, and the medium/high density area allows for single-family homes, ap artments, and other housing types. The Paulson Ranch subdivision would amend the currently approved subdivisi on layout for the Northeast Yosemite Specific Plan.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I. Land Use and Planning.
Would the Project:
1) Physically divide an established community?
2) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
1) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The project site is within the boundaries of the Merced City Limits. It would not physically divide the community as it is already part of the City. This proposal does not include the creation of streets or barriers. This potential impact is less than significant. 2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The subject site has a Zoni ng classification of Low Dens ity Residential (R-1-6) and Medium Density Residential (R-3-2), and a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD). Th e existing land use designations for this site allows for low de nsity residential uses such as single-family homes and duplexes, and the medium/high dens ity area allows for si ngle-family homes, apartments, and other housing type.. The proposed density and uses are consistent with the current land use designations for this site, and compatible with the existing residential single-family homes to the south. Therefore, this impact is less than significant.
J. Mineral Resources
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The City of Merced does not contain any min eral resources that re quire managed production according to the State Mining and Geology Board. Based on observed site conditions and review of geological maps for the area, economic deposits of precious or base metals are not expected to underlie the City of Merced or the project site. According to the California Geological Survey, Aggregate Availability in California - Map Sheet 52, minor aggregate production occurs west and north of the City of Merced, but economic deposits of aggregate minerals are not mined within the Initial Study #24-07
immediate vicinity of the SUDP/SOI. Commercial deposits of oil and gas are not known to occur within the SUDP/SOI or immediate vicinity.
According to the Merced County General Pl an Background Report (June 21, 2007), very few traditional hard rock mines exist in the County. The County’s mineral resources are almost all sand and gravel mining operations. Approximate ly 38 square miles of Merced County, in 10 aggregate resource areas (ARA), ha ve been classified by the Cali fornia Division of Mines and Geology for aggregate. The 10 identified resource areas contain an estimated 1.18 billion tons of concrete resources with approximately 574 million tons in Western Merced County and approximately 605 million tons in Eastern Merc ed County. Based on available production data and population projections, the Division of Mines and Geology estimated that 144 million tons of aggregate would be needed to satisfy the proj ected demand for construction aggregate in the County through the year 2049. The available supply of aggregate in Merced County substantially exceeds the current and projected demand.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
J. Mineral Resources. Would the Project:
1) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the re
gion and the residents of the state?
2) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan?
1) No Impact
No mineral resources occur within City Limits , SUDP/SOI, or within the project site, so no impact.
2) No Impact
See #1 above.
K. Noise
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Potential noise impacts of the proposed project can be categorized as those resulting from construction and those from operational activities. Construction noise would have a short-term effect; operational noise would c ontinue throughout the lifetime of the project. Construction associated with the development of the projec t would increase noise le vels temporarily during construction. Operational noise associated with the development would occur intermittently with the continued operation of the proposed project.
Initial Study #24-07
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to noise levels than other uses. Sensitive land uses can include residences, schools, nursing homes, hospitals , and some public f acilities, such as libraries. The noise level experienced at the receptor depends on the distance between the source and the receptor, the presence or absence of nois e barriers and other shielding devices, and the amount of noise attenuation (lessening) provided by the intervening terrain. For line sources such as motor or vehicular traffic, noise decreases by about 3.0 to 4.5A –weighted decibels (dBA) for every doubling of the distance from the roadway.
Noise from Other Existing Sources
Vehicular noise from Mercy Avenue and nearby uses such as Cruikshank Middle School, and Dignity Health Medical Hospital would be the prim ary existing noise source at the project site.
The nearest railroad corridor is approximately 2. 5 miles south from the proj ect site. The site is surrounded by various uses that generate operati onal noise on a daily basi s. There are several commercial uses located half a mile southwest of the project site.
According to the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan, noise exposure not exceeding 45 dB is considered to be a “normally acceptable” noise level for residential uses.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
K. Noise. Would the Project result in:
1) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
2) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
3) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
1) Less Than Significant
Construction Noise
Construction of the Project would temporarily increase noise levels in the area during the construction period. Therefore, the noise from construction may be steady for a few months and then cease all together. Construction activities, including site preparation and grading, building construction, and sidewalk and street improvements would be considered an intermittent noise impact throughout the cons truction period. Thes e activities could result in various effects on sensitive recepto rs, depending on the presence of intervening Initial Study #24-07
barriers or other insulating materials. The eff ects will be short term and would result in a less than significant impact.
Operational Noise
Operational noise would be the main noise source expected from the proposed project.
Traffic coming to and from the project site wo uld generate the most noise. However, the site is surrounded by ot her residential uses, which are ge nerally expected to generate similar amount of noise as the proposed development. Implementation of the Project would not lead to continued offsite effects related to noise genera ted by the Project. Given the noise from similar low impact zones near the subject site, this potential impact is less than significant.
2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the gene ration of any ground borne vibration or noise. This is a less-than-significant impact. 3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The project site is located approximately 4 miles northeast from active areas of the Merced Regional Airport and approximately 7 miles east from the Castle Airport. Therefore, no population working or living at the site would be exposed to excessive levels of aircraft noise. This potential impact is less than significant.
L. Population and Housing
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The Paulson Ranch subdivision would develop 1 04 homes on approximately 39.12 acres located in northeast Merced. The project site has a Zoni ng classification of Low Density Residential (R- 1-6) and Medium Density Residential (R-3-2), and a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LD) and High-Medium Density Residential (HMD). The existing land use designations for this site allows for low density residential uses such as single-family homes and duplexes, and the medium/high density area allows for single-family homes, apartments, and other housing types. The 104 lots woul d generally range in size be tween 6,000 square feet and 14,250 square feet.
Expected Population and Employment Growth
According to the State Department of Finance population estimates for 2023, the City of Merced’s population was estimated to be 91,837. Population pr ojections estimate that the Merced SUDP area will have a significant population of 159,900 by the Year 2030.
According to the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan, the City of Merced is expected to experience significant population and employment growth by the Year 2030.
Initial Study #24-07
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
L. Population and Housing.
Would the Project:
1) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
2) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
1) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The project site is currently designated for residential. The proposed General Plan Amendment is to modify the City’s Circulation Element, and does not include any changes to the existing General Plan land use designations for the su bject site. The proposed 104 dwelling units for this project are within the allowed range within the General Plan (would allow a maximum of 655 dwelling unit). Based on the need to increase housing supply, his potential impact would be less than significant.
2) No Impact
There project site is undeveloped. No housing would be displaced as a result of this project.
There is no impact.
M. Public Services
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Fire Protection
The City of Merced Fire Department provides fire protection, rescue, and emergency medical services from five fire stations throughout the urban area. Fire Statio n #55 is located at 3520 Parsons Drive, approximately 0.75 miles southeast from the project site. This Station would serve the proposed Project.
Police Protection
The City of Merced Police Department provides police protection for the entire City. The Police Department employs a mixture of sworn officers, non-sworn officer positions (clerical, etc.), and unpaid volunteers (VIP). The serv ice standard used for planning future police facilities is approximately 1.37 sworn officers per 1,000 population, per the Public Facilities Financing Plan.
Initial Study #24-07
Schools
The public school system in Merced is served by three di stricts: 1) Merced City School District (elementary and middle schools); 2) Merced Union High School Distri ct (MUHSD); and, 3) Weaver Union School District (serving a small area in the southeastern part of the City with elementary schools). The distri cts include various elementary schools, middle (junior high) schools, and high schools.
As the City grows, new schools will need to be built to serve our growing population. According to the Development Fee Justification Study for the MUHSD, Merced City Schools students are generated by new development at the following rate:
Table 6 Student Generation Rates
Commercial/Industrial
Category
Elementary (K-8)
(Students per 1,000 sq.ft.)
High School (9-12)
(Students per 1,000 sq.ft.)
Retail 0.13 0.038
Restaurants 0.00 0.157
Offices 0.28 0.048
Services 0.06 0.022
Wholesale/Warehouse 0.19 0.016
Industrial 0.30 0.147
Residential 0.559 (per unit) 0.109 (per unit)
Based on the table above the proposed 104 residen tial units would generate 59 K-8 students and 12 high school students.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
M. Public Services. Would the Project:
1) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need
for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any
of the following public services:
a) Fire Protection?
b) Police Protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other Public Facilities?
Initial Study #24-07
1) Less Than Significant
a) Fire Protection
The project site would be served by Fire Station #55 located at 3520 Parsons Drive (approximately 0.75 miles southeast from the project site). The response from this station would meet the desired response time of 4 to 6 minutes, citywide, 90 percent of the time, within the financial constraint s of the City. The proposed development would not affect fire protection services, and no new or modifi ed fire facilities w ould be needed. Any changes to the building or site would be required to meet all requirements of the California Fire Code and the Merced Municipal Code. Compliance with these requirements would reduce any future impacts to a less than significant level.
At the time a building permit is issued, the developer would be required to pay impact fees according to the City Public Fa cilities Financing Plan (PFFP). A portion of this fee goes to cover the city’s costs for fire protection su ch as fire stations, etc. In addition, the developer would be required to annex into the City’s Community Fa cilities District for Services. This would result in an assessment paid with property taxes in which a portion of the tax would go to pay for fire protection services. Compliance with all Fire, Building, and Municipal Code requirements as well as payment of the P ublic Facility Impact Fees, and annexation into the City’s CFD for services would reduce any potential impacts to a less than significant level.
b) Police Protection
The site would be served by the City Police Department. The development of the vacant project site could result in mo re calls to the site. Implem entation of the proposed project would not require any new or modified police facilities.
The same requirements for paying Public Fac ility Impact Fees and annexation into the City’s Community Facilities District for Serv ices would apply with a portion of the fees and taxes collected going toward the costs fo r police protection. Ther efore, this potential impact is reduced to a less-than-significant level.
c) Schools
The project site is located within the boundari es of the Merced City School District and Merced Union High School District. Based on the table and discussion provided in the “Settings and Description” section above, the proposed development would likely generate additional students to the school system. As appropriate, the developer would be required to pay all fees due under the Leroy F. Greene School Faciliti es Act of 1988. Once these fees are paid, the satisfaction of the devel oper of his statutory fee under California Government Code §65995 is deemed “full and complete mitigation” of school impacts.
This potential impact is less than significant.
d) Parks
Davenport Park is located approximately 1,000 f eet southeast of the subject site. This storage facility may slightly increase the use of neighborhood or regional parks.
Initial Study #24-07
Payment of the fees required under the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) as described above would be required at time of building permit issuance to help fund future parks and maintenance of existing parks would be required at the building permit stage. The payment of fees would reduce this potential impact to less than significant. e) Other Public Facilities
The development of the Project could impact the maintenance of public facilities and could generate impacts to other governmental servi ces. Payment of the fees required under the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) as described above would mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level.
N. Recreation
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
The City of Merced has a well-developed network of parks and recreation facilities. Several City parks and recreation facilities are located within a one-mile radius of the project site.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
N. Recreation. Would the Project:
1) Increase the use of neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
2) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construc tion or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
1) Less the Significant Impact
Development of the Project may increase the use of neig hborhood or regional parks.
However, payment of the required developmen t fees at the building permit stage would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level. 2) No Impact
The Project does not include recreational facilities and is not responsible for the construction or expansion of any recreational facilities.
Initial Study #24-07
O. Transportation/Traffic
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Roadway System
The project site is located in northeast Merced, approximately two and a ha lf miles northeast of Downtown and three and three-quarter miles north of Highway 99. The project site consists of an undeveloped lot totaling approximately 39.12 acres. The project site fronts an arterial road (E.
Cardella Road), with the nearest north-south road being Paulson Road (co llector road) currently terminating south of the project, but would be extended through the project up to Cardella Road.
Yosemite Avenue and Cardella Road are both de signed to carry large vol umes of traffic going through a large portion of the community. The subject site is half a mile east of G Street which provides access to Highway 99 that connects Merced with other regional communities throughout the State.
Transit Service
The Transit Joint Powers Authority for Merced County has jurisdiction over public transit in Merced County and operates The Bus. The Bus provides transportation fo r residents traveling within Merced and outside the City within neig hboring communities such as Planada, Atwater, and Livingston. Cat Tracks is a bus service for UC Merced students that also serves the City.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Senate Bill (SB) 743 directs the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop new guidelines for assessing transportation-rela ted impacts that “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses” (Public Resources Code Secti on 21099[b][1]). These new guidelines will replace automobile delay, as described through level of service (LOS), with more appropriate criteria and metrics based on travel demand, such as “vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated” (Public Resources Code Section 21099[b][1]). The State CEQA Guidelines were amended to include guidance for measuring travel demand and to recommend that delays related to congestion no longer be considered a significant impact under CEQA (OPR 2016).
In 2023, the City of Merced amended General Plan Policy T-1.8 to require the use of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Thresholds and Guidelines when evaluating environmental impacts of development projects under CEQA. At that time, the City also adopted by reference the VMT Thresholds and Guidelines as recommended by the Merced Count y Association of Governments (MCAG) in November 2022. Projects that genera te fewer than 1,000 daily trips and that are consistent with the General Plan may be scr eened out from the need for a VMT analysis.
Additionally, MCAG provides screen ing thresholds for various la nd uses. For single-family detached residential projects, not requiring a GP A, projects up to 106 dwelling units are eligible to be exempt from VMT analysis. As this proj ect includes only 104 single-family homes, would only generate 744 daily trips, and the General Plan Amendment for this project is not a change in land use, but a change to the Circulation Elemen t that does not affect VMT, this project was deemed exempt from further VMT analysis per the above guidelines.
Initial Study #24-07
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
O. Transportation/Traffic.
Would the project:
1) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
2) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3 subdivision (b)?
3) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
4) Result in inadequate emergency access?
1) Less-than-Significant Impact
Bicycle lanes exist along portions of G Street, and Yosemite Avenue located within a half mile of the site. Sidewalks are present along Paulson Road and Dunn Road to the south and east respectively. The proposed residential s ubdivision would not c onflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public tran sit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. 2) Less-than-Significant Impact
The General Plan would allow a maximum of 655 residential units on the subject site. The proposed 104 units would generate significan tly less vehicle traffic compared to the maximum 655 homes that could be developed on this site. The existing street network could adequately serve this proposal. According to Trip Generation (ITE Report), the average daily trips per unit is 6.59. At the maximum General Plan density of 655 residential units, that would total 4,317 trips per day. The project at 104 units would generate approximately 686 daily trips or 16% of the average daily trips compared to the maximum allowed by the General Plan. In addition, there are several walkable locations within a ¼ mile of the subject site, wh ich include Davenport Park, Cruickshank Middle School, Initial Study #24-07
Dignity Health Hospital, Merced College , and the Yosemite & G Crossing Shopping Center.
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 alterna tive modes of transportation are being assessed. The Transit Joint Powers Authority provides transit service through “The Bus.” There are several bus stops near the inters ection of Yosemite Avenue and G Street, and Yosemite Avenue and Mercy Avenue that provide access to bus routes.
The Amtrak (passenger train service) is locat ed within 2 and half miles from the subject site providing services to the greater Califor nia area and connections to travel across the country. The closest airport is Merced Regional Airport, lo cated approximately 4.5 miles southwest of the project site.
3) No Impact
City staff, including Police, Fire, and Engineering staff, reviewed the proposed subdivision layout and did not express any concerns regarding the proposed street network. Therefore, no impact would occur.
4) Less-than-Significant Impact
The Fire and Police departments reviewed th is proposal and are not requesting additional access points to this site. Therefore, proj ect construction and operation would not pose a significant obstacle to emergency response ve hicles. This impact on emergency access would be less than significant.
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
P. Water
The City’s water system is composed of 22 groundwater production wells located throughout the City, and approximately 350 miles of main lines. Well pump ope rators ensure reliability and adequate system pressure at all times to satisfy customer demand. Diesel powered generators help maintain uninterrupted operations during power outages. The C ity of Merced water system delivers more than 24 million gallons of drinking water pe r day to approximately 20,733 residential, commercial, and indus trial customer locati ons. The City is required to meet State Health pressure requirements, which call for a minimum of 20 psi at every service connection under the annual peak hour condition and maintenance of the annual average daily demand plus fire flow, whichever is stricter. The City of Merced Water Division is operated by the Public Works Department.
The City of Merced’s wells have an average depth of 414 feet and range in depth from 161 feet to 800 feet. The depth of these wells would suggest that th e City of Merced is primarily drawing water from a deep aquifer associated with the Mehrten geological format ion. Increasing urban demand and associated population growth, along with an increased shift by agricultural users from surface water to groundwater and prolonged drought have resulted in declining groundwater levels due to overdraft. This condition was recognized by the City of Merced and the Merced Irrigation District (MID) in 1993, at which time the two entit ies began a planning process to ensure a safe Initial Study #24-07
and reliable water supply for Eastern Merced County through the year 2030. Integrated Regional Water Planning continues today through various efforts.
Wastewater
Wastewater (sanitary sewer) collection and treatment in the Merced urban area is provided by the City of Merced. The wastewater collection system handles wastewater gene rated by residential, commercial, and industrial uses in the City.
The City Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), locat ed in the southwest part of the City about two miles south of the airport, has been periodically expanded and upgraded to meet the needs of the City’s growing population and new industry. The City’s wastewater treatment facility has a capacity of 11.5 million gallons per day (mgd); with an average fl ow of 8.5 mgd. The City has recently completed an expansion project to incr ease capacity to 12 mgd and upgrade to tertiary treatment with the addition of filtration and ultraviolet disinfection. Future improvements would add another 8 mgd in capacity (in increments of 4 mgd), for a total of 20 mgd. This design capacity can support a population of approximately 174,000. Th e collection system will also need to be expanded as development occurs.
Treated effluent is disposed of in several ways depending on the time of year. Most of the treated effluent (75% average) is discharged to Hartley Slough throughout the year. The remaining treated effluent is delivered to a land application area and the on-site City-owned wetland area south of the treatment plant.
Storm Drainage
The Draft City of Merced Storm Drainage Master Plan addresses the collection and disposal of surface water runoff in the City’s SUDP. The study addresses both the collection and disposal of storm water. Systems of storm dr ain pipes and catch basins are laid out, sized, and costed in the plan to serve present and projected urban land uses.
It is the responsibility of the developer to ensure that utilities, including storm water and drainage facilities, are installed in comp liance with City regulations and other applicable regulations.
Necessary arrangements with the utility companies or other agen cies will be made for such installation, according to the specifications of the governing agency and the City [(Ord. 1342 § 2 (part), 1980: prior code § 25.21(f)).] The disposal system is mainly composed of MID facilities, including water distribution canals and laterals, drains, and natural channels that traverse the area.
The City of Merced has been involved in deve loping a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to fulfill requirements of storm water discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) operators in accordance with Section 402(p) of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The SWMP was developed to also co mply with General Pe rmit Number CAS000004, Water Quality Order No. 2003-0005-DWQ.
Solid Waste
The City of Merced is served by the State R oute 59 Landfill and the State Route 59 Compost Facility, located at 6040 North Highway 59. The County of Merced is the contracting agency for landfill operations and maintenance, as the facilities are owned by the Merced County Association of Governments. The City of Merced provides services for all refuse pick-up within the City limits and franchise hauling companies co llect in the unincorporated area s. In addition to these two Initial Study #24-07
landfill sites, there is one privat e disposal facility, the Flintkot e County Disposal Site, at State Route 59 and the Merced River. This site is restricted to concrete and earth material.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
P. Utilities and Service Systems.
Would the Project:
1) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
2) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
3) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments?
4) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
5) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
1) Less Than Significant Impact
The City’s current water and wastewater system is capable of handling this project within the City of Merced. There are existing se wer and water lines along Paulson Road, which would be extended to go through the project site to Cardella Ro ad. No significant environmental impacts would result from connecti ng to the line. This potential impact is less than significant.
2) Less Than Significant Impact
No new water facilities are needed for this project. The existing water system is sufficient to serve the development. Potential impacts are less than significant. 3) Less Than Significant Impact
Refer to item 1 above.
Initial Study #24-07
4) Less Than Significant Impact
The City of Merced uses the State Route 59 La ndfill. Sufficient capacity is available to serve the future project. According to the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan DEIR, the landfill has capacity to serve the City through 2030. Pote ntial impacts are less than significant.
5) Less Than Significant Impact
All construction on the site woul d be required to comply with all local, state, and federal regulations regarding solid wa ste, including recycling. Po tential impacts are less than significant.
Q. Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Q. Tribal Cultural Resources
Would the project:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), o
r
i. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significa nt pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code §
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
Impact Analysis
1) No Impact
As stated in the Cultural Resources Section of this Initial Study, improvements associated with the project include site excavation, grad ing, paving, and construction of buildings.
The areas of the project subject to demolition and construction facilities are likely to have Initial Study #24-07
been subject to ground disturbance in the pa st. No tribal resources are known to have occurred or have been identified at the project site or in the vicinity of the project site.
However, as noted in the Cultural Resour ces Section, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL‐1 and CUL ‐3 would protect previously unr ecorded or unknown cultural resources, including Native American artifa cts and human remains, should these be encountered during project construction.
In addition, Assembly Bill (A B) 52 provides for c onsultation between lead agencies and Native American tribal organizations during the CEQA process. Since AB 52 was enacted in July 2015, the City has not been contacte d by any California Native American tribes requesting consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1.
R. Wildfire
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Both urban and wildland fire hazard potential exis t in the City of Merced and surrounding areas, creating the potential for injury, loss of life, and property damage. Urban fires primarily involve the uncontrolled burning of residential, commerci al, or industrial stru ctures due to human activities. Wildland fires affect grassland, brush or woodlands, and any structures on or near these fires. Such fires can result from either human made or natural causes.
Urban fires comprise the majority of fires in th e City of Merced. The site is surrounded by urban uses. The City of Merced Fire Department has procedures in place to address the issue of wildland fires, so no additional mitigation would be necessary.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
R . W i l d f i r e . If located in or near stat
responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would
the pro
ject:
1) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
2) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
3) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
Initial Study #24-07
4) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
chan
ges?
Impact Analysis
1) Less Than Significant Impact
The project does not include the construction of new roadways or changes to existing roads.
The project would also be required to comply with all applicable requirements of the California Fire Code. As such, the proj ect would not impact an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This impact would be less than significant. 2) Less Than Significant Impact
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is not located in any fire hazard zone. The areas su rrounding the project site are mostly developed, urban land.
There is a low potential for wildland fires within these parameters. Additionally, the California Building Code and the California Fire Codes work together to regulate building construction and related items such as the care of vacant lots and the storage of flammable liquids.
To provide effective fire prevention activities for low hazard occupancies, the Fire Department conducts seasonal hazard removal programs (primarily weed abatement). The City of Merced employs a weed abatement program, which requires property owners to eliminate flammable vegetation and rubbish from thei r properties. Each property with in the City is surveyed each spring and notices are sent to the property owne rs whose properties have been identified to pose a fire risk. Since inception of this program in 1992, grass or brush related fires within the City have been greatly redu ced. A “bulky item” drop off station has been opened near Highway 59 and Yosemite Avenue. Further, staging areas, building areas, and/or areas slated for development using spark ‐producing equipment are cleared of dried vegetation or other materials that could serve as fuel for combustion; impacts are considered less than significant.
3) Less Than Significant Impact
The project would be required to repair/replace any missing or damaged infrastructure along their property frontage. Howeve r, the on-going maintenance of roadways would fall to the City. All other infrastructure or utilities exist in the area. No additional infra-structure or on- going maintenance would be require d that would cause an impact to the environment. This impact is less than significant.
4) No Impact
The project site and surrounding area is relatively flat with no risk of downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Therefore, there is no impact.
Initial Study #24-07
S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, cl assified as greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. A portion of the solar radiation that enters the atmosphere is absorbed by the earth’s surface, and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space. Infrared radiatio n is absorbed by GHGs; as a result, infrared radiation released from the earth that otherwise w ould have escaped back into space is instead trapped, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on Earth.
GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources and anthropogenic sources, and are formed from secondary reac tions taking place in the atmosphere. The following GHGs are widely a ccepted as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate ch ange and are relevant to the project: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, and nitrous oxide.
Emissions of CO 2 are byproducts of fossil fuel co mbustion. Methane is the main component of natural gas and is associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Nitrous oxide is a colorless GHG that results from in dustrial processes, vehicle emissions, and agricultural practices.
Global warming potential (GWP) is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to CO2. The GWP of a GHG is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas in absorbing infrared radiation and the length of time the gas remains in the atmosphere (i.e., its atmospheric lifetime). The reference gas for GWP is CO
2; therefore, CO2 has a GWP of 1. The other main GHGs that have been attributed to human activity in clude methane, which has a GWP of 28, and nitrous oxide, which has a GWP of 265 (IPCC 2013). For example, 1 ton of methane has the same contribution to th e greenhouse effect as a pproximately 28 tons of CO 2. GHGs with lower emissions rates than CO 2 may still contribute to c limate change, because they are more effective than CO2 at absorbing outgoing infrared ra diation (i.e., they have high GWPs). The concept of CO2-equivalents (CO2e) is used to account for the different GWP potentials of GHGs to absorb infrared radiation.
Initial Study #24-07
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Would the project:
1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissi ons of greenhouse
gases?
1) Less -than-Significant Impact
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is responsible for protecting public health and welfare through the administ ration of federal and state air quality laws and policies. In December 2009, SJVAPCD adopted the Final Staff Report Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (SJVAPCD 2009). SJVAPCD also developed guidance for land-use agencies to address GHG emission impacts for new development projects. Projects complying with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program would have a less- than-significant individual and cumulative impact related to GHG emissions. Projects implementing best performanc e standards and reducing proj ect-specific GHG emissions by at least 29 percent compared to the business-as-usual condition would have a less-than- significant individual and cumulative impact on global climate change under this guidance.
However, models used to estimate GHG emi ssions now include some of the statewide measures that previous ly would have been used to ev aluate this 29 percent reduction performance standard, so this particular method of comparison is out of date.
To establish the context in which to consider the project’s GHG emissions, this analysis used guidance from the adjacent Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) to determine si gnificance. In 2014, SMAQMD adopted a significance threshold for GHG emissions consistent with the goals of Assembly Bill (AB) 32: 1,100 metric tons (MT) CO
2e per year for construction-related and operational
emissions (SMAQMD 2014). This significance threshold was developed to assess the consistency of a project’s emissions with the statewide framework for reducing GHG emissions.
The impacts associated with GHG emissions ge nerated by the project are related to the emissions from short-term c onstruction and operations. Off- road equipment, materials transport, and worker commute s during construction of the project would generate GHG emissions. Emissions generated by the project during operati ons are related to indirect GHG emissions associated with residential uses.
Initial Study #24-07
GHG emissions associated with construction of the project are shor t-term and will cease following completion of construction activity. Therefore, the project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. 2) Less-than-Significant Impact
In 2006, California enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (California Health and Safety Code Section 38500 et seq.). AB 32 establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve reductions in GHG emissions and establishes a cap on statewide GHG emissions. It requires that statewide GHG e missions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020.
In 2008 and 2014, the California Air Resour ces Board (ARB) approved the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) and the first update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework, respectively (ARB 2008; ARB 2014). In 2016, the state legislature passed Senate Bill SB 32, which established a 2030 GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. In response to SB 32 and the companion legislation of AB 197, ARB approved the Final Proposed 2017 Scoping Plan Update: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 GHG Target in November 2017 (ARB 2017). The 2017 Scoping Plan draws from the previ ous plans to present strategi es to reaching California’s 2030 GHG reduction target. The project would comply with any mandate or standards set forth by an adopted Scoping Plan Update effecting construction activities and operations.
In 2012, the City of Merced adopted the Merced Climate Action Plan to address the reduction of major sources of GHG emissions . The climate action plan established an emissions target of 1990 levels by 2020, commensurate with the State of California’s target (City of Merced 2012). To meet this goal, the City adopted values, goals, and strategies to reduce emissions. Goals of the plan include:
enhanced mobility of all transportation modes;
sustainable community design;
water conservation and technology;
protection of air resources;
waste reduction;
increased use of renewable energy sources;
building energy conservation; and,
public outreach and involvement.
The project would be consistent with the goals of the Merced Climate Action Plan.
As mentioned above, the project would not exceed emissions thresholds adopted by SMAQMD and would be consistent with the applicable requirements of the Merced Climate Action Plan. Therefore, the project would not c onflict with any applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the pur pose of reducing GHG emi ssions. This impact would be less than significant. This impact would be less than significant.
Initial Study #24-07
T. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
T. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Would the Project:
1) Have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California histor
y or prehistory?
2) Have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current project s, and the effects of
probabl
y future projects?)
3) Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
1) Less-Than-Significant Impact
As previously discussed in this document, the Project does not have the potential to adversely affect biological resources or cu ltural resources, because such resources are lacking on the project site, and any potential impacts wo uld be avoided with other applicable codes identified in this report. Also, the Project would not significantly change the existing urban setting of the project ar ea. Thus, this impact would be less than significant.
2) Less-Than-Significant Impact
The Program Environmental Impact Report conducted for the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan, the General Plan Program EIR (SCH# 2008071069), has rec ognized that future development and build-out of the SUDP/SOI will result in cumulative and unavoidable impacts in the areas of Air Quality and Loss of Agricultural Soils. In conjunction with this Initial Study #24-07
conclusion, the City has adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these impacts (Resolution #2011-63) which is herein incorporated by reference.
The certified General Plan EIR addressed and analyzed cumulative impacts resulting from changing agricultural use to urban uses. No new or unaddressed cumulative impacts will result from the project that have not previously been cons idered by the certified General Plan EIR or by the Statement of Overriding Considerations, or mitigated by this Expanded Initial Study. This Initial Study does not di sclose any new and/or feasible mitigation measures which would lessen the unavoidable and significant cumulative impacts.
The analysis of impacts associated with the development would contribute to the cumulative air quality and agricultural impacts id entified in the General Plan EIR. In the case of air quality, emissions from the proposed project would be less than significant. The nature and extent of these impacts, however, falls within the parameters of impacts previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. No individual or cumulative impacts will be created by the Project that have not previously been considered at the program level by the General Plan EIR or mitigated by this Initial Study.
3) Less-Than-Significant Impact
Development anticipated by the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan will have significant adverse effects on human beings. These include the incremental degradation of air quality in the San Joaquin Basin, the loss of unique farmland, the incremental increase in traffic, and the increased demand on natural resources, public services, and facilities. However, consistent with the provisions of CEQA previously identified, the analysis of the proposed project is limited to those impacts which are peculiar to the project site or which were not previously identified as significant effects in the prior EIR. The previously-certified General Plan EIR and the Statement of Ov erriding Considerations addressed those cumulative impacts; hence, there is no requireme nt to address them again as part of this project.
This previous EIR concluded that these sign ificant adverse impacts are accounted for in the mitigation measures incorporated into the General Plan EIR. In addition, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted by City Council Resolution #2011-63 that indicates that the significant impacts associated with development are offset by the benefits that will be realized in providing necessary jobs for residents of the City. The analysis and mitigation of impacts have been detailed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Merced Vision 2030 General Plan , which is incorporated into this document by reference.
While this issue was addressed and resolved with the General Plan EIR in an abundance of caution, in order to fulfill CEQA’s mandate to fully disclose potential environmental consequences of projects, this analysis is considered herein. However, as a full disclosure document, this issue is repeated in abbrev iated form for purposes of disclosure, even though it was resolved as a part of the General Plan.
Potential impacts associated wi th the Project’s development have been described in this Initial Study. All impacts were determined to be less than significant.
E DUNN RD
CARDELLA RD
W
HITE DOVE AVE
ROBIN DR
PLEASANT LN
PAULSON RD
TEAL CT
ROBIN CT
CRESCENDO AVE
FAVIER DR
OSPREY ST
MERCY AVE
CANOPY CT
DUNN RD
DESTINY DR
DOM
INICAN DR
CORMORANT DR
N GARDNER AVE
E CARDELLA RD
¯
Subjec Site
APN: 231-020-021
Undeveloped
(Land Use - Commercial)
Cruickshank
Middle School
Undeveloped
(Low Density Residential)
Undeveloped
(Land Use - Commercial)
Undeveloped
(Low Density Residential)
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF MERCED CIRCULATION PLAN
Figure 4.1
ATTACHMENT B
Subject Site
The portionofDestiny
DrivetothroughSubject
SitetobeEliminated
ATTACHMENT C
ATTACHMENT D
ATTACHMENT E