27. California tiger salamander: The California tiger salamander (CTS) is a federally and State-listed Threatened species. CTS is a large terrestrial salamander that occurs in central California from the Sacramento Valley to the south-central San Joaquin Valley, and in the surrounding foothills of both the Coast Ranges and the Sierra Nevada Mountains. CTS are also recorded from the San Francisco Bay region, Sonoma County, the Monterey Bay region, and the valleys and foothills of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties. CTS breed in temporary wetland pools, such as vernal pools, and other seasonal wetland bodies where ponded water is present for a minimum of three to four months, extending into the early spring. Such ponds and temporary wetlands provide necessary breeding and larval-stage habitat for the species. Adults spend most of the year in aestivation, underground in the burrows of small mammals, such as the California ground squirrel, or within other suitable subterranean retreats. They emerge at night during winter rain events for brief periods to breed. Aquatic juveniles (larvae) are mostly herbivorous.
CTS normally begin to reproduce after three to five years. There are no documented occurrences of CTS within the General Plan Area and they have been believed to be extirpated from the vicinity. The CDFW, however, has indicated that canals and storage ponds provide suitable habitat. In addition to the CDFW described aquatic habitat, this species also requires refugia (debris, burrows, crevices, barns, sheds, etc.) that could be used by CTS during their estivation period. It is also theoretically possible that a CTS could be present in isolated areas that have not been surveyed, but it would require appropriate refugia and aquatic habitat with an estimated 1.3 miles of each other. Such areas may include upland habitat along farmland fringe, irrigation ditches, roadside ditch, ponds, canals, farm equipment yards, and farmland residences. The paved roads, dirt roads, and tilled farmland provide limited to no habitat #21..
- 1140 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-8 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan because of the frequency of disturbance in these areas. While the potential for presence is deemed low, surveys of projects that have potential habitat that are tiered or approved under the General Plan shall be conducted as a part of the CEQA process.
28. Crotch’s bumble bee: The Crotch’s bumble bee is a State-listed Endangered species. The crotch bumble bee occurs primarily in California, including the Mediterranean region, Pacific Coast, Western Desert, Great Valley, and adjacent foothills through most of southwestern California.
It also occurs in Mexico (Baja California and Baja California Sur) and has been documented in southwest Nevada, near the California border. Their natural habitat is grassland and scrub areas, requiring a hotter and drier environment than other bumblebee species. This species can only tolerate a very narrow range of climatic conditions. This is a non-migratory species of bumble bee that nests underground, often in abandoned rodent dens.
29. San Joaquin Valley Woodrat: The San Joaquin Valley woodrat is a federal-listed Endangered and a State species of special concerns. This species requires wide, dense riparian forests with a thick understory of willows for nesting, while sites with a dominant cottonwood overstory are preferred for foraging. Suitable habitat is present along the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers.
30. Riparian Brush Rabbit: The riparian brush rabbit is a federal and state listed Endangered species. This species requires native valley riparian habitats with large clumps of dense shrubs, low-growing vines, and some tall shrubs and trees. Suitable habitat is present along the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers.
Special status animal species receive protection from various Federal and State laws and regulations, including FESA and CESA. These regulations generally prohibit the taking of a species or direct impact to foraging and breeding habitat without a special permit. Adherence to the following policies included in the Urban Area General Plan, as amended herein, and compliance with federal and state regulations, would ensure that any future direct or indirect impacts to candidate, sensitive or special-status species would be reduced to a less than significant level as development is proposed and implemented in the Modesto Planning area pursuant to the General Plan:
• SWPH-2: requires site-specific surveys for sensitive natural communities or species prior to development. (Note: this policy is proposed to be amended to clarify and strengthen the requirements of the policy in accordance with recommendations provided by CDFW) • SWPH-3: Avoid and preserve areas occupied by special-status species where feasible.
Where avoidance is not feasible, protect these areas with fencing, signs and or buffer zones.
• SWPH-4: Include additional protection measures for sensitive habitats. (Note: this policy is proposed to be amended to clarify and strengthen the requirements of the policy in accordance with recommendations provided by CDFW. This includes requirements for specific species including northwestern pond turtle, branchiopods, Crotch’s bumble bee, and California tiger salamander.)
• SWPH-5: Table 3.4-4 presents additional environmental protections.
3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES
#21..
- 1141 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-9 Impact 3.5-2: The Project would notPotential to lead to the disturbance of any human remains (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.5-3: The Project would notPotential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, and that is: 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), or a resource determined by the lead agency (Less than Significant)
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact 3.6-1: The Project would not Potential to expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.6-2: The Project would not Potential to result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.6-3: The Project would not Potential to result in development 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 off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.6-4: The Project would not Potential to result in development on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.6-6: The Project would not Potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature (Less than Significant)
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS , CLIMATE CHANGE, AND ENERGY No changes were made to Chapter 3.7 of the DEIR.
#21..
- 1142 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-10 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 3.8-4: The Project would not Potential to be located within an airport land use plan, two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.8-5: The Project would not Potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan (Less than Significant)
Impact 3.8-6: The Project would not Potential to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires (Less than Significant)
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
No changes were made to Chapter 3.9 of the DEIR.
3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
No changes were made to Chapter 3.10 of the DEIR.
3.11 NOISE
No changes were made to Section 3.11 of the Draft EIR.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
No changes were made to Chapter 3.12 of the DEIR.
3.13 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
No changes were made to Chapter 3.13 of the DEIR.
3.14 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
No changes were made to Section 3.14 of the Draft EIR.
4.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED TOPICS
No changes were made to Chapter 4.0 of the DEIR.
5.0 ALTERNATIVES
No changes were made to Chapter 5.0 of the DEIR.
#21..
- 1143 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-11
6.0 REPORT PREPARERS
No changes were made to Chapter 6.0 of the DEIR.
7.0 REFERENCES
No changes were made to Chapter 7.0 of the DEIR.
APPENDICES
The following changes are made to Appendix A. This includes the addition of an NOP comment letter provided by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife dated October 28, 2024. #21..
- 1144 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-12 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1145 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-13 #21..
- 1146 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-14 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1147 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-15 #21..
- 1148 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-16 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1149 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-17 #21..
- 1150 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-18 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1151 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-19 #21..
- 1152 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-20 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1153 -
REVISIONS AND ERRATA 3.0
Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan 3.0-21 #21..
- 1154 -
3.0 REVISIONS AND ERRATA
3.0-22 Final Environmental Impact Report – Modesto Urban Area General Plan #21..
- 1155 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE
MODESTO URBAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
REQUIRED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq)
I. INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the City of Modesto (City), as the CEQA lead agency to: 1) make written findings when it approves a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) was certified, and 2) identify overriding considerations for significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR.
These findings explain how the City, as the lead agency, approached the significant and potentially significant impacts identified in the environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for the General Plan Update (General Plan, or Project). The statement of overriding considerations identifies economic, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project that override any significant environmental impacts that would result from the Project.
As required under CEQA, the Final EIR describes the Project, adverse environmental impacts of the project, and mitigation measures and alternatives that would substantially reduce or avoid those impacts. The information and conclusions contained in the EIR reflect the City’s independent judgment regarding the potential adverse environmental impacts of the Project.
The Final EIR (which includes the Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR, responses to comments on the Draft EIR, and any revisions to the Draft EIR) for the Project, examined two alternatives to the Project that were not chosen as part of the approved project (the No Project [No Build] Alternative and the Increased Density Concentration Alternative).
The Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth below (“Findings”) are presented for adoption by the City Council (Council) as the City’s findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Public Resources Code, §21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, § 15000 et seq.) relating to the Project. The Findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of this Council regarding the Project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives to the Project, and the overriding considerations, which in this Council’s view, justify approval of the Modesto General Plan, despite its environmental effects.
#21..
- 1156 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
II. GENERAL FINDINGS AND OVERVIEW
A. Project Background
The City of Modesto is currently embarking on a new comprehensive update to the Urban Area General Plan (UAGP) that will look toward the City’s long-term future to reflect the issues, ideas, and aspirations of today, and plan toward the year 2050. That UAGP Update is in the early stages of a multi-year process, and is not anticipated to conclude until 2026 or later.
The project analyzed in the EIR consists of two parts. First, the City will examine, at a project level, proposed amendments to the General Plan land use designations to ratify and conform the General Plan land use designations with the changes adopted in the General Plan’s Housing Element. This would include amendments to UAGP Chapter III Community Development Policies. The amendments to Chapter III include:
Revisions to Section B. Adopted General Plan Land Use Designations to reflect the updated densities as follows.
o Table III-1 General Plan Land Use Designations on page III-2 will be updated under the Residential Density Guidance and Population Intensity columns to reflect the density and intensity changes.
o Section B.1.C (Residential-R) on page III-3 will be updated to reflect the density and intensity changes.
o Section B.2.C (Mixed Use-MU) on page III-3 will be updated to reflect the new “Mixed Use-Pedestrian and Mixed Use-Highway” uses, as well as the associated density and intensity changes.
o Section B.6.C (Village Residential -VR) on page III-5 will be updated. Revisions to Section D. Comprehensive Planning Districts to reflect the updated densities as follows.
o Exhibit III-1, Page 1 of 2: Comprehensive Planning Districts Summary will be updated under the dwelling units column to reflect the density and intensity changes. (page III-20)
o Exhibit III-1, Page 2 of 2: Comprehensive Planning Districts Summary will be updated under the dwelling units column to reflect the density and intensity changes. (page III-21)
Approval of these changes will create internal consistency within the General Plan and the density changes approved in the Housing Element Update. Rejection of these changes would mean the City would need to look at new/different changes to the Housing Element in order to comply with the City’s housing obligations.
#21..
- 1157 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
In addition to the above General Plan amendment changes, the City will examine environmental topics in light of legislative directives that have changed since the 2019 EIR was certified. For instance, in the 2019 EIR, traffic analysis was conducted under a level of service analysis, whereas the State has since revised the required rubric and directed that CEQA impacts to traffic perform a Vehicle Miles Traveled analysis.
The updated Modesto General Plan includes a framework of goals, policies, and actions that will guide the community toward its common vision. The General Plan is supported with a variety of maps, including a Land Use Map and Circulation Diagram.
B. Procedural Background
The City of Modesto circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed project on September 27, 2024 to trustee and responsible agencies, the State Clearinghouse, and the public. A scoping meeting was held on October 11, 2024. No public or agency comments on the NOP related to the EIR analysis were presented or submitted during the scoping meeting. However, during the 30-day public review period for the NOP, which ended on October 27, 2024, three written comment letters were received on the NOP. The NOP and all comments received on the NOP are presented in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
The City published a public Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR on February 28, 2025 inviting comment from the general public, agencies, organizations, and other interested parties. The NOA was filed with the State Clearinghouse (SCH # 2024091127) and the County Clerk, and was published in the The Modesto Bee pursuant to the public noticing requirements of CEQA. The Draft EIR was available for public review from February 28, 2025 through April 15, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. The Public Draft General Plan was also available for public review and comment during this time period.
The Draft EIR contains a description of the project, description of the environmental setting, identification of project impacts, and mitigation/minimization measures, as well as an analysis of project alternatives, identification of significant irreversible environmental changes, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative impacts. The Draft EIR identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less than significant impact, and provides detailed analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. Comments received in response to the NOP were considered in preparing the analysis in the Draft EIR.
The City received two (2) comment letters regarding the General Plan and Draft EIR from public agencies, organizations, and members of the public during the public comment period. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088, a Final EIR was prepared that responded to the written comments received, as required by CEQA. The Final EIR document and the Draft EIR, as amended by the Final EIR, constitute the Final EIR. #21..
- 1158 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
C. Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record
For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City’s findings and determinations consists of the following documents and testimony, at a minimum:
The NOP, comments received on the NOP, Notice of Availability, and all other public notices issued by the City in relation to the Modesto Urban Area General Plan EIR. The Modesto Urban Area General Plan Final EIR, including comment letters and technical materials cited in the document.
All non-draft and/or non-confidential reports and memoranda prepared by the City of Modesto and consultants in relation to the EIR.
Minutes of the discussions regarding the Project and/or Project components at public hearings held by the City.
Staff reports associated with Planning Commission and City Council meetings on the Project.
Those categories of materials identified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6.
The City Clerk is the custodian of the administrative record. The documents and materials that constitute the administrative record are available for review at the City of Modesto Office of the City Clerk at 1010 10th Street, Modesto, CA 95354.
D. Consideration of the Environmental Impact Report
In adopting these Findings, this Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to this Council, the decision-making body of the lead agency, which reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the Modesto Urban Area General Plan. By these findings, this City Council ratifies, adopts, and incorporates the analysis, explanation, findings, responses to comments, and conclusions of the Final EIR. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Final EIR represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City.
E. Severability
If any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the Modesto General Plan, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City. #21..
- 1159 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
III. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE
IMPACTS
A. Agricultural and Forest Resources
1. The proposed Project would result in the conversion of Farmlands, including Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural uses (EIR Impact 3.2-1) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in the conversion of farmlands, including important farmlands, to non-agricultural uses is discussed at pages 3.2-15 through 3.2-17 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.2-15 through 3.2-17 of the Draft EIR, through 2040, development under the UAGP could convert approximately 9,000 acres of Prime Farmland, approximately 1,100 acres of Unique Farmland, approximately 100 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance and
approximately 400 acres of Farmland of Local Importance to urban uses within the Planned Urbanizing Area.
The UAGP would place urban uses in proximity to existing agricultural activities. These urban uses would be subject to noise, dust, and potential chemical overspray from agricultural uses, which could result in complaints, especially from residential areas.
The UAGP results in an approximately 26-mile-long boundary between these uses. Therefore, approximately 1,100 acres of urban uses (within a 350-foot zone from the boundary) could be affected adversely. If agricultural activities are not conducted within a 350-foot zone of those uses, the efficiency of up to 1,100 acres of agricultural lands would be reduced.
LAFCo (AL-1, AL-2) and City (AL-13 through AL-21) policies would result in the orderly conversion of agricultural land as available developable land within the City is improved. To reduce the conversion of agricultural land for non-agricultural uses, the City allows development of detached single-family residences on lots smaller than the R-1 minimum standard of 5,000 square feet for #21..
- 1160 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
interior lots and 5,500 square feet for corner lots in the Planned Urbanizing Area. Single-family residences have been built on lots of approximately 2,100 square feet, resulting in houses consuming less than half the typical land area, resulting in further reduction of agricultural land conversion to urban uses. General Plan amendment policies AL-13 through AL-21 listed above would further reduce (but not eliminate) the impact. These policies would reduce the severity of the impact through requiring thoughtful and deliberate planning processes prior to conversion of agricultural land, and by promoting continued agricultural activities on developable land. General Plan policies would also promote higher-density infill development within the existing City, further reducing development pressure on greenfield areas.
However, because areas of Farmland as described under
Thresholds of Significance, above, would be converted to nonagricultural uses, the resulting impact(s) was previously found to be significant and unavoidable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with conversion of farmlands.
2. The proposed Project would conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or Williamson Act Contracts (EIR Impact 3.2-2)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in conflicts with Williamson Act Contracts is discussed at page 3.2-17 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on page 3.2-17 of the Draft EIR, there are a small single-digit number of Williamson Act contracts (contracts) within the Dry Creek CPD, toward the east side of the UAGP planning area. However, the applicable Open Space land use designation results in any potential impact(s) related to these contracts being less than significant. Nevertheless, separately, there are approximately 60 Williamson Act contracts in the Planned Urbanizing Area. The properties that are subject to these #21..
- 1161 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
contracts are designated for future conversion to non- agricultural uses, which results in a conflict with the contracts.
UAGP policies AL-12 through AL-21 serve to minimize direct impacts to agricultural resources by promoting continued agricultural activities on developable parcels, thoughtful and deliberate annexation, and development processes &
requirements, promoting new development at increased densities to occur within the existing City, and by supporting LAFCo’s policy to require that annexation projects preserve agricultural land that is of equal or better quality elsewhere in the County.
Based on the applicable threshold of significance, the resulting impact(s) would be significant and unavoidable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with Williamson Act Contract conflicts.
B. Air Quality
1. General Plan implementation would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (EIR Impact 3.3-2)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations is discussed at pages
3.3-44 through 3.3-49 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.3-44 through 3.3-49 of the Draft EIR, the maximum cancer risks from both the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) rail lines occurred 50 feet from the railroad track centerline and decrease with distance from the rail lines. Trains on the BNSF rail line would have a significant cancer risk (above 20 in one million excess cancer risk) within approximately 500 feet for exposures starting in 2025. For the UPRR rail line, trains would have a significant cancer risk within about 100 feet east of, and 200 feet west of, the rail line. Potentially significant setback #21..
- 1162 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
distances for acute and chronic Hazard Index would be greater than those identified above for excess cancer risk.
Since it is unlikely that this impact could feasibly be reduced to a less than significant level, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Additionally, while it is possible that the proposed density changes to the residential General Plan land uses, as well as the R1, R-2, and R-3 zones, would have the potential to place additional residences within the identified significant cancer risk zones, these areas are isolated to the UPRR and BNSP rail corridors. It is anticipated that a buffer of between 100 and 500 feet of the rail line would setback residents far away enough that they would be located outside the elevated risk zone. UAGP policies listed above (AQ-1 through AQ117) would also reduce impacts associated with air quality, including Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). Nevertheless, the proposed density changes would not change the previous impact determination of significant and unavoidable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
C. Cultural and Tribal Resources
1. The Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 (EIR Impact
3.5-1)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 is discussed at pages 3.5-28 and
3.5-29 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.5-28 and 3.5-29 of the Draft EIR, the City Zoning Ordinance requires that when #21..
- 1163 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
substantial changes to a structure are proposed, the development will be required to comply with other Zoning Ordinance provisions such as parking or landscaping requirements. This could result in modifications to the structure which substantially reduce its historical significance. This would be a less-than-significant impact with the application of UAGP Policies AH-1 through AH-4, because the standards of care and preservation processes defined therein would serve to protect and maintain the characteristics that are the basis of the identified historical significance. Demolition of a significant building cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, and, even with implementation of mitigation measures, the impact would be significant and unavoidable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with historical or archaeological resources.
D. Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change and Energy
1. General Plan implementation would generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and/or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases (EIR Impact 3.7-1)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and/or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation is discussed at pages
3.7-35 through 3.7-39 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts As described on pages 3.7-35 through 3.7-39 of the Draft EIR, General Plan policies and implementing actions would minimize potential impacts associated with GHG emissions in the Planning Area through the promotion of VMT reduction strategies, multimodal support and transportation improvements, and the support of green building practices, among other policies and actions, and would support requirements under AB 32, SB 375, and SB 32.
#21..
- 1164 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Subsequent development projects would be required to comply with the General Plan and adopted federal, state, and local regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions. The City has prepared the General Plan to include numerous goals and policies intended to reduce GHG emissions associated with future development and improvement projects. However, even with implementation of the goals, policies, and actions contained in the proposed General Plan, there is no guarantee that the General Plan alone would be sufficient to limit GHGs to the extent required by AB 32, SB 375, and SB 32 and other federal and state regulations, and a quantitative GHG analysis at the program level is not feasible. Therefore, General Plan implementation is considered to have the potential to generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and/or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with GHG emissions and impacts.
E. Noise
1. The Project would generate exposure to significant traffic noise sources (EIR Impact 3.11-1)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in exposure to significant traffic noise sources is discussed at pages 3.11-17 through
3.11-23 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts As described on pages 3.11-17 through 3.11- 23 of the Draft EIR, Existing and Buildout noise levels along many roadways in the City of Modesto are calculated to exceed those considered compatible for noise-sensitive land uses (65 dBA Ldn for single family residential uses). As such, noise levels at the locations of proposed residential developments and other noise- #21..
- 1165 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
sensitive land uses allowed for under the Project would exceed the City’s noise thresholds of acceptability. Site planning alternatives and noise barriers may be necessary and should be considered during a project’s design phase to reduce exterior noise levels to acceptable levels. Where exterior transportation noise levels would exceed 60 dBA Ldn in new residential development, interior levels may exceed 45 dBA Ldn assuming that windows and doors are open for ventilation. Interior noise levels within residential units are 20 to 25 decibels lower than exterior noise levels with the windows closed, assuming typical California Building Code construction methods.
Where exterior noise levels are 60 to 70 dBA Ldn, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below 45 dBA Ldn with the incorporation of an adequate forced-air mechanical ventilation system in the residential units to allow residents the option of controlling noise by keeping the windows closed. In areas exceeding 70 dBA Ldn, the inclusion of windows and doors with high Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings, and the
incorporation of forced-air mechanical ventilation systems, may be necessary to meet 45 dBA Ldn.
The applicable UAGP policies would assist in reducing traffic noise of future individual projects. However, such impacts could remain significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to traffic noise.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with transportation noise sources.
2. The Project would result in exposure to excessive railroad noise sources (EIR Impact 3.11-2)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in exposure to excessive railroad noise sources is discussed at pages 3.11-23 and 3.11-24 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. #21..
- 1166 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
(c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.11-23 and 3.11-24 of the Draft EIR, based on the noise monitoring survey, train operations generated a noise level of up to 88 dBA Ldn at 75 feet from the center of the UPRR main line running along 8th Street, up to 79 dBA Ldn at 75 feet from the center of the M&ET line running along Yosemite Boulevard, and up to 82 dBA Ldn at 75 feet from the center of the BNSF tracks running along Santa Fe Avenue. Maximum instantaneous noise levels (Lmax) from train warning whistles typically ranged from approximately 90 to 110 dBA Lmax at 75 feet from the tracks.
The UAGP includes policies and actions that are intended to minimize exposure to excessive noise, including noise associated with railroad operations. Implementation of these UAGP policies and actions would ensure that development allowed under the UAGP is not exposed to noise levels associated with railroad operations more than the City’s established standards. However, such impacts could remain significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to traffic noise.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with railroad noise sources.
3. The Project would result in the generation of excessive stationary noise sources (EIR Impact 3.11-3)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in exposure to excessive stationary noise sources is discussed at page 3.11-24 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on page 3.11-24 of the Draft EIR, placement of residential uses within proximity to industrial #21..
- 1167 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
uses would also have the potential to expose residents to increased noise levels in exceedance of City noise standards.
Conversely, the industrial uses could be subject to new noise standards to ensure noise level compatibility with nearby residential and mixed-use neighborhoods. Industrial uses could be subject to new limitations for noise intensive activities to keep noise levels at nearby residential and mixed-use neighborhoods within City noise level standards. The UAGP includes policies and actions that are intended to reduce noise associated with stationary sources. However, such impacts could remain
significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to stationary noise sources.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with stationary noise sources.
4. The Project would result in an increase in construction noise sources (EIR Impact 3.11-4)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in an increase in construction noise sources is discussed at pages 3.11-25 and 3.11-26 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.11-25 and 3.11-26 of the Draft EIR, Construction activities would occur as new development occurs. Activities involved in construction would typically generate maximum noise levels ranging from 85 to 90 dB at 50 feet. Construction could result in periods of significant ambient noise level increases and the potential for annoyance.
However, construction noise would be temporary, intermittent, and would vary depending on the nature of the construction activities being performed. Buildout of the UAGP would also occur over a period of many years. The UAGP includes policies and actions that are intended to reduce noise associated with #21..
- 1168 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
construction noise. The applicable UAGP policies, would assist in reducing noise and vibration levels during construction of future individual projects. These policies would serve to reduce noise levels resulting from construction activities and to reduce interior residential noise levels. These policies would minimize both direct impacts. However, such impacts could remain significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to construction noise.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with construction noise.
5. The Project would result in construction vibration (EIR Impact 3.11-5) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in construction vibration is discussed at pages 3.11-26 and 3.11-27 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.11-26 and 3.11-27 of the Draft EIR, depending on the proximity of existing structures to each construction site, the structural soundness of the existing buildings, and the methods of construction used, vibration levels may be high enough to damage existing structures. Given the scope of the UAGP and the proximity of many existing structures, groundborne vibration impacts would be potentially significant.
As with any type of construction, vibration levels may at times be perceptible. However, construction phases that have the highest potential of producing vibration (pile driving and use of jackhammers and other high-power tools) would be intermittent and would only occur for short periods of time for any individual project site.
The applicable UAGP policies would assist in reducing vibration levels during construction of future individual projects.
Specifically, Noise-13 and Noise-14 would reduce potential #21..
- 1169 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
impacts from sources of vibration. These policies would minimize both direct and cumulative impacts. However, such impacts could remain significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible.
Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to traffic noise.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with construction vibration.
6. The Project would result in exposure to groundborne vibration (EIR Impact
3.11-6)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in exposure to groundborne vibration is discussed at pages 3.11-27 and 3.11-28 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.11-27 and 3.11-28 of the Draft EIR, development facilitated by the Project could expose persons to excessive Ground-borne vibration levels attributable to train operations. The proposed locations of buildings and their specific sensitivity to vibration are not known at this time; however, such uses located near the tracks could be exposed to ground vibration levels exceeding FTA guidelines.
Rail traffic along the line is not anticipated to increase to 30 trains or more per day and future train activity would be considered “infrequent” with respect to the FTA vibration impact criteria.
Since many of these trains pass during evening and nighttime hours when people are normally at rest, the 80 VdB limit is used to characterize the vibration compatibility. Ground-borne vibration levels from train passbys along this rail line are anticipated to range from 79 to 80 VdB at 50 feet from the center of a main railroad track, 73 to 74 VdB at 100 feet from the center of main railroad track, and 68 VdB at 200 feet from the center of main railroad track during freight and passenger train pass-by events. Residences proposed within 45 feet of the center of a #21..
- 1170 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
main rail line could be exposed to vibration levels exceeding 80 VdB.
The applicable UAGP policies are aimed at reducing vibration impacts. Future building development would also be subject to the California Building Code requirements, which contain standards related to instability and groundborne vibrations from earthquake risk. However, such impacts could remain significant and unavoidable if the project-specific circumstances render application of mitigating policies infeasible. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact relative to groundborne vibration.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with groundborne vibration.
F. Transportation and Circulation
1. General Plan implementation may result in VMT per employee that are greater than 85 percent of Baseline conditions (EIR Impact 3.13-1) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in VMT impacts is discussed at pages 3.13-32 through 3.13-34 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 3.13-32 through 3.13- 34 of the Draft EIR, the data shows that General Plan
implementation with the proposed amendments to the General Plan and zoning ordinance would result in VMT that would be greater than 85% of baseline conditions, which would exceed the OPR’s SB 743 Memorandum criteria. Moreover, it is anticipated that there will be some individual projects developed that may individually have VMT increases that are greater than 85% of baseline conditions. Furthermore, General Plan implementation with the proposed amendments to the General Plan and zoning ordinance would not screen out under the OPR’s screening criteria, nor is total VMT in the model area expected to decrease. #21..
- 1171 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
For these reasons, the impact would not change from the previous impact determination of significant and unavoidable. (2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with transportation VMT impacts.
G. Cumulative Impacts
1. Cumulative impact to agricultural lands and resources. (EIR Impact 4.2) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative loss of agricultural land and resources, including important farmlands, significant farmlands, land under the Williamson Act, and other farmlands, is discussed on pages 4.0-5 and 4.0- 6 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-6 and 4.0-7 of the Draft EIR, development in Stanislaus County, including that within both unincorporated areas and cities, and some of the
development envisioned in the UAGP, would result in cumulative impacts related to the conversion of agricultural land. Modesto, as the largest city in the county, is expected to and planned to accommodate a substantial share of Stanislaus County’s projected population growth. Although policies in the UAGP and the County General Plan encourage efficient land use and minimize
agricultural conversion (as described under Direct Impacts, above), the loss of agricultural land from projected regional population growth is inevitable. Accordingly, growth within Modesto’s planning area would contribute considerably to this loss. This impact(s) is considered significant and unavoidable. (2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative impacts to agricultural lands and resources. #21..
- 1172 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
2. Cumulative impact on the region's air quality (EIR Impact 4.3) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact on the region's air quality is discussed at pages 4.0-6 through 4.0-8 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-6 through 4.0-8 of the Draft EIR, Rule 9510 would not be considered mitigation under CEQA. However, it would require that construction exhaust emissions be reduced by 20 percent for NOx and 45 percent for PM10. Additionally, implementation of the proposed Project could result in cumulatively considerable long-term area and mobile source emissions, resulting from operation and use of subsequent development. Overall, since the full nature of the impacts of proposed Project-generated TAC impacts is not fully known currently, this is considered a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative impacts on the region's air quality.
3. Cumulative impact on known and undiscovered cultural resources (EIR Impact
4.5)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact on known and undiscovered cultural resources is discussed at page 4.0-10 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on page 4.0-10 of the Draft EIR, each project would require specific surveys for potential resources and the evaluation of any resources discovered during #21..
- 1173 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
construction activities. Other policies and actions designed to reduce impacts on cultural and tribal cultural resources within the Planning Area and the region are also provided in Section 3.5 (Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources). Adherence to these policies, actions, and regulations will avoid and/or minimize a cumulative loss of these important resources if they are found during project-specific surveys or construction. However, demolition of significant buildings cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, and, even with implementation of mitigation measures, the impact would be considered a
cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact. (2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative impacts on known and undiscovered cultural resources.
4. Cumulative impacts related to greenhouse gases, climate change, and energy (EIR Impact 4.7)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact related to greenhouse gases, climate change, and energy is discussed at pages 4.0-11 through 4.0-13 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-11 through 4.0-13 of the Draft EIR, subsequent development projects would be required to comply with the General Plan and adopted federal, state, and local regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions.
The City has prepared the General Plan to include numerous goals and policies intended to reduce GHG emissions associated with future development and improvement projects. However, even with implementation of the goals, policies, and actions contained in the proposed General Plan, there is no guarantee that the General Plan alone would be sufficient to limit GHGs to the extent required by AB 32, SB 375, and SB 32 and other federal and state regulations, and a quantitative GHG at the program levels is not #21..
- 1174 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
feasible. Therefore, General Plan implementation is considered to have the potential to generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and/or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Overall, however, the proposed UAGP amendment’s incremental contribution to cumulative greenhouse gas, climate change, and energy impacts would be considered a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative impacts to greenhouse gases, climate change, and energy.
5. Cumulative impacts related to noise (EIR Impact 4.12) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative noise impacts is discussed at pages 4.0-16 and 4.0-17 of the Draft EIR.
(b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-16 and 4.0-17 of the Draft EIR, noise projections based on the traffic levels anticipated in the UAGP indicate that noise levels would exceed the UAGP and noise ordinance standards. Noise may also exceed noise ordinance standards for railroad noise, stationary noise sources, construction vibration, and groundborne vibration. This is a significant cumulative effect. The development allowable under the proposed General Plan amendment would make a
considerable contribution to that effect. The impact(s) is significant and unavoidable. Therefore, this is considered a cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impact. (2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any #21..
- 1175 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative increases in noise levels.
6. Cumulative impacts on the transportation network (EIR Impact 4.14) (a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in a considerable contribution to the cumulative impacts on the transportation network is discussed at pages 4.0-18 through 4.0-20 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Mitigation and Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-18 through 4.0-20 of the Draft EIR, General Plan implementation would result in VMT that would be greater than 85% of baseline conditions; additionally, General Plan implementation would not cause the total VMT in the model area to decrease. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable and cumulatively considerable.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with cumulative impacts on the transportation network.
H. Significant Irreversible Effects
1. Irreversible and adverse effects (EIR Impact 4.16)
(a) Potential Impact. The potential for the Project to result in irreversible and adverse effects is discussed at page 4.0-33 of the Draft EIR. (b) Mitigation Measures. Minimized to the greatest extent feasible through General Plan Policies and Actions. No feasible mitigation is available. (c) Findings. Based upon the EIR and the entire record before this Council, this Council finds that:
(1) Remaining Impacts. As described on pages 4.0-26 and 4.0-31 of the Draft EIR, the UAGP includes an extensive policy framework that is designed to address land use and environmental issues to the greatest extent feasible, while allowing growth and economic prosperity for the City. However, even with the policies and #21..
- 1176 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
actions that will serve to reduce potential significant impacts, the proposed UAGP amendment will result in significant irreversible changes and has the potential to result in adverse effects as described above. This impact is considered a significant and unavoidable impact under CEQA.
(2) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with irreversible effects.
IV. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THOSE IMPACTS WHICH ARE
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT, LESS THAN CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE, OR HAVE
NO IMPACT
A. Specific impacts within the following categories of environmental effects were found to be less than significant as set forth in more detail in the Draft EIR.
1. Aesthetics and Visual Resources: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.1-1: The Project would not result in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas and resources or substantial degradation of visual character
b. Impact 3.1-2: The Project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway
c. Impact 3.1-3: The Project would not result in light and glare impacts
2. Agricultural and Forest Resources: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.2-3: Project implementation would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use
3. Air Quality: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.3-1: General Plan implementation would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants
#21..
- 1177 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
b. Impact 3.3-3: General Plan implementation would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting substantial numbers of people
4. Biological Resources: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.4-1: The Project would not generate substantial adverse effects, either directly or indirectly through habitat modification on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus 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
b. Impact 3.4-2: The Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
c. Impact 3.4-3: The Project would not 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 native wildlife nursery sites
d. Impact 3.4-4: The Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance
e. Impact 3.4-5: The Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan
5. Cultural and Tribal Resources: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.5-2: The Project would not lead to the disturbance of any human remains
b. Impact 3.5-3: The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, and that is: 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 #21..
- 1178 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Code Section 5020.1(k), or a resource determined by the lead agency
6. Geology and Soils: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.6-1: The Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, or landslides
b. Impact 3.6-2: The Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil
c. Impact 3.6-3: The Project would not result in development 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 off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse
d. Impact 3.6-4: The Project would not result in development on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property
e. Impact 3.6-5: General Plan implementation does not have the potential to have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater f. Impact 3.6-6: The Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature g. Impact 3.6-7: General Plan implementation would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state, or 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
7. Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.7-2: General Plan implementation would not result in a significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency #21..
- 1179 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.8.1: The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment
b. Impact 3.8-2: The Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school c. Impact 3.8-3: General Plan implementation would not have projects located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5
d. Impact 3.8-4: The Project would not be located within an airport land use plan, two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area
e. Impact 3.8-5: The Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
f. Impact 3.8-6: The Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires
9. Hydrology and Water Quality: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.9-1: General Plan implementation would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan
b. Impact 3.9-2: General Plan implementation would not result in the depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or conflict with a groundwater management plan
c. Impact 3.9-3: General Plan implementation could alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation, flooding, impeded flows, or polluted runoff
d. Impact 3.9-4: General Plan implementation would not release pollutants due to project inundation by flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
#21..
- 1180 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
10. Land Use, Population and Housing: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.10-1: Project implementation would not physically divide an established community
b. Impact 3.10-2: The Project would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the Project adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect
c. Impact 3.10-3: The Project would not induce substantial population growth in an area
d. Impact 3.10-4: The Project would not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing
11. Public Services and Recreation: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.12-1: The proposed Project would not result in result in adverse physical impacts on the environment associated with the need for new governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts
b. Impact 3.12-2: The Project would not result in adverse physical impacts associated with the deterioration of existing parks and recreation facilities or the construction of new parks and recreation facilities
12. Transportation and Circulation: The following specific impacts were found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.13-2: General Plan implementation would not conflict with a program, plan, policy or ordinance addressing the circulation system, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities
b. Impact 3.13-3: General Plan implementation would not increase hazards due to a design feature, incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access
13. Utilities and Service Systems: The following specific impact was found to be less than significant:
a. Impact 3.14-1: General Plan implementation would not result in insufficient water supplies available to serve the City and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years
#21..
- 1181 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
b. Impact 3.14-2: General Plan implementation would not require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects
c. Impact 3.14-3: General Plan implementation would not have the potential to result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the Project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments d. Impact 3.14-4: General Plan implementation would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects
e. Impact 3.14-5: General Plan implementation would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded storm water drainage facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects
f. Impact 3.14-6: General Plan implementation would comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals, and would not exceed of the capacity of local infrastructure
B. The project was found to have a less than cumulatively considerable contribution to specific impacts within the following categories of environmental effects as set forth in more detail in the Draft EIR.
1. Impact 4.1: Cumulative degradation of the existing visual character of the region
2. Impact 4.4: Cumulative loss of biological resources, including habitats and special status species
3. Impact 4.6: Cumulative impacts related to geology and soils
4. Impact 4.8: Cumulative impacts related to hazardous materials and human health risks
5. Impact 4.9: Cumulative impacts related to hydrology and water quality
6. Impact 4.10: Cumulative impacts related to local land use, population, and housing
7. Impact 4.13: Cumulative impacts to public services and recreation
8. Impact 4.16: Cumulative impact related to utilities
#21..
- 1182 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
C. The above impacts are less than significant or less than cumulatively considerable for one of the following reasons:
1. The EIR determined that the impact is less than significant for the Project.
2. The EIR determined that the impact is less than significant for the Project with the implementation of General Plan policies, or uniformly applied development standards and regulations.
3. The EIR determined that the Project would have a less than cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative impact.
V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
A. Identification of Project Objectives
An EIR is required to identify a “range of potential alternatives to the project [which] shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one of more of the significant effects.” Chapter 2.0 of the Draft EIR identifies the Project’s goals and objectives. The Project objectives include:
Amend the land use and zoning densities, including the R-1 duplex allowance, in accordance with the adopted Modesto Housing Element;
Comply with new State and Federal laws;
Provide improved transportation alternatives, including transit, bicycle & pedestrian facilities;
Facilitate an improved mix of land uses to reduce vehicle miles traveled by locating residential land uses close to employment, retail and services; Promote infill development;
Provide framework for intensified development in Modesto’s downtown area; Align Modesto’s land use and transportation goals and policies; Establish a realistic set of assumptions for infrastructure needs and funding; Facilitate complete, safe, and walkable neighborhoods; Provide for a variety of transportation options;
Promote equitable, affordable housing;
Support existing neighborhoods / communities; and,
Maintain the General Plan and Sphere-of-Influence boundaries (for purposes of defining the proposed project to be analyzed under CEQA). #21..
- 1183 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
B. Alternatives Analysis in EIR
1. Alternative 1: No Project (No Build) Alternative
The No Project (No Build) Alternative is discussed on pages 5.0-3 through 5.0-10 of the Draft EIR. Under
Under Alternative 1, the City would not adopt the General Plan Update. The No Project (No Build) Alternative is the continuation of the existing adopted UAGP into the future.
Thus, the impacts of the proposed UAGP amendment would be compared with the impacts that would occur with buildout of Modesto as envisioned in the existing adopted General Plan. The No Project (No Build) Alternative would not change the allowed density within the MU-P, MU-H, P-D, R-1, R-2, and R-3 zones to allow additional capacity within the city limits, as well as in the UAGP Planning Area (outside the city limits). The impacts of the existing adopted UAGP are described in the 2019 Program EIR prepared for the existing UAGP.
Under Alternative 1, the existing General Plan policy framework would still be in effect, which would constitute a status quo approach to land use regulation in the City. The policy framework proposed by the General Plan Update encourages and aims to achieve a community with a compatible land use pattern that meets the City’s long-term housing, employment, and civic needs while reducing impacts created by growth through a self-mitigating approach to the policy framework. Land uses allowed under the proposed General Plan provide opportunities for additional multifamily residential and jobs-generating growth at in-fill locations within existing urbanized areas of the city, as well as new growth adjacent to existing urbanized areas inside the City limits.
Additionally, the proposed General Plan was prepared in conformance with State laws and regulations associated with the preparation of general plans, including requirements for environmental protection.
a. Findings: The No Project (No Build) Alternative is rejected as an alternative because it would not achieve the Project’s objectives.
b. Explanation: This alternative would not realize the benefits of the Project and fails to achieve some of the Project objectives. Alternative 1 would not include updated policies, particularly those related to greenhouse gases, community health, equity/environmental justice, and complete streets policies to address safety, access, and mobility for all roadway users, as required by State law. This alternative would not include various policies proposed in the General Plan update to ensure protection of environmental resources, both at a project level and under cumulative conditions, consistent with the objectives of CEQA. #21..
- 1184 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Alternative 1 fails to meet several of the basic project objectives, including addressing new requirements of new State and Federal laws; and amending the land use and zoning densities, including the R-1 duplex allowance, in accordance with the adopted Modesto Housing Element.
Therefore, Alternative 1 (No Project) is rejected from further consideration.
2. Alternative 2: Increased Density Concentration Alternative The Increased Density Concentration Alternative is discussed on pages 5.0-3, 5.0-4, and
5.0-10 through 5.0-18 of the Draft EIR.
Under Alternative 2, the proposed Project would be developed with the same components as described in the Project Description, but residential density would be concentrated in a few targeted areas, such as the Downtown Area and Baseline Developed Area, while leaving other areas, such as the Planned Urbanizing Area, with the existing densities. The Increased Density Concentration Alternative would maintain the same total number of existing residential units in the Baseline Developed Area and Planned Urbanizing Area (39,406) but would only incorporate proposed density changes in the Baseline Developed Area and Downtown Area. This would result in a reduction of total proposed units to 42,039 units, a reduction from the 61,243 units associated with the proposed Project.
a. Findings: The Increased Density Concentration Alternative is rejected as an alternative because it would not achieve the Project’s objectives.
b. Explanation: This alternative would achieve the basic Project objectives.
Like the proposed Project, Alternative 2 would adopt the updated policy document as well amend the land use and zoning densities, including the R-1 duplex allowance, in accordance with the adopted Modesto Housing Element. This alternative would concentrate residential density in a few targeted areas, such as the Downtown Area and Baseline Developed Area, while leaving other areas, such as the Planned Urbanizing Area, with the existing densities. This would allow greater residential densities in some areas, but not throughout the entire Planning Area. This would result in less capacity for residential growth compared to the proposed Project. This alternative is only partially consistent with the project objective that is aimed as promoting more affordable housing given that the housing supply and housing demand directly affect housing prices, and a reduced supply as a result of this alternative is anticipated to place more upward pressure on housing prices. This alternative is also only partially consistent with the project objective aimed at improving the mix #21..
- 1185 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
of land uses to reduce vehicle miles traveled by located residential land uses close to employment, retail, and services. The reduced density and housing supply from this alternative is anticipated to result in an increased VMT per capita. Lastly, this alternative is only partially consistent with the project objective that amends the land use and zoning densities, given that the density changes would not apply to the entire planning area.
CEQA requires that an environmentally superior alternative be identified among the alternatives that are analyzed in the EIR. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, an EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2)). The environmentally superior alternative is that alternative with the least adverse environmental impacts when compared to the proposed project.
As discussed in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR and summarized in Table 5.0- 1 of the Draft EIR, Alternative 2 (Increased Density Concentration Alternative) is the environmentally superior alternative because Alternative 2 because all environmental issues would have reduced impacts compared to the proposed Project. Overall, Alternative 2 is the most effective in terms of reducing one or more of the significant impacts of the proposed project (although it would not reduce any significant impacts to less than significant). Additionally, when compared to the proposed General Plan, Alternative 2 would increase the severity of impacts related to Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change and Energy and Transportation and Circulation.
As previously discussed, Alternative 2 fails to reduce any significant impacts to a less than significant level. Additionally, this alternative would increase the severity of impacts related to Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change and Energy and Transportation and Circulation and would provide fewer housing opportunities throughout the community compared to the proposed General Plan. Furthermore, the General Plan was crafted to account for market conditions in relation to density and intensity. Although Alternative 2 allows additional maximum residential densities, the resulting development in a few targeted areas, such as the Downtown Area and Baseline Developed Area, while leaving other areas, such as the Planned Urbanizing Area, with the existing densities.
For these economic, social, market conditions, and other reasons, the Project is considered superior to Alternative 2.
#21..
- 1186 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
VI. STATEMENTS OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(b) and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City of Modesto has balanced the benefits of the proposed General Plan against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the proposed General Plan and has included all feasible mitigation measures as policies and action items within the General Plan. Modesto has also examined alternatives to the proposed project, and has determined that adoption and implementation of the proposed General Plan is the most desirable, feasible, and appropriate action. The other alternatives are rejected as infeasible, failed to meet project objectives, were not able to reduce any significant impacts to a less than significant levels, or increased the severity on significant impacts based on consideration of the relevant factors discussed in Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR.
A. Significant Unavoidable Impacts
Based on the information and analysis set forth in the EIR and reiterated in Section III of these Findings, implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in the following project-specific significant impacts related to: agricultural resources, air quality, GHG, mineral resources, noise, transportation and circulation, utilities, and irreversible effects. These impacts are identified below:
Impact 3.2-1: The proposed Project would result in the conversion of Farmlands, including Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural uses; Impact 3.2-2: The proposed Project would conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or Williamson Act Contracts;
Impact 3.3-2: General Plan implementation would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations;
Impact 3.5-1: The Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5; Impact 3.7-1: General Plan implementation would generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and/or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases; Impact 3.11-1: The Project would exposure to significant traffic noise sources; Impact 3.11-2: The Project would result in exposure to excessive railroad noise sources; Impact 3.11-3: The Project would result in the generation of excessive stationary noise sources; Impact 3.11-4: The Project would result in an increase in construction noise sources; Impact 3.11-5: The Project would result in construction vibration; Impact 3.11-6: The Project would result in exposure to groundborne vibration; Impact 3.13-1: General Plan implementation would result in VMT increases that are greater than 85 percent of Baseline conditions;
#21..
- 1187 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Impact 4.2: Cumulative impact to agricultural lands and resources; Impact 4.3: Cumulative impact on the region's air quality; Impact 4.5: Cumulative impacts on known and undiscovered cultural resources; Impact 4.7: Cumulative impacts related to greenhouse gases, climate change, and energy; Impact 4.12: Cumulative impacts related to noise;
Impact 4.14: Cumulative impacts on the transportation network; Impact 4.16: Irreversible and adverse effects.
B. Benefits of the Proposed General Plan/Overriding Considerations The City of Modesto has (i) independently reviewed the information in the EIR and the record of proceedings; (ii) made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially lessen the impacts resulting from the proposed General Plan to the extent feasible by including policies and actions in the General Plan that effectively minimize or reduce potential environmental impacts to the greatest extent feasible; and (iii) balanced the project’s benefits against the project’s significant unavoidable impacts.
Adoption and implementation of the Modesto General Plan would provide the following economic, social, legal, and other considerable benefits:
1. The General Plan promotes compact and environmentally-sustainable development through goals and policies that balance the need for adequate infrastructure, housing, and economic vitality with the need for resource management, environmental protection, and preservation of quality of life for Modesto residents.
2. The General Plan provides a land use map and policy document that accounts for existing development, physical constraints, economic development, flood and other hazards, and incompatible uses and assigns densities and use types accordingly to enhance the safety, livability, and economic vitality of Modesto.
3. The General Plan improves mobility options through the development of a multimodal transportation network that enhances connectivity, supports community development patterns, limits traffic congestion, promotes public and alternative transportation methods, and supports the goals of adopted regional transportation plans.
4. The General Plan aids the City in implementing their latest Housing Element by proposing amendments to the General Plan land use designations to ratify and conform the General Plan land use designations with the changes adopted in the General Plan’s Housing Element.
#21..
- 1188 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
5. The General Plan directs the preservation and environmental stewardship of the vast array of natural, cultural, and historic resources that uniquely define the character and ecological importance of the City and greater region.
6. The General Plan addresses adverse environmental effects associated with climate change by facilitating sustainable development, promoting energy efficiency, and promoting development that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.
7. The General Plan enhances the local economy and provides opportunities for future jobs and business development growth by planning for commercial and industrial development near existing urbanized areas and transportation corridors.
VII. CONCLUSION
After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, the Council finds that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified may be considered “acceptable” due to the specific considerations listed above which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project.
The Modesto City Council has considered information contained in the EIR prepared for the proposed General Plan as well as the public testimony and record of proceedings in which the project was considered. Recognizing that significant unavoidable agricultural resources, air quality, cultural resources, GHG, noise, transportation and circulation, and irreversible effects impacts may result from implementation of the proposed General Plan, the Council finds that the benefits of the General Plan and overriding considerations outweigh the adverse effects of the Project. Having included all feasible mitigation measures as policies and actions in the General Plan, and recognized all unavoidable significant impacts, the Council hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated herein, is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants adoption of the proposed General Plan and outweighs and overrides its unavoidable significant effects, and thereby justifies the adoption of the proposed General Plan.
Based on the foregoing findings and the information contained in the record, the Council hereby determines that:
1. All significant effects on the environment due to implementation of the proposed General Plan have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible;
#21..
- 1189 -
Modesto Urban Area General Plan CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
2. There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed General Plan which would fully mitigate or substantially lessen the impacts to a less than significant level; and
3. Any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to the factors described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations above.
#21..
- 1190 -
1 ORDINANCE NO. -C.S.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF MODESTO AMENDING
TITLE 10 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE MODESTO MUNICIPAL
CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 2 (DEFINITIONS), ARTICLE 1
(DEFINITIONS); CHAPTER 3 (LAND USE REGULATIONS), ARTICLE 1 (PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL LAND USES); CHAPTER 3,
ARTICLE 2 (SPECIFIC LAND USE REGULATIONS); CHAPTER 4
(DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS), ARTICLE 1 (RESIDENTIAL ZONES); AND CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 5 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS)
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-532, adopting the Modesto 2023-2031 Housing Element (hereinafter “the Housing Element”); and WHEREAS, on April 10, 2024, the California Department of Housing and Community Development found the Housing Element in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law per Gov. Code § 65580 et seq; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element includes Program A-3, General Plan and Zoning Densities, which requires the City to revise the densities of the residential zones in the zoning code and align them with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City is concurrently proposing an Amendment to the General Plan (GPA-24-999) that aligns with the proposed residential density herein as required by the adopted Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element also includes Program A-11, Facilitate Missing Middle/Middle Income Housing, which requires the City to amend the zoning code to allow to allow duplexes to be approved ministerially on all lots in the Low Density Residential (R-1) zone with a single-family residential use; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study has been prepared as required by CEQA, which concluded that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared; and #21..
- 1191 -
2 WHEREAS, a Programmatic Environmental Impact Report for the Modesto Urban Area General Plan was prepared, which concluded that the City Council would need to adopt a statement of overriding considerations as well as written findings in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15093; and
WHEREAS, a 45-day public review period for the proposed draft Environmental Impact Report began on February 28, 2025, and concluded on April 15, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City received two (2) public comment letters on the draft Environmental Impact Report and has made changes to the document as a result, addressing their contents and providing responses thereto within the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 5, 2025, in Chambers, 1010 Tenth Street, Modesto, California, at which hearing evidence both oral and documentary was received and considered; and
WHEREAS, on May 5, 2025, the Planning Commission recommended in Resolution 2025-28 that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations as well as written findings in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15093; and WHEREAS, on May 5, 2025, the Planning Commission recommended in Resolution 2025-29 that the City Council approve an Ordinance amending the Modesto Municipal Code as described in Sections 2 through 7 below; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on June 10, 2025, in the Tenth Street Place Chambers located at 1010 10th Street, Modesto, California, at which hearing evidence both oral and documentary was received and considered. #21..
- 1192 -
3 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Modesto does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. The proposed changes will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. The residential density changes will benefit the community by allowing higher density development, which the Housing Element promotes and encourages.
The changes to allow duplexes ministerially in R-1 zones allow for additional options for landowners to provide housing, and also allow for additional units in areas that would otherwise be considered built out. These changes benefit the public welfare by providing the opportunity for additional housing units to be built, and additional housing development and codification of duplexes will discourage substandard housing and ensure that housing is built compliant with Building and Fire Codes.
B. The proposed changes will result in an orderly planned use of land. The residential density changes provide consistency between the zoning ordinance and the General Plan, which makes preparing and reviewing plans for compliance with the regulations more reliable and allows for orderly development. The duplex changes build on the existing Code’s allowance for duplexes on corner lots in the R-1 zone, extending the permission to all lots, providing consistency throughout the zone.
C. The proposed changes are in accordance with the community’s objectives as set forth in the General Plan and any applicable specific plans. These changes implement the requirements of the Housing Element, which is a component of the General Plan.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 2, “Definitions”, Article 1, “Definitions”, is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
10-2.101 Purpose and Intent.
The words and phrases used in Title 10 shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this Article unless otherwise apparent from the context. Words not listed in this Article shall be interpreted as defined in a dictionary or other standard reference manual. …
#21..
- 1193 -
4 10-2.121(B) Duplex
Two primary single-family dwelling units on a single parcel that have separate entrances. A duplex is not a multiple-family dwelling as defined in Section 10-2.122 even if the two units share walls or are otherwise connected.
…
10-2.1107 Yard, Street-Side.
An area extending across the full lot depth between the street-side lot line and the buildings, structures, and parking area.
SECTION 3. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 3, “Land Use Regulations”, Article 1, “Permitted and Conditional Land Uses”, is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
10-3.101 Land Use Table.
The following Land Use Table identifies those uses that are permitted, conditional, and not permitted for each listed zoning district.
(a) The land use symbols shown on Table 3.1-1 have the following meaning:
(1) "P" indicates that the use is permitted
(2) "C" indicates that the use is conditional (A conditional use permit is required) (3) "-" indicates that the use is not permitted
(4) The zoning district symbols and corresponding zoning district names are as follows:
R-1 Low Density Residential
R-2 Medium Density Residential
R-3 Medium-High Density Residential
MU-P Mixed Use Pedestrian Oriented
MU-H Mixed Use Highway Oriented
P-O Professional Office
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 General Commercial
C-3 Highway Commercial
C-M Commercial-Industrial
M-1 Light Industrial
M-2 Heavy Industrial
See Chapter 4, Land Use Regulations, for the definition and purpose and intent of the zoning districts.
#21..
- 1194 -
5 (b) Refer to the Chapter 9, Administration, to determine the required application and process for permitted and conditional uses.
(c) Refer to the notes column for additional information. #21..
- 1195 -
6 Table 3.1-1 Permitted and Conditional Land Uses
Land Use Zoning Districts Notes
R1 R2 R3 MUP MUH PO C-1 C-2 C-3 CM M1 M2
AGRICULTURAL
Community Gardens P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.114
Fruit and nut trees,
vines, row crops,
horticulture stock
P P P P P P P P P P P P
RESIDENTIAL
Accessory Uses
Animals and Fowl P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.202
Garage Sales P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.206
Home Business P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.207
Personal Cannabis
Cultivation
P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.601 et
seq.
Dwellings
Accessory Buildings P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section 10-4.114
Accessory Dwelling
Unit, Junior Accessory
Dwelling Unit
P P P P P - - - - - - - See Section
10-4.115
Single Family Dwelling P P P - - - - - - - - - In R-1, 1 unit per lot. For
corner lots,
For
duplexes,
see Section
10-3.217
Manufactured Homes P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.209
Multiple Family - P P P P C C C C - - - See Sections
10-9.1002 b
3, 10-9.1002
b 5, and 10-
4.115. ADUs
and JADUs
are allowed
in
conjunction
with
#21..
- 1196 -
7 multiple
family
development
on
commercial
properties
for which a
CUP has
been issued
in
accordance
with Section
10-4.115.
Mobile Home Parks - - - - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-7.103 b 2
Other Residential Uses within Dwellings
Lodging and Boarding
(3 or fewer persons, 1
dwelling)
P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.208
Lodging and Boarding
(4 or more persons, 1
dwelling)
C C P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.208
Lodging and Boarding
(3 or fewer persons, 2
dwellings on a lot)
- P P C C C C C C - - - See Section
10-3.208
Lodging and Boarding
(4 or more persons, 2
dwellings on a lot)
- C P C C C C C C - - - See Section
10-3.208
CIVIC/INSTITUTIONAL
Educational Facilities
School - Private (including charter
schools) C C C P P P P P P C C C
School - Public (including charter
schools) C C C P P P P P P C C C
School - Vocational - - - P P P P P P P P P
Healthcare Facilities
Hospital - - - P P - - P P P P P
Substance Abuse
Clinic/Facility
- - - P P P P P P P P P
Veterinary Hospital (large animals)
- - - - - - - - - P P P See Section
10-2.1100
Veterinary Hospital (small animals)
- - - P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.1101
Non-Profit Organization
No Retail (office, classroom, meeting
hall) C C C P P P P P P P P P
Retail - - - P P - P P P P P P
Public Facilities
#21..
- 1197 -
8 Library - - - PP P P P P P P P
Museum - - - PP P P P P P P P
Public Buildings and Grounds (i.e.
corporation yard) C C C
CC C C C C P P P
Public Facilities, Minor (wells, pumps) P P P
PP P P P P P P P
Public Parks P P P PP P P P P P P P
Storm Drainage
Facilities
P P P PP P P P P P P P
Quasi-Public Facilities
Cemetery - - - - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-7.103 b 3
Church (place of worship) C C C
PP P P P P P P P
Utilities
Solar Energy Systems (accessory use) P P P
PP P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.187
Solar Energy Farm - - - - - - - - - - P P See Section
10-2.186
Utility Company
Buildings, Facilities, and
Grounds
C C C C C C C C C P P P
Utilities and Railroads See Section
10-3.221
COMMERCIAL
Communication
Broadcasting Studio (radio or
television) - - -
PP - - P P P P P
Radio or Television
Transmitter
- - - CC - C C C P P P
Wireless
Telecommunication
Facilities
See Chapter
3, Article 4
Entertainment
Adult Entertainment
Business
- - - - - - - - - - P P See Chapter
3, Article 3
Carnival (entertainment permit
required) - - -
PP - - P P P P P See Title 4,
Chapter 1,
Article 4
Circus (entertainment permit
required) - - -
PP - - P P P P P See Title 4,
Chapter 1,
Article 4
Entertainment Establishment
(entertainment permit required) - - -
PP - - P P P P P See Title 4,
Chapter 1,
Article 4
Theater, Motion Picture (indoor)
- - - PP - - P P P P P
Commercial Cannabis
Uses
See Chapter
3, Article 7
Commercial Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - - See Section #21..
- 1198 -
9 Activity 10-3.210
Lodging
Motel, Hotel - - - P P P P P P P P P
Bed and Breakfast (2 rooms for
lodging, owner resides on site) P P P - - - - - - - - - Office
General - - - P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.159
Medical - - - P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.160
Outdoor Sales and Activities
Auction Yard - - - - - - - - - - P P
Commercial
Certified Farmers'
Market
- - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 a
Food and Drink
Stands
- - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 b
Fund Raisers
(nonprofit
organizations)
P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 c
Outdoor Dining Areas - - - P P - P P P P P P See Section 10-3.212 d
Outdoor Display,
major
- - - P P - - P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 e
(2)
Outdoor Display,
minor
- - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 e
(1)
Outdoor Sales
(products customarily
sold indoor)
- - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 f
Promotions P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 g
Seasonal Sales
(fireworks, pumpkins,
Christmas trees)
P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.212 h
Mobile Food Facilities - - - P P - P P P P P P See Sections 10-3.210
and 10-
3.212 i
Flea Market - Indoor - - - P P - - P P P P P
Flea Market - Outdoor - - - - - - - - - - P P
Industrial - - - - - - - - - P P P See Section
10-3.213
Recreational
Campground, - - - - C - - - C P P P
#21..
- 1199 -
10 Recreation Vehicle
Overnight Park
Health Club - - - P P - P P P P P P
Private Club, Lodge,
Social Club, Cultural
Center
- - - P P - P P P P P P
Recreation Facility -
Indoor
- - - P P - C P P P P P See Section
10-2.165
Recreation Facility -
Outdoor
- - - C C - - C C P P P See Section
10-2.166
Recycling (Collection)
Recycling Facility, Large
(more than 500 SF area)
- - - C C - - C C P P P
Recycling Facility, Small
(500 SF max area)
- - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-3.215 b
Unattended Containers
no more than 50 SF area
(in residential zones w/
school, church, or
government use)
P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.215 a
Unattended
Containers/Reverse
Vending Machine no
more than 50 SF area
(w/ permitted or
conditional use)
- - - P P P P P P P P P
Restaurants
Banquet Hall - - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section 10-3.203
Bar, Cocktail Lounge,
Tavern
- - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section
10-3.203
Restaurants (w/
alcohol)
- - - C/P C/P - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section
10-3.203
Restaurants (w/o
alcohol)
- - - P P - P P P P P P
Retail
General Retail - - - P P - - P P P P P See Section
10-2.174
Neighborhood Retail - - - P P - P P P P P P See Section 10-2.175
Services
General Services
Ambulance Service - - - P P - - P P P P P
Armored Car Service - - - P P - - P P P P P
Business Services - - - P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.178
#21..
- 1200 -
11 Car Wash - - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section 10-3.222
Equipment Rental
(indoors)
- - - P P - - P P P P P
Exterminating Service - - - P P - - P P P P P
Fortune Telling - - - P P - - P P P P P
Funeral Home
(includes cremation)
- - - C C - - C C P P P
Janitor Service - - - P P - - P P P P P
Kennel - - - C C - - C C P P P
Laboratory (research
and testing)
- - - P P - - P P P P P
Package Delivery
Service
- - - - C - - - C P P P
Personal Services - - - P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-2.179
Security Company - - - P P - - P P P P P
Self Storage - - - - C - - - C P P P
Sign Painting Shop - - - P P - - P P P P P
Stone Monument - - - C C - C C C P P P
Taxicab Service - - - P P - - P P P P P
Taxidermist Shop - - - P P - - P P P P P
Towing Services (no impound yard)
- - - P P - - P P P P P
Trade Services - - - P P - - P P P P P See Section
10-2.182
Repair Services
Major Repair - - - P P - - P P P P P See Section
10-2.180
Minor Repair - - - P P - P P P P P P See Section
10-2.181
Social Assistance
Services
Assisted Living
Facility
C C P P P P P P P - - -
Adult Day Care (3 or fewer clients, 1
unit per lot) P P P - - - - - - - - - Residential
dwelling.
Clients plus
family
members
Adult Day Care (4 or more clients, 1
unit per lot) C C C - - - - - - - - -
Adult Day Care (3 or fewer clients, 2
units per lot) C C C - - - - - - - - -
Adult Day Care C C C P P C P P P P P P Commercial
facility
Day Care Home - Small Family (6 or
fewer children) P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.204 a 1
#21..
- 1201 -
12 Day Care Home - Large Family (7-
14 children) P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.204 a 2
Child Day Care Home (15 or more
children) C C C - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.204 a 3
Child Day Care Center C C C P P C P P P P P P See Section 10-3.204 b
Convalescent and
Other Care Facility
C C C P P C P P P P P P Commercial
facility
Emergency Shelter - - - - - - C C P C C C See Section
10-3.205
Homeless Shelter - - - - - - C C P C C C See Section
10-3.205
Low Barrier
Navigation Center
- - - P P P P P P C C C See Sections
10-2.149.1
and 10-
3.208.1
Residential Care Facility (6 or fewer
persons) P P P - - - - - - - - -
Residential Care Facility (7 or more
persons) C C C - - - - - - - - -
Residential Care Facility (2 or more
care facilities) C C C - - - - - - - - - See Section
10-3.216
Residential Service Facility (not
State licensed) C C C - - - - - - - - -
Supportive Housing P P P P P P P P P - - - See Section
10-2.192
Transitional Housing P P P P P P P P P - - - See Section 10-2.194
Vehicle Related
Heavy Vehicles See Section
10-2.198
Farm Equipment
Sales, Rental, Repair, &
Service
- - - - C - - - C P P P
Truck & Trailer Sales,
Rental, Repair, & Service
- - - - C - - - C P P P
Light Vehicles See Section
10-2.199
Minor Maintenance (minor tune up,
smog check) - - - C/P C/P - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section 10-3.222
Parts Store - - - P P - P P P P P P
Rental and Sales - - - P P - - P P P P P
Repair and Service,
Major
- - - - - - - - - C/P C/P C/P See Sections
10-2.199 a
and 10-
3.222
Repair and Service,
Minor
- - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Sections
10-2.199 b
#21..
- 1202 -
13 and 10-
3.222
Service Station - - - P P - P P P P P P
Stereo Installation - - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section 10-3.222
INDUSTRIAL
Manufacturing
Heavy - - - - - - - - - - - P See Section
10-2.150
Light - - - - - - - - - - P P See Section
10-2.151
Other Manufacturing
Involving:
Chemical Products (Hazardous)
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Explosives - - - - - - - - - - - C
Natural Gas and Gas
Products
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Paper, Pulp, and
Wood (no burning
operation)
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Other Industrial
Animal Slaughter
Facility
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Brewery - - - - - - - - - - P P
Microbrewery - - - C/P C/P - - C/P C/P C/P C/P C/P See Section 10-3.203
Bulk Fuel Storage (Class II flammable
liquids for the power needs of food
processing plants)
- - - - - - - - - - P P
Cabinet Shop - - - - - - - - - P P P
Contracting Business (with equipment
and materials yard) - - - - - - - - - P P P
Distributing, Freighting
or Trucking Yard
- - - - - - - - - - P P
Equipment Rental Yard - - - - - - - - - P P P
Laundry and Dry
Cleaning Plant
- - - - - - - - - P P P
Machine Shop - - - - - - - - - P P P
Power Plant - - - - - - - - - - C P
Rock Crushing - - - - - - - - - - - C
Sand, Gravel, Brick, and Building Block
Yard (no concrete mixing,
manufacture or rock crushing)
- - - - - - - - - - P P
Sheet Metal Shop - - - - - - - - - P P P
Tire Rebuilding,
Recapping, Retreading
- - - - - - - - - P P P
Transit and
Transportation
- - - - - - - - - - P P
#21..
- 1203 -
14 Equipment Storage Yard
Vehicle Impound Yard - - - - - - - - - P P P
Warehousing - - - - - - - - - P P P
Waste Disposal or
Transfer Station
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Welding Shop - - - - - - - - - P P P
Wholesale Business - - - - - - - - - P P P
Winery - - - - - - - - - - - P
Recycling Facilities
Recycling, Junk
Handling, Processing
and Storage, Heavy
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Recycling Processing
Facility, Light
- - - - - - - - - - P P
Vehicle Salvage,
Wrecking
- - - - - - - - - - - C
Miscellaneous
Accessory Uses and Buildings
Customarily incidental
to permitted &
conditional uses
P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.201 a
Incidental
Manufacturing,
Processing, Packaging,
Storage, or Wholesale
Sales
- - - P P - P P P P See Section
10-3.201 b
Parking
Parking Area in
residential zone for
adjacent nonresidential
use in nonresidential
zone
C C C - - - - - - - - -
Parking Area in P-O
zone for adjacent
commercial use in
commercial zone
- - - - - P - - - - - -
Parking Lot or Garage - - - P P - P P P P P P
Recreational Vehicles P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section 10-3.214
Trucks and Truck
Trailers in residential
zones
- - - - - See Section
10-3.220
Temporary Buildings
Construction Buildings P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section 10-3.218
Mobile Living Quarters P P P - - - - - - - - - See Section #21..
- 1204 -
15 10-3.211
Sales Offices and Model
Homes
P P P P P P P P P P P P See Section
10-3.219
Legend
P Permitted Use — Not Permitted C Conditional Use Note: A blank box means the land use is not applicable and/or refer to notes. P* Low Barrier Navigation Centers as a Permitted Use in the Mixed Use and Commercial Zones shall be repealed on January 1, 2027.
SECTION 4. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 3, “Land Use Regulations”, Article 2, “Specific Land Use Regulations”, Section 10-3.217, “Corner Lots in the R-1 Zone” is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
10-3.217 Corner Lots Duplexes in the R-1 Zone.
(a) Two (2) single-family dwellings or a A duplex on any corner lot are is allowed on any lot in the R-1 Zone subject to all other standards of the R-1 zone including but not limited to lot coverage, setbacks, height, parking, and fencing but not including density., provided that the driveway serving the off-street parking for each unit shall take access from different streets.
If the lot has access to an alley, one (1) or both driveways may access the alley. (b) An accessory dwelling unit is allowed on any interior lot in the R-1 Zone or any residential zone where the lot contains only an existing single-family dwelling in accordance to Section 10-4.115. A lot in the R-1 zone that has an existing or proposed duplex is eligible for Accessory Dwelling Units as per Section 10-4.505(a), Lots with a Single-family Dwelling.
SECTION 5. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 4, “Development Standards”, Article 1, “Residential Zones (R-1, R-2, R-3)”, Section 10-4.104, “Density”, is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
10-4.104 Density.
(a) In the R-2 Zone, there shall be a minimum density of one (1) dwelling unit per four thousand (4,000) square feet of lot area, for sites smaller than one (1) acre, and a minimum density of approximately eleven (11) dwelling units per net acre for sites one (1) acre or larger. A maximum density of one (1) dwelling unit shall be permitted for each three #21..
- 1205 -
16 thousand (3,000) square feet of lot area, for sites smaller than one (1) acre, and a maximum density of approximately fourteen and one-half (14.5) dwelling units per net acre shall be permitted for sites one (1) acre or larger. In the R-1 zone, there shall be a maximum density of 10.9 dwelling units per net acre.
(b) In the R-3 Zone, there shall be a minimum density of more than one (1) dwelling unit per three thousand (3,000) square feet of lot area, for sites smaller than one (1) acre, and a minimum density of more than fourteen and one-half (14.5) dwelling units per net acre for sites larger than one (1) acre. A maximum density of one (1) dwelling unit shall be permitted for each one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of lot area, for sites smaller than one (1) acre, and a maximum density of approximately twenty-nine (29) dwelling units per net acre shall be permitted for sites larger than one (1) acre. In the R-2 zone, there shall be a minimum density of 10.9 dwelling units per net acre, and a maximum density of 22 dwelling units per net acre.
(c) In the R-3 zone, there shall be a minimum density of 14.5 units per net acre, and a maximum density of 45 dwelling units per net acre.
(c)(d) In the R-2 and R-3 zones, the minimum density shall be provided unless the applicant demonstrates and the Director makes the following findings:
(1) The proposed development is on an existing lot where the lot cannot accommodate a development of the minimum density due to configuration of existing buildings or shape or size of the lot, or
(2) A lower density will not adversely affect the City's ability to accommodate and provide its remaining share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for very-low and low-income households based on the remaining acreage of Medium Density Residential (R-2) or Medium-High Density Residential (R-3) zoned land at the time of application, provided, that if an adverse impact as described could otherwise occur, that such impact will be mitigated by one (1) of the following means:
(i) An equivalent parcel of land of the same or greater acreage is provided by the applicant and rezoned to the same or greater density simultaneously, or (ii) The applicant agrees to construct and covenant for affordable units on the subject site or another site in a number sufficient to ensure no net loss of units based on the minimum density set forth herein.
SECTION 6. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 4, “Development Standards”, Article 5, “Accessory Dwelling Units”, Section 10-5.505, “Accessory Dwelling Units”, is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
#21..
- 1206 -
17 10-4.505 Number and type of Accessory Dwelling Units Permitted. (a) Lots with a Single-family Dwelling or Duplex. On a lot developed with an existing or proposed single family dwelling or duplex, an applicant may choose from any of the following ADU types (i.e., attached, detached, converted) or a JADU, or a combination thereof not to exceed two (2) additional units beyond the primary single-family residence. (1) An Attached (new construction) ADU meeting the requirements of this chapter. (2) A Detached (new construction) ADU:
(i) Minimum four (4) foot side and four (4) foot rear yard setbacks are required. (3) A Converted ADU may be located within an existing single-family dwelling (i.e., in living space to be converted to an ADU, e.g., a master bedroom suite), or within an existing detached accessory structure (e.g., a detached garage). (i) The ADU located within an existing or proposed single-family dwelling must have exterior access.
(ii) The side and rear setbacks of the existing accessory structure to be converted must be sufficient for fire and safety.
(4) One (1) Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) is allowed per lot zoned for singlefamily residential, where there is only one (1) existing or one (1) proposed single family dwelling.
(i) Junior Accessory Dwelling Units shall conform to the requirements in Section 10- 4.509, below.
(b) Lots with Multi-family Residential Dwellings.
(1) Multiple accessory dwelling units are allowed within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageway, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings. (2) The number of ADUs shall not exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the existing multifamily units, except that at least one (1) ADU is allowed. (3) Not more than two (2) detached ADUs may be added to a lot that has a proposed multifamily dwelling, and not more than eight (8) detached ADUs may be added to a lot that has an existing multifamily dwelling.
(c) ADUs developed on a lot with an existing or proposed Place of Worship. (1) An ADU may be developed on a lot, meeting the following requirements:
(i) Zoned Residential or Commercial, and excluding the Industrial Zones (C-M, M1, and M-2); (ii) Developed with an existing or proposed place of worship; and #21..
- 1207 -
18 (iii) Where the church or place of worship meets the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requirements for tax exempt status under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 501 (c)(3).
(2) Not more than two (2) detached ADUs may be built.
(3) Each ADU may not exceed 1,200 square feet in floor area. (4) Each ADU shall meet the required front setbacks of the respective zoning district. (5) Each ADU shall meet the required street-side setbacks of the respective zoning district.
(6) Each ADU shall have a minimum four (4) foot interior side and rear yard setbacks. (7) No additional off-street parking is required for the ADUs, if at least one (1) existing off-street parking space is reserved for tenants in each proposed ADU. (8) The ADUs shall have a maximum height of sixteen (16) feet.
SECTION 7. AMENDMENT OF CODE.
Title 10 of the Modesto Municipal Code, Chapter 4, “Development Standards”, Article 5, “Accessory Dwelling Units”, Part 10-4.506, “Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): Maximum Sizes”, is hereby amended to read as follows (with deletions in strikethrough and additions in underline):
10-4.506 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): Maximum Sizes. (a) Attached ADUs. The total floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the primary dwelling. For a duplex, the total floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the primary unit or units that the accessory dwelling unit is proposed to be attached to. This limitation shall not preclude development of an attached ADU of up to 800 square feet. (b) Detached ADUs.
(1) The total floor area for a detached ADU shall not exceed twelve hundred (1,200) square feet.
(2) A detached ADU shall not exceed the square footage (in floor area) of the existing or proposed single family dwelling.
(c) Converted ADUs.
(1) When an existing detached accessory structure is converted to an ADU, a maximum one-hundred-fifty (150) square-foot expansion beyond the dimensions of the existing #21..
- 1208 -
19 accessory structure is allowed, provided the expansion is used solely for accommodating ingress and egress.
(2) Any expansion to an existing structure that is nonconforming as to its setbacks, shall provide a minimum four (4) foot interior side yard and four (4) foot rear yard setbacks.
SECTION 8. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
An Initial Study/Environmental Impact Report, Environmental Assessment No.
EA/C&ED No. 2024-38, has been prepared by the City of Modesto that analyzed the proposed changes to the Municipal Code, which the City Council certified and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations as well as written findings in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15093 by Resolution 2025-__, adopted on June 10, 2025.
SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and operation from and after thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.
SECTION 10. PUBLICATION.
At least two (2) days prior to its final adoption, copies of this ordinance shall be posted in at least three (3) prominent and distinct locations in the City; and a notice shall be published once in The Modesto Bee, the official newspaper of the City of Modesto, setting forth the title of this ordinance, the date of its introduction and the places where this ordinance is posted. #21..
- 1209 -
20 The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Modesto held on the 10th day of June, 2025, by Councilmember , who moved its introduction and passage to print, which motion being duly seconded by Councilmember , was upon roll call carried and ordered printed and published by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
Sue Zwahlen, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Diane Nayares-Perez, City Clerk
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
JOSE M. SANCHEZ, City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO DESCRIPTION:
By:
Community & Economic Development
Department, Planning Division
#21..
- 1210 -
21 FINAL ADOPTION CLAUSE
The foregoing ordinance, having been published as required by the Charter of the City of Modesto, and coming on for final consideration at the regular meeting of the Council of the City of Modesto held on the ____________, 2025, Councilmember ______________moved its final adoption, which motion being duly seconded by Councilmember ________________, was upon roll call carried and the ordinance adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
MAYOR, SUE ZWAHLEN
ATTEST: ____________________________
DIANE NAYARES-PEREZ, City Clerk
Effective Date: _________________, 2025
#21..
- 1211 -
Environmental Assessment No. EA/C&ED No. 2024-38
https://www.modestogov.com/DocumentCenter/View/23856/Modesto-General-Plan-FinalEnvironmental-Impact-Report #21..
- 1212 -
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-1
March 2019
Chapter III
Community Development Policies
This chapter contains the “instructions” for building the actual physical components of the City of Modesto (City) in a manner consistent with Chapter II. This chapter establishes the proposed general distribution and extent of land uses within the Modesto Urban Area General Plan. It contains Land Use policies to guide the physical development of Modesto, within three areas defined in Chapter II:
Downtown Area, Baseline Developed Area, and Planned Urbanizing Area. This chapter also provides the Land Use Diagram and Land Use Designations for the Modesto Urban Area General Plan. This chapter complies with Section 65302(a) of the California Government Code.
A. LAND USE DIAGRAM
Figure III-1 is the Land Use Diagram, which presents the general distribution of land uses within the Modesto Urban Area General Plan boundary. The Land Use Diagram conforms to Section 65302(a) of the Government Code, and is hereby adopted and incorporated into this Modesto Urban Area General Plan.
The word “Diagram” is distinguished from “Map” in the context of a California Attorney General Opinion (67 Cal.Ops.Atty.Gen. 75, 77), to provide a certain limited degree of flexibility in applying the Land Use Designations to specific parcels.
B. ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
The following Land Use Designations are presented on the Land Use Diagram (Figure III-1). These designations describe the extent of each land use type within the Modesto Urban Area. Each Land Use Designation includes standards of population density and building intensity, in conformance with Government Code Section 65302(a), and each is summarized in Table III-1, below. #21..
- 1213 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-2
March 2019
Table III-1. General Plan Land Use Designations
Land Use
Designation Non-Residential Intensity Guidance* Residential Density Guidance Residential N/A Low-Density Residential
(R1 zoning) – up to 10.9 du /
gross acre
Medium-Density Residential
(R2 zoning) – 10.9 to 22 du /
gross acre
Medium-High-Density
Residential (R3 zoning) –
22 to 45 du / gross acre
Mixed Use FAR = 0.35 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of non-Residential area
Average 14 du / gross acre of
Residential area
Commercial FAR = 0.35 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of the area
N/A
Industrial FAR = 0.30 to 0.50 SF bldg / SF of
gross acreage of the area
N/A
Downtown FAR = 1.0-14.0 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of the entire area
FAR = 1.0-14.0. Residential
density is not otherwise limited.
Village
Residential
4% of area designated Village
Residential
FAR = 0.35 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of the non-residential area
6.6 du / gross acre for entire CPD
BusinessCommercialResidentialApproximately 70% of acreage designated Business-CommercialResidential
FAR = 0.4 SF bldg. / SF of gross
acreage of the area
Approximately 30% of acreage
designated BusinessCommercial-Residential
10-30 du / gross acre
Regional
Commercial
FAR = 0.35 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of the area
N/A
Business Park FAR = 0.40 SF bldg / SF of gross
acreage of the area
N/A
Open Space N/A Low Density Residential –
max. 1.0 du / 10 acres
CPD = Specific plan District FAR = Floor Area Ratio SF = square foot du = dwelling unit N/A = not applicable
* FAR is calculated by dividing the total square footage of building floorspace by the total square footage of the property that it is located on.
#21..
- 1214 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-3
March 2019
1. Residential (R)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for residential uses throughout the Modesto Urban Area. Residential uses include single-family detached housing, single-family attached housing, multi-family housing, and mobile homes. Small-lot single-family residential development is encouraged, subject to applicable zoning regulations, design guidelines and General Plan criteria. Compatible uses in the residential designation may include schools, parks, and religious or community facilities. Existing small-scale commercial and office uses are also deemed compatible. b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied anywhere within the Modesto Urban Area General Plan where residential land uses would be compatible with other existing and planned land uses. c. Land Use Intensity
The land use intensity is a typical density of 6.6 dwelling units per gross acre, to a maximum of 10.9 dwelling units per gross acre, on an area-wide basis without requiring a General Plan Amendment, and between 10.9 and 45.0 dwelling units per gross acre for multi-family housing.
2. Mixed Use (MU)
a. Purpose and Intent
To characterize those areas in Modesto Urban Area that are already developed and that contain a mixture of all or some of the following uses in close proximity to each other:
residential, commercial, office, and/or institutional. Additional purpose and intent of the MU designation is to provide for future development opportunities for mixed uses. In the existing Baseline Developed Area where this designation is applied, zoning controls land use on a specific parcel.
b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied to those areas of the Modesto Urban Area that are already developed and contain a mixture of uses as described above. This designation may also be applied to areas outside of the Baseline Developed Area where mixed-use development would be appropriate.
c. Land Use Intensity
For new development, the land use mix should include residential uses and non-residential uses including but not limited to institutional, office, and commercial uses. For residential uses, the intensity should average approximately 14 dwelling units per acre over the entire residential area, with project-specific density to be consistent with zoning. For nonresidential uses, the guiding intensity is a Floor Area Ratio of approximately 0.35. #21..
- 1215 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-4
March 2019
3. Commercial (C)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for a range of Commercial uses to serve the current and projected needs of Modesto’s population. This designation encompasses a variety of service and retail uses, including but not limited to business, medical, and professional offices (other than large office campuses), neighborhood retail centers, convenience retail, highway-oriented commerce (restaurants, gas stations, automotive repair, and service), and Regional Commercial uses.
b. Location Criteria
Commercial land uses in Modesto are generally located at intersections along major arterial streets and expressways. The Modesto Zoning Code presents additional criteria for the location and type of Commercial uses.
c. Land Use Intensity
The guiding intensity is a Floor Area Ratio of approximately 0.35.
4. Industrial (I)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for industrial uses in the Modesto Urban Area. This designation provides for the full range of industrial uses, including but not limited to manufacturing, food processing, trucking, packing, and recycling, as well as those enterprises which may want to combine office and production aspects of their business in the same complex. b. Location Criteria
Industrial land uses in Modesto are generally located within larger tracts of land oriented towards Freeway 99 and/or one of the three railroads serving the Urban Area. c. Land Use Intensity
The guiding intensity is a Floor Area Ratio of approximately 0.50.
5. Downtown (D)
a. Purpose and Intent
Downtown Modesto should be the focal point of community life and the social, cultural, business, governmental and entertainment center of Stanislaus County. This vision will be achieved through partnerships between private enterprise and government agencies. The City #21..
- 1216 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-5
March 2019
shall take the lead through strategic investments in public infrastructure and by recruiting and assisting with new private investment.
Housing will be an integral part of Downtown Modesto, to be complemented by and stimulated by a safe and attractive, tree-lined environment. Modern transportation systems shall provide convenient transportation to and within the Downtown Area. Vertical mixeduse development is allowed, and is encouraged by the Downtown zones. b. Location Criteria
The Downtown designation shall be applied within the original downtown grid / City center and limited surrounding areas. The Land Use Diagram (Exhibit III-1) indicates the boundaries of this area.
c. Land Use Intensity
Residential and non-residential development should conform to the standards, regulations and criteria contained within the City of Modesto’s Downtown Zoning District regulations and/or other zoning code regulations that apply within the Downtown area. The applicable guiding intensity is a Floor Area Ratio between 1.0 and 14.0.
6. Village Residential (VR)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for the development of urban “villages.” Villages are to be comprised of mixeduse, compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented neighborhoods that are intended to accommodate a variety of residential product types, such as detached houses on small lots, multi-family housing and senior housing, in addition to neighborhood-serving non-residential uses. The Comprehensive Planning District Exhibits beginning on page 22 of this Chapter provide general guidance, as applicable, for policy implementation of the Village Residential Designation. Villages should be comprehensively planned using the Specific Plan process presented in Section III-D, below.
b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied to areas throughout the Planned Urbanizing Area, as shown in Figure II-1. As areas designated Village Residential are entitled, annexed and developed, the General Plan land use designation should be changed to Residential. c. Land Use Intensity
The Comprehensive Planning Districts (CPDs) presented in Section III-D, below, contain the actual land use mix and intensities for each CPD.
Residential: The residential density within a CPD is typically 6.6 dwelling units per gross acre for the entire district. Small-lot single-family residential development is encouraged, subject to applicable zoning regulations, design guidelines and General Plan criteria.
Consistent with the Housing Element, at least 15 percent of the residentially-designated land #21..
- 1217 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-6
March 2019
area shall be reserved for multi-family development at a minimum density of 22.0 dwelling units per acre. The maximum multi-family residential density is 45.0 dwelling units per acre.
Commercial: Approximately four (4) percent of lands designated Village Residential shall be devoted to commercial uses, with a guiding intensity of 0.35 FAR.
7. Business Commercial Residential (BCR)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for a combination of land uses, including Business Park, Commercial and Residential, in close proximity in order to reduce vehicle trips. This designation is intended to accommodate employment-intensive uses, and medium-high-density residential uses, with a variety of goods and services readily available. The desired result is compact and walkable development that integrates a mix of land uses such that opportunities to live near employment, shopping and service centers are created.
b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied to areas within the Planned Urbanizing Area, as shown in Figure II-1, at locations that have adequate access to regional traffic routes and transit corridors. This designation is intended for those areas where the combination of land uses would be appropriate and compatible with neighboring uses. c. Land Use Intensity
The land use mix should be a minimum of 55 percent and maximum of 70 percent of gross acreage devoted to business park uses; a minimum of 20 percent and a maximum of 30 percent of gross acreage to be devoted to residential uses; and, a minimum of 10 percent and a maximum of 20 percent of gross acreage devoted to commercial uses. Vertical mixed-use development is also encouraged.
For residential uses, densities should be between 10 and 30 dwelling units per gross acre, respectively. For non-residential uses, the guiding intensity is approximately 0.4 FAR. #21..
- 1218 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-7
March 2019
Example photos to illustrate BCR development concept
8. Regional Commercial (RC)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for large-scale commercial areas and regional retail Commercial uses serving the needs of the entire region. Regional Commercial uses serve a much larger population by providing commercial activities not needed on a regular basis. Their location is primarily determined by major transportation routes which allow convenient access. b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied anywhere within the Modesto Urban Area General Plan area that is located with adequate access to regional traffic routes and transit corridors. c. Land Use Intensity
The land use intensity is a Floor Area Ratio of approximately 0.35.
9. Business Park (BP)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for areas of light industrial and employment-intensive uses, and to produce an environment conducive to industries and employers seeking an aesthetically attractive “campus-like” setting. Regional Commercial uses are also permitted in Business Parks. b. Location Criteria
This designation may be applied anywhere within the Modesto Urban Area General Plan area that has adequate access to regional traffic routes and transit corridors. c. Land Use Intensity
Business Parks should have a campus-like setting, with a guiding intensity of approximately
0.40 FAR.
10. Open Space (OS)
a. Purpose and Intent
To provide for regional recreational open space (active and passive) along the Tuolumne River, Stanislaus River, and Dry Creek. Community and neighborhood parks and other smaller open space areas can be accommodated within any Land Use Designation. In the Open Space designation, planned land uses shall include low-impact recreational facilities, #21..
- 1219 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-8
March 2019
public ownership, low-density residential, and agriculture. New development within areas designated Open Space shall be designed to not detract from habitat value or passive recreational uses, nor increase flood potential.
b. Location Criteria
This designation is applied along the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers and Dry Creek. c. Land Use Intensity
For residential uses in the Open Space designation, the density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per ten (10) acres.
11. Salida Community Plan (SCP)
a. Purpose and Intent
If the Salida Comprehensive planning district is annexed to the City of Modesto, the City does not propose to change any land use directions from those established by Stanislaus County. Therefore, the Salida Community Plan, as adopted by Stanislaus County, will continue to guide growth and development for this area, even upon annexation to the City. b. Location Criteria
This designation is applied only in the Salida Comprehensive planning district, as shown in Exhibit III-1. These are precisely the same boundaries as for the Salida Community Plan adopted by Stanislaus County as of January 1, 1995.
c. Land Use Intensity
The Stanislaus County General Plan, in effect as of January 1, 1995, contained ten Land Use Designations to guide development within the Salida Community Plan. School sites were also designated in the Community Plan. These Land Use Designations are described in detail in the “Salida Comprehensive planning district,” presented in Section III-D. #21..
- 1220 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-9
March 2019
C. LAND USE GOALS AND POLICIES
The Land Use Designations presented above are supplemented by Land Use goals and policies, which are presented and categorized below. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve these objectives: smart growth and sustainable development; reduced per capita vehicle miles travelled and improved air quality; and, maximized efficiencies of infrastructure systems and delivery of services.
1. Overall
Goal III.A
Zoning Consistency. Maintain and enhance consistency between the General Plan (land use designations and policies) and zoning.
Policy III.A.1
Parcel-Specific Zoning. Zoning within the incorporated City limits should be, and generally is, consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations as presented on the Land Use Diagram.
However, because these designations are broad in nature, there may be minor instances in which the existing zoning for a particular property is not consistent with the Land Use Designation for the property. These situations are still considered to be consistent with the overall goals and policies of the General Plan, and development of these properties may occur consistent with zoning.
Policy III.A.2
Rezoning. Rezonings should also be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations.
However, rezonings involving less than five (5) acres may occur even if they are not consistent with the Land Use Designation for the property, as long as the rezoning can be found consistent with the Land Use goals and policies of the General Plan. Rezonings of five (5) acres or more that are inconsistent with the applicable Land Use Designation(s) will require a General Plan amendment.
Goal III.B
Quality of Life. Maintain and improve the integrity of the existing developed City, and promote complete, sustainable, compatible and high-quality development – for living, working, shopping and recreation – across the entire city.
Policy III.B.1
Infill Incentives. Facilitate infill development through active leadership and strategic provision of infrastructure and services, and supporting land uses. Provide incentives for infill development, redevelopment and growth in existing urbanized areas to enhance community character, optimize infrastructure investments, support increased transit use, promote non-motorized transportation, increase housing diversity and enhance commercial viability. Structure fee programs so that infill development is “priced” according to its relative infrastructure efficiencies and the communitywide benefits to be realized. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice) Policy III.B.2
Existing City. To maximize economic and social benefits, and resource efficiencies, prioritize and focus new development within the existing City limits. This will strengthen existing neighborhoods and maximize efficiencies of utility / infrastructure systems. New development will be accessible by all modes of transportation, both motorized and non-motorized, with an emphasis on availability of public services. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice) #21..
- 1221 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-10
March 2019
Policy III.B.3
Property Maintenance. Encourage owners of visually unattractive or poorly-maintained properties to upgrade existing deficiencies, whether related to structures, outdoor storage / activities, and/or any other maintenance issues, in order to improve their visual quality. (environmental justice)
2. Neighborhoods
Promote and facilitate a fabric of complete, cohesive, pedestrian-friendly and family-oriented neighborhoods across the entire City. New neighborhoods are to be integrated with existing neighborhoods, through contextual design consideration, compact development patterns and application of Neighborhood Compatibility Guidelines and other applicable development guidelines.
Goal III.C
Neighborhoods. Create neighborhoods that are complete, compact and sustainable so that housing, jobs, shopping and transit access are within easy walking distance. Include a mix of compatible land uses within close proximity, contain a diversity of housing types to accommodate a wide range of economic levels and age groups, and have a center focus that combines commercial, civic, cultural, and recreational uses in order to facilitate high-quality living environments. Access to healthy foods and grocery stores that sell fresh fruits and vegetables is a high priority. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.C.1
Complete Neighborhoods. Complete neighborhoods promote livability, sustainability and safety for all residents. Neighborhoods are to contain: a mix of housing types including affordable and market-rate; a range of services and facilities such as schools, parks, retail, services & civic facilities; transit access within a half-mile of all dwelling units; and, complete streets with tree canopy cover that accommodate both motorized and non-motorized mobility. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.C.2
Protect Established Neighborhoods. Preserve, protect, and enhance established neighborhoods by providing sensitive transitions between and among adjoining neighborhoods, and by requiring new development – both private and public – to respect and respond to those existing physical characteristics, buildings, streetscapes, open spaces, and urban form that contribute to the overall character and livability of the neighborhood. (environmental justice) Policy III.C.3
Neighborhood Shopping Centers. Locate neighborhood shopping centers, preferably at the intersection of two arterial streets, in each neighborhood. Neighborhood shopping center should include full-service food stores with fresh fruits and vegetables. (environmental justice) #21..
- 1222 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-11
March 2019
Policy III.C.4
Diverse Centers. Encourage development of local, citywide and regional mixed-use centers that address different community needs and market sectors, and that compliment and are well-integrated with surrounding neighborhoods. (Air quality, public health) Policy III.C.5
New Neighborhood Core. All parts of new neighborhoods should be within a half-mile of a central gathering place that is located on a collector street or minor arterial and that includes public space, shopping areas, transit access, and community-supportive facilities and services. (Air quality, public health)
Policy III.C.6
Traditional Grid and Pedestrian Safety. Design new neighborhoods with traditional grid block sizes ranging from 300 to 400 feet in length. Separate sidewalks from the curb with a minimum eight-foot (8’) landscaped parkway. Construct context-appropriate traffic-calming improvements, such as traffic circles and intersection bulbouts. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation) Policy III.C.7
Connections to Transit. New neighborhoods include transit stops that support and connect to the citywide transit system, and that are within a half-mile walking distance of all dwelling units. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation)
Policy III.C.8
Neighborhood Schools. Neighborhoods should contain sufficient K-12 schools necessary to serve them. Locate schools on Collector streets, preferably at or near the intersection of two Collector streets. Locate neighborhood parks (see Chapter VI for parks standards) adjacent to school sites.
New schools and parks should be surrounded by streets on all sides wherever possible to encourage access by walking and bicycling. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation) Great, Safe Neighborhoods
Complete Neighborhoods promote livability and safety for residents of all ages, incomes and cultural backgrounds. Characteristics of complete neighborhoods include the following:
A mix of housing types affordable to all income levels; A neighborhood watch group and/or other neighborhood-scale organizations; At least one vibrant commercial or civic activity area that provides neighborhood identity; Services and facilities including full-service grocery stores, schools, parks, & other public spaces; Substantial tree canopy & general landscaping, combined with lighting enhance safety; An interconnected street network with short blocks and very few cul-de-sacs; Convenient access to public transportation and high-quality bicycle & pedestrian facilities; and, School sites that are central to neighborhoods.
#21..
- 1223 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-12
March 2019
Policy III.C.9
Senior Housing Development. Encourage the development of senior housing in neighborhoods that are accessible to public transit, commercial services, and health & community facilities. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice) Policy III.C.10
Neighborhood Open Space. Neighborhoods should contain an ample supply of specialized open space in the form of squares, greens and parks, whose frequent use is encouraged through placement and design. Provide linkages between such areas and surrounding neighborhoods.
Policy III.C.11
Development Guidelines. Apply Neighborhood Compatibility Guidelines, Multi-Family Residential Design Guidelines, Guidelines for Small-Lot Single-Family Residential Developments, and other adopted development guidelines, as appropriate to new construction, additions to existing structures, replacement of existing buildings / land uses, and other neighborhood improvements.
Policy III.C.12
Residential Design. For new residential development, include a range of lot sizes, varied setbacks, and orient buildings to the street (e.g. entry, windows).
Policy III.C.13
Transitions in Scale. Scale and massing of new development in higher-density centers and corridors should provide appropriate transitions in building height and bulk that are sensitive to the physical and visual character of adjoining neighborhoods.
Safe Schools
Safe Schools promote accessibility, education, exercise, healthy food choices and role models for Modesto’s youth. Characteristics of Safe Schools include the following:
A convenient network of sidewalks and pedestrian improvements in general to assist students in getting to school, regardless of their available transportation mode choice options; A well-developed network of bicycle lanes, paths and trails to allow safe and convenient access to schools for those students that choose to bike to school; Healthy foods, including fresh fruits and produce, that are consistently available at school; Extended outdoor playtime and recreational facilities, and a formal physical education program;
Qualified, competent and experienced teachers and faculty, including counselors and police department staff; and,
A central location to neighborhoods, and prominent placement along the connector street network in the Planned Urbanizing Area.
#21..
- 1224 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-13
March 2019
3. Major Transportation Corridors
This General Plan acknowledges the “land use-transportation connection” by providing direction with regard to both public and private investment along major transportation corridors. Future corridor studies will provide detailed guidance for site design, land use mix, and development intensity, in addition to transportation options and “Complete Streets.”
Goal III.D
Corridor Studies. Corridor Studies guide infill development, and re-use / recycling of existing development, along major transportation corridors. Such development will balance vehicular circulation and access against all other travel modes – both motorized and non-motorized. Development along major transportation corridors should mix land uses effectively so that housing, retail and service needs are combined with pedestrian-friendly facilities and gathering places. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.D.1
Study Corridors. The following “Major Transportation Corridors” are the best candidates for reinvestment, based in part on the connectivity they provide between downtown and other parts of the City / surrounding region (see Figure III-2):
i. McHenry Avenue / SR108;
ii. Yosemite Avenue / SR132;
iii. Crows Landing Road;
iv. Paradise Road;
v. Maze Boulevard;
vi. N. 9th Street; and,
vii. other corridor(s) as needed.
Policy III.D.2
Corridor Study Topics. Corridor Studies will address the following:
i. Transportation mode priority (includes transit, bicycle and pedestrian); ii. Street design;
iii. Land use designations;
iv. Development standards & design guidelines;
v. Pedestrian safety; and,
vi. other considerations as applicable.
Goal III.E
Corridor Development. Development along major transportation corridors that occurs pursuant to an adopted corridor study should be compact, mixed-use, transit- / bicycle- / pedestrian-friendly, and scaled appropriately to match the context and transition to existing nearby neighborhoods. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.E.1
Transit Oriented Development. Locate higher-density, transit-oriented, mixed-use development (TOD) along major transportation corridors near significant intersections and public transportation facilities. Development density along major transportation corridors should increase with proximity to transit stops and decrease with distance from transit stops in order to encourage increased transit ridership. Establish specific thresholds, standards and guidelines for TOD and other development types in the applicable corridor study documentation. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
#21..
- 1225 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-14
March 2019
Policy III.E.2
Corridor Mixed-Use Infill. Promote mixed-use infill development along major transportation corridors through the use of corridor studies, zoning, flexible development standards, density bonuses and other development incentives. Locate such development along the back of sidewalk, and oriented to frame the street, while incorporating public plazas and pedestrian amenities that will create people-oriented centers for living, working and gathering. (environmental justice) Policy III.E.3
Corridor Residential Infill. Encourage high-quality, compact, multi-story residential infill development along major transportation corridors, through design criteria contained within applicable corridor study documentation. Minimize parking requirements where appropriate.
Maintain compatibility with form and function of nearby existing neighborhoods through use of applicable design guidelines.
Policy III.E.4
Corridor Study Implementation. Corridor studies may include a form-based code component to guide subsequent development, in order to provide clear and consistent development standards.
Other potential implementation mechanisms include, and are not limited to, mixed-use and/or overlay zoning, specific plans, and design guidelines.
Policy III.E.5
Corridor Features. Promote the transformation of major transportation corridors, via formal corridor studies, into boulevards that are attractive, comfortable, and safe for pedestrians and cyclists by incorporating the following design features: (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
i. Wide sidewalks to accommodate pedestrian traffic, amenities and landscaping; ii. Class I, II or IV bicycle facilities;
iii. On-street parking between sidewalks and travel lanes; iv. Few curb cuts and driveways;
v. Enhanced pedestrian street crossings;
vi. Compatible interface with adjacent existing residential neighborhoods; vii. Buildings located at the back of sidewalk;
viii. Building entrances oriented to the street;
ix. Transparent ground floor frontage;
x. Street trees and furnishings; and,
xi. Pedestrian-scale lighting and signage.
The following exhibits reflect development concepts that include some of these features. These concepts, while shown within the context of existing development on surrounding properties, are not intended in any way to dictate or restrict development options or alternative designs that would otherwise be consistent with this General Plan and applicable zoning regulations.
4. Downtown
The City of Modesto will continue to focus on Downtown as the cultural, social, business and activity center of Modesto. Implementation of the City’s Downtown Form-Based zoning code will assist in facilitating progress toward meeting the policy objectives reflected below. #21..
- 1226 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-15
March 2019
Goal III.F
Downtown Focus. Downtown Modesto is a high-priority area for both public and private investment.
Therefore, the City should prioritize and focus infrastructure investments here. Downtown is planned to become a more urban, higher-density, mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented, economically vibrant, innovative center for living, working, socializing and recreating. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.F.1
Density and Mix. Implement higher density, mixed-use development to create a balanced, vibrant downtown and active neighborhood centers by streamlining development processing, offering public parking for projects with parking structures (in lieu of the provision of private parking), reducing fees and providing for deferral of fees.
Policy III.F.2
Downtown Housing. Housing in the Downtown Area should include a variety of unit types and densities, ranging from medium to very high, to act as a catalyst for other types of development.
Policy III.F.3
Support Downtown Businesses. Enhance downtown businesses by establishing new downtown residential and mixed-use development, which will provide customers for downtown businesses.
Policy III.F.4
Public Spaces. Enhance the visual appeal of Modesto’s public spaces by upgrading existing parks, plazas, and streets, and by creating new parks and plazas.
Policy III.F.5
Sense of Place. Develop a cohesive design along roadway corridors to help establish a sense of orientation and aid with navigation, by using consistent shade tree species, lighting and street furniture between adjoining street sections along the corridors. Develop historic 10th and J Streets as attractive, pedestrian-oriented streets.
Policy III.F.6
Downtown Development. Higher-density, transit-oriented, mixed-use development (TOD) within the Downtown area should be strategically located near the most significant intersections and public transportation facilities such as the multi-modal transportation station. TOD should be designed and oriented toward these and any other major transportation facilities, as they are among the most important building blocks for Downtown Modesto’s future. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.F.7
Reduce Trips by Car. Reduce the use of automobiles and the need to own a car by prioritizing infrastructure for pedestrians, bicycles, buses, and rail over automobile infrastructure, which also reduces the need for off-street parking. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.F.8
Downtown Accessibility. Develop a context-sensitive circulation system that prioritizes and facilitates pedestrians, bicycles, and transit, and which also accommodates automobiles. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice) #21..
- 1227 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-16
March 2019
Policy III.F.9
Downtown Multi-Modal Transportation Center. Support development of a downtown multimodal transportation center, and its connectivity to various transportation modes, to act as a catalyst for intensified mixed-use development within the downtown area. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.F.10
Cultural Amenities. Continue to support existing cultural amenities Downtown, and encourage development of additional amenities that promote the City as the regional center for social activity.
Policy III.F.11
Building Height Transitions. Maintain height standards for Downtown and adjoining transition areas consistent with the General Plan vision for a higher-density Downtown and sensitive transitions to surrounding neighborhoods.
5. Commercial / Retail Centers
This General Plan will guide design and development of new shopping centers, and will also be applied to re-development of existing retail and commercial centers. Retail activity should be accessible by all transportation modes, particularly for non-motorized modes, and is intended to be designed consistent with applicable zoning regulations and development guidelines.
Goal III.G
Connectivity and Centers. Commercial development should strengthen the vehicular, pedestrian and visual connections between shopping centers and their surrounding neighborhoods, and between neighboring retail sites, through physical improvements, public transit and coordinated land use and transportation planning. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice) Policy III.G.1
Making Shopping Centers More Pedestrian Friendly. Support the transformation of autooriented shopping centers currently characterized by retail strips surrounded by large surface parking lots into pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly places. Retail activity and shopping in general should be designed for pedestrian, bicyclist and transit user safety and convenience. Wide sidewalks, crosswalks, clear and well-lit storefront windows, varied building facades, awnings, street furniture, public art, extensive landscaping and pedestrian-scaled signage are among the design components to be considered. (Air quality, public health, energy conservation, environmental justice)
Policy III.G.2
Building Orientation. For new shopping center development, and for renovation of older shopping centers where feasible, locate buildings at the “front” of the site (at or near the back of sidewalk) and parking at the “back” of the site, behind the buildings. This policy is intended to be applied where contextually-appropriate, primarily in the more walkable areas of the City.
Policy III.G.3
Commercial Design. Incorporate high-quality design features into shopping center development, including the following:
Interconnected streets and walkable blocks connected to transit facilities; Buildings sited around common plazas, courtyards, walkways and open spaces; #21..
- 1228 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-17
March 2019
A complete signage program for business identification and way-finding; Attractive landscaping and lighting to promote pedestrian activity; and, Clearly-marked driveways, pedestrian routes and building entries that minimize potential conflicts among trucks, autos, bicycles and pedestrians.
Policy III.G.4
Commercial Development Guidelines. Apply neighborhood Compatibility Guidelines, Design Guidelines for Commercial & Industrial Development, and other applicable development guidelines, as appropriate to new construction, additions to existing structures, replacement of existing buildings / land uses, and other commercial development activity.
6. Employment Centers
The following goals and policies are to guide design and development of new business park, industrial and office development (employment centers), and will also be applied to re-development of employment centers. Employment centers should improve the City’s economy by decreasing the local unemployment rate and increasing the amount of money circulating through the local economy. Therefore, the City should monitor the availability of land area for new employment centers in order to ensure a balanced supply of available land. Employment centers should be easily accessible by all transportation modes, and should be designed consistent with applicable zoning regulations and design guidelines.
Goal III.H.
Employment Centers. Locate employment-intensive uses, such as medical and professional offices, light industry, R&D and skill training, in appropriate areas as designated by the General Plan and the zoning map. Locate Business Parks, Industrial development and other employment centers near access points to major transportation facilities so that they are accessible by all modes of transportation.
Policy III.H.1
Priority Areas. Besides Downtown, the Kiernan Business Park (KBP) area is the highest priority for employment center development. KBP will develop further as a more distinctive and attractive business park / office park that caters to medical, professional, technological and similar businesses in a campus-like setting.
Policy III.H.2
Employment Center Design. Design employment center development to accommodate safe and convenient walking, biking and transit use, and provide a high-quality campus-like environment, characterized by the following: (Air quality, public health, energy conservation) Interconnected streets and walkable blocks;
Buildings sited around common plazas, courtyards, walkways and open spaces; On-site landscaping and buffers between buildings and properties; Visual screening of areas for outdoor storage, processing and/or other industrial operations; A thoughtful and well-executed signage program for business identification and way-finding; Landscaping and lighting to promote pedestrian activity; Clearly-marked driveways, pedestrian routes and building entries that minimize potential conflicts among trucks, autos, bicycles and pedestrians; and, Control of operations regarding lighting, noise, odors, vibrations, hazardous / toxic materials, heavy equipment / truck access and any other environmental considerations that may affect nearby properties.
#21..
- 1229 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-18
March 2019
Policy III.H.3
Employment Center Guidelines. Apply adopted Design Guidelines, such as those for Commercial & Industrial Development, as appropriate to new construction, additions to existing structures, replacement of existing buildings / land uses, and other employment center development.
Policy III.H.4
Accessory Support Uses. Employment centers should incorporate accessory uses such as public open space, transit facilities, child-care facilities, health clubs, professional offices and non-office retail uses, based on the size and location of the development, as appropriate.
D. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DISTRICTS
Each of the Comprehensive Planning Districts (CPDs) delineated on the Land Use Diagram (Figure III-1) are further described in this Section. All Specific Plans adopted to implement a given CPD shall include a text narrative and a map or diagram, conforming to the requirements of the relevant CPD. The minimum planning area for a new specific plan is approximately 480 acres, or as otherwise determined adequate for true comprehensive planning of new growth areas. For those CPDs where a specific plan has already been adopted, no exhibit is shown. Open Space CPDs are regulated via the applicable park system master plan.
1. Principal Comprehensive Planning District Policies
The following Principal CPD policies apply to all CPDs, regardless of whether they are located in the Baseline Developed Area or the Planned Urbanizing Area.
Policy III.I.1
CPD Implementation. Specific Plans, as defined in Chapter VIII, should be used for the implementation of the CPDs presented in Figure III-1.
Policy III.I.2
CPD Property Owners. Since each CPD contains a number of properties, unified direction from affected property owners should be encouraged, particularly for privately-initiated applications. In the case of disparate or unknown development intentions, the City may proactively seek consensus from affected property owners.
Policy III.I.3
CPD Specific Plans. The Specific Plan(s) within each CPD should follow the policies and procedures as outlined in the City of Modesto’s Specific Plan Procedures and Preparation Guide (Guide), which identifies all subsequent land use approvals required to be consistent with the Specific plan. The Guide should be updated in order to keep it current with regard to policies and practices.
Policy III.I.4
Specific Plan Financing. Each Specific Plan should be accompanied by a long-range financing strategy that provides reasonable estimates of the costs of on- and off-site infrastructure to support the proposed development pattern. The strategy should generally address public facility funding for any development project that serves to implement the subject Specific Plan. If new public facilities #21..
- 1230 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-19
March 2019
are required that will also serve the broader community, the Specific Plan should include options for broad-based funding mechanisms. Each Specific Plan should address the need to provide water, wastewater and storm drainage infrastructure, in the context of the required Facilities Master Plan and Infrastructure Master Plan (prepared at developer’s expense).
Policy III.I.5
Public Safety Funding. With each Specific Plan, prepare a long-range financing strategy that provides reasonable estimates of the long-term public safety facilities, maintenance and operational costs. Identify funding mechanisms for these costs within the financing strategy documentation.
Policy III.I.6
Specific Plan-CPD Relationship. More than one Specific Plan may be processed within a given CPD, as long as the remaining area within the CPD can still comply with the General Plan policies presented in this chapter. Conversely, a Specific Plan can be used to implement more than one CPD, when those districts are adjoining. A CPD may consist of more than one Specific Plan provided that the Specific Plans are consistent, compatible, and complement one another. This is particularly important for issues related to, but not limited to, land use plans, circulation plans and the Specific Plans’ financing sections (which must be correlated to provide for adequate infrastructure throughout the CPD). If Specific Plans are adopted at different times within a CPD, the first Specific Plan should include an infrastructure plan for the entire CPD.
2. Adoption of Comprehensive Planning Districts
On the following pages, 16 CPDs are hereby adopted as Exhibits III-2 through III-17 inclusive.
Exhibits for those CPDs where a specific plan(s) has been adopted for the entire area are not shown.
Brief descriptions of these CPDs are summarized in Exhibit III-1. The order presented does not imply the order in which each Specific Plan should be processed. To the contrary, no phasing or sequencing of development is intended through the CPD process, as long as each Specific Plan conforms to the requirements of its respective CPD.
In addition to the scenario noted above where a specific plan(s) has already been adopted for a given CPD, certain CPDs have other special considerations that result in no need to include an Exhibit reflecting development assumptions and policies applicable to their respective specific plan process. For example, development in the Tuolumne River CPD is governed by the Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP) Master Plan. The boundaries of this CPD match the boundaries of the TRRP Master Plan area.
#21..
- 1231 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-20
March 2019
Exhibit III-1, Page 1 of 2: Comprehensive Planning Districts Summary Exhibit No.
Comprehensive
Planning District (CPD)
Land Use Designations
within the CPD Acreage
Dwelling
Units Jobs
BASELINE DEVELOPED AREA
Downtown Area Downtown 710 3,500 40,200
Baseline Developed Area
(excludes Downtown)
Residential, Commercial,
Industrial, Mixed Use
22,540 81,870 135,160
Baseline Developed Area subtotals 23,250 85,370 175,360 PLANNED URBANIZING AREA – Inside Sphere of Influence
(N/A) Coffee / Claratina Residential 160 1,080 ---
Commercial 10 --- 240
III-3 College West Business Park 230 --- 5,980
(N/A) Dry Creek Open Space 510 50 ---
III-4 Empire North Village Residential
Residential
160
60 1,060
400
110
---
III-5 Fairview Village Residential
Residential
Commercial
140
210
20 920
1,390
---
100
---
480
III-6 Hetch-Hetchy Village Residential 790 5,030 550
Regional Commercial 170 --- 4,080
III-7 Highway 132 Business Park
Residential
630
30 ---
60 16,380
---
III-8 Johansen Village Residential 600 3,810 420
III-9 Kiernan / Carver Residential 240 1,580 ---
Regional Commercial 70 --- 1,680
Business Park 300 --- 7,800
Business-Comm-Res 490 2,940 7,640
Mixed Use 50 420 480
III-11 Kiernan / McHenry Business Park 370 --- 9,620
Regional Commercial 100 --- 2,400
(N/A) North Beyer Residential 160 960 ---
Mixed Use 20 160 200
III-12 Paradise / Carpenter Village Residential 810 5,110 570 (N/A) Pelandale / Snyder Residential
Commercial
360
20 2,380
---
---
480
Mixed Use 10 80 100
III-13 Roselle / Claribel Village Residential
Residential
840
380
5,540
2,510
590
---
Regional Commercial 110 --- 2,640
Business-Comm-Res
Commercial
260
30 1,560
---
4,060
720
#21..
- 1232 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-21
March 2019
Exhibit III-1, Page 2 of 2: Comprehensive Planning Districts Summary Exhibit No.
Comprehensive
Planning District (CPD)
Land Use Designations
within the CPD Acreage
Dwelling
Units Jobs
PLANNED URBANIZING AREA – Inside Sphere of Influence (cont’d) (N/A)
(N/A)
Tuolumne River
Village One
Open Space
Residential
1,630
1,510
160
9,970
---
---
III-15 Whitmore / Carpenter
Mixed Use
Business-Comm-Res
Commercial
Village Residential
10 340
40 690
80 1,800
---
4,380
100
5,300
960
480
Planned Urbanizing Area – Inside Sphere of Influence subtotals 12,560 53,430 74,160 PLANNED URBANIZING AREA – Outside Sphere of Influence
III-2
III-9
III-10
III-14
Beckwith / Dakota
Kiernan / Carver
Kiernan / Carver North
Salida &
Business Park
Regional Commercial
Business Park
Business Park
Salida Community Plan
690
350
230
490
4,310
---
---
---
---
(B)
17,940
8,400
5,980
12,740
(B)
Stanislaus River Open Space 740 (B) (B)
Total Acreage, Dwelling Units & Jobs in the Planned Urbanizing Area – Outside Sphere of Influence subtotals
6,810 45,060
GRAND TOTALS
Total Acreage, Dwelling Units & Jobs in the Baseline Developed Area and the Planned Urbanizing Area – Inside Sphere of Influence 35,810 138,800 249,520
Total Acreage, Dwelling Units & Jobs within the entire planning area 42,620 138,800 294,580 (A) Acreages, population estimates, and employment estimates rounded to the nearest ten (10). (B) The Salida Community Plan and Stanislaus River CPDs are administered by Stanislaus County. (C) Total population of approximately 390,000 assumed at 2040 (or later) based on traffic analyses. (D) Assumed Village Residential and Residential gross density = 6.6 du / acre (E) Assumed Business Park employee density = 26 per acre (F) Assumed Regional Commercial and Commercial employee density = 24 per acre (G) Assumed Village Residential employee density = 0.7 per acre #21..
- 1233 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-22
March 2019
E. SENATE BILL 244 – DISADVANTAGED UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES Senate Bill 244 (SB244), which was signed into law in 2011, requires that local agencies analyze the Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities (DUC) within their Spheres of Influence (SOI). Based on information provided by the State of California Department of Water Resources, and the criteria set forth in SB244, Modesto has a total of nine (9) individual DUCs within its Sphere of Influence. Figure III-3, below, shows the boundaries of each DUC. The following information describes the DUCs and the general infrastructure needs for each, including rough cost estimates, and an overview of funding.
1. Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Infrastructure Needs Area 1: “West Modesto” – Water
The City provides water service to all but a few parcels in Area 1. Area 1 has some adequately-sized 10” to 16” water mains which provide a strong backbone system for water supply. However, there are many existing 4” and 6” steel mains that are prone to leaking and calcification with age, resulting in reduced pipe capacity and efficiency. The water system’s smaller pipes will require future upsizing in order to meet City Standards. A sufficient and reliable source of potable water to meet the existing and expected demands is available from both ground water and surface water supplies.
The City has an annual Pipeline Strengthen and Replacement Program of about $4M to $5M per year, prioritized to replace smaller and older water mains throughout the water system – both within and outside the City limits. The “Robertson Road” and “Hilltop” neighborhoods within Area 1 have been upsized with new water mains. Because the City already owns, maintains and provides water in Area 1, there are no additional costs to extend water service. The estimated cost for system improvements to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 1 is $10.8M.
Area 1: “West Modesto” – Wastewater
The City does not provide sanitary sewer services to Area 1 except for the residential area south of Robertson Rd., a portion of Paradise Rd., and a few parcels along the fringe of the City limits. Area 1 is otherwise served by individual septic systems. The City’s 54” West Trunk runs along Grimes Ave. and Paradise Rd. The existing City wastewater collection mains are mostly within the City limits and along the boundary of Area 2. Due to the size and existing boundary configuration of Area 1, connections to the sanitary sewer system may require several points of extension to serve properties fronting individual streets. It is estimated that approximately 46,000 lineal feet (LF) of 8” PVC sewer pipe would need to be installed throughout Area 1. The 2007 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (WWMP) indicates that new 15” diameter sub-trunks are to be extended from the West Trunk to serve the area west of Carpenter Rd., which includes Area 1.
A detailed wastewater system hydraulic capacity analysis has not been specifically prepared for the existing sanitary sewer infrastructure in order to identify wastewater system improvements, beyond the conceptual pipeline assumptions in this preliminary analysis (e.g., lift stations, treatment plant expansion, etc.), that would make up the backbone facilities required to serve Area 1. The estimated cost to construct the 15” subtrunks and 8” mains is $25.8M.
#21..
- 1234 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-23
March 2019
Area 1: “West Modesto” – Storm Drainage
Area 1 does not have an existing storm drainage system other than a few rockwells. Storm water management consists of runoff to parcel frontages from rural roads, as there are typically no curbs & gutters. The Robertson Rd. Neighborhood, south of Robertson Rd, does have several rockwells for drainage of some local street intersections, but this neighborhood would still be considered to have substandard storm drainage infrastructure.
The 2008 Storm Drainage Master Plan (SDMP) locates Area 1 within the large subbasin 41 (east of Carpenter Rd.), subbasin 26 (west of Carpenter Rd.) and a few parcels in subbasin 24 (west of Modesto Irrigation District Lateral 4). Storm water collected in subbasins 41 and 24 will be conveyed in pipelines in these subbasins, through the adjacent subbasin 26, to a detention basin, pump station and outfall to the Tuolumne River. Proposed trunks that would serve Area 1 include 24” to 78” pipes that would also serve limited areas within the City limits. For Area 1 within subbasins 41 and 24, the SDMP identifies approximately 17,000 LF of storm trunk pipeline. For Area 1 within subbasins 26, the SDMP identifies approximately 4,450 LF of storm trunks, including the outfall to Tuolumne River. The estimated costs for master plan storm water infrastructure (trunks, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
24” to 78” pipe, basin, pump station: $30M
Curb & Gutter: $9.5M
An alternative storm water management approach consisting of installing drywells in specific areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets may be feasible, and would require some curb and gutter installation. The installation and maintenance of full curb and gutter for the entire Area 1 along with approximately 375 drywells may prove economically infeasible. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly-dependent on groundwater levels, since high levels would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality impact requirements. However, to remain consistent with other DUC areas where drywell costs are presented, the estimated costs for drywells and curb and gutter for Area 1 are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
375 Drywells: $19M
Curb & Gutter: $9.5M
Area 1: “West Modesto” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 1 is served by the Burbank / Paradise and Woodland Fire Districts, which are staffed largely by volunteers. Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 1 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agencies’ ability to provide fire suppression needs. The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 2: “Riverdale Park” – Water
The Riverdale Park Tract Community Services District (CSD) supplies water from a single groundwater well to most of Area 2 (aka Riverdale Park or Riverdale). The majority of the area already has 8” PVC water pipes and a few 6” mains installed in the late 1980s. The parcels on Vivian Rd. are served by private wells. A detailed water system analysis has not been prepared for this area. Such an analysis #21..
- 1235 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-24
March 2019
would identify water system improvements, beyond the existing pipelines identified above, that would make up the backbone facilities required to serve the community. However, based on the Engineer’s Report, the City’s Water System Standards, general knowledge of the area’s water system, and fairly recent completion of various off-site water system facilities in the vicinity, a sufficient and reliable source of potable water to meet the expected demands of the area could reasonably be made available.
The City has an agreement with the Riverdale CSD to provide water on an emergency temporary basis in the event that the community’s groundwater well is compromised in some way. This agreement has been exercised in the past, most notably when severe flooding of the area shut down the well. Since Area 2 is already served by the Riverdale CSD, costs of new water system improvements would be the responsibility of the Riverdale CSD. There are two scenarios, other than annexation, in which the City of Modesto might need to consider providing a permanent water supply: 1) if the Riverdale CSD were to request that the City of Modesto provide a permanent water supply due to a significant failure of the community’s well or if groundwater quality issues required expensive and cost–prohibitive treatment of groundwater; and, 2) if the Riverdale CSD were to request that the City take over ownership and maintenance of the water system, including water supply. Both of these scenarios assume no groundwater supply from the existing well since it is unlikely that the City would maintain the well if it were to take over the system. So long as the existing well is operational, the water supply is potable, and the Riverdale CSD continues to serve this community, Modesto is not considering provision of water service to this area, except on an emergency basis as described above. However, the City has planned for the contingency of water service to this area to fulfill its agreement to serve emergency water supply and also under buildout of the Whitmore-Carpenter Comprehensive Planning District (CPD), which includes the Riverdale Park area.
Under Scenario 1, described above, where the Riverdale CSD would retain ownership and maintenance of the water system, a permanent water supply and delivery from the City’s system would require an upsizing of the Hatch Rd. pipe connection to 12” from the City to Riverdale, removal of the existing well facility, some hydraulic modeling, and payment of the applicable connection fee. Scenario 2, described above, assumes costs to upsize the supply main to 12”, upsize the Hatch Rd. main to 12”, abandon the existing well, install additional valves, meters and boxes, possible upsizing of some 6” water mains, connection fees, additional hydraulic modeling, and system testing, flushing and backflow devices. The estimated costs of improvements for both scenarios are: Scenario 1 – $350K; and, Scenario 2 – $1.4M.
The Engineer’s Report also identified master plan infrastructure to serve future development of the Carpenter-Whitmore CPD, which includes Area 2, and proposed roughly six miles of new 12” water mains to serve the CPD plus new water supply and system storage capacity. In addition, smaller 8” pipes for individual streets would also be required as part of future subdivision development. However, in order to serve only Area 2, and assuming such service might occur without full development of the Carpenter-Whitmore CPD, it was determined that the estimated costs for infrastructure identified with either Scenario 1 or Scenario 2 would likely be adequate for those existing demands.
Area 2: “Riverdale Park” – Wastewater
The City does not provide sanitary sewer service to Area 2. Area 2 is in the Riverdale CSD and served by individual septic systems. The City does not have existing sewer system infrastructure in the vicinity that could serve Area 2. The City’s General Plan and the WWMP presume that future development of the Carpenter-Whitmore CPD which includes Area 2 would largely determine the infrastructure required to serve this community. The WWMP proposes serving this area as part of specific plan development for the Whitmore-Carpenter CPD whereby a new sewer trunk would be extended from Ustick Rd. at Imperial #21..
- 1236 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-25
March 2019
Dr. to Whitmore Ave., then west on Whitmore Ave. to serve the CPD west of Carpenter Rd. Per the WWMP, about three miles of new sewer trunk and a sewer lift station would be needed.
Serving the Riverdale Park community exclusive of new development in the Carpenter-Whitmore CPD would require a sewer system of less capacity, although it would be challenging considering the distance from existing City facilities, available right of way, and likely other existing obstacles impacting constructability. The following infrastructure at a minimum would be required: at least one sewer lift station and force main, the extension of infrastructure from the existing City system to Carpenter Rd. along Hatch Rd., a sewer collection system of 8” pipes, and the abandonment of individual septic systems as each property connects to the system. The nearest potential existing City infrastructure is on Monticello Ln. at least 2,000 feet east of the Carpenter Rd. / Hatch Rd. intersection. The estimated conceptual cost to extend sewer infrastructure to Area 2 is $7.7M.
A detailed wastewater system hydraulic capacity analysis has not been conducted specifically on the existing sewer infrastructure or exclusively for Area 2 in order to identify additional new wastewater system facilities, beyond the pipelines and lift station identified in this conceptual analysis. Cost estimates for master plan elements as presented in the 2007 WWMP are not being presented here since the extension of large sewer trunks would be functionally inadequate to convey the relatively low flows from only Area 2. These large facilities would also cost several million dollars more than a dedicated system to serve just Area 2.
Area 2: “Riverdale Park” – Storm Drainage
The storm drainage method, if any, in Area 2 is not documented, and is most likely non-existent or perhaps served by a few rockwells. The community does not have curbs and gutters and thus most likely lacks a positive or centralized storm drainage system. The CSD may be responsible for storm drainage, although the County may maintain it as well. The soils in this area drain relatively well, with high infiltration rates and thus providing for reduced runoff issues.
The City plan for providing storm water management is addressed in the SDMP as part of the larger Whitmore-Carpenter CPD area. The SDMP identifies Area 2 to be in the future sub-basin 27. Within subbasin 27, the SDMP identifies approximately 1,500 lf of 30” pipe, along Hatch Rd. to serve the Riverdale area, which would convey storm water to a future detention basin and pump station with a discharge to the Tuolumne River. Additional smaller collection system pipes (usually 12” to 24”) would also be required to convey storm water from Riverdale Park to the future 30” trunk. The estimated costs for master plan infrastructure (trunk, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
30” pipe, basin, pump station: $4.6M
Curb & Gutter: $1.9M
An alternative storm water management approach for Riverdale Park would consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with approx. 62 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels since high levels would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
62 Drywells: $3M
Curb & Gutter: $1.9M
#21..
- 1237 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-26
March 2019
Area 2: “Riverdale Park” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 2 is served by the Burbank / Paradise Fire District, which is staffed largely by volunteers.
Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 2 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agency’s ability to provide fire suppression needs.
The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 3: “Rouse-Colorado” – Water
The City currently provides water service to most developed properties within Area 3. Most of the water distribution mains are sized to current City standards for residential and commercial uses. Only one or two streets, Colorado St being the longest, have smaller 4” and 6” mains, which is not unusual for older neighborhoods and/or areas such as this that were formerly served by the Del Este Water Company.
Area 3 has few vacant parcels, and any future growth potential would mostly be limited to intensification and sub-parceling of larger underdeveloped lots located primarily north of Figaro Ave. The 4” and 6” mains in Colorado Ave. from Garden Ave. to South Ave., and the 8” steel main in Rouse Ave. from Sutter Ave. to Sunset Ave., are likely to require replacement in the future as leak and repair frequency increases with time. The costs for system improvements to upsize mains likely would be included in the City’s annual Pipeline Strengthen and Replacement budget for the entire water system in future years.
Because the City already owns, maintains and provides water in Area 3, there are no additional costs to extend water to this DUC. The estimated costs for system improvements to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 3 is $1.6M
Area 3: “Rouse-Colorado” – Wastewater
The City currently provides sanitary sewer service to about 15% of Area 3 with the majority of these services along Garden Ave. The unserved developed parcels have septic systems. The area has relatively few vacant parcels and therefore future growth potential is limited to intensification and sub-parceling of larger underdeveloped lots, located primarily north of Figaro Ave.
Providing full sanitary sewer service to this area has been studied in the WWMP in terms of larger sewer trunk and treatment systems capacity, and the WWMP anticipates this area would be served in the future.
The Sutter Sewer Trunk was identified in the WWMP as not having adequate peak wet-weather capacity to serve existing demands or build-out of its tributary area that includes Area 3. System improvement plans have been developed to address these capacity issues. The City is currently analyzing / designing a new large sewer trunk in the area to mitigate existing constraints and future capacity needs of the Sutter Trunk. With this design, capacity would be available for Area 3 once the new trunk is constructed. New mains extended from this new trunk would likely consist of 8” pipelines. The estimated cost of these 8” mains is $4.7M.
Area 3: “Rouse-Colorado” – Storm Drainage
Area 3 does not have an existing storm drainage system and storm water management consists of runoff to parcel frontages from rural roads (no curbs or gutters). The SDMP shows Area 3 within the large subbasin 41. Proposed trunks that would also serve this Area 3 include 48” and 54” pipes to a future Detention Basin and outfall to the Tuolumne River via pump station. The estimated costs for master plan infrastructure components (trunk, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
#21..
- 1238 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-27
March 2019
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
48” / 54” pipe, basin, pump station: $2.9M
Curb & Gutter: $2M
An alternative storm water management approach for Area 3 would consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets, or installing full curb and gutter along with approximately 75 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels, since high levels would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
75 Drywells: $3.6M
Curb & Gutter: $2M
Area 3: “Rouse-Colorado” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 3 is served by the Burbank / Paradise Fire District, which is staffed largely by volunteers.
Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 3 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agency’s ability to provide fire suppression needs.
The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 4: “Bret Harte” – Water
The City provides water service to all developed lots in Area 4. The area is developed with only a few vacant parcels. Area 4 has a significant number of streets with 6” and some 4” water mains, which have been prone to leaks and breaks with increasing frequency. The City’s Pipeline Strengthen and Replacement program has been implementing projects in this area for the last two years to replace these older mains with new, larger pipes. This program results in improved water pressure and significantly reduced maintenance needs and water losses. Because the City already owns, maintains and provides water in Area 4, there are no additional costs to extend water. The estimated cost for system improvements to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 4 is $2.8M.
Area 4: “Bret Harte” – Wastewater
The City currently provides sewer service to all developed lots in Area 4. This DUC is fully-developed with only a few vacant lots remaining. The existing sewer system in Area 4 was installed between 1987 and 1995. Sewer main sizes include a few 6” pipes, but mostly range in size from 8” up to 33”. These trunk lines are sufficient to serve the demands of Area 4 under all hydrologic conditions per City Standards. There are no identified wastewater system improvements needed for Area 4.
Area 4: “Bret Harte” – Storm Drainage
Area 4 does not have an existing gravity pipe storm drainage system. Storm water management mostly consists of runoff to parcels from rural roads (no curbs or gutters) or in some instances rockwells that drain the surrounding roadway. The SDMP shows Area 4 in subbasin 9. Proposed trunks that would serve Area 4 include 36” to 72” pipes conveying storm water to a future detention basin and outfall to the Tuolumne River via pump station. The 72” pipe and detention basin would also serve the adjoining subbasins 11 and 43. The estimated cost for master plan infrastructure (trunks, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
#21..
- 1239 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-28
March 2019
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
36” / 72” pipe, basin, pump station: $10M
Curb & Gutter: $5.8M
An alternative storm water management approach for Area 4 would consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with approximately 200 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management is highly-dependent on groundwater levels, since high levels would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
Drywells: $9.9M
Curb & Gutter: $5.8M
Area 4: “Bret Harte” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 4 is served by the Industrial Fire Protection District, which provides service via a Joint Powers Agency that includes the Cities of Modesto and Ceres. Staff employed by the Modesto and Ceres Fire Departments provide service throughout the Industrial Fire Protection District. Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 4 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agencies’ ability to provide fire suppression needs. The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 5: “Olivero / Hatch” – Water
The City provides water to service to nearly all developed parcels within Area 5, which is mostly developed with just a few vacant parcels north of Hatch Rd. Undersized water mains (6” and smaller) exist within the Olivero Rd. and Glacier Ave. rights-of-way. The City’s water Engineer’s Report indicates that larger mains in Crows Landing Rd. and Hatch Rd. are hydraulically sufficient to serve this area. The estimated cost for system improvements to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 5 is $5.7M.
Area 5: “Olivero / Hatch” - Wastewater
The City provides wastewater service to some portions of Area 5 west of Crows Landing Rd., but does not have sewer system infrastructure along Olivero Rd. Properties that are not served by the City’s sewer infrastructure utilize an on-site septic system. The area is mostly developed, with a few undeveloped parcels north of Hatch Rd. Most of the individual properties in Area 5 – developed or not – are relatively large and rural in character.
The 2007 WWMP did not identify any specific project improvements for Area 5 because the pipes needed to serve would be 8”, which is generally smaller than master plan-level elements. However, the WWMP does contemplate provision of wastewater service of this area. Specifically, an 8” main connecting to the 30” trunk crossing Hatch Rd. would serve parcels on Olivero Rd. and Hatch Rd. Additional 8” mains would also serve the area north of Hatch Rd. for Glacier Ave. and Crater Ave., with connections to the 30” trunk in Cascade Ave. The estimated cost to install the 8” pipes in this area is $4.6M. #21..
- 1240 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-29
March 2019
Area 5: “Olivero / Hatch” – Storm Drainage
Area 5 does not have an existing gravity pipe storm drainage system north of Hatch Rd. This area does have some rockwells, generally along Crater Ave. and Glacier Ave. The Olivero Rd. / Jim Wy. and Olivero Rd. / Crows Landing Rd. intersections have catch basins that gravity stormwater flow to local storage basins, but no system along Olivero Rd itself. The 2008 SDMP has identified the Olivero Rd. area as part of sub-basin 11 and the area north of Hatch Rd. as part of Sub-basin 43. Sub-basins 11 and 43 will have gravity pipe systems conveying storm water to a storage Detention Basin with a pump station and discharge to the Tuolumne River.
The estimated costs to construct master planned infrastructure for Area 5 are included in the infrastructure for Area 4, and no additional master planned infrastructure is required. Estimated costs have not been specifically identified for these smaller pipes but since there are only a few streets in this area, conceptually, the estimated cost would likely be approximately $300,000. Such a system would also require the installation of curb and gutter. The estimated cost for master plan infrastructure (trunk, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
36” / 72” pipe, basin, pump station: $0 (See cost estimate for Area 4, above) Curb & Gutter: $1.3M
Small storm pipes: $300,000
An alternative storm water management approach for Area 5 would consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with approx. 43 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels, since high levels would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells and curb and gutter are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
43 Drywells: $2.1M
Curb & Gutter: $1.3M
Area 5: “Olivero / Hatch” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 5 is served by the Industrial Fire Protection District, which provides service via a Joint Powers Agency that includes the Cities of Modesto and Ceres. Staff employed by the Modesto and Ceres Fire Departments provide service throughout the Industrial Fire Protection District. Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 5 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agencies’ ability to provide fire suppression needs. The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 6: “Parklawn” - Water
The City currently provides water service to all developed parcels in Area 6, which is fully-developed with residential and limited commercial uses. This area has sufficient existing 10” and 12” mains connecting it to the City’s water distribution network and, as such, the City’s water system Engineer’s Report does not call for backbone distribution infrastructure improvements for this area. #21..
- 1241 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-30
March 2019
Area 6 does have a large number of 4” mains located in alleys that serve the connections to individual parcels, which is not uncommon for former Del Este areas or older neighborhoods built in the 1940s and 1950s. The leak frequency of these older mains is not particularly high compared to other higher priority areas. However, these mains will likely need to be replaced with larger pipes in the future. The estimated cost for system improvements to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 6 is $1.7M.
Area 6: “Parklawn” - Wastewater
The City of Modesto and County of Stanislaus entered into a formal agreement in 2013 to use County funding to construct a sanitary sewer system for this area. Improvements included 8” and 12” mains and a lift station located on Nelson Way that, via a force main, conveys flows to the existing 15” Oats Ct. gravity subtrunk. This project was completed in 2015, after which the City accepted ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Individual parcels are allowed to connect to City sewer service.
Area 6: “Parklawn” – Storm Drainage
With the exception of a few rockwells, Area 6 does not have an existing storm drainage system. Storm water management consists of runoff to parcel frontages from rural roads that lack no curbs and gutters.
The 2008 SDMP identifies this area within the larger subbasin 10 tributary area. Proposed trunk lines that would serve Area 6 would also be sized to serve the subbasin 10 area south of Parklawn, and would consist of 54” to 72” pipes that would convey storm water to the same detention basin proposed for DUC Areas 4 and 5, with an outfall to the Tuolumne River. The estimated cost for master plan infrastructure (trunk, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
36” / 72” pipe, basin, pump station: $6.5M
Curb & Gutter: $1.2M
An alternative storm water management approach for Area 6 would consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with an estimated 70 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels, since groundwater would interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
70 Drywells: $3.5M
Curb & Gutter: $1.2M
Another potential option for Area 6 in lieu of the proposed larger SDMP master planned storm water system or drywells could be the installation of a smaller gravity system with conveyance to an underground storage and percolation system at the existing park located south of Parklawn Ave. This storm water management method has not yet been reviewed for feasibility in terms of existing groundwater levels and other considerations, nor have costs been calculated. A concept cost estimate may be in the $4M dollar range, including the smaller pipes. Curb and gutter street improvements would also be required.
Area 6: “Parklawn” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 6 is served by the Industrial Fire Protection District, which provides service via a Joint Powers Agency that includes the Cities of Modesto and Ceres. Staff employed by the Modesto and Ceres Fire #21..
- 1242 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-31
March 2019
Departments provide service throughout the Industrial Fire Protection District. Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 6 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agencies’ ability to provide fire suppression needs. The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 7: “South 7Th Street Mobilehome Parks” – Water
Area 7 consists of just two parcels developed with mobile homes and is part of a larger, mostly nonresidential, unincorporated area included within the City’s water service area. The southernmost of the two parcels, located on S. 7th St., is served with a City water connection from a 10” water main, which is sufficiently sized to serve the existing development. The northern parcel, located at Crows Landing Rd. and S. 7th St., is not currently served by City water, although an existing 12” water main is located nearby along Zeff Rd.
The 10” and 12” mains along and across S. 7th St. are sufficient for the existing mobile homes. A future infrastructure project might consist of extending the existing 10” water main in S. 7th St. to Zeff Rd., though there is no indication this is necessary to serve the northern parcel. At such time as the northern parcel requests water service through the “Will Serve” process, the City will provide information regarding specific water system improvements required to serve this parcel. A lower-cost option might be to extend a dedicated service pipe about 275’ from the 12” Zeff Rd. pipeline to serve these mobile homes.
No cost estimates are being provided for this area since there appear to be reasonably adequate City facilities in the area from which to extend water service.
Area 7: “South 7Th Street Mobilehome Parks” – Wastewater Area 7 consists of two parcels described above under “Water.” Neither of these parcels is connected to the City’s wastewater system. It is assumed that the mobilehome parks are served by septic systems.
The WWMP study included the larger area in which these two parcels are located in terms of downstream trunk and wastewater treatment capacity. There is an existing 24” sewer trunk fronting the southern parcel on S. 7th St. that could serve this parcel. Sewer infrastructure that might provide service to the northern parcel does not exist. A sewer main would need to be extended north along S. 7th St. or north along Crows Landing Rd. from the existing 24” trunk to provide service to this parcel. The estimated cost to extend a small main to serve the northern parcel is $500K.
Area 7: “South 7Th Street Mobilehome Parks” – Storm Drainage Area 7 consists of two parcels developed with mobile home parks. Since these are privately-developed parcels, the City does not have any plan or expectation to provide storm drainage as these areas that are entirely under private land ownerships with no internal public roadways. Parcels such as these would normally be required to provide their own on-site storm drainage management systems. Typically, this would consist of a series of rockwells or horizontal drain pipes to manage runoff on the property.
If the larger surrounding unincorporated area were to be annexed to Modesto, the City would look at the need for off-site public right-of-way storm drainage needs along S. 7th St., Crows Landing Rd. and Zeff Rd. The SDMP includes this area in subbasin 43. Master planned infrastructure to serve the area north of SR99 to Zeff Rd. includes 36” to 54” pipes that would convey storm water to a detention basin and outfall via pump station to the Tuolumne River. Subbasin 43 is proposed to share the same detention basin and #21..
- 1243 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-32
March 2019
pump station facility and some large trunks with subbasins 9, 10, and 11. The estimated costs for master plan infrastructure (trunk, basin, pump station), and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
36” / 54” pipe, basin, pump station: $2.9M
Curb & Gutter: $800K
An alternative storm water management approach for the unincorporated County area that includes Area 7 could consist of installing drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with an estimated 105 drywells. The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels, since high groundwater could interfere with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
105 Drywells: $5.2M
Curb & Gutter: $800K
Area 7: “South 7Th Street Mobilehome Parks” – Structural Fire Protection Area 4 is served by the Industrial Fire Protection District, which provides service via a Joint Powers Agency that includes the Cities of Modesto and Ceres. Staff employed by the Modesto and Ceres Fire Departments provide service throughout the Industrial Fire Protection District. Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 4 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agencies’ ability to provide fire suppression needs. The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 8: “Airport Neighborhood” – Water
The City currently provides water service to all developed parcels in Area 8, which is fully-developed with just a handful of vacant parcels remaining. In the early 2010s, the City installed several new mains in Area 8 to replace the older and smaller deficient pipes. Water main sizes consist of 8” to 12” and are sufficient for the residential development in this area. No cost estimates are provided as the area has adequate existing water system infrastructure and therefore no foreseeable system improvements.
Area 8: “Airport Neighborhood” – Wastewater
There is no City wastewater service provided to Area 8. The WWMP did include this area in its study in terms of downstream trunk and treatment capacity, but did not identify specific infrastructure improvements to serve it because pipe sizes are generally smaller than master plan-level elements. The City has an existing 60” sewer trunk along Oregon Dr. (the “River Trunk”) to which this area’s parcels located south of Hyde St. would connect utilizing 8” to 12” mains. The few parcels located north of Hyde St. would connect to the existing Yosemite Ave. main, which conveys flows to the 30” Santa Rosa Ave.
Trunk and then to the 60” River Trunk.
The City and County entered into agreements whereby City staffing provided sewer system design services and the County provided construction management and funding to construct a full sewer system for this area. Construction of this project is phased as funding becomes available. Phase 1 is to serve about 79 parcels along Kerr Ave. Completion of the full project will depend on availability of #21..
- 1244 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-33
March 2019
construction funding and is expected to be completed in no more than three (3) phases. The County will pursue construction funding for the remaining phases. The total estimated cost of the project is $9.5M.
Area 8: “Airport Neighborhood” – Storm Drainage
With the exception of a few rockwells, Area 8 does not have a storm water management system. Streets within Area 8 generally lack curb and gutter. The SDMP has identified the majority of this area as within sub-basin 59 (north of MID Lateral 1) and a portion in subbasin 74 (south of MID Lateral 1). In subbasin 59, the SDMP proposes about 4,600 lf of 42” to 54” trunks and a discharge to Dry Creek. In subbasin 74, which includes some of Area 8 but also the developed area south of Oregon Dr, the SDMP proposes about 1,800 lf of 48-in to 60-in trunks to route storm water to the Tuolumne River Regional Park. For a gravity storm drainage system, installation of curb and gutter would typically be necessary. Estimated costs for master planned infrastructure, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Gravity System
42” / 60” pipe and pump station: $4.3M
Curb & Gutter: $2.9M
An alternative storm water management approach to a gravity pipe system could be the installation of drywells in areas of most need to mitigate any local flooding of streets or installing full curb and gutter along with drywells. For Area 8, approximately 100 drywells would be required to serve the entire area.
The drywell method of storm water management would be highly dependent on groundwater levels, since high groundwater interferes with drywell efficiency and storm water quality requirements. The estimated costs for drywells, and curb and gutter street improvements, are:
Estimated Costs – Drywell System
100 Drywells: $5M
Curb & Gutter: $2.9M
Area 8: “Airport Neighborhood” – Structural Fire Protection Area 8 is served by the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire District, which is staffed largely by volunteers.
Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 8 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agency’s ability to provide fire suppression needs.
The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
Area 9: “Empire” – Water
The City provides water in the unincorporated community of Empire (Area 9) to all but a few of the developed parcels. City water is also provided to Empire Elementary School and Glick Middle School.
The community is largely built out within the current community plan and water service area. There are three active City water wells in the vicinity of Area 9 and existing water mains range between 4” and 12” pipes. The water system in Empire is part of the larger City of Modesto water distribution system.
There is no indication of significant hydraulic issues in Empire according to the City’s water Engineer’s Report, likely due to existence of 12” backbone pipes, local groundwater supply and proximity to surface water transmission mains. The older and smaller steel 4” and 6” distribution mains are prone to increasing frequency of leakage and breaking as they age, which can result in higher impacts to the limited capacity of smaller pipelines. The leak frequency in Empire does not indicate a significant issue #21..
- 1245 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-34
March 2019
at this time compared to the current higher priority areas of the water system. However, with time, these older and smaller mains would be identified for replacement. Because the City already owns, maintains and provides water to Area 9, there are no additional costs to extend water infrastructure here. The estimated cost to upsize older, undersized mains for Area 9 is 5.2M.
Area 9: “Empire” – Wastewater
The City of Modesto provides wastewater treatment for the unincorporated community of Empire (Area 9) by accepting wastewater from the Empire Sanitary District (ESD) via a 10” sewer main along Yosemite Ave. The City of Modesto owns, operates, and maintains the conveyance system in Empire which consists of 6” to 10” gravity mains and no sewer lift stations.
Area 9 is mostly developed within the current Empire community plan and ESD service area. The existing 10” main is historically deficient for design peak wet weather hydraulic conditions. The City’s downstream 10” main on S. McClure Rd. is also capacity deficient. The City’s WWMP includes plans for conveyance and treatment capacity to serve Empire, and the City serves as ex-officio governing board for the ESD. The City’s 10” mains have been identified as requiring an upsize to meet existing peak wetweather flows. The estimated cost to upsize the existing main is $3.8M.
Area 9: “Empire” – Storm Drainage
Area 9 has some gravity storm drainage systems managed by the County with a discharge pipe along Santa Fe Ave. to the Tuolumne River. The tributary (“catchment”) area for this existing river discharge is the Yosemite Ave. corridor and the older downtown area. The areas on the north end of the community have a gravity system that flows to rockwells. The older part of the community, roughly north of Yosemite Ave. and south of McCoy Ave. do not have curb and gutter. The area generally north of McCoy Ave. has curb and gutter. The County has made improvements to these storm drainage systems over the last decade, though the City does not have any specific information. The County is also presenting a proposal for a low-impact development storm drainage project to the Community that would also include enlarging the existing discharge pipe size from 36” to 66” and which would allow for expanding the existing gravity system to include areas on the north end of the community. The County project has a total estimated cost of about $15M.
The SDMP identifies the Empire area as sub-basin 7 and proposed pipes ranging from 36” to 66” and also the need to increase the storm outfall pipe from 36” to 66”. Smaller pipes for streets that may not have a gravity system in place have not been identified or confirmed with the County. The estimated cost for master planned infrastructure is $7.5M.
Area 9: “Empire” – Structural Fire Protection
Area 9 is served by the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire District, which is staffed largely by volunteers.
Upgrading the water system infrastructure in Area 9 as described above, in addition to the installation of fire hydrants as needed, would improve the responsible agency’s ability to provide fire suppression needs.
The cost estimate shown above for water system enhancements would also generally apply to fire protection infrastructure needs.
2. Funding
The nine (9) DUC areas that are the subject of this SB244 analysis were previously developed under the jurisdiction of Stanislaus County with residential and other land uses. Therefore, the County is generally #21..
- 1246 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-35
March 2019
responsible for identifying the necessary funding for construction of infrastructure systems consistent with City standards, prior to the City’s consideration for annexation. All other infrastructure components, such as streets, street lights, curb gutter & sidewalk, etc., are also typically required to be installed by the County. Subject to a formal Infrastructure Improvement Agreement (IIA), the City would inspect all infrastructure improvements installed by the County, prior to acceptance as a condition of annexation.
This infrastructure funding and construction model has been effective in several neighborhoods that are located in the general area of the DUCs (south and west Modesto). The Shackelford neighborhood, which is located northeast of Area #5, has been improved by the County and annexed to the City. Other neighborhoods, such as Bret Harte, Robertson Road and Parklawn, have had sewer system improvements designed and constructed by the County, and it is reasonable to expect that other infrastructure improvements will occur in these areas – subject to a formal IIA – as a pre-condition of annexation.
The State of California Office of Planning and Research has published a Technical Advisory for SB244, which describes several potential funding sources and mechanisms. Among these are “…taxes, benefit assessments, bonds and exactions (including impact fees).” In addition, several state funding programs are listed: California Department of Health Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund; State Water Resources Control Board Revolving Fund Program; State Water Resources Control Board Small Community Wastewater Grant Program; Department of Water Resources Integrated Regional Water Management Grant Program; Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentive Program; United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development Grants and Loans; and, Community Development Block Grant Funds.
The County of Stanislaus has funded infrastructure improvements within neighborhoods located in areas identified as DUCs via a combination of funding sources, including some referenced above. Specifically, improvements to the Shackelford neighborhood were funded through Redevelopment Agency monies, the County Road Fund, Tobacco Settlement funds, and Congestion Relief. Infrastructure improvements in the Parklawn neighborhood were funded via Community Development Block Grant funds and a State Water Board grant. Redevelopment Agency funds were also used for sanitary sewer system improvements to the Bret Harte and Robertson Road neighborhoods.
Finally, the City’s most recent Municipal Services Review (MSR) documentation (2004) describes the various utilities and services needed to support buildout of the Modesto Sphere-of-Influence. The 2004 MSR concludes that sufficient water, wastewater, storm drainage and fire protection services can be made available to accommodate growth and development contemplated by the General Plan. Subsequent to preparation of the 2004 MSR, the City doubled its wastewater processing capacity – from 30 mgd to 60 mgd – which results in further certainty regarding Modesto’s ability to ultimately provide sewer service to both: 1. new growth areas; and, 2. exiting developed areas such as DUCs.
3. Disadvantaged Unincorporated Community Policies
The following policies apply to all DUCs, regardless of whether they are classified as an “island community” or “fringe community” as defined within SB244.
Policy III.E.1.
Coordinate with the County of Stanislaus regarding long-term planning for provision of services, including but not limited to: water, wastewater, storm drainage, streets, street lights and public safety. (Public health, environmental justice)
#21..
- 1247 -
Chapter III. Community Development Policies
City of Modesto
Urban Area General Plan III-36
March 2019
Policy III.E.2.
Consistent with General Plan Policy II.C.1., consider UGR analysis in odd-numbered years. When the UGR documentation is prepared, include analyses of the utilities, infrastructure and services, and the associated funding considerations, for all DUCs within the City of Modesto Sphere of Influence. The most recent UGR documentation is incorporated herein in its entirety by this reference.
#21..
- 1248 -