Patterson City Council
August 16, 2022

Grade Crossings
The rail line has two grade crossing near the Zacharias Master Plan area: Zacharias Road and SR-33.

Each is summarized as follows:

Zacharias Road: This grade crossing only provides cross bucks. There are no gates, flashers, or concrete panel roadbed.

SR-33: This grade crossing is protected with gates, flashers, and cross bucks. This crossing also provides a concrete panel roadbed over the tracks.

Passenger
A passenger train station is located in Turlock-Denair, about 20 miles east of Patterson. Service is provided by the Amtrak California San Joaquins, which connect Oakland and Bakersfield and

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Sacramento and Bakersfield. Fourteen daily trains (seven northbound and seven southbound) serve the Turlock-Denair station. Destinations along the San Joaquins route include Merced, Fresno, and Bakersfield to the south and Stockton, Antioch, Martinez, and Oakland to the north.

3.14.3 - Regulatory Framework
State
California Department of Transportation
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) builds, operates, and maintains the State highway system, including the interstate highway system. Caltrans’s mission is to improve mobility Statewide.

The department operates under strategic goals to provide a safe transportation system, optimize throughput and ensure reliable travel times, improve the delivery of State highway projects, provide transportation choices, and improve and enhance the State’s investments and resources. Caltrans controls the planning of the State highway system and accessibility to the system. Caltrans establishes LOS goals for highways and works with local and regional agencies to assess impacts and develop funding sources for improvements to the State highway system. Caltrans requires encroachment permits from agencies or new development before any construction work may be undertaken within the State’s right-of-way. For projects that would impact traffic flow and levels of services on State highways, Caltrans would review measures to mitigate the traffic impacts.

Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS C and LOS D on State Highway facilities (Caltrans 2002); however, Caltrans recognizes that achieving LOS C/LOS D may not always be feasible.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
In November 2017, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released a technical advisory containing recommendations regarding the assessment of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), proposed thresholds of significance, and potential mitigation measures for lead agencies to use while implementing the required changes contained in Senate Bill 743. Also in November 2017, OPR released the proposed text for Section 15064.3, “Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts,” which summarized the criteria for analyzing transportation impacts for land use projects and transportation projects and directs lead agencies to “choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure.” OPR recommends that for most instances a per service population threshold should be adopted and that a fifteen percent reduction below that of existing development would be a reasonable threshold.

As noted in the OPR guidelines, agencies are directed to choose metrics that are appropriate for their jurisdiction to evaluate the potential impacts of a project in terms of VMT. The current deadline for adopting policies to implement SB 743 is January 2020; the change to VMT is anticipated to be formally adopted as part of updates to the CEQA guidelines in 2018. However, the City of Patterson has/has not established specific local VMT thresholds and industry-wide standards are still in the advisory stage. The latest direction from OPR also lists new exemptions for certain projects with revised screening thresholds (e.g., 100 trips/day, map based, or near transit stations). As such, a VMT

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
analysis is not required under CEQA at the time of Draft EIR release; new guidelines have not yet been adopted and the final guidelines may change based on the comments received.

Regional
Stanislaus Council of Governments
The Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) is the Congestion Management Agency for Stanislaus County. StanCOG oversees implementation of the Congestion Management Plan and administers the Measure L Transportation Ordinance and Expenditure Plan. Measure L was approved by voters in 2016 and assesses a half-cent sales tax within Stanislaus County for transportation improvements. Additionally, StanCOG also is the lead agency for the South County Corridor Project and oversaw the preparation of the Feasibility Study Report for the project.

Local
City of Patterson
General Plan
The General Plan establishes the following goals and policies relevant to transportation:

Goal T-1: Street design and access standards shall provide for safe and efficient movement of goods and people. Restrictive traffic control measures (such as channelization, street closures, and prohibition of some traffic movements) shall be used where appropriate to promote traffic safety and efficient traffic operation.

Policy T-1.2: The City shall endeavor to maintain a minimum Level of Service “D,” as defined by the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual or subsequent revisions, on all streets and intersections within the city. To identify the potential impacts of new development on traffic service levels, the City shall require the preparation of traffic impact analyses at the sole expense of the developer for developments determined to be large enough to have potentially significant traffic impacts. This standard does not apply to freeways which are governed by the standards established by Caltrans.

Policy T-1.3: The City shall implement a hierarchical street system in which each street serves a specific, primary function and is sensitive to the context of the land uses served. The hierarchy of streets shall be based on the existing one square mile backbone grid system of streets along section lines and the traditional circulation pattern established in the City’s downtown. Development of residential neighborhoods within the backbone grid may employ a more circuitous street pattern with cul-de-sacs, traffic circles, roundabouts and other traffic calming features to help reduce traffic speeds.

Policy T-1.4: Streets shall be dedicated, widened, extended, and constructed based on the roadway classifications/definitions and street sections provided in the City’s roadway improvement standards and Street Master Plan (see implementation measure T-2). Dedication and improvements of full rights-of-way shall not be required in existing developed areas where the City determines that such improvements are either infeasible or undesirable. Other deviations from these standards shall be permitted upon a determination by the City Engineer that safe and adequate public access and circulation are preserved by such deviations.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Policy T-1.5: Neighborhood streets shall be designed, where feasible, to discourage unsafe traffic speeds.

Policy T-1.6: The City shall promote efforts of Stanislaus County, StanCOG and other stakeholders in the development of the South County Corridor to connect W. Main Avenue to Interstate 5. The City’s preference for the alignment of the South County Corridor is shown on the Circulation Plan (Figure II-4 of Chapter II. Land Use/Circulation Diagrams and Standards).

However, the final alignment should be decided through a cooperative effort among stakeholders, and informed by a comprehensive feasibility study that assesses at least the following:
- The appropriate right-of-way width and location;
- Environmental and regulatory constraints, especially as they relate to agricultural and biological resources;
- The need for, and economic/environmental feasibility of, constructing a second bridge over the San Joaquin River;
- An estimate of relevant costs; and
- An analysis of alternatives;
Policy T-1.8: The primary purpose of streets outside the downtown is the movement of vehicles and goods; parking shall be a secondary and subordinate use only. If travel demands dictate, on-street parking may be removed on streets that serve primarily non-residential development to increase traffic-carrying capabilities.

Policy T-1.9: Truck access to avoid residential neighborhoods. Industrial and commercial development shall be planned so that truck access through residential areas is avoided.

Policy T-1.10: Funding of traffic improvements. The City shall ensure through a combination of traffic impact fees and other funding mechanisms that new development fully mitigates its impact on traffic facilities by paying its share of the costs of circulation improvements. New development shall pay a proportional share of costs of required improvements necessitated by the new development.

Policy T-1.11: Private streets discouraged. The City shall discourage the development of private streets in new residential projects. Where private streets are allowed, they shall be constructed to City street standards.

Policy T-1.12: Traffic calming encouraged. Traffic calming techniques, including roundabouts, traffic circles, ‘chokers’ and chicanes, shall be considered as an alternative to traditional intersection controls. Where cul-de-sacs are employed, consideration should be given to establishing connections between the cul-de-sac and other streets, parks, bicycle paths and pedestrian trails.

Policy T-1.13: New interchange. The City shall investigate the construction of a new interchange at Interstate 5 north of Sperry Avenue in the vicinity of Zacharias Road.

Policy T-1.14: Protection of Neighborhoods. The City shall ensure to the extent feasible that pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile connections are maintained in existing neighborhoods affected by transportation and other development projects.

Goal T-4: To consider air quality and noise impacts along with traffic flow efficiency when making decisions about improvements to existing roadways or the construction of new roadways.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Policy T-4.1: To the extent feasible, the City shall provide for separation of residential and other noise-sensitive land uses from major roadways to reduce noise and air pollution impacts from traffic.

Goal T-5: To promote intergovernmental communication and cooperation concerning transportation-related issues.

Goal 6: To ensure the adequate provision of both on- and off-street parking.

Policy T-6.2: Off-street parking required. The City shall require provision of adequate offstreet parking in conjunction with all new developments. Parking shall be located convenient to new development and shall be easily accessible from the street system. The adequacy and appropriateness of parking requirements in the Zoning Ordinance shall be periodically reevaluated.

Goal T-7: To promote pedestrian, bicycle and rail travel as alternatives to automobile use.

Policy T-7.1: The City shall create and maintain a safe and convenient system of pedestrian and bicycle pathways that encourages walking and bicycling as an alternative to driving. New development shall be required to pay its fair share of the costs for development of this pathway system.

Policy T-7.2: All new development shall be reviewed to ensure safe pedestrian access is provided from the street, within parking areas and between new development and surrounding neighborhoods.

Policy T-7.3: The City shall establish a safe and convenient network of identified bicycle routes connecting new residential areas by the shortest possible routes with recreation, shopping, and employment areas within the city. The City shall cooperate with surrounding jurisdictions in designing and implementing an area-wide bikeway system.

Policy T-7.4: Bicycle routes shall emphasize paths separated from vehicle traffic (Class I) to the maximum extent possible, but shall also include bicycle lanes within public streets (Class II and III). The City shall limit on-street bicycle routes to those streets where the available roadway width and traffic volumes permit safe coexistence of bicycle and motor vehicle traffic.

Policy T-7.5: To the extent practicable, bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be included within open space areas.

Policy T-7.6: The City shall require the inclusion of bicycle parking facilities at all new major public facilities and commercial and employment sites and shall encourage large employers to provide showers for employees.

Policy T-7.7: The City shall promote the safe “sharing” of roads between automobiles and bicyclists.

Policy T-7.8: Bicycle safety shall be considered when implementing improvements for automobile traffic operations.

Improvement Funding Programs
The City of Patterson has specific policies in the City’s General Plan and funding programs to ensure the City develops and manages the roadway system to maintain LOS D or better during the peak hour for intersections and roadways in the City. The City programs and funds improvements to its circulation network through the Capital Improvement Program in the City’s annual budget. Through the Capital Improvement Program, the City allocates funds to construct improvements as needed to

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
maintain the Level of Service defined in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Sources of funding for improvements to the City’s circulation network include its transportation impact fee, federal and state gas tax revenues, and grants.

Principal funding programs that provide transportation improvement funding in the City of Patterson include its Impact Fee Program and the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) Program. Both of these programs are briefly described below.

City of Patterson Impact Fee Program
Under the City of Patterson’s Impact Fee Program, fees are charged to new developments based on the size of the proposed construction (for example, units of residential or square footage of nonresidential). This program provides a source of funds dedicated for a wide range of municipal facilities, which includes numerous fee categories. The Traffic/Road Improvement fee category provides funding for transportation improvement projects within the City to implement the 2030 General Plan Circulation Element by providing for the acceptable operation of intersections upon buildout of the General Plan. Buildout of the City’s General Plan will require capacity improvements to transportation facilities (intersections and roadway segments) to support the increased demand.

In terms of timing, the City has interpreted its General Plan to require that the public facilities necessary to accommodate such new development be provided concurrently or in advance of such development. The total costs of the transportation improvements, which were identified in the West Patterson Projects Final EIR, were used to calculate transportation impact fees based on estimated trips generated at buildout of the General Plan.

Monies collected through the Impact Fee Program become special revenue funds, which must be expended on transportation projects identified in the Impact Fee Study. As such, when a traffic impact study on a development project identifies impacts to intersections included in the Impact Fee Study, and those impacts that would result from that project’s traffic, the mitigating improvements to address those impacts have already been included in the capital improvements identified for those intersections, and payment of impact fees by the project developer will typically constitute full mitigation for intersection impacts. Pursuant to the General Plan, the City’s Capital Improvement Program must be updated on a periodic basis to ensure that improvements adequately address cumulative traffic conditions as they may evolve over time. To help assess these conditions and identify the necessary short-term and mid-term roadway improvements, the City has initiated a Traffic Monitoring Program, also to be updated periodically to assess short-term and mid-term circulation needs. The first results from the Traffic Monitoring Program evaluated nearly every intersection in the City’s Impact Fee Study, and made recommendations on improvements over a 2-, 4-, and 6-year time horizon.

The I-5/Sperry Avenue Interchange project, which proposes to increase capacity along Sperry Avenue and the freeway on-ramps to accommodate future growth, is included in the Impact Fee Program. The Stanislaus Council of Governments’ (StanCOG’s) Travel Demand Model was used to calculate the percentage of future traffic growth through the I-5/Sperry Avenue Interchange attributable to the various land use categories (e.g., business park, commercial, residential). The impact fees necessary to construct the improvements were then allocated to the various land use

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
categories based on their percent contribution to the total peak-hour trips through the interchange.

The City will assess these fees to future developments according to its land use category.

State Transportation Improvement Plan
The STIP is a multi-year capital improvement program of transportation projects on and off the State Highway System, funded with revenues from the Transportation Investment Fund and other state funding sources. Improvement projects that provide regionwide significance are nominated by local agencies and regional transportation planning agencies such as StanCOG.

The I-5/Sperry Avenue interchange project is eligible for STIP funding, which, if made available, would offset a portion of the improvement costs for the interchange improvements. Pending approval, these funds would significantly minimize transportation impact fees assessed to future development.

West Patterson Financing Authority
The West Patterson Financing Authority was formed by the City of Patterson in 2001 to fund and implement necessary public infrastructure improvements in conjunction with new development on the west side of Patterson. The Patterson City Council acts as the West Patterson Financing Authority Board of Directors. The West Patterson Financing Authority established Community Facilities District No. 2001-01 (Public Improvements) in 2001 and Community Facilities District No. 2005-01 (West Patterson Business Park) in 2005. The boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2001 01 generally encompass the residential development between Baldwin Avenue and Ward Avenue, and the boundaries of Community Facilities District No. 2005-01 encompass the 820-acre West Patterson Business Park. The West Patterson Financing Authority issued approximately $73 million in Special Tax Bonds since 2002 to fund improvements. Special tax levies are assessed to properties with the Community Facilities Districts to repay the bonds.

3.14.4 - Methodology
AMG prepared a Traffic Impact Study to evaluate potential traffic impacts of proposed Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plans. The following are key steps of the study approach:

Collect traffic counts to establish baseline traffic conditions Develop travel demand model for the project
Conduct trip generation and distribution of project trips Determine traffic condition for the following scenarios:

Existing + Approved Projects
Existing + Approved Projects + Proposed Project
2040 Cumulative No Project
2040 Cumulative Plus Project
2040 Cumulative Plus Project (with new Zacharias Avenue/I-5 Interchange) Determine impact of project trips based on established Significance Criteria

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Modeling
The travel demand model recently calibrated and utilized for the Sperry Road at Interstate 5 Interchange Improvements project (hereafter, the I-5/Sperry Model) was selected as the modeling tool for this project. The I-5/Sperry Model was based on the travel demand model developed for the Crows Landing Industrial Business Park Transportation Infrastructure Master Plan (TIMP). The TIMP Model integrated the network and land use information from the Three-County Travel Demand Model and the data available from the City of Patterson Travel Demand Model available at that time.

The base year of the TIMP Model is 2012, and the forecast year is 2035. It includes 6,772 Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) and 100 gateways.

Base Year Validation
The following base year validation checks were conducted to the TIMP Model for the I-5/Sperry Traffic Operations Analysis Report (TOAR) project:

Validation at Major Regional Facilities
The calibrated 2012 TIMP model volumes to Caltrans counts were compared at selected locations on I-580, SR-99, and I-5 near the study area. Validation statistics for daily, AM/PM peak-hour volumes, were calculated based on criteria from Caltrans forecasting guidelines. The TIMP model met most of the validation targets.

Comparison of the K and D Factors at Key Locations
The K and D factors were calculated from the 2015 counts, the 2012 Model volumes before and after the calibration, and compared to the K and D factors provided by Caltrans. The K & D factors from the 2015 counts were very consistent with those provided by Caltrans, and the calibration improved the reasonableness of K & D factors from the 2012 model.

After the validation, the TIMP model was deemed appropriate for demand forecasting for I-5/Sperry project, based on “Guide on the Consistent Application of Traffic Analysis Tools and Methods”, FHWA 2011.

Trip Generation
Trip generation is defined as the number of “vehicle trips” produced by a particular land use or project. A trip is defined as a one-direction vehicle movement. The total number of trips generated by each land use includes the inbound and outbound trips.

In consultation with staff, the trip generation estimates for the proposed land uses (residential, mixed-use, light industrial, commercial and school) were calculated using the standard reference Trip Generation, 10th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).

For this study, pass-by trip reduction based on ITE was applied. These trips, known as Pass-By trips, do not result in a route deviation for the existing vehicles as these vehicles are already traveling on a route that provides direct access to the project site. Therefore, these trips result in increased driveway traffic for the project site but do not result in an increase of traffic traveling through the

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
network. Without applying the Pass-By reduction, the trip estimation would effectively double count trips which are attributed to these vehicles.

Since the proposed project is a mixed of residential, commercial and light industrial development, it is anticipated that there would be some internal trips. Studies have shown that conventional use of ITE has overlooked the full potential for internalizing trips through interaction among on-site activities. The ITE trip generation data and analysis methods apply primarily to single-use and freestanding sites, which limits their applicability to compact, mixed-use development. In 2011, two major studies introduced methodologies for predicting traffic generation from mixed use development:
i. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 684, “Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed- Use Developments,” analyzed internal-capture relationships of mixed-use sites and examined the travel interactions among six individual types of land uses: office, retail, restaurant, residential, cinema, and hotel; and ii. The U.S. EPA–sponsored 2011 report, “Traffic Generated by Mixed-Use Developments — A Six-Region Study Using Consistent Built Environmental Measures,” investigated trip generation, mode choice, and trip length for trips produced and attracted by mixed use developments. Researchers selected six regions — Atlanta, Boston, Houston, Portland, Sacramento, and Seattle — to represent a wide range of urban scale, form, and climatic condition. It was concluded that the ITE Trip Generation Manual and Handbook overestimate peak traffic generation for mixed-use development by an average of 35 percent.

For this project, AMG assumed that approximately 10 percent of trips are internal trips by customers who frequent the retail, might also patronize the mixed use and other uses. The estimated potential trip generation of the proposed project is shown in Table 3.14-6. It is estimated that the project will generate approximately 7,047 and 8,047 total trips during the AM and PM peak-hours, respectively.

Table 3.14-6: Proposed Project Trip Generation
TAZ Land Use ITE Code Size
AM Peak PM Peak
Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
A Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 343 DU 0.46 36 122 158 0.56 122 71 193
B Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 595 DU 0.46 63 211 274 0.56 210 124 334
C Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 272 DU 0.46 29 97 126 0.56 96 57 153
High Density Residential ITE221 147 DU 0.36 14 39 53 0.44 40 25 65 Mixed Use ITE 820 315 KSF Eq. 192 118 310 Eq. 610 661 1,271 D Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 471 DU 0.46 50 167 217 0.56 166 98 264

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
TAZ Land Use ITE Code Size
AM Peak PM Peak
Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
E Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 340 DU 0.46 36 121 157 0.56 120 71 191
High Density Residential ITE221 246 DU 0.36 23 66 89 0.44 66 43 109 Elem School (K-6) ITE 520 500 STU 0.67 181 154 335 0.17 41 44 85 Mixed Use ITE 820 190 KSF Eq. 153 94 247 Eq. 420 454 874 F Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 605 DU 0.46 64 215 279 0.56 214 125 339
High Density Residential ITE221 216 DU 0.36 20 58 78 0.44 59 37 96 G Low Density Residential ITE210 431 DU 0.74 80 239 319 0.99 269 158 427 H Light
Industrial(Warehouse)
ITE 150 2,730 KSF 0.17 358 116 465 0.19 140 379 519
I Light Industrial ITE110 4,181 KSF 0.7 2,576 351 2,927 0.63 1,659 975 2,634 J Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 700 DU 0.46 74 248 322 0.56 247 145 392
Community Commercial ITE 820 350 KSF Eq. 203 124 327 Eq. 660 714 1,374 K Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 320 DU 0.46 34 114 148 0.56 113 67 180
Low Density Residential ITE210 400 DU 0.74 74 222 296 0.99 249 147 396 Middle School ITE 522 900 STU 0.58 282 240 522 0.17 75 78 153 L Medium Density
Residential
ITE220 395 DU 0.46 42 140 182 0.56 140 82 222
Sub-Total 1 4,584 3,256 7,831 — 5,716 4,555 10,271
Pass-By Reductionsa
Mixed Use/Commercial ITE 820 — — — — — — -34% -575 -622 -1,196 Sub-Total 2 4,584 3,256 7,831 — 5,141 3,933 9,075
Internal Trip Reductionsb
10% Internal Trip Assumption -10% -458 -326 -784 -10% -572 -456 -1,028 Total New Trips 4,126 2,930 7,047 — 4,569 3,477 8,047
Notes:
a 34% Ave. Pass-by trips for shopping center (ITE 820, ITE Handbook) b
Internal trips of 10% used (NCHRP 684)—lower than shown in NCHRP 684 or EPA Study ITE Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition, 2017
Source: AMG, 2020.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Proposed Access and Circulation
The proposed circulation plans for Zacharias Master Plan and Baldwin Master Plan are shown in Exhibit 3.14-3. Comprehensive travel is provided through use of arterials for crosstown travels, major and minor collectors to distribute traffic collected from local residential streets.

Zacharias Master Plan
East-west major collectors include Zacharias Road, which will also serve as a major arterial on the northern boundary of the project. This major collector/arterial provides east-west connections from Rogers Road in the west to SR-33 to the east. There are three north-south major collectors including Rogers Road, Baldwin Road and Ward Avenue that will facilitate traffic flow throughout the whole development. Traffic flow though the various neighborhoods of the development would be facilitated by several minor collector streets including the new east-west connector (to the north of Ivy Avenue) across the PID Canal that will intersect with Ward Avenue and connect to SR-33 to the east.

The new intersection with SR-33 would be signalized. The existing Ward Avenue / SR-33 intersection would either be closed or converted to restricted access (e.g., right-in, right-out). Ward Avenue would ultimately be extended along the west side of the railroad tracks to provide access to the northern portion of the Ranchette Triangle. To ensure pedestrian and bike safety, many of the neighborhood streets would be designed with traffic calming geometric features including curvilinear streets and roundabout at strategic locations to calm traffic. Neighborhood subdivisions are generally designed around various grid to provide maximum access points for pedestrian access and bike travel.

Baldwin Master Plan
Access from the proposed neighborhood is provided by three minor east-west collectors that connect to the major collector street, Baldwin Road. North-south travel is provided by a proposed minor collector street on the western boundary of the project which would parallel the Delta Mendota Canal.

3.14.5 - Thresholds of Significance
According to the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether transportation impacts are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx

3.14.6 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section discusses potential impacts associated with the proposed project and provides mitigation measures where necessary.

Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic Conditions
Impact TRANS-1: Buildout of the Master Plans would generate traffic under Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Conditions that may conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system.

Impact Analysis
This impact assesses Existing plus Approved Plus Project Traffic Conditions.

Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan
To more accurately represent traffic access in the model, 11 Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) were created to represent the Zacharias Master Plan and one TAZ in the Baldwin Master Plan.

Intersections
As indicated earlier, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255 Difference Method was applied to calculate the travel demand forecasts for the scenario. As appropriate, volumes were adjusted at several intersections to more reasonably reflect planned future driveways and traffic distributions.

A new east-west connector across the PID Canal (to the north of Ivy Avenue) would be added and would intersect with Ward Avenue and connect to SR-33 to the east. The new intersection with SR33 would be signalized. To facilitate good traffic flow of project traffic, it is assumed that a higher capacity residential collector would be designed to connect from SR-33 in the east to Rogers Road to the west. It is assumed that the existing Ward Avenue/SR-33 intersection would either be closed or converted to restricted access (e.g., right-in, right-out).

Exhibit 3.14-4 shows the Existing plus Approved Traffic Conditions peak-hour turning movement volumes and lane geometry.

Exhibit 3.14-5 shows the Existing plus Approved plus Project Traffic Conditions peak-hour turning movement volumes and lane geometry. Table 3.14-7 shows the LOS under Existing plus Approved plus Project Traffic Conditions.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Table 3.14-7: Existing plus Approved plus Project Intersection LOS Intersection
Existing plus Approved Plus
Proposed Project
Existing plus Approved plus
Project—Mitigated
Existing
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Sperry Avenue/I-5 SB OffRampsOne-Way 352 F 599 F Signal 42.9 D 82.5 F 2 Sperry Avenue/I-5 NB OnRampsOne-Way 2,242 F 1,431 F Signal 40.2 D 31.2 C 3 Sperry Avenue/Rogers Road Signal 104 F 143 F Signal 40.3 D 83.4 F 4 Sperry Avenue/Park Center
Drive
Signal 11 B 25 C Signal 10.8 B 17.7 B
5 Sperry Avenue/Baldwin
Road
Signal 85 F 89 F Signal 49.5 D 36.4 D
6 Sperry Avenue/American
Eagle Drive
Signal 28 C 18 B Signal 28.3 C 10.1 B
7 Sperry Avenue/Ward
Avenue
Signal 62 E 52 D Signal 29.9 C 32.9 C
8 Sperry Avenue/South Del
Puerto Avenue
Signal 15 B 10 B Signal 13.3 B 34.2 B
9 Sperry Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way 15 C 13 B Signal 37.7 D 30.3 C 10 Walnut Avenue/M
Street/SR-33
Signal 328 F 312 F Signal 47.8 D 29.4 C
11 SR-33/Las Palmas Avenue Signal 73 E 45 D Signal 35.6 D 51.5 D 12 Olive Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way 85 F 220 F Signal 51.2 D 54.2 D 13 Park Center/Keystone
Pacific Parkway
Two-Way 1,841 F 1952 F Signal 32.7 C 34.8 C
14 Rogers Road/Keystone
Pacific Parkway
Two-Way 28 D 23 C Signal 35.4 D 51.5 D
15 Rogers Road/Zacharias
Road
Two-Way 94,934 F 18 C Signal 46.7 D 54.2 D
16 Baldwin Road/Zacharias
Road
All-Way
Stop
1,059 F 1,011 F Signal 32.6 C 50.8 D
17 Zacharias Road/SR-33 Two-Way 258 F 1,855 F Signal 41.7 D 54.3 D 18 Ward Avenue/SR-33 One-Way — — — — — — — — —
19 SR-33/Eucalyptus Avenue One-Way 4,106 F 9,013 F Signal 27.6 C 18.1 B 20 Baldwin Road/SR-33 One-Way 3,393 F 8,404 F Signal 34.7 C 30.6 C 21 Rogers Road/SR-33 One-Way 1,567 F 3,489 F Signal 18.2 B 25.1 C 22 Sycamore Two-Way 48 E 326 F Signal 8.2 A 8.4 A

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Intersection
Existing plus Approved Plus
Proposed Project
Existing plus Approved plus
Project—Mitigated
Existing
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
Avenue/Eucalyptus
23 Elm Avenue/Eucalyptus
Avenue
Two-Way 25 D 13 B Two-Way 24.4 C 12.8 B
24 Sycamore Avenue/Las
Palmas Avenue
Signal 56 E 107 F Signal 34.5 C 39.7 D
25 Elm Avenue/Las Palmas
Avenue
Signal 123 F 56 E Signal 33.0 C 24.6 C
26 Jennings Road/West Main
Avenue
One-Way 1,596 F 385 F Signal 43.5 D 25.2 C
27 SR-33/New East-West
Connection
All-Way
Stop
256 F 316 F Signal 12.4 B 16.8 B
28 Ward Avenue/New EastWest Connection All-Way
Stop
233 F 335 Signal 17.1 B 18.8 B
29 SR-33/Grayson Road All-Way
Stop
907 F 1,234 F Signal 37.5 D 46.1 D
30 Marshall Road/Ward
Avenue
Two-Way
Stop
16 C 19 C Two-Way
Stop

15.5 C 18.6 C
31 SR-33/Marshall Road Two-Way
Stop
105 F 1711 F Two-Way
Stop

6.2 A 13.9 B
32 SR-33/Crows Landing
Road/Fink Road
All-Way
Stop
81 F 81 F All-Way
Stop

9.1 A 6.2 A
Note:

BOLD = Deficient levels of service
Source: AMG 2020.

Under Existing plus Approved Plus Proposed Project Conditions, 24 intersections would operate at deficient levels.

Roadways
Table 3.14-8 shows the arterial levels of service under Existing plus Approved plus Project Traffic Condition. Several arterial segments need to be widened to operate acceptably during the AM and PM peak-hours.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) Table 3.14-8: Existing plus Approved plus Project Traffic Condition Roadway Segment LOS Link
ID Roadway Segment
Existing Plus Approved Plus Proposed Project Existing Plus Approved Plus Proposed Project (Mitigated) Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Source: AMG 2020.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-24 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Freeways
The freeway levels of service under Existing plus Approved plus Project Traffic Condition are shown in Table 3.14-9. Both freeway segments would operate acceptably during the peak-hour.

Table 3.14-9: Existing plus Approved plus Project Freeway Segment LOS Link
ID Freeway Segment
EPAPP
#
Lanes
AM PM
Volume
(vph)
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Volume
(vph)
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Y I-5 NB (north of Sperry Avenue) 2 1,764 27.9 D 1,681 26.3 D I-5 SB (north of Sperry Avenue) 2 1,881 32.1 D 1,884 34.4 D Z I-5 NB (south of Sperry Avenue) 2 1,808 28.9 D 1,172 19.5 C I-5 SB (south of Sperry Avenue) 2 1,567 24.3 C 1,338 22.3 C Note:

Source: AMG, 2020.

Required Improvements
Twenty-one of the 28 study intersections would operate at deficient levels and, therefore, require mitigation. Based on the results of the projected traffic for the Existing plus Approved plus Proposed Project, intersections that require improvement measures in this scenario are described below:

Community Facilities District or Other Financing Mechanism The City of Patterson and project applicant intend to pursue a Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism similar to the existing Community Facilities District No. 2005-01 for the West Patterson Business Park to fund and implement public infrastructure improvements for the proposed Master Plans. The financing mechanism would be overseen by the City of Patterson and would have the ability to issue bonds for infrastructure improvements and levy assessments against property owners within the district boundaries to repay the bonds. When Master Plan buildout triggers the need for the improvements, the City would use the bond proceeds to install the improvements. In cases where the necessary improvement is located on a facility outside of the jurisdictional control of the City of Patterson, the City would work with the relevant agency (i.e., the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans) to implement the improvement. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a requires the applicant and the City to establish the financing mechanism prior to recordation on the first final map.

1. Sperry Avenue /I-5 SB Ramps, and 2. Sperry Avenue /I-5 NB Ramps As indicated earlier, a Project Report and Project Approval & Environmental Documentation (PA & ED) for Sperry Avenue and I-5 interchange is underway. The intersection would improve to LOS D or better after signal improvement during the AM peak-hour. However, the Southbound Off-Ramp intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak-hour. Traffic adaptive signal operations might improve the operations to acceptable level of service. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1b.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx

3. Sperry Avenue/Rogers Road
Add additional eastbound left turn, eastbound right-turn and add additional through lane for both directions making Sperry Avenue four lane road. Northbound double left-turn, through and rightturn lanes would be required to serve future commercial land use south of Sperry Avenue. The intersection would improve to LOS D or better during the AM peak-hour. However, the intersection would operate at unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak-hour. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1c.

4. Sperry Avenue/Rogers Road
Add additional eastbound through lane making Sperry Avenue four lane road. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1d.

5. Sperry Avenue/Baldwin Road
Add additional eastbound through lane making Sperry Avenue four lane road. Additional northbound left-turn lane might be required. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1d.

8. Sperry Avenue/Del Puerto Avenue
Add additional eastbound through lane on Sperry Avenue. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1e.

9. Sperry Avenue/SR-33
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane to each approach. Two left-turn lane might be required in the northbound. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1f.

10. M Street/Walnut Avenue/SR-33
Add shared through and right-turn lane in the southbound, add additional westbound left-turn lane and northbound right-turn lane. Add a second northbound through lane on SR-33. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1g.

12. Olive Avenue/SR-33
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane to each approach. Add a second through lanes in each direction on SR-33. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1h.

13. Park Center/Keystone Pacific
Signalize intersection and add turn lanes. Add eastbound right-turn lane and northbound left-turn lane. Needs further evaluation. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1i.

14. Rogers Road/Keystone Pacific
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane to each approach. Rogers Road should be widened to two lanes on each approach. Add a second southbound through lane. At the intersection, Keystone Pacific might need to provide for two through lanes. No Parking might be required on the first block near the intersection. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1j.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-26 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx

15. Rogers Road/Zacharias Road
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane on each approach. Zacharias Road should be widened to two lanes on each approach. Three through lanes might be required on northbound approach on Rogers Road. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1k.

16. Baldwin Road /Zacharias Road
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane to each approach. Add additional westbound left-turn lane. Add right-turn lane and additional through lane on northbound and southbound Baldwin Road.

This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1l.

17. Zacharias Road/SR-33
Signalize intersection. Add two left-turn lanes on north and two right-turn lane in the eastbound approach. It is our understanding that the intersection might be redesigned to extend and connect with Eucalyptus Avenue under the South County Corridor plan. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1m.

19. SR-33/Eucalyptus Avenue
Signalize intersection. SR-33 should be widened to two lanes on each approach. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1n.

20. Baldwin Road /SR-33
Signalize intersection and add left-turn lane in the northbound. Add additional eastbound left-turn lane and additional through lane on northbound approach. SR-33 should be widened to two lanes in both directions. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1o.

21. Rogers Road/SR-33
Signalize intersection. Add left-turn lane and right-turn lane on eastbound approach. SR-33 should be widened to two lanes in both directions. Add additional eastbound left-turn lane and additional through lane on northbound approach. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS1p.

24. Sycamore Avenue/E. Las Palmas Avenue
Signalize intersection. Add left-turn lane to north-south approach. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1q.

26. West Main Avenue /Jennings Avenue
Signalize intersection and add eastbound left-turn lane. West Main Avenue should be widened to two lanes in both directions. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1r.

27. SR-33/New East-West Connection
Signalize intersection and add two northbound left-turn and one southbound right-turn lanes. SR-33 should be widened to two lanes in both directions. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1s.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx

28. Ward Avenue/New East-West Connection
Signalize intersection and add two northbound left-turn lanes. It is recommended that the New EastWest Connection roadway should consider having two lanes in both directions. The project should pay its fair share for all intersections and roadway improvements. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1t.

29. SR-33/Grayson Road
Signalize the intersection. The project should pay its fair share for all intersections and roadway improvements. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1u.

31. SR-33/Marshall Road
Signalize the intersection. The project should pay its fair share for all intersections and roadway improvements. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1v.

32. SR-33/Crows Landing Road/Fink Road
Signalize the intersection. The project should pay its fair share for all intersections and roadway improvements. This improvement is reflected in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1w.

Conclusion
Buildout of the Master Plans would contribute new trips to intersections, roadways, and freeways forecast to operate at unacceptable levels. Twenty-six feasible mitigation measures are proposed to reduce project impacts. However, for certain facilities, the improvements would not restore operations to acceptable levels. In addition, mitigation measures are proposed for facilities that are outside the jurisdiction of the City of Patterson and, therefore, uncertainty exists regarding their implementation. For these reasons, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures TRANS-2a, TRANS-2b, and:

MM TRANS-1a Prior to recordation of the first final map, the project applicant and the City of Patterson shall establish a Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism to fund transportation improvements. Applicants that pursue development in accordance with the Baldwin Master Plan and Zacharias Master Plan shall contribute a fair share of the costs of necessary improvements at the time building permits are sought through participation in the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism.

MM TRANS-1b Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the Interstate 5 / Sperry Avenue interchange. The improvements shall consist of the installation of signals at both ramp terminals and adaptive signal operations. These improvements shall be

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-28 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1c Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the Sperry Avenue / Rogers Road intersection. The improvements shall consist of additional eastbound left turn, eastbound right-turn and add additional through lane for both directions making Sperry Avenue four lane road. In addition, the improvements shall include the following lane geometry for Rogers Road extension northbound approach: double left-turn, through and right-turn lanes. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1d Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for widening Sperry Avenue to four lanes between Rogers Road and Baldwin Road. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, an additional northbound left turn lane shall be installed. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1e Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for adding an eastbound through lane to Sperry Avenue at Del Puerto Avenue. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1f Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Sperry Avenue/State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection and adding a left turn lane to each approach. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, a second left turn lane shall be installed on the north bound approach.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1g Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of M Street / Walnut Avenue / State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of installing a shared through and right-turn lane on the southbound approach, an additional westbound left-turn lane and northbound right-turn lane and second through lane. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, two through lanes shall be installed on SR-33. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-29
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
MM TRANS-1h Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Olive Avenue / State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane to each approach and adding a second through lane on the northbound and south bound approaches. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, a second left turn lane shall be installed on the north bound approach.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1i Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Park Center / Keystone Pacific Parkway. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection and adding an eastbound right-turn lane and northbound left-turn lane.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1j Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Rogers Road / Keystone Pacific Parkway. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane to each approach, widening Rogers Road to two through lanes on each approach, and widening Keystone Pacific Parkway to two through lanes on each approach. In addition, a second southbound through lane on Rogers Road shall be installed. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1k Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Rogers Road / Zacharias Road. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane to each approach, and widening Zacharias Road to two through lanes on each approach. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, Rogers Road shall be widened to provide three through lanes on the northbound approach. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1l Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Baldwin Road / Zacharias Road. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane to each approach, adding a second westbound left-turn lane, adding a right turn lane and additional through lane on northbound and southbound Baldwin Road, and widening Zacharias Road to two through lanes on each approach.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-30 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
MM TRANS-1m Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Zacharias Road / State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of adding two left-turn lanes on the northbound approach and two right-turn lanes on the eastbound approach.

Additionally, the existing railroad grade crossing adjacent to this intersection shall be upgraded with gates, flashers, and a concrete panel roadbed. Because the proposed South County Corridor would reconfigure this intersection as an overcrossing, the City of Patterson has the discretion to forego this mitigation measure in order to avoid conflicts with the planned improvements. The City shall transfer the fees to Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1n Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of State Route 33 / Eucalyptus Avenue. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection and widening State Route 33 to provide two lanes on each approach. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1o Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Baldwin Road / State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane on the northbound approach, and widening State Route 33 to provide two lanes on each approach. In addition, an additional eastbound left-turn lane and additional through lane on the northbound approach shall be installed. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1p Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Rogers Road / State Route 33. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane on the northbound approach, and widening State Route 33 to provide two lanes on each approach. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1q Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of Sycamore Avenue /

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-31
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
E. Las Palmas Avenue. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding left turn lanes on the northbound and southbound approaches. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1r Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of West Main Avenue / Jennings Avenue. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, adding a left turn lane on the eastbound approach. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1s Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit for the portion of the Zacharias Master Plan located east of Baldwin Road, the project applicant shall install improvements to the planned intersection of State Route 33 / East-West Connection.

The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, installing two northbound left-turn and one southbound right-turn lanes, and widening State Route 33 to two lanes in each direction. The applicants are responsible for the full cost of these improvements. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1t Prior to issuance of the first occupancy permit for the portion of the Zacharias Master Plan located east of Baldwin Road, the project applicant shall install improvements to the planned intersection of Ward Avenue / East-West Connection.

The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection, installing two northbound left-turn lanes. If determined to be necessary by the City of Patterson, The East-West Connection shall provide two lanes in each direction. The applicants are responsible for the full cost of these improvements. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1u Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of SR-33 / Grayson Road. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-32 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
MM TRANS-1v Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of State Route 33/ Marshall Road. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection. The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies.

These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1w Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall pay fair share fees to the City of Patterson for improvements to the intersection of State Route 33 / Crows Landing Road. The improvements shall consist of signalizing the intersection.

The City shall transfer the fees to the County of Stanislaus or Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with the respective agencies. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS1a.

MM TRANS-1x When monitoring determines that SR-33 between Baldwin Avenue and Sperry Avenue is approaching deficient operations, the 2-lane portion of this roadway shall be widened to four lanes. The City shall transfer the fees Caltrans to implement the improvement provided that an agreement is in place with this agency. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1a.

MM TRANS-1y When monitoring determines that Zacharias Road between west of Baldwin Road and SR-33 is approaching deficient operations, the roadway shall be widened to four lanes. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS1a.

MM TRANS-1z When monitoring determines that Baldwin Road between north of Zacharias Road and the New East-West Connector is approaching deficient operations, the roadway shall be widened to four lanes. These improvements shall be programmed into the Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism contemplated by Mitigation Measure TRANS1a.Level of Significance After Mitigation Significant unavoidable impact.
2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions
Impact TRANS-2: Buildout of the Master Plans would generate traffic under 2040 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions that may conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy of the circulation system.

Impact Analysis
This impact assesses 2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-33
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan
To preserve the enhanced validation results in the Patterson area in the TIMP Model while maintaining consistency with the StanCOG 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Committee Strategy (RTP/SCS) forecasts for the rest of the region, a FRATAR adjustment was applied to the TIMP Model 2035 trip tables using TIMP Model 2035 trip ends as targets for Patterson zones, and StanCOG Model 2035 trip ends as targets for the other zones. Thus, the 2035 TIMP Model trip tables are consistent with StanCOG 2014 RTP/SCS projections.

Interstate 5 Mainline Traffic Growth
The Interstate 5 traffic forecasts in the project area used an annual growth rate of approximately 1.5 percent for the design projections to account for additional local trips due to modified land uses in the amended City of Patterson General Plan.

The NCHRP 255 Difference Method was applied to calculate the travel demand forecasts for the existing conditions (2019) and the future cumulative conditions (2040). Average annual growth by inbound direction at study intersections and by direction at study segments were first calculated based on 2012 and 2035 TIMP Model forecasts. The total growth from the existing conditions (2019) to the future cumulative conditions (2040) were then added to the observed counts to obtain the forecasts for the future cumulative conditions (2040). As appropriate, volumes were adjusted at several intersections to more reasonably reflect planned future driveways and traffic distributions. 2040 Cumulative Plus Project – No Zacharias Interchange Two 2040 Cumulative scenarios were modeled: No Zacharias Interchange and New Zacharias Interchange. Under the former scenario, the planned I-5 / Zacharias Road / South County Corridor interchange would not be developed. Under the latter scenario, the planned interchange would be developed.

Intersections
This section presents the assessment of potential transportation impacts of 2040 Cumulative No Project Traffic Conditions. Exhibit 3.14-6 shows the 2040 Cumulative No Project Traffic Conditions peak-hour turning movement volumes and lane geometry.

Table 3.14-10 shows the LOS under 2040 Cumulative No Project Traffic Conditions. It is assumed that proposed improvements Sperry Avenue and I-5 Interchange would be implemented including signalization and widening to four lanes. The intersection would improve to LOS D or better after signal improvement. In addition, it is assumed that the level of intersections and roadway improvements under the Existing plus Approved Projects scenario would be available under this future cumulative base scenario.

Exhibit 3.14-7 shows 2040 Cumulative plus Project Peak Hour Turning Movements and lane geometry. Table 3.14-10 shows the LOS under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Peak Hour Turning Movements. It is assumed that proposed improvements Sperry Avenue and I-5 Interchange would be implemented including signalization and widening to four lanes. The intersection would improve to LOS D or better after signal improvement.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-34 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
In addition, it is assumed that the level of intersections and roadway improvements under the Existing plus Approved Projects scenario would be available under this future cumulative base scenario.

Table 3.14-10: 2040 Cumulative plus Project Intersection LOS Intersection
2040PP (No Zach IC) 2040PP (No Zach IC)—Mitigated
Future
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Sperry Avenue/I-5 SB Off-Ramps All-Way 353 F 407 F Signal 51 D 43 D 2 Sperry Avenue/I-5 NB On-Ramps One-Way 28 D 306 F Signal 41 D 16 B 3 Sperry Avenue/Rogers Road Signal 170 F 175 F Signal 43 D 53 D 4 Sperry Avenue/Park Center Drive Signal 22 C 82 F Signal 20 C 31 C 5 Sperry Avenue/Baldwin Road Signal 84 F 175 F Signal 42 D 34 C 6 Sperry Avenue/American Eagle
Drive
Signal 21 C 21 C Signal 21 C 21 C
7 Sperry Avenue/Ward Avenue Signal 44 D 65 E Signal 22 C 45 D 8 Sperry Avenue/South Del Puerto
Avenue
Signal 11 B 9 A Signal 11 B 9 A
9 Sperry Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way 29 D 21 D Signal 29 C 37 D 10 Walnut Avenue/M Street/SR-33 Signal 306 F 213 F Signal 41 D 18 B 11 SR-33/Las Palmas Avenue Signal 54 D 43 D Signal 43 D 40 D 12 Olive Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way 62 F 46 E Signal 45 D 32 C 13 Park Center/Keystone Pacific
Parkway
Two-Way 17 C 210 F Signal 12 B 17 B
14 Rogers Road/Keystone Pacific
Parkway
Two-Way 14 B 21 C Signal 21 C 20 C
15 Rogers Road/Zacharias Road Two-Way 51* F 14 B Signal 18 B 31 C 16 Baldwin Road/Zacharias Road All-Way 612 F 859 F Signal 30 C 55 D 17 Zacharias Road/SR-33 Two-Way 461 F 680 F Signal 27 C 46 D 18 Ward Avenue/SR-33 One-Way — — — — — — — — —
19 SR-33/Eucalyptus Avenue One-Way 51* F 539 F Signal 16 B 13 B 20 Baldwin Road/SR-33 One-Way 3,262 F 3,301 F Signal 16 B 13 B 21 Rogers Road/SR-33 One-Way 51* F 5399 F Signal 22 C 13 B 22 Sycamore Avenue/Eucalyptus Two-Way 501 F 9 A Signal 11 B 27 C 23 Elm Avenue/Eucalyptus Avenue Two-Way 332 F 26 D Signal 8 A 9 A 24 Sycamore Avenue/Las Palmas
Avenue
Signal 43 D 25 B Signal 53 D 26 C

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-35
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Intersection
2040PP (No Zach IC) 2040PP (No Zach IC)—Mitigated
Future
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
25 Elm Avenue/Las Palmas Avenue Signal 20 C 22 C Signal 20 C 22 C 26 Jennings Road/West Main
Avenue
One-Way 457 F 106 F Signal 18 B 13 B
27 SR-33/New East-West
Connection
All-Way 782 F 752 F Signal 31 C 34 C
28 Ward Avenue/New East-West
Connection
All-Way 261 F 401 F Signal 13 B 17 B
29 SR-33/Grayson Road All-Way
Stop
390 F 1,090 F Signal 40 D 52 D
30 Marshall Road/Ward Avenue Two-Way
Stop
53 F 16 C All-Way 17 C 15 C
31 SR-33/Marshall Road Two-Way
Stop
15 B 12 B Signal 10 B 18 B
32 SR-33/Crows Landing Road/Fink
Road
All-Way
Stop
768 F 811 F Signal 29 C 21 C
Notes:
* Computational error due to high traffic demands. Delay cannot be calculated.

Bold = Deficient operation
Source: AMG 2020.

Roadways
Table 3.14-11 shows the arterial levels of service under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Condition. Several arterial segments need to be widened to operate acceptably during the AM and PM peak-hours.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) Table 3.14-11: 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Condition Roadway Segment LOS Link
ID Roadway Segment
2040PP 2040PP (Mitigated)
Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-37
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Freeways
The freeway levels of service under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions are shown in Table 3.14-12. It is estimated that both freeway segments would operate unacceptably in the commute direction during the peak-hour.

Table 3.14-12: 2040 Cumulative plus Project Freeway Segment LOS Link
ID Freeway Segment
2040PP
#
Lanes
AM PM
Volume
(vph) A
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Volume
(vph)
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Y I-5 NB (north of Sperry Ave.) 2 2,142 37.5 E 1,661 25.9 C I-5 SB (north of Sperry Ave.) 2 1,921 33.0 D 2,149 41.3 E Z I-5 NB (south of Sperry Ave.) 2 2,149 37.7 E 1,556 25.9 C I-5 SB (south of Sperry Ave.) 2 1,565 24.2 C 2,051 35.4 E Notes:

Bold = Deficient operation
Source: AMG, 2020.

Required Improvements
Based on the results of the projected traffic for the 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions, intersections require all of the improvements identified in Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a through TRANS-1s.
2040 Cumulative Plus Project – New Zacharias Interchange This section presents the assessment of potential transportation impacts of the proposed Project under 2040 Cumulative plus Project assuming a new interchange at I-5/Zacharias Road. The new interchange at I-5/Zacharias was coded as a diamond interchange. Zacharias Road was assumed to be a 4-lane arterial similar to Sperry Avenue.

The Stanislaus Council of Governments is studying the development of a South County Corridor between Interstate 5 near Patterson and SR-99 in Turlock. A Feasibility Study was released in 20168 that considered alignment options and recommended that three of the alternatives be carried forward for further review. Two of those alternatives contemplate an I-5/South County Corridor interchange northwest of the Master Plan area, with the alignment following Zacharias Road to SR33, where a grade separated interchange would be constructed.

The Master Plan’s circulation plan accommodates these two alignments of the future South County Corridor and limits the number of connections along Zacharias Road. If the South County Corridor is not developed along Zacharias Road, this roadway would still be improved to arterial standards.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-38 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
It is projected that the new interchange would attract approximately 2,300 vph during the peakhour. This will provide much relief from traffic congestions along Sperry Avenue and other major roadways in the City.

Intersections
This section presents the assessment of potential transportation impacts of the 2040 Cumulative plus Project with proposed Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5. Exhibit 3.14-8 shows 2040 Cumulative plus Project (proposed Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5) Peak Hour Turning Movements and lane geometry. Table 3.14-13 shows the LOS under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Peak Hour Turning Movements. It is assumed that proposed improvements Sperry Avenue and I-5 Interchange would be implemented including signalization and widening to four lanes. The intersection would improve to LOS D or better after signal improvement.

Table 3.14-13: 2040 Cumulative plus Project Intersection LOS (with new Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5)
Intersection
2040PP (With Zach IC) 2040PP (With Zach IC)—Mitigated
Existing
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Sperry Avenue/I-5 SB OffRampsOne-Way
Stop
170 F 145 F Signal 29 C 20 B
2 Sperry Avenue/I-5 NB OnRampsOne-Way
Stop
591 F 377 F Signal 11 B 12 B
3 Sperry Avenue/Rogers
Road
Signal 51 D 55 D Signal 26 C 32 C
4 Sperry Avenue/Park Center
Drive
Signal 15 B 22 C Signal 13 B 17 B
5 Sperry Avenue/Baldwin
Road
Signal 39 D 50 D Signal 30 C 26 C
6 Sperry Avenue/American
Eagle Drive
Signal 18 B 14 B Signal 18 B 14 B
7 Sperry Avenue/Ward
Avenue
Signal 31 C 42 D Signal 21 C 25 C
8 Sperry Avenue/S Del
Puerto Avenue
Signal 9 A 8 A Signal 9 A 8 A
9 Sperry Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way
Stop
3777 F 1424 F Signal 33 C 37 D
10 Walnut Avenue/M
Street/SR-33
Signal 61 E 48 D Signal 23 C 16 B
11 SR-33/Las Palmas Avenue Signal 23 C 23 C Signal 21 C 21 C 12 Olive Avenue/SR-33 Two-Way
Stop
26 D 28 D Signal 18 B 17 B

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-39
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Intersection
2040PP (With Zach IC) 2040PP (With Zach IC)—Mitigated
Existing
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
13 Park Center/Keystone
Pacific Parkway
Two-Way
Stop
11 B 19 C Signal 11 B 12 B
14 Rogers Road/Keystone
Pacific Parkway
Two-Way
Stop
12 B 13 B Signal 16 B 14 B
15 Rogers Road/Zacharias
Road
Two-Way
Stop
39 E 200 F Signal 18 B 21 C
16 Baldwin Road/Zacharias
Rd. ad
All-Way 131 F 190 F Signal 22 C 26 C
17 Zacharias Road/SR-33 Two-Way
Stop
326 F 32 D Signal 14 B 22 C
18 Ward Avenue/SR-33 One-Way
Stop
— — — — — — — — —
19 SR-33/Eucalyptus Avenue One-Way
Stop
80 F 327 F Signal 22 C 28 C
20 Baldwin Road/SR-33 One-Way
Stop
841 F 121 F Signal 15 B 8 A
21 Rogers Road/SR-33 One-Way
Stop
438 F 89 F Signal 12 B 10 A
22 Sycamore
Avenue/Eucalyptus
Two-Way
Stop
715 F 446 F Signal 19 B 12 B
23 Elm Avenue/Eucalyptus
Avenue
Two-Way
Stop
34 D 40 E TwoWay8 A 10 A
24 Sycamore Avenue/Las
Palmas Avenue
Signal 33 C 26 C Signal 38 D 25 C
25 Elm Avenue/Las Palmas
Avenue
Signal 24 C 26 C Signal 21 C 23 C
26 Jennings Road/West Main
Avenue
One-Way
Stop
338 F 88 F Signal 28 C 18 B
27 SR-33/New East-West
Connection
All-Way 292 F 334 F Signal 18 B 20 C
28 Ward Avenue/New EastWest ConnectionAll-Way 261 F 401 F Signal 13 B 27 C 29 SR-33/Grayson Road All-Way
Stop
556 F 284 F Signal 28 C 18 B
30 Marshall Road/Ward
Avenue
Two-Way
Stop
59 F 15 B All-Way 18 C 14 B
31 SR-33/Marshall Road Two-Way
Stop
11 B 189 F Signal 20 C 9 A

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-40 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Intersection
2040PP (With Zach IC) 2040PP (With Zach IC)—Mitigated
Existing
Control
AM PM
Mitigated
Control
AM PM
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
32 SR-33/Crows Landing
Road/Fink Road
All-Way
Stop
391 F 296 F Signal 19 B 22 C
Bold = Deficient level of service
Source: AMG, 2020.

Roadways
Table 3.14-14 shows the arterial levels of service under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions (proposed Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5). Several arterial segments need to be widened to operate acceptably during the AM and PM peak-hours.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) Table 3.14-14: 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Condition Roadway Segment LOS (with new Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5) Link
ID Roadway Segment
2040PP-ZaclC 2040PP-ZaclC (Mitigated)
Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound Northbound/Eastbound Southbound/Westbound

AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS Speed LOS

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-42 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Freeways
The freeway levels of service under 2040 Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions are shown in Table 3.14-15. It is estimated that the freeway segment south of Sperry Avenue would operate unacceptably during the peak hour.

Table 3.14-15: 2040 Cumulative plus Project (with new Zacharias Road Interchange at I-5) Freeway Segment LOS
Link
ID Freeway Segment
2040-ZalcC
#
Lanes
AM PM
Volume
(vph)
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Volume
(vph)
Density
(pc/mi/ln) LOS
Y I-5 NB (north of Sperry
Avenue)
2 1.718 27.0 D 1,475 22.7 C
I-5 SB (north of Sperry
Avenue)
2 1,652 27.6 D 1,647 29.9 D
Z I-5 NB (south of Sperry
Avenue)
2 2,146 37.6 E 1,575 26.3 D
I-5 SB (south of Sperry
Avenue)
2 1,558 24.1 C 2,062 36.7 E
Required Improvements
All of the improvements identified in Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a through TRANS-1z would be required under the 2040 New Zacharias Interchange scenario.

Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management is a general term for various strategies that increase transportation system efficiency. TDM treats mobility as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself, and so helps individuals and communities meet their transport needs in the most efficient way, which often reduces total vehicle traffic.

Recommended TDM strategies should encourage future property owners, developers, and employers to use creative and effective ways to reduce motor vehicle trips and their associated impacts. TDM strategies should ensure that new developments are designed to make non-single occupant vehicle (SOV) travel easier for new residents, tenants, employees, and visitors by using sustainable travel modes such as carpooling, vanpooling, carsharing, transit, walking, biking, and teleworking. TDM encourages developers, businesses, property owners, homeowners’ associations, public agencies and institutions to provide information, incentives, advocacy, and specific services for enhanced transportation options.

TDM for the proposed project could establish the following goals:

Reduce the frequency and distance of auto trips

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-43
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Shift trips towards the use of environmentally friendly and non-motorized modes of transportation
Partner with project developers and communities to reduce SOV trips Increase the accessibility and convenience of alternatives to driving-alone Increase awareness of all transportation choices and costs Encourage use of innovative programs and new technologies to reduce driving alone There are many different TDM strategies with a variety of transportation impacts. Some improve the transportation options available to consumers. Some cause changes in trip scheduling, route, destination or mode. Others reduce the need for physical travel through more efficient land use, or transportation substitutes. TDM is an increasingly common response to transportation problems especially considering SB 743 VMT legislation. Although most individual TDM strategies only affect a small portion of total travel, the cumulative impacts of a comprehensive TDM program can be significant.

TDM programs have been around as major components of urban transportation systems since the 1970s and a significant body of knowledge has been built over this time. In practice, TDM programs range from light-duty marketing campaigns that accomplish little to robust, integrated systems that have measurable impacts on traffic volumes in specific corridors or districts.

Individual businesses can implement and support TDM strategies in their roles as employers, developers, building operators and service providers. In these roles, businesses often make decisions that affect whether TDM strategies are considered at all, how TDM solutions are evaluated and compared with alternatives, and the quality with which TDM strategies are implemented.

Demand management can benefit businesses directly. For example, parking management can reduce costs and increase flexibility for employers and developers. Commute Trip Reduction strategies, such as Parking Cash Out and Guaranteed Ride Home programs, can help with employee recruitment and retentions. TDM can improve public relations by reducing congestion and pollution problems.

Best TDM Strategies
Appropriate TDM measures would be different for residential and non-residential projects. The following strategies are particularly suitable for implementation by businesses and residences which the proposed project could consider.

Alternative Work Schedules
Alternative work schedules include flextime, Compressed Work Week (CWW), and staggered shifts.

They can reduce peak period commute travel and help accommodate ridesharing and transit use.

Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
Measures promoting the use of bicycles and walking as alternative modes of transportation will include the following key elements:

A clearly designated pedestrian circulation network within the site that links to the City of Patterson roadway network. Currently there are Class II on-street bike lane on Baldwin Road

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-44 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
and Ward Avenue. Class II bike lane should be provided on both streets in the project area.

The existing site plan shows pedestrian routes that connect to adjacent local roadways. Clearly designated bike lanes should be provided that connects to employment centers and downtown areas.

Secure bicycle parking in safe, strategic locations within the site.

Safety amenities such as lighting, sidewalks, and off-street pedestrian / bicycle paths.

Guaranteed Ride Home
Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) programs provide an occasional subsidized ride to commuters who use alternative modes, to help deal with unexpected conditions.

Transit, Shuttles, and Ridesharing
Ridesharing is being embraced by a wider group of people than ever before. This provide much opportunity to reduce SOV and promote TDM. The emerging choices of transportation management options, as well as major industry players like Uber, Via, Sidecar and Lyft, reflect a cultural trend that’s defining contemporary times: the desire for choice. The following should be actively promoted.

Carpool or vanpool program
Commute assistance and ride-matching
Shuttle program / shuttle consortium / fund transit service Transit passes or subsidies
Car share on-site
Self-Driving shuttle
Self-driving shuttle between residential and employment centers are currently being considered or used in many cities. This might be a feasible strategy in trip reduction if it is implemented between large employment centers and new homes in the future Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plans.

Transportation Management Associations
Businesses can help create Transportation Management Associations (TMAs), which are membercontrolled, organizations that provide transportation services in a particular area. Depending on the circumstances, some TMAs have been proven to be critical for the long-term success of a TDM program.

TDM Coordinator / Contact Person
Actively participate in a Transportation Management Association Developer TDM Fee/ TDM Fund
Telework
Telework involves the use of telecommunications to substitute for physical travel, including telecommuting, teleshopping, distance-learning, electronic government, video conferencing, and Internet-based business-to-business activities.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-45
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Implementation
One of the keys to successful TDM programs is understanding how to manage the scale of TDM programs and how to work within a complex urban environment with multiple agencies and organizations interacting, sometimes with competing goals.

Different TDM measures are appropriate for implementation by different entities at different scales.

There is little a single employer can do to improve regional public transit service, for example.

Regional transit agencies with regional tax bases provide transit service and they typically participate in ancillary programs designed to promote transit patronage, including setting up pass programs.

Cities within those transit regions may be represented on the transit board and can influence transit decision making. In some cases, cities may operate local circulators and shuttles as adjuncts to the regional transit system. Groups of employers, operating through a TMA can implement an employee transit pass program, sharing costs and creating an efficient marketing effort with an information clearinghouse. They can work with the transit agency and city to obtain better service or improved transit stops near their worksites, or to run a local circulator. In many cases, Caltrans or StanCOG may have funds available to help start up TMAs and to support their efforts. In fact, many metropolitan areas have a regional commute trip reduction program designed to provide services and resources to TMAs.

The TDM Program should include a marketing program to make future employees aware of the available commute options and services provided by local transit agencies and each employer, and to encourage employees to use commute alternatives. The marketing and promotion effort will include distribution of information on available commute services, assistance with commute planning, and other services that make the use of commute alternatives more convenient.

The provision of a transportation network that facilitates bicycle and walking modes will also influence an employee's decision to use a commute mode alternative to the automobile. The project site plan incorporates specifications for sidewalks that will enhance the pedestrian environment.

Mitigation Measures TRANS-2a and TRANS-2b require the implementation of TDM measures for both the Zacharias Master Plan and Baldwin Master Plan as they buildout.

Conclusion
Buildout of the Master Plans would contribute new trips to intersections, roadways, and freeways forecast to operate at unacceptable levels. Twenty-two feasible mitigation measures are proposed to reduce project impacts. However, for certain facilities, the improvements would not restore operations to acceptable levels. In addition, mitigation measures are proposed for facilities that are outside the jurisdiction of the City of Patterson and, therefore, uncertainty exists regarding their implementation. For these reasons, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-46 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures TRANS-1a through TRANS-1z and:

MM TRANS-2a Prior to the approval of each map for the Zacharias Master Plan and Baldwin Master Plan, the applicant shall prepare plans for review and approval by the City of Patterson that identify the following applicable Transportation Demand Management Measures
A clearly designated pedestrian circulation network within the site that links to the City of Patterson roadway network.

Secure bicycle parking in safe, strategic locations within the site.

Safety amenities such as lighting, sidewalks, and off-street pedestrian / bicycle paths.

MM TRANS-2a Prior to the final approval for individual development projects that would employ more than 50 people that occur pursuant to the Zacharias Master Plan, the applicant shall retain a qualified transportation consultant to prepare a project-specific Transportation Demand Management Plan that includes the following applicable measures:

Transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities
Alternative work schedules
Guaranteed ride home
Carpool or vanpool program
Commute assistance and ride-matching
Shuttle program / shuttle consortium / fund transit service Transit passes or subsidies
Car share on-site
Self-Driving shuttle
Transportation Management Associations
Telework
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant unavoidable impact.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
Impact TRANS-3: Buildout of the Master Plans may conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

Impact Analysis
This impact evaluates vehicle miles traveled. Because no thresholds have been adopted by a State or regional agency at the time of Draft EIR release, the City of Patterson, as the lead agency has elected to conduct a qualitative analysis.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-47
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan
The proposed Master Plans contemplate the development of up to 5,086 dwelling units, 7.7 million square feet of non-residential uses, two schools, parks, a trail network, and flood control basin.

Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would generate an estimated 233,894,978 vehicle miles traveled on an annual basis. Both Master Plans contemplate residential communities within proximity to employment, retail, services, schools, and parks. In addition, the Master Plans contemplate a multi-modal transportation network consisting of roadways, on-street and off-street bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities. Collectively, these attributes create opportunities short vehicle trips and non-motorized trips.

Moreover, buildout of the Master Plans would promote improving jobs-housing balance in Patterson.

As of July 2020, the California Department of Finance indicates that Patterson has 23,764 residents and the California Employment Development Department indicates it has 9,400 jobs. Expressed as a ratio, this yields 2.52 residents / job. As such, Patterson is considered housing rich.

The Zacharias Master Plan contemplates 7.765 million square feet of non-residential uses, primarily light industrial. At buildout, the Baldwin and Zacharias Master Plans would add 19,988 residents and 8,670 new jobs. Additionally, buildout of the nearby Arambel Business Park would add an estimated 10,093 jobs to Patterson, bringing total future employment of 18,763. As a ratio, the Master Plans plus Arambel yield 1.07 residents / job.

When added to the existing values, this yields citywide numbers of 43,752 residents and 28,163 jobs.

As a ratio, it yields 1.55 residents / job. As such, it provides context regarding how the Master Plans – the combined biggest development project in City history – affects jobs-housing balance.

Overall, this demonstrates that the Master Plans would move Patterson substantially closer to a jobshousing balance. Furthermore, the new employment opportunities would be located within 2 miles of most of the proposed Mater Plan residential uses, close enough to enable workers who live in Patterson to consider alternate modes of transportation. To facilitate this, Mitigation Measures TRANS-2a and TRANS-2b require the implementation TDM measures at both the design and operational levels.

In sum, buildout of the Master Plans would advance State objectives regarding reducing VMT.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures TRANS-2a and TRANS-2b.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Zacharias Master Plan Project
Transportation Administrative Draft EIR

3.14-48 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Roadway Safety
Impact TRANS-4: Buildout of the Master Plans may substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.

Impact Analysis
The proposed Master Plans contemplate the development of up to 5,086 dwelling units, 7.765 million square feet of non-residential uses, two schools, parks, a trail network, and flood control basin.

Baldwin Master Plan Area
The Baldwin Master Plan area abuts agricultural uses to the east and south. Baldwin Road would be extended south to serve the Master Plan uses. It would be expected that agricultural equipment would travel along this new segment of Baldwin Road. The roadway is contemplated to provide a shoulder, which would slow moving agricultural equipment to safety traverse this roadway.

Zacharias Master Plan Area
Agricultural Equipment
The Zacharias Master Plan area abuts agricultural uses to the west, north, and east. In addition, the Ranchette Triangle contains existing agricultural uses that may continue their existing land use activities as the balance of the Master Plan area builds out.

Zacharias Road between Rogers Road and SR-33 would be improved to provide a shoulder, which would slow moving agricultural equipment to safety traverse this roadway.

Additionally, no changes are proposed to Ivy Avenue or Rose Avenue within the Ranchette Triangle.

To the extent that agricultural equipment uses these roads, this would not be affected by the Master Plan.

Railroad Grade Crossings
There are two active railroad grade crossings near the Zacharias Master Plan boundaries.

The SR-33 grade crossing provides cross bucks, flashers, gates, and a concrete panel roadbed, which is an appropriate level of protection.

The Zacharias Road grade crossing provides only cross bucks. Ultimately, the planned South County Corridor contemplates a grade separated crossing at this location. However, there is a possibility that some or all of the Zacharias Master Plan may buildout prior to this facility being constructed, creating a scenario that the Zacharias Road grade crossing would experience a substantial increase in daily crossings. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure TRANS-1m requires the applicant to upgrade the safety devices at the Zacharias Road grade crossings in conjunction with the intersection improvements at SR-33 / Zacharias Road.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Administrative Draft EIR Transportation
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.14-49
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/Client-DropBox submittal 112420/Word Documents - TRACKS/17900003 Sec03-14 Transportation.docx
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure TRANS-1m.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Emergency Access
Impact TRANS-5: Buildout of the Master Plans would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Impact Analysis
The proposed Master Plans contemplate the development of up to 5,086 dwelling units, 7.765 million square feet of non-residential uses, two schools, parks, a trail network, and flood control basin.

Baldwin Master Plan Area
The Baldwin Master Plan contemplates a looped internal circulation network that would connect to existing segments of Baldwin Road and the City of Patterson Corporation Yard access road. Thus, two points of connection would be provided. Moreover, the Master Plan incorporates the General Plan Circulation Element’s roadway sections and, thus, the internal roadways would meet City standards for access and circulation. As such, adequate emergency response and evacuation would be provided.

Zacharias Master Plan Area
The Zacharias Master Plan contemplates an internal circulation network with multiple connections to existing segments of Rogers Road, Zacharias Road, Baldwin Road, and Ward Avenue. The Zacharias Master Plan also contemplates an East-West Connector that would link the Master Plan area to State Route 33. Additionally, two Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) points would be provided at the existing Ivy Avenue and Rose Avenue cul-de-sacs. Moreover, the Master Plan incorporates the General Plan Circulation Element’s roadway sections and, thus, the internal roadways would meet City standards for access and circulation. As such, adequate emergency response and evacuation would be provided.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx

3.15 - Utilities and Service Systems

3.15.1 - Introduction
This section describes the existing utilities and service system setting and potential effects from project implementation on the site and its surrounding area. Descriptions and analysis in this section are based on the Water Supply Assessment prepared by Woodard & Curran, which is provided in Appendix I.

Water
The City of Patterson Public Works Department Water Division oversees municipal potable water supply and delivery.

Supply
The City of Patterson derives all of its water supply from groundwater pumping of the DeltaMendota Groundwater Subbasin. The Subbasin is split into two aquifers: an upper (non-potable) and a lower (potable). The two aquifers are separated by the thick, semi-impermeable Corcoran Clay layer. The City operates 10 wells, 8 potable and 2 non-potable, that pump from both aquifers.

Wastewater
The City of Patterson Public Works Department Wastewater Division of the Patterson Public Works Department provides wastewater transmission, treatment, and disposal for both the City of Patterson and Diablo Grande, a small community located 6 miles to the west. A network of sanitary sewer collection pipelines, approximately 63.4 miles in length and ranging in diameter from 6 to 33 inches, collects wastewater throughout the City. The main trunk pipeline is located beneath Walnut Avenue. Two lift stations assist in the conveyance of wastewater to the Water Quality Control Facility.

The Water Quality Control Facility, which occupies approximately 240 acres, is located at 14901 Poplar Avenue, and is permitted to treat 2.25 million gallons of effluent per day. The facility treats an average of 1.65 million gallons of effluent on a daily basis. Treated effluent is disposed of via the Advanced Integrated Pond System.

The City of Patterson has prepared improvement plans and acquired land for the expansion of the facility. The plans call for expanding the facility’s treatment capacity to 3.50 million gallons per day (mgd). The City completed environmental review of the expansion pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Storm Drainage
The developed areas of the City of Patterson are served by a municipal storm drain system. On the west side of the City, the storm drain system discharges runoff into Salado Creek.

In the project vicinity, limited storm drainage facilities exist (roadside ditches, swales, etc.), reflecting the current agricultural uses of the Master Plan areas. The Master Plan areas are not currently served by the City’s municipal storm drainage system.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Solid Waste
Bertolotti Disposal provides franchise solid waste collection within the City of Patterson. Solid waste is disposed of at the Fink Road Landfill in Crows Landing. The landfill’s characteristics are summarized in Table 3.15-1. As shown in the table, the Fink Road Landfill has approximately 7.1 million cubic yards of remaining capacity.

Table 3.15-1: Fink Road Landfill Summary
Location Acreage Permitted Capacity Remaining Capacity
Maximum Daily
Throughput
4000 Fink Road, Crows
Landing, CA
202.5
acres
14,640,000 cubic
yards
7,184,701 cubic
yards 2,400 tons
Source: California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, 2020.

3.15.2 - Regulatory Framework
State
California Water Code Section 10912
Passed into law in 2001, Senate Bill (SB) 221 (and its companion SB 610) was intended to address the sufficiency of water supply sources for future developments. Both Bills require preparation of an WSA for approval of a project subject to CEQA and meeting the description of a “project” as defined in the California Water Code Section10912. A project is defined in the California Water Code (CWC) as any proposed development of more than 500 dwelling units or industrial uses of more than 650,000 square feet. Additionally, for a water utility with fewer than 5,000 connections, any development requiring an increase in the number of connections by more than 10 percent must also comply with this portion of the CWC.

The primary difference between SB 610 and SB 221 is that the Verification of Water Supply for SB 221 must also consider: (1) a historical record of at least 20 years, (2) an urban water shortage contingency analysis, (3) supply reduction for “specific water use sector” per Water Supplier’s resolution, ordinance, or contract and (4) the amount of water that can be reasonably relied upon from specified supply projects. It is intended as a ‘fail safe’ mechanism to ensure that collaboration on finding needed water supplies occurs before construction on a new large subdivision begins.

However, both SB 610 and SB 221 include the following requirements:

Documentation of wholesale water suppliers.

Documentation of supply sources, including quantities received and expected.

If groundwater is a source, this must also include a description of the groundwater basin from which the proposed project will be supplied, including information regarding overdraft conditions.

Discussion of existing and expected water demands.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Discussion of whether the water provider’s total projected water supplies available during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years will satisfy demands during a 20-year projection.

A project-specific assessment of the demands associated with the proposed project and a discussion of the water provider’s ability to meet those demands during a 20-year projection.

City of Patterson
General Plan
The City of Patterson General Plan sets forth the following goals and policies relevant to utilities and service systems:

Goal PS-1: To maintain an adequate level of service in the City’s water system to meet the needs of existing and future development.

Policy PS-1.3: Supply for new development. The City shall not approve any new development without the demonstrated assurance of an adequate water supply to support such development that meets City criteria for both potable and non-potable demands, and a Cityapproved funding mechanism to pay for necessary improvements. Such assurance shall be provided in a form and manner determined by the City, and may include, but is not limited to, the following:
a. A contract between the property owner(s) and a water purveyor guaranteeing the longterm delivery of a suitable quantity of water to serve the intended use of the property consistent with the General Plan;
b. A contract between a water purveyor and the City guaranteeing the long-term delivery of a suitable quantity of water to serve the intended use of the property consistent with the General Plan;
c. Such other mechanism suitable to the City.

Goal PS-2: To maintain an adequate level of service in the City’s wastewater collection and disposal system to meet the needs of existing and future development.

Policy PS-2.2: Provision of sewer service. The City shall ensure the provision of adequate sewer service to all new development in the city and support the extension of sewer service to existing developed areas where this service is lacking.

Goal PS-3: To maintain an adequate level of service in the City’s storm drainage system to accommodate runoff from existing and future development and to prevent property damage due to flooding.

Policy PS-3.2: Expansion of drainage systems. The City shall expand and develop storm drainage facilities to accommodate the needs of existing and planned development.

Policy PS-3.5: Pollutant requirements. Future drainage system discharges shall comply with applicable state and federal pollutant discharge requirements.

Policy PS-3.6: National Flood Insurance Program. The City shall continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. To this end, the City shall ensure that its regulations are in full compliance with standards adopted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Policy PS-3.10: Storm drainage improvements required. Construction of storm drainage improvements shall be required, as appropriate, to prevent flooding during periods of heavy rainfall. Where feasible, storm drainage facilities should continue to be combined with park facilities.

Policy PS-3.14: Erosion control. The City shall require new development to incorporate erosion control measures to minimize sedimentation of streams and other natural drainage features.

Policy PS-3.15: Groundwater recharge. Where feasible, storm drainage facilities shall be designed to assist with, and complement, the water supply program in regard to groundwater recharge.

Goal PS-4: To provide for the efficient collection and disposal of solid waste while minimizing impacts to the physical and social environment.

Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance
Patterson Municipal Code Chapter 6.14 requires all construction and renovation to implement construction and demolition debris recycling. Applicants are required to submit a waste management plan as part of the building permit application describing how construction and demolition debris recycling would be carried out. City official review and approve the plan and the applicant is legally bound to implement it.

3.15.3 - Methodology
The water analysis is based on a Water Supply Assessment prepared by Woodard & Curran, which is provided in Appendix I. FCS prepared the wastewater, storm drainage, and solid waste analysis using information provided by the Master Plans, the City of Patterson, and the California Department of Resources Recovery and Recycling.

3.15.4 - Thresholds of Significance
According to the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, to determine whether impacts to utilities and service systems are significant environmental effects, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated.

Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

3.15.5 - Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Water Supply
Impact US-1: Buildout of the Master Plans would not require additional water supplies to provide adequate water supply during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

Impact Analysis
This impact assesses the adequate of water supply under buildout of the Baldwin and Zacharias Master Plans. The analysis in this impact is based on the Water Supply Assessment prepared by Woodard & Curran.

Baldwin and Zacharias Master Plans
Potable Water Infrastructure
The City of Patterson would provide potable water service to the Master Plan areas. Additionally, property owners would be required to use non-potable groundwater for irrigation purposes. Exhibit 2-11a depicts the Zacharias Master Plan potable water system and 2-11b depicts the Baldwin Master Plan potable water system.

Non-Potable Water Infrastructure
The City of Patterson would provide non-potable water service to the Zacharias Master Plan area.

Exhibit 2-12 depicts the Zacharias Master Plan non-potable water system. The Baldwin Master Plan area is not proposed to be served with non-potable water.

Master Plan Boundaries Existing Demand
Existing water demands in the Master Plan boundaries are almost entirely non-potable, agricultural demands that are supplied by shallow (above-Corcoran) groundwater wells. Existing demands are not metered so they were estimated based on the approximate number of dwelling units and available crop and evapotranspiration information for the area. A summary of existing demands in the Master Plan boundaries are summarized in Table 3.15-2 (potable demands) and Table 3.15-3 (non-potable demands).

Table 3.15-2: Existing Potable Water Demand
Land Use
Total Acreage
(acres)
Number of Units
(EDU)1
Water Demand
Factors
(Residential gpcd)2
2018 Demand
(AFY)3
Very Low Density Residential n/a 34 102.9 14
Notes:
1 Estimated based on aerial image of Zacharias project area. 2 Average residential gallons per capita per day based on 2018 demand provided by City of Patterson.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Land Use
Total Acreage
(acres)
Number of Units
(EDU)1
Water Demand
Factors
(Residential gpcd)2
2018 Demand
(AFY)3
3 Assumes average household size of 3.46 per current City population and household count.

Demand = 34 [EDU] * 3.46 [person/EDU] * 102.9 [gal/day/person] *10^-6 [MG/gal] * 1120 [AFY/MGD] Table 3.15-3: Existing Non-Potable Water Demand
Land Use/Crop Type1 ET0 (in/yr)2
Irrigated Area
(acre)
Irrigation
Efficiency2
Total Demand
(AFY)3
Alfalfa and Alfalfa Mixtures 47.3 268.5 65% 1,630
Almonds 37.6 363.1 75% 1,516
Beans 26.7 64.7 65% 222
Cherries 41.1 38.6 75% 176
Idle n/a 19.4 0% 0
Miscellaneous Truck Crops 26.7 75.6 65% 259
Plums, Prunes, Apricots 41.1 61.9 75% 283
Tomatoes 26.1 384.2 65% 1,285
Landscape Water Demand Total 5,370
Notes:
1 DWR Land Use data (2014) downloaded from
https://gis.water.ca.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Planning/CropMapping2014/MapServer. 2 ITRC Data downloaded from http://www.itrc.org/etdata/index.html, for a typical year (1997) in Zone 14. 3 Demand [AFY] = ETc [in./yr.] * (1/12) [ft./in.] * Irrigated Area [acre]/Irrigation Efficiency [-] City of Patterson Existing Demand
The 2018 Water Management Plan (WMP) and the 2018 Annual Report were provided for analysis of the existing water system demands within City limits. Based on the 2018 Annual Report, the City currently has approximately 6,600 active water meter accounts. Of the potable water meters, roughly 6,170 are associated with residential users (single family and multi-family meters, including both indoor and outdoor demands), 275 are associated with non-residential indoor water use, and 155 are associated with non-residential irrigation. Based on the City’s latest billing records for a full calendar year (2018), the City has a potable water demand of 3,102 AFY. This demand is about 16 percent lower than the existing demand reported in the WMP, which was based on 2013 billing records. The 2018 demand is slightly higher (5 percent) than the demand from 2015 presented in the 2015 UWMP. The City’s existing non-potable demand is approximately 216 AFY, as recorded in the 2015 UWMP.

Aside from the effects of the drought, the reason water use has decreased since the WMP was developed—the increase from 2015 to 2018 due to 2015 occurring in the middle of the drought which suppressed demands—is that the City has implemented an effective water conservation

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx program. The City meters all of its services and has an increasing tiered rate schedule to encourage efficient water use. The City has ordinances in place to discourage water waste, including odd-even watering and penalties for irrigation “run-off.” In 2008, the City started a program to replace its oldest water pipes with the highest frequency of leaks and repairs in order to reduce water loss. In general, the City has decreased its per capita water usage year after year as part of ongoing conservation efforts to both comply with SB X7-7 requirements and to more sustainably manage its groundwater supply. Demands in 2013, during a dry water year, are higher than demands recorded in 2018, a below average water year, which could indicate that users are becoming accustomed to water-saving habits implemented during the extended drought period recorded from 2014-2017.

Based on the most recent demand data for the City, it is reasonable to assume that the projections developed as part of the WMP and UWMP may be conservative. However, given that it has not yet been a full two years since the end of the drought, it cannot yet be determined what the long-term impacts of the conservation actions implemented during the drought will be on City demands.

Therefore, the demand factors and projected City demands from the WMP will be used for the purposes of this WSA, recognizing that they may overpredict actual future demand but will provide a conservative analysis for determination of available water supplies.

Future Water Demand
The buildout potential of the development is 5,391 dwelling units and 7,765,000 square feet of nonresidential uses (GDR Engineering 2019). This development will replace existing land uses (agricultural and low-density residential) and generate a new water demand from indoor and outdoor uses. Projected potable water demand at buildout was developed based on the demand factors developed for the WMP and the planned land use. In the WMP, existing water demand (water consumption billing data) and land use data (City’s GIS) was used to develop water demand factors. Based on the total water usage by parcel and the total acreage by land use, the demand factors were determined for each of the six existing land use categories. These demand factors were then adjusted based on new development standards (such as units per acre). Demand projections developed for the WMP were used in the 2015 UWMP and incorporated conservation in order to meet the required SB X7-7 target of 164 gallons per capita per day (gpcd).

Non-potable demand projections were developed based on assumed irrigated acreage for the development areas and the required water based on evapotranspiration data. Non-potable demands for the proposed lakes within the Project area were calculated based on the approximate loss to evaporation (provide by GDR). It is assumed that any losses to recharge would be immediately recaptured by the shallow wells refilling the lakes. The projected demands calculated for the development are an update to those included in the 2018 WMP which relied on less specific land use information from the 2040 General Plan.

For comparison, the demand projection for the Project area was calculated based on the estimated residential population for Project and the per capita demand factor included in the 2018 WMP (158 gpcd) and calculated from the 2018 billing data (103 gpcd). The land use-based projection fell between the two population-based projections. The land use-based demands were not as high as the maximum population-based projection as the Project area includes a lower percentage of nonresidential development (about 25 percent) compared to the City as a whole (about 50 percent). The estimated future per capita demand factor included in the WMP was developed based on the

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx complete buildout of the City’s General Plan so it is expected that future developments will include a higher percentage of non-residential development to balance out this primarily residential project.

The total projected water demand for the Project area is estimated to be 2,159 AFY at buildout for an average water year, which compares to an existing water demand of 5,384 AFY and the previously projected demand of 2,457 AFY from the WMP. The demands projected for the Project area in the 2018 WMP are presented in Table 3.15-4. Table 3.15-5 summarizes the proposed development by land use, and the projected demands are presented in Table 3.15-6 (potable demands) and Table

3.15-7 (non-potable demands). A comparison of the demand projection for the Project from the WMP and for this WSA are presented in Table 3.15-8. As shown in Table 3.15-8, the updated projections indicate a net demand reduction, with reduced potable demand and an increased nonpotable demand for the area.

Table 3.15-4: 2018 WMP Potable Water Demand Projection for the Zacharias and Baldwin Area
Land Use Acreage
Dwelling
Units
Water Demand
Factors (AFY/acre)2
Projected Potable
Demand (AFY)
Low Density Residential 1,293 n/a1 1.9 2,457
Total 1,293 — — 2,457
Notes:
1 An exact unit count was not available for the Project area during the development of the WMP. 2 Water demand factors were developed for the WMP demand projection based on billing data and land use.

Table 3.15-5: Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plan Area Development by Land Use Category Land Use Categories Acreage (Gross) Dwelling Units Square Footage Low Density Residential 263 1,114 —
Medium Density Residential 524 3,454 —
High Density Residential 31 538 —
Mixed Use 28 285 505,000
Commercial 22 — 350,000
Light Industrial 318 — 6,910,000
Park/Bike & Pedestrian Pathways 65 — —
Open Space (Lakes) 13 — —
Public/Institutional1 29 — —
Total 1,293 5,391 7,765,000
Note:
1 The acreage for the Public/Institutional was not broken out in the plans provided by GDR included in Appendix I. Per GDR direction, 14 acres were extracted from the Low Density Residential category and 15 acres were extracted from the Medium Density Residential category.

Source: Zacharias Master Planning Area (GDR Engineering 2020), Baldwin Master Planning Area (GDR Engineering 2019)

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 856 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Table 3.15-6: Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plan Area Potable Water Demand Projection by Land Use
Land Use Acreage
Dwelling
Units
Water Demand
Factors (AFY/acre)2
Projected Potable
Demand (AFY)
Low Density Residential 263 1,114 1.9 500
Medium Density Residential 524 3,454 1.1 577
High Density Residential 31 538 2.5 77
Mixed Use 28 285 2.2 62
Community Commercial 22 — 0.8 18
Light Industrial 318 — 0.4 127
Park/Bike & Pedestrian
Pathways 65 — 2.6 168
Open Space (Lakes) 13 — 0
1 0
Public/Institutional 29 1,400 students 1.1 32
Total 1,293 5,391 — 1,560
Notes:
1 Water demand factors were developed for the WMP demand projection based on billing data and land use. 2 The demand factor for Open Space was set to zero for this projection as the lakes included in the Project plans do not have a potable demand associated with them.

Table 3.15-7: Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plan Area Non-Potable Water Demand Projection by Land Use
Land Use Categories
Acreage
(Gross)
Irrigated
Acreage Factor1
Irrigated
Acreage ETc (in)2
Projected NonPotable
Demand (AFY)3
Low Density Residential 393 — 0 56.2 0
Medium Density Residential 393 — 0 56.2 0
High Density Residential 31 — 0 56.2 0
Mixed Use 28 0.1 2.8 56.2 13
Community Commercial 22 0.1 2.2 56.2 10
Light Industrial 318 0.1 31.8 56.2 149
Park/Bike & Pedestrian
Pathways 63 0.8 51.8 56.2 243
Open Space (Lakes) 9 — — — 1164
Public/Institutional 38 0.5 14.5 56.2 68
Total 1,293 — 103 — 599
Notes:
1 Based on assumptions for the development area. Irrigation demand for residential land use is not separated from

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Land Use Categories
Acreage
(Gross)
Irrigated
Acreage Factor1
Irrigated
Acreage ETc (in)2
Projected NonPotable
Demand (AFY)3
potable demands as residential units are unlikely to be dual-plumbed. 2 ITRC Data downloaded from http://www.itrc.org/etdata/index.html, for a typical year (1997) in Zone 14. Assumed ETc for grass.
3 Assumed Irrigation Efficiency equals 1 and that it was a normal water year (average rainfall): Demand [AFY] = ETc [in./yr.] * (1/12) [ft./in.] * Irrigated Area [acre]
4 The non-potable demand for the lakes was calculated based on the approximate loss by evaporation. This value was provided by GDR.

Table 3.15-8: Water Demand Projection Comparison for the Zacharias Master Plan Category
Projected Demand for
WSA
2018 WMP Projected
Zacharias/Baldwin Demand1
Net Water Demand
(Change from WMP)
Potable (AFY) 1,560 2,021 -461
Non-Potable (Irrigation) (AFY) 599 436 163
Total (AFY) 2,159 2,457 -298
Notes:
1 The 2018 WMP projected demands based on General Plan land use and a land use demand factor. The assumption from the WMP is that around 82% of demands will be met with a potable supply and 18% would be met with nonpotable supply. That split between potable and non-potable was applied to the projection for the Zacharias and Baldwin Plan areas.

Although this EIR is based on a 20-year buildout horizon, the WSA conservatively assumed that the Master Plans would be developed in two evenly split phases spanning 5 years each, beginning in 2020. A breakdown of the development phasing and projected demands with this assumption is presented in Table 3.15-9, Table 3.15-10, and Table 3.15-11.

Table 3.15-9: Development Phasing by Land Use Category for the Zacharias Master Plan Land Use Category 2020-2025 2025-2030 2030-2035 2035-2040 Total Low Density Residential
131.7 acres 131.7 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 263.3 acres 557 DUs 557 DUs 0 DUs 0 DUs 1114 DUs
Medium Density
Residential
262.1 acres 262.1 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 524.1 acres 1,727 DUs 1,727 DUs 0 DUs 0 DUs 3,454 DUs
High Density Residential

15.3 acres 15.3 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 30.6 acres
269 DUs 269 DUs 0 DUs 0 DUs 538 DUs
Mixed Use

14.1 acres 14.1 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 28.2 acres
143 DUs 143 DUs 0 DUs 0 DUs 285 DUs
Community Commercial 11.1 acres 11.1 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 22.2 acres Light Industrial 158.8 acres 158.8 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 317.5 acres

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Land Use Category 2020-2025 2025-2030 2030-2035 2035-2040 Total Park/ Bike & Pedestrian
Pathways 32.4 acres 32.4 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 64.7 acres Open Space (Lakes) 6.7 acres 6.7 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 13.4 acres Public/ Institutional 14.5 acres 14.5 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 29.0 acres Total
646.5 acres 646.5 acres 0.0 acres 0.0 acres 1293.0 acres 2,696 DUs 2,696 DUs 0 DUs 0 DUs 5,391 DUs
Table 3.15-10: Phased Potable Demand Projections for the Zacharias Master Plan Land Use Categories 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Low Density Residential 0 250 500 500 500
Medium Density Residential 0 288 577 577 577
High Density Residential 0 38 77 77 77
Mixed Use 0 31 62 62 62
Community Commercial 0 9 18 18 18
Light Industrial 0 64 127 127 127
Park/ Bike & Pedestrian Pathways 0 84 168 168 168
Open Space (Lakes) 0 0 0 0 0
Public/ Institutional 0 16 32 32 32
Total (AFY) 0 780 1,560 1,560 1,560
Table 3.15-11: Phased Non-Potable Demand Projections for the Zacharias Master Plan Land Use Categories 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Low Density Residential 0 0 0 0 0
Medium Density Residential 0 0 0 0 0
High Density Residential 0 0 0 0 0
Mixed Use 0 7 13 13 13
Community Commercial 0 5 10 10 10
Light Industrial 0 74 149 149 149
Park/ Bike & Pedestrian Pathways 0 121 242 242 242
Open Space (Lakes) 0 58 116 116 116
Public/ Institutional 0 34 68 68 68
Total (AFY) 0 299 599 599 599

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Using a land use-based demand projection discussed in the City’s 2018 WMP, the City’s total projected water demand in 2040, as presented in the 2015 UWMP, is 11,801 AFY. This demand accounts for the City’s planned conservation efforts at the time the WMP and UWMP were developed. Based on the selected supply portfolio, the City plans to meet about 82 percent of demands with potable supplies (about 9,642 AFY) and about 18 percent of demands with nonpotable supplies (about 2,159 AFY). Table 3.15-12 summarizes the City’s projected demand from the WMP.

Table 3.15-12: Citywide Projected 2040 Demands
Demand Type 2018 WMP Projected 2040 City Demand (AFY)
Potable 9,642
Non-Potable (Irrigation) 2,159
Total 11,801
Source: 2018 City of Patterson Water Master Plan (Woodard & Curran, 2018) and 2015 City of Patterson UWMP (RMC 2016)
Water Supply
The City’s current water supply source is local groundwater from the Delta-Mendota Groundwater Subbasin.

Local groundwater from the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (a subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin) is the sole source of the City’s current production supply. The City operates 10 water production wells, eight of which dedicated to potable supply and two for non-potable supply.

One of the potable wells (Well 6) is currently on standby and its capacity is not being considered as part of the City’s supply. The City’s existing potable well field is located in the eastern portion of the City between East Las Palmas Avenue, South 2nd Street and the Patterson Irrigation District Canal.

The City supplies potable groundwater for residential, industrial, and commercial uses through a combination of these wells, storage tanks, and a network of piping. The City’s existing groundwater capacity is 6,620 AFY of potable supply (7,500 gpm instantaneous capacity) and 930 AFY of nonpotable supply (1,600 gpm instantaneous capacity), as presented in Table 3.15-13.

Table 3.15-13: City Existing Groundwater Well Capacity
Well No. Potable/Non-Potable Instantaneous Capacity (gpm) 2 Potable 800
4 Non-Potable 900
5 Potable 1,400
6 Potable 6001
7 Potable 1,500
8 Potable 1,000

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Well No. Potable/Non-Potable Instantaneous Capacity (gpm) 9 Potable 800
11 Potable 1,200
Keystone Non-Potable 700
142 Potable 800
Total Non-Potable Annual Capacity: 930 AFY3Instantaneous Capacity: 1,600 gpm Total Potable Annual Capacity: 6,620 AFY3Instantaneous Capacity: 7,500 gpm Notes:
1 Well 6 is currently on standby and its capacity is not included in the City’s supply. 2 Well 14 is planned and will be online within the next year. 3 Annual yield includes well downtime for maintenance and other operational considerations. The wells do not run continuously.

The Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Subbasin) is approximately bounded on the west by the Coast Range, on the north by the Stanislaus/San Joaquin County line, on the east by the San Joaquin River and follows the boundary of the Tranquility Irrigation District at its southernmost reach. Groundwater studies of the local basin from 2002 through 2010, conducted by Kenneth D. Schmidt and Associates Groundwater Consultants (KSA) based in Fresno, California, concluded that there are essentially two aquifers underlying the City; a lower confined zone, and an upper unconfined zone. The two aquifers are separated by the thick, semi-impermeable Corcoran Clay layer. The Corcoran Clay formation is a regional aquitard which underlies the subbasin at depths of about 100 to 500 feet and acts as a confining bed. The upper (semi-confined) and lower (confined) aquifers of the Subbasin are generally quite thick, with groundwater wells commonly extending to depths of up to 800 feet to extract from the sub-Corcoran lower aquifer.

KSA estimated that natural inflows to the two underlying aquifers are approximately 3,500 AFY (upper) and 8,900 AFY (lower), respectively, based on hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and gradients. Additional recharge to the upper aquifer is expected from canal seepage, percolation of applied irrigation water, and stream flow seepage. Hence, total inflow to the local basin underlying the City is upwards of 12,500 AFY (KSA 2010). Water quality in the shallower portion of the upper aquifer (reachable within about 25 feet of the land surface) is suitable for non-potable use, though recent monitoring suggests that total dissolved solids (TDS) and nitrate concentrations are on the rise.

Water quality below the Corcoran Clay is generally suitable for potable use, however there are some instances of high TDS and Chrome 6 levels. Chrome 6 concentrations in the Subbasin have generally been compliant with State and Federal regulations. The California Department of Public Health (now the Division of Drinking Water) implemented a stricter standard in 2014 (reducing the acceptable limit from 50 micrograms per liter to 10 micrograms per liter) however the standard was rescinded.

A new standard has not yet been established; however, the Chrome 6 levels would not be in compliance if the 2014 standard was re-imposed.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx In 2014, the Sustainability Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was passed requiring the formation of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and preparation of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) to sustainably manage groundwater supplies. The City formed its own GSA (City of Patterson GSA) to partner with seven other GSAs to develop the GSP for the Northern and Central Regions of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. As the Delta-Mendota Subbasin is considered a critically overdrafted high-priority groundwater basin by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), the Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Region GSP was submitted by January 31, 2020. At the time this WSA was prepared, the GSP has been completed and was submitted to the DWR. Based on the information provided in the GSP (additional information can be found on the GSP website), it is expected that the following groundwater management measures will be implemented in the basin:

Increased conservation and efficiency
Increased groundwater recharge
Increased water recycling and reuse, and
Integrated groundwater management with other water resources (such as stormwater) Lower aquifer pumping limitations to minimize inelastic land subsidence.

In anticipation of the requirements of SGMA and the preparation of the GSP, the City conducted an Operational Yield Study as part of the WMP. The goal of that exercise was to determine the approximate volume of groundwater that the City could extract without impacting its infrastructure or use of groundwater resources outside of its sphere of influence.

Results of that study were incorporated into the development of the future water supply portfolio (discussed in the next section). Additional details from the Operational Yield Study can be found in the 2018 WMP.

Future Water Supply Summary
As part of the City’s 2018 WMP, the City evaluated supply options and selected a supply portfolio that allowed the City independent control of its water supply and easier implementation of water supply projects. The complete supply portfolio includes groundwater pumping for potable and nonpotable use, recycled water, stormwater capture, and conservation. The four supply projects selected to enhance the City’s existing supply portfolio are discussed below as is the new supply offered by the Project.

Results of the WMP and Operational Yield Study conducted by the City were considered during development of the GSP. Per the GSP, it was assumed that at buildout the City would pump 11,776 AFY of potable water from the deep aquifer and 1,302 AFY of non-potable water from the shallow aquifer. These supplies were determined to be acceptable under the basin management plan and are in line with the future water supply presented in this section. The City’s planned supply portfolio, updated since the WMP to include the supply provided by the Project, is summarized in Table

3.15-14 with a breakdown of planned supplies in 2040 and at buildout.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Table 3.15-14: Planned City Water Supplies with the Master Plans Supply Planned Yield in 2040 Planned Yield at Buildout (2050) Potable Groundwater (AFY) 8,388 10,115
Non-Potable Groundwater (AFY) 856 1,032
Recycled Water (AFY) 857 1,512
Stormwater Capture (to potable) (AFY) 1,700 1,700
Stormwater Capture (to non-potable) (AFY)1 1,185 1,185
Total (AFY) 12,986 15,544
Potable (AFY) 10,088 11,815
Non-Potable (AFY 2,898 3,729
Notes:
1 Stormwater capture (to non-potable) represents the on-site stormwater capture included in the Project. This supply was not included in the 2018 WMP.

Conservation
The City will implement a variety of conservation measures with estimated water savings ranging from 700 AFY to 1,800 AFY. The supply portfolio assumes approximately 1,000 AFY of water savings due to conservation at buildout. Examples of conservation programs that have been or could be implemented include:

Existing conservation program
- Toilet, washing machine, dishwater, etc. replacement rebates - Cash for Grass rebates
- Free water conserving fixtures
- Updated plumbing codes
- Residential water surveys to identify possible areas of waste Potential conservation program
- Future plumbing codes updates
- Require hot water on demand
Conservation is not included in the future supply summary, but it was considered and planned in order to reduce projected future demands.

Treated Wastewater for Non-Potable Reuse
The City’s Water Quality Control Facility (WQCF) will be retrofitted to treat water to non-potable Title 22 standards after which the effluent will be pumped to infiltration ponds (to be constructed) near the existing non-potable wells. In addition to pumping from the existing wells, new shallow wells will be constructed for additional non-potable water supplies.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Del Puerto Creek Stormwater Capture
Seasonal stormwater flows from Del Puerto Creek can be captured and diverted to percolation ponds. Pending a groundwater study, these ponds would recharge the shallow aquifer (for nonpotable use) and/or the deep aquifer (for potable use). Water could then be pumped from the aquifers through existing and/or new wells.

Beneficial use of stormwater is a part of the Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Region GSP and capture and recharge of Del Puerto Creek flows are included as a project in the GSP. The City will work with neighboring agencies to maximize beneficial use of the available stormwater in the region.

As part of the WMP effort, it was estimated that the annual yield of Del Puerto Creek stormwater capture would be approximately 1,700 AFY. Initial field work indicates that a properly sited recharge basin would recharge to the deep aquifer to replenish potable supply. For the purposes of the WMP and this WSA, it is assumed that the stormwater would provide a potable water supply, though additional work is planned to investigate and determine the optimal project site.

Additional Groundwater Pumping
The existing groundwater pumping capacity of the City of Patterson is 7,500 AFY, though only about 4,500 AFY is currently being utilized. An Operational Yield Study was conducted as part of the 2018 WMP to estimate the volume of groundwater that the City could extract from the underlying DeltaMendota Groundwater Subbasin without impacting their current groundwater pumping infrastructure and without significantly impacting the use of groundwater resources in the area surrounding the City’s Sphere of Influence. Based upon the results of the Operational Yield Study, which indicated that the City could pump in the range of 10,000 – 12,000 AFY, the City could construct additional groundwater wells to increase its pumping capacity. Under the future supply portfolio, it is assumed that the City will construct enough potable wells to produce up to 10,115 AFY at buildout.

On-site Stormwater Capture and Recharge
While not included in the supply portfolio presented in the 2018 WMP, the City has included a requirement that all new development, including the Master Plans, include stormwater retention and percolation on-site. This requirement means that any rainfall on the development area would be captured and recharged, with no water lost to the San Joaquin River. Though the yield of the Master Plans’ stormwater basin and groundwater recharge basin has not been calculated at this time, a simplified calculation can be conducted based on the Master Plan areas and the City’s annual average rainfall. If it is assumed that all rainfall falling on the site is captured, then the additional supply provided by the Master Plans is 1,185 AFY, as shown:

Estimated On-site Stormwater Capture = 1,293 acres x 11 inches of rain/ year x 1 foot/12 inches = 1,185 AFY
The WSA assumed that all on-site stormwater capture will provide an additional non-potable supply.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Water Supply Reliability
Estimates of the City’s supply during single and multiple dry years is based on the information provided in the City’s 2015 UWMP. On-site stormwater capture provided by the Project is not included in the dry year supply estimates as a more detailed analysis of on-site capture in dry years has not been conducted. Table 3.15-15 summarizes the City’s supply availability by water year type.

These UWMP numbers reflect that the available water supply was assumed to be equal to the demand projections for each potential water year type through 2040 with the understanding that the City should be able to draw on the groundwater basin to fulfill its demands.

Table 3.15-15: Available Supply Under Normal and Dry Year Conditions Year Type 2020 (AFY) 2025 (AFY) 2030 (AFY) 2035 (AFY) 2040 (AFY) Normal Year1 6,969 9,457 10,633 11,810 12,986
Single-Dry Year2 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Multiple Dry Year2 — — — — —
First Year 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Second Year 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Third Year 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Notes:
1 This supply projection has been updated to include stormwater capture (to non-potable) from on-site stormwater capture included in the Project. This supply was not included in the 2015 UWMP. 2 Source: 2015 City of Patterson UWMP (RMC, 2016)
With the development of the GSP for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin, there will be some limits on groundwater pumping during dry years. Pumping restrictions in the GSP area are based on 2015 water elevations in the groundwater basin. As stated in the GSP, the City should be able to continue extractions to the point where lower aquifer groundwater elevations are no deeper than 95% of 2015 water elevations. For the upper aquifer, 2015 groundwater elevations are the lowest they can go. As discussed previously, the City has implemented an effective conservation program to reduce demands and is continuing to expand their conservation efforts. For the purposes of this WSA, the supplies under dry year conditions presented in the UWMP will be used. While those supplies may be slightly conservative as they do not include the on-site stormwater capture provided by the Master Plans, conservation initiatives will be implemented to reduce demands, especially during dry years.

Supply and Demand Comparison
To determine if the City currently has sufficient supply to meet the Master Plans’ demands the City’s existing supply and demands with the Project were compared. The City’s total existing demand (for the entire 2018 calendar year) is 3,318 AFY. With the addition of the projected demand at buildout, the City’s total demand would be 5,477 AFY (broken out in Table 3.15-16).

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Table 3.15-16: Existing City Demand with Project
Category Existing City Demand Zacharias Demand
Existing City Demand
+ Project Demand
Potable (AFY) 3,102 1,560 4,662
Non-Potable (Irrigation) (AFY) 216 599 815
Total (AFY) 3,318 2,159 5,477
The City’s existing supplies will be supplemented by the estimated 1,185 AFY on-site stormwater capture and recharge included in the Zacharias Master Plan. This brings the City’s total existing supplies to around 8,735 AFY. Based on this supply and the projected demand with the Project, the City has adequate supply to meet its existing demands plus the Zacharias development (as presented in Table 3.15-17). This assessment does assume that the City’s demands remain constant aside from the implementation of the Master Plans, however there is adequate supply to support additional development throughout the City’s service area.

Table 3.15-17: Existing City Demand with Master Plans versus Existing Supply with Master Plans
Category After Project Implementation
Total City Existing Supply (AFY)1 8,735
Total City Demand with Zacharias Development (AFY) 5,477 Sufficient Supply? Yes
Notes:
1 This supply projection has been updated to include stormwater capture (to non-potable) from on-site stormwater capture included in the Project. This supply was not included in the 2015 UWMP.

To more fully determine the City’s ability to meet its planned demands as well as the Project demands, the phased supply and demand through 2040 was assessed. The total water demand for the Project is 2,240 AFY at buildout in 2040. The projected water use in 2040 of 2,159 AFY is comprised of 1,560 AFY for potable demands and 599 AFY for irrigation. The Project would reduce the projected potable demands and increase the projected non-potable demands for the City (compared to the projected demand for the Project area included in the WMP), with a net decrease in overall demand of 298 AFY as shown in Table 3.15-18. Changes to the City’s potable and nonpotable water demand are broken out by 5-year phases in Table 3.15-19 and Table 3.15-20, respectively.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Table 3.15-18: Citywide Projected 2040 Water Demands with and without the Project Category
2018 WMP Projected
City Water Demand
(AFY)
Change in Projected
Zacharias/Baldwin Water
Demand (AFY)
Updated Projected
City Water Demand
(AFY)
Potable 9,710 -461 9,249
Non-Potable (Irrigation) 2,091 163 2,254
Total 11,801 -298 11,503
Table 3.15-19: Phased Citywide Projected 2040 Potable Water Demands with and without the Project
Land Use Categories 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2018 WMP Projected City Demand (AFY) 5,246 6,806 7,775 8,743 9,710 Change in Projected Zacharias Demand (AFY) 0 -230 -461 -461 -461 Updated Projected City Demand (AFY) 5,246 6,576 7,314 8,282 9,249 Table 3.15-20: Phased Citywide Non-Projected 2040 Potable Water Demands with and without the Project
Land Use Categories 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2018 WMP Projected City Demand (AFY) 1,130 1,466 1,674 1,882 2,091 Change in Projected Zacharias Demand (AFY) 0 82 163 163 163 Updated Projected City Demand (AFY) 1,130 1,547 1,837 2,046 2,254 It is worth noting that the GSP assumes a higher available groundwater supply for the City at buildout (2050) than presented in the WMP. The supply portfolio presented in the GSP included a total of 13,078 AFY of groundwater supply (11,776 AFY of potable, below-Corcoran, supply and 1,302 AFY of non-potable, above-Corcoran, supply) compared to 11,417 AFY (10,115 AFY of potable supply and 1,302 AFY of non-potable supply) in the WMP. Though the supply projections included in the GSP are the most recent, they are not yet approved by DWR so the lower, more conservative groundwater supply numbers from the WMP (and UWMP) will be used for determining the available supply for the Project. A comparison of the projected City supply at buildout (2050) in the WMP and GSP is included in Table 3.15-21.

Table 3.15-21: Comparison of Planned City Groundwater Supplies at Buildout (2050) Supply
Included in
2018 WMP Supply Portfolio
Included in
GSP
Potable Groundwater (AFY) 10,115 11,776

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-20 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Supply
Included in
2018 WMP Supply Portfolio
Included in
GSP
Non-Potable Groundwater (AFY) 1,302 1,302
Total Groundwater Supply (AFY) 11,417 13,078
Recycled Water (AFY) 1,512 1,512
Stormwater Capture (to potable) (AFY) 1,700 —
Total Potable (AFY) 11,815 11,776
Total Non-Potable (AFY 2,814 2,814
Total Supply (AFY) 14,629 14,590
Projected water supply (from the WMP and UWMP, updated with the on-site stormwater capture) and demand for the entire City service area including the Project is presented in Table 3.15-22. As shown in the table, the City’s planned water supply is sufficient to meet demands to 2040, including those projected for the Project. Given that future water supplies for the City were planned based on available data at the time, Project stakeholders, including the City, should work together to update the phasing and implementation plan of planned supply projects now that the timing of this development project is better understood. Further, the phasing of the supplies included in the WMP does not align with those presented in the GSP, so the City and Project stakeholders will need coordinate with GSP partners to ensure sustainable use of the groundwater basin.

Table 3.15-22: City Water Demand (with Project) versus Supply Category 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Total City Supply (AFY)1 6,969 9,457 10,633 11,810 12,986 Total City Demand (AFY) 6,376 8,123 9,151 10,327 11,503 Sufficient Supply? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Notes:
1 This supply has been updated to include stormwater capture (to non-potable) from on-site stormwater capture included in the Project. This supply was not included in the 2015 UWMP.

Supply and Demand Comparison in Dry Years
When comparing water demand and water supplies to determine availability of a long-term reliable water supply for the proposed Project, the assessment must consider available supply under “average” year conditions as well as for single-dry and multiple-dry water year conditions. The purpose is to evaluate whether there could be shortfalls in supply under various hydrologic conditions, and if so, to provide a basis for planning for those conditions. Dry year supply availability was determined as part of the 2015 UWMP (which did not include on-site stormwater capture provided by the Project). A comparison of the projected supplies and demands with the Project under dry year conditions is presented in Table 3.15-23. As shown in the table, the City has sufficient supplies to meet all projected demands, including the Project, through 2040.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-21
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Table 3.15-23: City Demand (with Project) versus Dry Year Supply Category 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Total City Supply1 Single Dry Year (AFY) 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801 Total City Demand – Single Dry Year (AFY) 6,376 8,123 9,151 10,327 11,503 Sufficient Supply? Single Dry-Year (AFY) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Total City Supply1
Multiple Dry Year — — — — —
First Year (AFY) 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Second Year (AFY) 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Third Year (AFY) 6,376 8,272 9,448 10,625 11,801
Total City Demand – Multiple Dry Year
6,376 8,123 9,151 10,327 11,503
(All Years) (AFY)
Sufficient Supply?
Multiple-Dry Year —
First Year (AFY) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Second Year (AFY) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Third Year (AFY) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Notes:
1 Source: 2015 City of Patterson UWMP (RMC, 2016). This supply projection has not been updated to include stormwater capture (to non-potable) from on-site stormwater capture included in the Project.

The City’s supply portfolio was developed with the impacts of SGMA in mind, but before the GSP had been prepared. It has been assumed that the supply reliability assessment presented in the 2015 UWMP is reasonable for this WSA, but it is recommended that the updated supply reliability assessment required for the 2020 UWMP (which will include additional SGMA-related impacts and new supply information) be reviewed as soon as it is available to confirm this assumption. In the meantime, in order to maintain the water supply reliability of the City supply at the level it currently resides for all of its customers, the Master Plans would incorporate demand management through compliance with the Plumbing Code and Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

Conclusion
Woodard & Curran concluded that the City of Patterson has adequate supply to serve the Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plan areas. While the City has sufficient existing supplies to serve the Master Plans, implementation of the Master Plans would significantly increase the City’s demands and would contribute a substantial portion of the City’s planned buildout.

The Master Plans would result in a net decrease in demand in comparison to the 2018 WMP projection for the Master Plan areas, lowering the City’s projected potable demand by 461 AFY and total demand by 298 AFY. Though the total City demand would be reduced, the projected nonpotable demand for the Master Plans is slightly higher (163 AFY higher) than previously projected for this area. That said, the Master Plans would promote upper aquifer recharge throughout the

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-22 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx development area through the incorporation of pervious surfaces per requirements for new development in the City’s sphere of influence. The estimated yield of the on-site capture and recharge to the upper aquifer provided by the Master Plans is approximately 1,185 AFY, which should more than offset the increase in non-potable demand of 140 AFY. The non-potable demand could be reduced or mitigated through drought tolerant landscaping or by requiring more specific landscaping efficiencies.

The City’s supply portfolio, 2015 UWMP and WMP (on which the WSA was based) was developed prior to the completion of the GSP for the Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Regions. While the WMP and UWMP did project for the impacts of SGMA and the GSP includes slightly higher groundwater supplies for the City at buildout then included in the WMP, the City of Patterson will continue to enforce the Plumbing Code and Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance provisions that pertain to high water efficiency fixtures and landscaping.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Wastewater
Impact US-2: Buildout of the Master Plans would not require additional unplanned treatment capacity at the Water Quality Control Facility.

Impact Analysis
The City of Patterson would provide wastewater collection and treatment service to the Master Plan areas.

Zacharias Master Plan
The City of Patterson provides sanitary sewer service facilities for the city through the use of sanitary sewer main, trunks lines, pump stations, force mains, and the Sewer Treatment Plant. The Zacharias Master Planning Area will provide sanitary sewer collection systems for the planning areas.

The sewer main for the two southwestern warehouses in the Zacharias Ranch Planning Area leading south to the existing sewer main in Keystone Pacific Parkway. This will eventually tie into the existing trunk sewer system running through Sperry and Ward Avenues.

For the TPF Development, Keystone Ranch, and the southern parcels of the Ivy Rose Gardens Planning Areas, a new sewer main will be constructed in Rose Avenue and Ward Avenue to the existing sewer main on Vicki Lynn Lane. The existing 10-inch sewer line on Vicki Lynn Lane will be upgraded to a larger 12-inch line heading southeast towards Salado Creek; up to the existing 8-inch line running parallel to North 4
th Street that currently connects to the M Street Trunk Line. A new

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-23
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx line on 4th Street will be constructed to help re-route the sewer past the existing blockage in the sewer system on M Street, with the existing 8-inch line being rebuilt / refurbished as necessary. The connection on Ward Avenue and Vicki Lynn Lane will be a temporary connection until the North Patterson Trunk Sewer (NPTS) Line is constructed and operational to the Zacharias Master Planning Area. Upon the operation of the NPTS Line, a sewer line will be constructed to connect north to the NPTS Line, and the connection to Vicki Lynn Lane will be disconnected.

The Lakeside Hills Planning Area, and remainder of the Ivy Rose Gardens and Zacharias Ranch Planning Areas, will connect to the NPTS Line where appropriate. Their construction will be triggered after construction of the NPTS Line up to their property limits, or whenever appropriate afterwards.

The NPTS Line will be sized and constructed based on the proposed buildout within the City of Patterson Sewer Master Plan.

The project area sanitary sewer facilities are as shown in Section 2, Project Description, on Exhibit 2- 12a. The extension of the NPTS Line, including sizing and facilities, will be as shown on Exhibit 2-12b.

The temporary connection to Vicki Lynn Lane and re-routing of the sewer main on 4th Street will be as shown on Exhibit 2-12c.

Baldwin Master Plan
The City of Patterson provides sanitary sewer service facilities for the city through the use of sanitary sewer main, trunks lines, pump stations, force mains, and the Sewer Treatment Plant. The Baldwin Ranch Master Planning Area will provide sanitary sewer collection systems for the planning area.

A sewer main will be constructed in Baldwin Road connecting the Baldwin Ranch Planning Area. This line will flow north, connecting to the existing North Sperry Trunk Line (NSTL) in Sperry Avenue. The NSTL is currently not in operable conditions and is disconnected from the existing working trunk sewer main in Sperry Avenue. Prior to connection to the NSTL, work will be done on rehabbing the existing NSTL and reconnecting it to the existing trunk sewer system. This includes This is consistent with the current City of Patterson Sewer Master Plan.

The layout of the sewer facilities will be as shown in Section 2, Project Description, on Exhibit 2-12d.

Combined Master Plans
Table 3.15-24 summarizes the combined wastewater generation of the Master Plans at buildout. As shown, the Mater Plans would generate an estimate 1.006 MGD at buildout.

Table 3.15-24: Wastewater Generation Estimate
Sewer Trunk
Daily Wastewater Generation
Gallons Per Day Million Gallons Per Day
Sperry Avenue (Baldwin Master Plan) 51,540 0.052
Zacharias Road (Lakeside Hills, Zacharias Ranch, and Ivy Rose) 621,006 0.621 Ward Avenue / 4th Street (TPF, Keystone Ranch, and Ivy Rose) 315,875 0.316 Keystone Pacific Parkway (Zacharias Ranch) 23,130 0.023

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-24 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Sewer Trunk
Daily Wastewater Generation
Gallons Per Day Million Gallons Per Day
Total 1,011,551 1.006
Source: GDR Engineering 2020.

The City of Patterson’s Water Quality Control Facility has a reliable capacity of 2.25 mgd and receives an average of 1.65 mgd during dry weather conditions.

The City approved a 1.25-mgd expansion of the Water Quality Control Facility in 2010, which would increase capacity of 3.50 mgd. However, since approval of the expansion, regulations have been put in place that increase the period of time that wastewater needs to be stored on-site, which effectively reduce sewage treatment capacity by as much as 0.50 mgd, for a capacity of 3.00 mgd.

Furthermore, the City has approximately 1.332 mgd of capacity committed to other approved projects. When the existing dry weather flows of 1.65 mgd are accounted for, there is a projected future demand of 2.982 mgd without buildout of the Master Plans.

As previously noted, the proposed Master Plans would generate 1.006 mgd at buildout. The applicants would be assessed sewer connection fees to fund capital improvements to the municipal wastewater collection and treatment system. This would include capacity upgrades at the Water Quality Control Facility. Any treatment capacity upgrades at the Water Quality Control Facility would be carried out independently of the proposed Master Plans and would be evaluated in a separate environmental review process. Impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Storm Drainage
Impact US-3: Buildout of the Master Plans would not result in downstream flooding impacts from inadequate storm drainage infrastructure.

Impact Analysis
The Master Plans would be served with separate storm drainage systems described as follows.

Zacharias Master Plan
The storm drainage control facilities will be implemented within the Zacharias Master Planning Area with the intention of achieving following:

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-25
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Flood Control for the 10-year, 24-hour storm (detention basins) for individual areas, and corresponding Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) outlet devices and lines.

Flood Control for the 100-year, 24-hour storm (retention basins and wet basin lakes) for the entire Zacharias Master Planning Area.

The FEMA Solution for retaining the 100-year FEMA floodplain (183 acre-feet of runoff based on the 100-year Flood Depths for Del Puerto Creek Hydraulic Model by Balance Hydrologies, Inc.) for the Zacharias Master Planning Area.

Recharge of the stormwater runoff into the lower aquifer groundwater table below to Corcoran Clay Layer, where the City’s potable water wells draw water from.

The storm drainage system will utilize multiple stages of storage involving both detention and retention purposes for the project site. The Zacharias Ranch Planning Area will utilize a mix of detention (designed for 10-year, 24-hour storage) and retention (designed for 100-year, 24-hour storage) basins. Both types of basins will have SCADA gravity outlet systems with corresponding pipelines to meter the flow out of the basins. The retention basins will be designed to drain stormwater through the SCADA system for up to a 10-year, 24-hour storm event, with the basin retaining and percolating the runoff for corresponding drainage areas for any storm event exceeding a 10-year, 24-hour event; up to a 100-year, 24 hour event. The TPF Development and Keystone Ranch Planning Areas will each have a retention basin with corresponding SCADA outlet systems draining to the lakes. The Ivy Rose Gardens Planning Area will have a detention basin with a pump station and force main for metering water out of the basin to the lakes. The pump station will be designed for a minimum 1360 gpm flowrate.

The Lakeside Hills Development Area will have a series of wet basin lakes for flood control. These lakes will be designed to hold the entirety of the 100-year, 24-hour storm event for the Lakeside Hills Development Area, as well as the difference between the 100-year and 10-year events for the detention basins within the Zacharias Ranch and Ivy Rose Gardens Planning Areas. This will achieve the ultimate goal of storing the 100-year, 24-hour storm event for the entirety of the Zacharias Master Planning Area between the lakes and retention basins. Consequently, the lakes will store the 10-year, 24 hour storm event for the entire Zacharias Master Planning Area, as both the detention and retention basins will drain to the lakes for any storm event equal to or below the 10-year event.

The lakes will drain to a pump station that will meter out through a force main to the FEMA Basin.

The pump station will have a maximum output of 2000 gpm for draining the lakes. Note that the dry basins (detention basins and retention basins) are designed for a maximum 48-hour drawdown period, whereas the lakes are not required as such.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Basin will act as a solution to the FEMA requirement to divert or retain the 100-year flood runoff for the Zacharias Master Planning Area.

The basin will be designed with a two-stage system for an upper reservoir and lower reservoir area.

The lower reservoir will be utilized during smaller storms for a combination of runoff from the floodplain, and for intermediate storage for the stormwater pumped from the lakes. The upper reservoir will be reserved for major storms where floodplain runoff exceeds the lower reservoir. The basin will be designed to percolate the FEMA floodplain runoff within a 48-hour drawdown period.

The basin will have an inlet structure attached to the force main coming from the wet basin lakes,

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-26 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx and an outlet structure with corresponding pump station. The basin pump will operate at a maximum 2000 gpm flowrate, so as to drain the stormwater coming from the lakes, and a channel will be provided to minimize infiltration occurrence for the water from the lakes.

The outlet force main from the FEMA Basin will flow to the Recharge Basin Facility, to the northwest of the Zacharias Master Planning Area. The Recharge Basin Facility will be located at the existing rock quarry, where a location has been designated by the City of Patterson. The location noted does not have the Corcoran Clay Layer (an impervious layer separating the potable and non-potable water tables), and instead infiltrates directly into the lower aquifer. The overall Zacharias Master Planning Area will have an annual runoff of 604 acre-feet per year, or 0.539 mgd. The vast majority of this stormwater will be recharged through the Recharge Basin Facility.

The project area facilities provided will be subject to the most up-to-date version of the City of Patterson’s Multi-Agency Post Construction Manual, and the corresponding Phase II Permit requirements for stormwater. The developers for each project area will be responsible for meeting these requirements within their project areas (Zacharias Ranch, TPF Development, Keystone Ranch, Lakeside Hills, and Ivy Rose Gardens Planning Areas) and maintaining such facilities as required.

The Storm Drain Master Plan for the project area storm drain facilities is shown in Section 2, Project Description, on Exhibit 2-9a. The FEMA Solution Basin and corresponding facilities is shown on Exhibit 2-9b, and the Recharge Basin Facility and corresponding force main is shown on Exhibit 2-9c.

Baldwin Master Plan
The Baldwin Master Plan contemplates a storm drainage system consisting of bioswales, inlets, and underground piping that would convey runoff to stormwater basins. The Baldwin Master Plan storm drainage system would connect to the existing municipal system and no off-site improvements would be necessary. Exhibit 2-9d depicts the Baldwin Master Plan storm drainage system.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

Solid Waste
Impact USS-4: Buildout of the Master Plans may generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Impact Analysis
The Master Plans would generate solid waste from both construction and operational activities.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Utilities and Service Systems
FirstCarbon Solutions 3.15-27
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Baldwin and Zacharias Master Plans
Construction Waste Generation
Construction waste generation is summarized in Table 3.15-25. Buildout of the Master plans would generate 24,612 cubic yards of solid waste over a period of at least two decades. These values are conservative and do not account for any construction demolition debris recycling practices that would reduce the solid waste stream volume.

Table 3.15-25: Construction Solid Waste Generation Summary Activity Waste Generation Rate Square Feet Waste Generation Residential Construction 0.0025 ton / square foot 7,629,000 19,073 tons Non-Residential Construction 0.0019 ton / square foot 7,765,000 14,754 tons Total 34,457 tons
24,612 cubic yards
Notes:
1 ton = 2,000 pounds
1 cubic yard = 1.4 tons
Residential solid waste was calculated based on an average dwelling size of 1,500 square feet Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. FCS, 2020.

The Fink Road Landfill has 7.1 million cubic yards of remaining capacity. Thus, proposed Master Plan’s construction solid generation value would represent less than 0.01 percent of remaining capacity.

To ensure that construction activities minimize waste to the maximum extent feasible, MM USS-4 requires compliance with the City of Patterson Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance. With the implementation of mitigation, impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Waste Generation
Operational solid waste generation estimates are summarized in Table 3.15-26. At buildout, the Master Plans would generate 6,530 cubic yards of solid waste annually. These values are conservative and do not account for any recycling or waste reduction practices that would reduce the solid waste stream volume.

Table 3.15-26: Operational Solid Waste Generation Summary Activity Waste Generation Rate Units
Annual Waste
Generation
Residential Waste Generation 0.52 ton / dwelling unit / year 5,086 dwelling units 2,645 tons
Non-Residential Waste
Generation

0.26 ton / 1,000 square feet /
year
7,765K square
feet 2,019 tons
Total 4,664 tons
6,530 cubic yards

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Utilities and Service Systems Draft EIR

3.15-28 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/edit/17900003 Sec03-15 Utilities.docx Activity Waste Generation Rate Units
Annual Waste
Generation
Notes:

Residential waste generation based on a rate of 20 pounds / dwelling unit / week Non-Residential waste generation based on a rate of 10 pounds / 1,000 square feet / week 1 ton = 1.4 cubic yards
Source: FCS, 2020.

The Fink Road Landfill has 7.1 million cubic yards of remaining capacity. Thus, proposed Master Plan’s annual solid generation value would represent less than 0.01 percent of remaining capacity.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
MM USS-4 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Master Plan applicants shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Patterson’s Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance. The applicants shall prepare a waste management plan that identifies (1) the estimated volume or mass of construction and demolition debris; (2) the maximum volume or mass of such materials that can be feasibly diverted via reuse or recycling; (2) the vendor or facility that would collect and transport the materials; and (4) the estimated volume and mass of materials that would be landfilled. The City of Patterson shall review and approve the plan and the applicant is required to implement the approved plan during construction activities.

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less than significant impact.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx SECTION 4: CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

4.1 - Introduction
CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires the consideration of cumulative impacts within an EIR when a project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable. Cumulatively considerable means that “. . . the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” In identifying projects that may contribute to cumulative impacts, the CEQA Guidelines allow the use of a list of past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects, producing related or cumulative impacts, including those which are outside of the control of the lead agency.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b), “. . . the discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, the discussion need not provide as great [a level of] detail as is provided for the effects attributable to the project alone.” The discussion should be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness, and it should focus on the cumulative impact to which the identified other projects contribute rather than on the attributes of other projects that do not contribute to the cumulative impact.

The proposed Master Plans’ cumulative impacts were considered in conjunction with other proposed and approved projects in the City of Patterson and unincorporated Stanislaus County. Table 4-1 provides a list of the other projects considered in the cumulative analysis.

Table 4-1: Cumulative Projects
Jurisdiction Project Characteristics Location Status
City of Patterson Sperry Commercial
Center Project
Travel center (20 fueling
positions; convenience store;
fast food restaurant;
maintenance)
Sperry Avenue / Rogers
Road
Approved;
Unbuilt
Arambel Business
Park

13.47 million square feet
business park / commercial
Rogers Road / Keystone
Pacific Parkway
Approved;
Partially
Built
West Patterson
Business Park
9 million square feet business
park / light industrial
Sperry Avenue / Park
Center Drive
Approved;
Mostly
Built
Villages at
Patterson
3,100 dwelling units; 723,800
square feet commercial /
office / light industrial
State Route 33 / Walnut
Avenue
Approved;
Under
constructio
n
BHT Properties
Auto Storage
224-acre auto storage facility Arambel Business Park Approved; Unbuilt
Baldwin North
Master Plan
445 dwelling units; 300,000
square feet of commercial /
Sperry Avenue / Delta
Mendota Canal
Approved;
Unbuilt

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Jurisdiction Project Characteristics Location Status
industrial uses
Stanislaus
County
Crows Landing
Industrial Business
Park
416 acres aviation; 350 acres
light industrial/manufacturing;
349 acres logistics /
distribution; 78 acres business
park / office; 68 acres public
facilities
Naval Auxiliary Air
Station Crows Landing
Approved;
Unbuilt
Diablo Grande 2,000 dwelling units; winery;
two golf courses
Diablo Grande Parkway Approved;
Partially
built
Del Puerto
Water District
Del Puerto Canyon
Reservoir
82,000-acre-foot reservoir
impounded by 260-foot high
dam; An approximately 4.65-
mile segment of Del Puerto
Canyon Road would be
relocated around reservoir
Del Puerto Canyon EIR
certified;
Project
unfunded
Stanislaus
Council of
Governments
South County
Corridor
Expressway linking I-5 and SR99 in southern Stanislaus County
Zacharias Road between
I-5 and SR-33
Proposed
Source: City of Patterson 2020. County of Stanislaus 2020.

4.2 - Cumulative Impact Analysis
The cumulative impact analysis below is guided by the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15130. Other key principles established by this section include:

A cumulative impact only occurs from impacts caused by the proposed Master Plans and other projects. An EIR should not discuss impacts that do not result from the proposed Master Plans.

When the combined cumulative impact from the increment associated with the proposed Master Plans and other projects is not significant, an EIR need only briefly explain why the impact is not significant; detailed explanation is not required.

An EIR may determine that a project’s contribution to a cumulative effect impact would be rendered less than cumulatively considerable if a project is required to implement or fund its fair share of mitigation intended to alleviate the cumulative impact.

The cumulative impact analysis that follows relies on these principles as the basis for determining the significance of the proposed Master Plans’ cumulative contribution to various impacts.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx

4.2.1 - Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
The geographic scope of the cumulative aesthetics, light, and glare analysis is the area surrounding the Master Plan boundaries. This is the area within view of the project; therefore, the area most likely to experience changes in visual character or experience light and glare impacts.

The proposed Master Plans consists of the development of up to 5,086 dwelling units and 7.7 million square feet of non-residential uses and associated infrastructure on approximately 1,227 acres. The proposed Master Plans’ would employ a Modern Mission architectural theme to promote a cohesive, unique design.

The Master Plan boundaries is located within an area that contains existing urban development, including the Keystone Pacific Business Park and Patterson Gardens residential development. The proposed Master Plans would be guided by design standards for architecture, landscaping, signage, and similar items. Adherence to the Master Plan’s standards would ensure that the project would be compatible with the existing visual character of the project vicinity and not impair views of the Diablo Range from existing developed parts at Patterson.

As shown in Table 4-1, there are several other development projects in the project vicinity that have the potential to alter the visual character of the area. These projects would be subject to design and landscaping requirements to ensure that they do not degrade visual character and comply with applicable General Plan and Zoning Ordinance standards.

The proposed Master Plans would introduce new sources of light and glare to the project vicinity. As previously noted, the proposed Master Plans would include standards for exterior lighting fixtures and illuminated signage. Adherence to the Master Plan’s standards would ensure that the project’s new sources of light and glare would be limited to appropriate areas and avoid creating substantial spillover effects. Thus, it can be reasoned that surrounding land uses would not be exposed to substantial sources of light and glare from the proposed Master Plans. Other projects that propose new sources of illumination would be required to demonstrate that spillover effects are avoided or minimized to the maximum extent feasible. As such, the proposed Master Plans would not have the potential to have a cumulative contribution to a light and glare impact.

4.2.2 - Agricultural Resources
The geographic scope of the cumulative agricultural resources analysis is Stanislaus County.

Agricultural resources are evaluated here in the context of countywide resources, because the City has adopted a number of policies and plans that are designed to facilitate smart growth and preserve agricultural resources within its boundaries, with a view toward how such growth sits in the context of the surrounding unincorporated areas; therefore, it is appropriate to use this as the basis for assessing cumulative impacts.

Several of the projects listed in Table 4-1 would occur on land mapped as Important Farmland and, therefore, would have the potential to convert farmland to non-agricultural use. The proposed Master Plans would convert 1,034 acres of Important Farmland to urban uses. Most of the Master Plan boundaries listed in Table 4-1 are within the current or future boundaries of the City of

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Patterson and therefore are contemplated for urban development. (Note that Diablo Grande and Crows Landing Industrial Business Park are outside of the Patterson city limits and Planning Area.) The EIR for the City of Patterson General Plan found that conversion of prime agricultural land, including the Master Plan boundaries, to urban uses to be a significant and unavoidable impact. As part of adopting the City General Plan, the Patterson City Council adopted findings of fact and a statement of overriding consideration indicating that urban development was of greater benefit to the community than preserving agricultural land within city limits. Although conversion of the project area to urban uses would reflect the land use assumptions contained in the City of Patterson General Plan, farmland is an important resource to the region, and direct conversion of Important Farmland to urban land uses would be considered a significant impact under LESA methodology.

Mitigation is proposed requiring the preservation of Important Farmland at a 1:1 ratio; however, the mitigation does not provide certainty that net new Important Farmland acreage would be created or the productivity of existing non-Important Farmland could be improved such that it could be reclassified as Important Farmland. Other projects may also be required to mitigate for the conversion of Important Farmland. Similar to the proposed Master Plans, mitigation may not provide certainty regarding the availability of Important Farmland. As such, the proposed Master Plans would contribute to cumulative impacts on conversion of Important Farmland.

The project in combination with the buildout of past, present, and probable future projects would not create pressure to prematurely convert adjacent farmland to non-agricultural uses. All of the lands immediately adjacent to the Master Plan boundaries are within the Patterson General Plan Planning Area or are currently within the Patterson city limits, signifying that they are ultimately anticipated to be converted to urban use at some point in the future. Furthermore, it would be expected that the farmland areas west and north of the Master Plan boundaries would not convert to urban use until after the proposed Master Plans is built out, which is expected to take 20 years.

The proposed Master Plans and probable future projects therefore do not combine to create a significant cumulative effect.

4.2.3 - Air Quality
The geographic scope of the cumulative air quality analysis is the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, which encompasses all or portions of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties. Air pollution is regarded as a regional issue; therefore, this would be the area most likely to be impacted by project emissions.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District) air quality plan uses the growth projections and land use information in adopted general plans to estimate future average daily trips and then vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which are then provided to the Valley Air District to estimate future emissions in the AQPs. Existing and future pollutant emissions computed in the AQP were based on land uses and growth projections from area general plans. These emissions form the emissions budget used by the Valley Air District to demonstrate air quality conformity for the Regional Transportation Plan. The future emissions, combined with emissions from all other sources, are modeled in the Valley Air District’s regional air quality models to determine the reductions required to attain the air quality standards by the applicable federal deadline. AQPs detail the control measures and emission reductions required for reaching attainment of the air standards.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Although the proposed Master Plans are significant with the growth projections contained in the City of Patterson General Plan, it is not necessarily consistent with the projections contained in the AQPs because adoption of the General Plan occurred after the latest AQPs were adopted. As such, the proposed Master Plans is not consistent with the AQP. Other projects may or may not be consistent with the land use and growth projections set forth in the applicable General Plan. Because the proposed Master Plans is not consistent with the growth assumptions contained in the AQPs, it would have a cumulative contribution to inconsistency with the clean air plans.

All of the projects listed in Table 4-1 would result in new air emissions during construction or operations (or both). The proposed Master Plans would emit construction and operational emissions at levels that would not exceed the Valley Air District thresholds after the implementation of feasible emissions reductions measures. Other projects that exceed Valley Air District thresholds would also be required to implement feasible emissions reductions measures. Because the proposed Master Plans’ emissions would not exceed Valley Air District thresholds, it would not cumulatively contribute to impacts related to air quality violations.

All of the projects listed in Table 4-1 would result in some net increase of criteria pollutants for which the Air Basin is classified as “nonattainment.” Because of the size and scope of the proposed Master Plans, its net increase is considered cumulatively considerable. Emissions of criteria pollutants from other projects may or may not be considered cumulatively considerable. Because the proposed Master Plans’ net increase is cumulatively considerable, it would have a cumulative contribution to nonattainment of criteria pollutants.

All other project air quality impacts were found to be less than significant and did not require mitigation (e.g., sensitive receptors). Other projects that result in similar impacts would be required to mitigate for their impacts. Because the proposed Master Plans can mitigate all of these remaining air quality impacts to a level of less than significant, it would not have a related cumulative considerable impact.

4.2.4 - Biological Resources
The geographic scope of the cumulative biological resources analysis is the project vicinity. Biological impacts in an agricultural setting, where foraging habitats and similar areas are disrupted by farming activities, tend to be localized. Therefore, the area near the Master Plan boundaries would be the area most affected by project activities (generally within a 0.5-mile radius).

Potential project-level impacts on special-status plants and wildlife are limited to the burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike, migratory birds, Swainson’s hawk, San Joaquin kit fox, and western red and hoary bats; therefore, the project would not have the potential to contribute to the cumulative loss of any other special-status plant or wildlife species. The proposed Master Plans would implement standard mitigation for the previously mentioned special-status species, which would involve pre-construction surveys, and if necessary, implementation of avoidance measures, which would reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. Most of the other projects listed in Table 4-1 are located within the City of Patterson and, therefore, would be required to mitigate for impacts on special-status species in a manner similar to the proposed Master Plans. As, such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to impacts on specialstatus species.

4.2.5 - Cultural Resources
The geographic scope of the cumulative cultural resources analysis is the project vicinity. Cultural resource impacts tend to be localized because the integrity of any given resource depends on what occurs only in the immediate vicinity around that resource, such as disruption of soils; therefore, in addition to the Master Plan boundaries itself, the area near the Master Plan boundaries would be the area most affected by project activities (generally within a 500-foot radius).

Construction activities associated with development projects in the project vicinity may have the potential to encounter undiscovered cultural resources. These projects would be required to mitigate for impacts through compliance with applicable federal and state laws governing cultural resources. Even if a significant cumulative impact could be found, the proposed Master Plans would not make a cumulatively considerable impact. Most of the Master Plan boundaries is used for agriculture and has been previously disturbed by agricultural actives such as disking and tilling of the soil. As such, the Master Plan boundaries is in a disturbed state, which limits the potential for undiscovered resources to be encountered.

The Master Plan boundaries contains several structures that are more than 50 years of age and may have historical significance. Mitigation is proposed requiring that these structures be assessed for historical significance and if found to be significant, the applicant must implement one of the following: a Historical American Building Survey, an interpretive exhibit describing the history of the site, relocation of the structure, or adaptive reuse of the structure. Other projects listed in Table 4-1 may contain potential historic resources. For those that do, they would be required to implement similar mitigation measures.

Although there is the possibility that previously undiscovered resources could be encountered by subsurface earthwork activities, the implementation of standard construction mitigation measures would ensure that undiscovered cultural resources are not adversely affected by project-related construction activities, which would prevent the destruction or degradation of potentially significant cultural resources in the project vicinity. Given the low potential for disruption, and the comprehensiveness of mitigation measures that would apply to this project and those in the vicinity, the residual, insignificant impacts of the projects would not combine to make a significant cumulative impact and, even if the combined impact was significant because of substantial resources on a different Master Plan boundaries, the proposed Master Plans would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution given previous disruptions to its ground and the lack of any known resource within its boundaries.

4.2.6 - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
The geographic scope of the cumulative geology, soils, and seismicity analysis is the project vicinity.

Adverse effects associated with geologic, soil, and seismic hazards tend to be localized, and the area near the Master Plan boundaries would be the area most affected by project activities (generally within a 0.25-mile radius).

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Development projects in the project vicinity may have the potential to be exposed to seismic hazards. However, there is a less than significant potential of the projects in combination to expose people or structure to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death in the event of a major earthquake; fault rupture; ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure; landslide; or liquefaction. There are no active or potentially act faults in the City or project area, and although the Master Plan boundaries might be exposed to strong ground shaking during an earthquake from faults that lie further afield, continued construction of buildings and other structures consistent with current development codes would minimize the potential for severe damage and loss of life. Seismic design criteria account for peak ground acceleration, soil profile, and other site conditions, and they establish corresponding design standards intended primarily to protect public safety and secondly to minimize property damage.

Regarding liquefaction and soil stability, the topography of the Master Plan boundaries and the sites of the projects listed in Table 4-1 is relatively flat. Groundwater occurs at depths greater than 15 feet below surface, which makes the likelihood of liquefaction remote. Thus, there is little potential of projects to cumulatively contribute to liquefaction and soil stability impact, and thus a less than significant cumulative impact would result.

Regarding soil erosion, groundbreaking could lead to increased erosion rates on-site soils, which could cause unstable ground surfaces and increased sedimentation in nearby streams and drainage channels. However, project construction activities would implement standard stormwater pollution prevention mitigation measures to ensure that earthwork activities do not result in substantial erosion off-site. This mitigation, in turn, would have to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permitting program, which regulates water quality originating from construction sites. The NPDES program, which governs projects statewide (and nationwide), requires the preparation and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Programs for construction activities that disturb more than 1 acre, and the implementation of Best Management Practices that ensure the reduction of pollutants during stormwater discharges, as well as compliance with all applicable water quality requirements. Thus, given the proposed Master Plans and nearby projects would have to comply with federal and state regulations that are designed to minimize impacts to projects on a wide geographic scale, this project would make no cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impact.

4.2.7 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The geographic scope of the cumulative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis is the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, which encompasses all or portions of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties. Air pollution is regarded as a regional issue; therefore, this would be the area most likely to be impacted by project emissions.

The projects listed in Table 4-1 would emit new GHG emissions. The proposed Master Plans was found to exceed the adopted GHG emissions per capita and, therefore, would have a significant unavoidable impact. Other projects, despite any unavoidable impact, would also be required to incorporate appropriate measures meet this target to the extent feasible. The proposed Master Plans would have a related cumulative considerable impact

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Future development projects in the PG&E service area would be required to comply with Title 24 energy efficiency standards. At buildout, the proposed Master Plans would demand an estimated 150 million kWh of electricity on an annual basis and 386 million cubic yards of natural gas on an annual basis. The proposed Master Plan’s structures would be designed in accordance with Title 24, California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings. These standards include minimum energy efficiency requirements related to building envelope, mechanical systems (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and water heating systems), indoor and outdoor lighting, and illuminated signs. The incorporation of the Title 24 standards and other energy conservation measures into the project would ensure that the project would not result in the inefficient, unnecessary, or wasteful consumption of energy. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other future projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on energy consumption.

4.2.8 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The geographic scope of the cumulative hazards and hazardous materials analysis is the project vicinity, which includes areas within a 0.50-mile radius of the Master Plan boundaries. Adverse effects of hazards and hazardous materials tend to be localized because the impacts of spills and releases usually do not travel beyond 0.50 mile. Therefore, the area near the Master Plan boundaries would be the area most affected by project activities.

The Master Plan boundaries contain structures that predate the federal bans on asbestos-containing building materials, lead-based paint and, therefore, mitigation is proposed requiring assessment and, if present, proper abatement of these materials. Additionally, the proposed Master Plans’ operational characteristics would not involve the use, storage, transport, or disposal of large quantities of hazardous materials. As such, the proposed Master Plans would not have any significant impacts on hazards or hazardous materials. Other projects that may result in potential exposure to hazardous materials would be required to implement mitigation measures to protect public health and safety. However, most of the projects listed in Table 4-1 would not involve the use large quantities of hazardous materials during operations or involve characteristics that could expose surrounding land uses to hazardous air emissions or materials, since surrounding projects involve non-intensive uses such as residential, professional commercial, light industrial, and no heavy manufacturing or refining activities, which precludes the likelihood of significant impacts. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution.

4.2.9 - Hydrology and Water Quality
The geographic scope of the cumulative hydrology and water quality analysis is the Patterson area.

Hydrologic and water quality impacts concern local waterways and groundwater sources, which affect the greater Patterson area.

The proposed project could, in conjunction with other projects within the City and surrounding area, contribute urban runoff pollutants to downstream receiving waters, resulting in degradation of water quality in Salado Creek and San Joaquin River. The proposed project would incorporate SWPPP controls during construction. Post-construction, runoff will be directed to recharge facilities in the

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 884 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Zacharias planning area. In addition, BMP, LID and stormwater treatment measures to control and treat stormwater runoff post-construction per NPDES Phase II Permit requirements would be implemented in the project area. Similarly, other developments within the City of Patterson would be required to comply with these regulations. As a result of compliance with the NPDES Phase II Permit, development within or near the City of Patterson, including the proposed project, would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact to water quality and hydrology.

The proposed project could, in conjunction with other projects within the City and surrounding area, contribute flood waters to downstream receiving waters, resulting in degradation of water quality in Salado Creek and San Joaquin River. Preliminary drainage plans for the Zacharias planning area indicate that stormwater runoff would be retained or detained within the project area in a series of bioswales, basins, lakes and a recharge basin which together would accommodate the 100-year flood event, which exceeds compliance with City requirements. In addition, the Baldwin planning area would detain the 10-year flood event in compliance with City requirements. The proposed flood control retention basin along the Del Puerto Creek would collect flood flows that currently spread across the Zacharias planning area as well as further south-southeast, affecting parts of the City. The inclusion of this basin into the project contributes to an improvement in flood conditions in the project area and the City. Similar measures implemented within other projects, as required by the City and the NPDES Phase II Permit, would result in a less than significant cumulative impacts related to flooding. As a result of compliance with State and City requirements, the cumulative effects from the proposed and other potential projects would result in a less than significant cumulative impact to flooding.

The proposed project could, in conjunction with other projects within the City and surrounding area, degrade groundwater supply or quality in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. The City’s Water Management Plan and the Water Supply Assessment concluded that cumulatively, the City has sufficient available supply to support the project and all cumulative projects without negatively impacting groundwater resources in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin from which the City draws its supply. In addition, the Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Groundwater Sustainability Plan Group (of which the City of Patterson is a member) submitted a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP 2019) that describes measures and actions needed to achieve long-term sustainability of both the upper and lower groundwater aquifers, as required by 2040, and to stay in compliance with Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Conservation measures for new developments as required by the City and implementation of measures in the Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Groundwater Sustainability Plan as required by Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, would result in a less than less-than-significant cumulative impacts related to groundwater use.

4.2.10 - Land Use
The geographic scope of the cumulative land use analysis is the City of Patterson General Plan Planning Area. Land use decisions are made at the City level; therefore, the City of Patterson General Plan Planning Area is an appropriate geographic scope.

Impacts involving land use plans or policies would not combine to result in cumulative impacts. The determination of significance for impacts related to whether a project would conflict with any

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 885 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx applicable land use plan or policy is addressed on a project-by-project basis, as required by California land use and planning law, and the Patterson Municipal Code.

The proposed Master Plans consists of the development of up to 5,086 dwelling units and 7.7 million square feet of non-residential uses and associated infrastructure on approximately 1,227 acres. The proposed Master Plans’ land use activities are consistent with the intended uses of the City of Patterson’s General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance’s zoning districts. As such, the proposed Master Plans would be consistent with the General Plan and Municipal Code, and there is no other envisioned plan which would make the proposed Master Plans less consistent than when examined individually.

Thus, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other planned or approved projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on land use.

4.2.11 - Noise
The geographic scope of the cumulative noise analysis is the project vicinity, including surrounding sensitive receptors. Noise impacts tend to be localized because ambient noise generally tends to dissipate within 0.25 mile, and existing noise from roadways tends to have a canceling effect on noise emanating from a Master Plan boundaries; that is, the logarithmic properties of noise and distance usually mean there are no additive effects. Therefore, the area near the Master Plan boundaries (generally 0.25 mile) would be the area most affected by project activities.

Construction activities associated with the proposed Master Plans would result in substantial sources of noise. As discussed in Section 3.11, Noise, the construction activities for proposed Master Plans would not exceed the noise thresholds for any receivers. The timing of construction activities associated with other development projects would overlap minimally, if at all, with the proposed Master Plans. Furthermore, because noise is a highly localized phenomenon, even if construction activities did overlap in time with the proposed Master Plans, the intervening distance and roadway noise would diminish any additive effects. Construction activities at these other planned and approved projects would be required to take place during daytime hours, and the City and project applicant would be required to evaluate construction noise impacts and implement mitigation, if necessary, to minimize noise impacts. Given these distances and the intervening structures and vegetation, no significant cumulative construction noise impact would be expected. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that construction noise from the proposed Master Plans would not combine with noise from other development projects to cause cumulatively considerable noise impacts.

The proposed Master Plans’ construction and operational vibration levels would not exceed annoyance thresholds. Because vibration propagates in waves through the soil, multiple pieces of equipment operating simultaneously would each produce vibration waves in different phases that typically would not increase the magnitude of the vibration. Furthermore, vibration is a highly localized phenomenon, and tends to dissipate to insignificant levels within dozens of feet, as explained in Section 3.10, Noise; thus, there would be no possibility for vibration associated with the project to combine with vibration from other projects because of their distances from the Master

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 886 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Plan boundaries. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable vibration impact.

As discussed in Section 3.11, Noise, the proposed Master Plan’s vehicular trips would not make a substantial incremental contribution to ambient noise levels. These noise levels account for existing vehicle trips as well as vehicle trips from future projects. Mitigation is proposed requiring that residential units within the Zacharias Master Plan include mechanical ventilation systems to allow the residents the option of closing windows to avoid exposure to excessive roadway noise. Other projects would be required to evaluate roadway noise and, if necessary, mitigate for such impacts.

The proposed Master Plans’ contribution to off-site vehicular noise levels would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance, which take into account the existing noise levels and future 2035 without project noise levels. Thus, the proposed Master Plans would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable increase in ambient roadway noise.

As discussed in Section 3.10, Noise, non-transportation noise may exceed significance thresholds at any receivers. These noise levels account for existing noise sources as well as noise from future projects. Mitigation is proposed requiring that noise attenuating measures be implemented to reduce residential exposure to non-transportation noise. Other projects would be required to mitigate for non-transportation noise impacts at nearby sensitive receptors in accordance with City standards. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to any permanent increases in ambient noise levels associated with stationary noise sources in the project vicinity.

4.2.12 - Population and Housing
The geographic scope of the cumulative population and housing analysis is the City of Patterson.

The proposed Master Plans is anticipated to add 19,988 new residents and 8,670 employees to Patterson population and workforce at buildout. The City of Patterson General Plan projects a buildout population of 66,673 persons sometime after 2030 or an increase of more than 46,000 persons over the same time period that the proposed Master Plans would be built out. As such, the proposed Master Plans would likely employ Patterson residents and would not require substantial amounts of employees to relocate to Patterson. Furthermore, the proposed Master Plans is consistent with the Patterson General Plan Land Use designations and therefore growth resulting from development of the project area is anticipated. Other projects included in Table 4-1 may result in population growth; however, they would be required to demonstrate consistency with their respective land use designations and therefore would be consistent with planned growth. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on population or housing.

4.2.13 - Public Services and Recreation
The geographic scope of the cumulative public services analysis is the service area of each of the providers serving the proposed Master Plans. Because of differences in the nature of the public service and utility topical areas, they are discussed separately.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
The geographic scope of the cumulative fire protection and emergency medical services analysis is the Patterson Fire Department service area, which encompasses the City of Patterson. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the City of Patterson have the potential to combine with the project to create cumulative impacts.

Buildout of the proposed Master Plan would increase calls for service, thereby creating the need for additional personnel and a fire station. The project applicants would pay fire protection development fees. Other projects listed in Table 4-1 would be required to implement similar measures to ensure adequate levels of fire protection are maintained. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on fire protection and emergency medical services.

Police Department
The geographic scope of the cumulative police protection analysis is the Patterson Police Services jurisdictional area, which encompasses the City of Patterson. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the City of Patterson have the potential to combine with the project to create cumulative impacts.

Buildout of the proposed Master Plan would increase calls for service, thereby creating the need for additional personnel. The project applicants would pay police protection development fees. Other projects listed in Table 4-1 would be required to implement similar measures to ensure adequate levels of police protection are maintained. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on police services.

Schools
The geographic scope of the cumulative school analysis is the Patterson Unified School District, which encompasses Patterson and surrounding unincorporated areas. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the City of Patterson have the potential to combine with the project to create cumulative impacts.

Buildout of the proposed Master Plan would increase K-12 enrollment, thereby creating the need for additional classroom capacity. The project applicants would dedicate an elementary and middle school site to the School District as well as pay development fees. Other projects listed in Table 4-1 would be required to dedicate school sites or pay development fees. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on schools.

Parks
The geographic scope of the cumulative park analysis is the City of Patterson. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the City of Patterson have the potential to combine with the project to create cumulative impacts.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx Buildout of the proposed Master Plan would increase demand for parks and recreation, thereby creating the need for additional parkland. The project applicants would dedicate more than 60 acres of new parkland as well as pay park fees. Other projects listed in Table 4-1 would be required to dedicate parkland or pay park fees to ensure adequate park and recreational facilities are maintained. As such, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on parks.

4.2.14 - Transportation
The geographic scope of the cumulative transportation analysis is the roadway network shown in Exhibit 3.14-1, which largely consists of almost the entire City of Patterson and nearby unincorporated areas. All the new development projects listed in Table 4-1 would generate new vehicle trips that may trigger or contribute to unacceptable intersection operations. All projects would be required to mitigate for their fair share of impacts. At buildout, the proposed Master Plans would generate 7,047 trips during the weekday morning (AM) peak-hour and 8,047 trips during the weekday (PM) afternoon peak-hour. The proposed Master Plans would contribute trips to intersections that would operate at unacceptable levels during Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic and to intersections and roadway segments that would operate at unacceptable levels during 2040 Cumulative Conditions. All feasible mitigation measures are proposed that would improve operations to acceptable levels. However, because there is uncertainty whether all necessary improvements would be fully funded and implemented as contemplated, the residual significance is significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other projects, would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to unacceptable intersection operations.

For other transportation-related areas, the proposed Master Plans would have significant impacts on alternative transportation. After the implementation of mitigation, these impacts would be reduced to a level of less than significant. Other projects that result in similar impacts would be required to mitigate for their impacts. Because the proposed Master Plans can mitigate all of its impacts to a level of less than significant, it would not have a related, cumulatively considerable impact.

4.2.15 - Utilities and Service Systems
Water
The geographic scope of the cumulative water analysis is the City of Patterson water service area, which encompasses the city limits.

At buildout, the proposed Master Plans are estimated to demand 1,560 acre-feet of water per year.

A Water Supply Assessment was prepared by Woodard & Curran, which indicated that the proposed Master Plans’ water demand would be within the City of Patterson’s projected available supply through 2040, which accounts for demand from existing users and future growth. As such, adequate water supplies are anticipated to be available to serve the proposed Master Plans, as well as other projects in the service area. Nonetheless, because long-term water supply is a significant concern in California, the proposed Master Plans would reduce its demand on water supply through the implementation of indoor and outdoor water conservation measures. These measures would reduce

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Cumulative Effects Draft EIR
4-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx overall project demand for potable water and ensure that long-term water supply impacts are less than significant. All future projects also would be required to demonstrate that potable water supply sources are available, and these projects may be required to implement water conservation measures. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other planned and approved projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on potable water supply.

Wastewater
The geographic scope of the cumulative wastewater analysis is the Patterson water quality control facility service area, which collects wastewater from Patterson. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the service area have the potential to combine with the project to exert cumulative impacts.

All future projects would be required to demonstrate that sewer service is available to ensure that adequate sanitation can be provided. At buildout, the proposed Master Plans would generate 1.006 million gallons of effluent per day. The Master Plan would provide sewer fees to the City for capital improvements to the City’s Water Quality Control Facility to accommodate effluent. Patterson is currently planning for the expansion of the Water Quality Control Facility’s treatment capacity. The increased capacity would be expected to provide adequate capacity to serve the projects listed in Table 4-1 within the service facility’s service area. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other planned and approved projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on wastewater.

Storm Drainage
The geographic scope of the cumulative storm drainage analysis is the City of Patterson’s storm drainage system, which generally encompasses lands within the city limits. Those projects listed in Table 4-1 that lie in the drainage system service area have the potential to combine with the project to exert cumulative impacts.

All future development projects in the project vicinity would be required to provide drainage facilities that collect and detain runoff such that off-site releases are controlled and do not create flooding. The proposed Master Plans would install on-site stormwater infrastructure that would provide adequate capacity for the proposed Master Plan’s runoff. Therefore, the proposed Master Plans, in conjunction with other planned and approved projects, would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on storm drainage.

Solid Waste
The geographic scope of the cumulative solid waste analysis comprises those projects contributing to the Fink Road Landfill near Crows Landing.

The landfill has a remaining capacity of 7.1 million cubic yards. Future development projects would generate construction and operational solid waste and, depending on the volumes and end uses, would be required to implement recycling and waste reduction measures. The proposed Master Plans is anticipated to generate 24,612 cubic yards of solid waste during construction and 6,530 cubic yards annually during operations. These values are conservative and do not adjust for construction and demolition debris recycling and curbside collection of recyclable materials and

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Cumulative Effects
FirstCarbon Solutions 4-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec04-00 Cumulative.docx green waste. These practices would divert substantial quantities of materials from the solid waste stream and contribute to conserving landfill capacity, thereby extending the operational life of such facilities. Thus, the contribution of the proposed Master Plans would not be cumulatively considerable.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx SECTION 5: ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT

5.1 - Introduction
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.6, this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) contains a comparative impact assessment of alternatives to the proposed project. The primary purpose of this section is to provide decision makers and the general public with a reasonable number of feasible project alternatives that could attain most of the basic project objectives, while avoiding or reducing any of the project’s significant adverse environmental effects. Important considerations for analysis of these alternatives are noted below (as stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6).

An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project; An EIR should identify alternatives that were considered by the lead agency, but rejected as infeasible during the scoping process;
Reasons for rejecting an alternative include:
- Failure to meet most of the basic project objectives; - Infeasibility; or
- Inability to avoid significant environmental effects.

5.1.1 - Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The proposed project would result in the following significant unavoidable impacts:

Important Farmland: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would convert 1,246 acres of Important Farmland to non-agricultural use. Mitigation is proposed consisting of farmland preservation elsewhere in Stanislaus County; however, preservation would still result in the net loss of farmland. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Consistency with Air Quality Plan: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in ozone precursor and particulate matter emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, would be inconsistent with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s air quality plan. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Cumulative Criteria Pollutant Emissions Impacts: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in ozone precursor and particulate matter emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, have a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air pollution. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Generation: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in greenhouse gas emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx Consistency with Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in greenhouse gas emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, would be inconsistent with State greenhouse gas reduction strategies.

Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic Conditions: The proposed Master Plans would contribute new vehicle trips to intersections, roadway segments, and freeway segments that would operate at unacceptable levels under Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic Conditions. Mitigation is proposed consisting of improvements to affected facilities; however, in certain cases, it would not restore operations to acceptable levels or is considered uncertain because the facilities are outside the jurisdictional control or the City of Patterson. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.
2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions: The proposed Master Plans would contribute new vehicle trips to intersections, roadway segments, and freeway segments that would operate at unacceptable levels under 2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions.

Mitigation is proposed consisting of improvements to affected facilities; however, in certain cases, it would not restore operations to acceptable levels or is considered uncertain because the facilities are outside the jurisdictional control or the City of Patterson. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

5.1.2 - Alternatives to the Proposed Project
The four alternatives to the proposed project analyzed in this section are as follows:

No Project Alternative: Neither the Baldwin Master Plan nor the Zacharias Master Plan would be implemented, and the planning areas would continue their existing agricultural land use activities within unincorporated Stanislaus County.

Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative: The Zacharias Master Plan would be implemented as contemplated and the Baldwin Master Plan would not be implemented.

Reduced Density Alternative: A 25 percent reduction would be applied to the buildout potential of both the Baldwin Master Plan and the Zacharias Master Plan; however, the boundaries of the Master Plans would remain the same.

Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative: Both the Baldwin Master Plan and the Zacharias Master Plan would be implemented as contemplated, but Ivy Avenue would provide a through connection between Ward Avenue and the Patterson Irrigation District (PID) Lateral M Canal.

Four alternatives to the proposed project are analyzed below. These analyses compare the proposed project to each individual project alternative. In several cases, the description of the impact may be the same under each alternative when compared with the CEQA Thresholds of Significance (i.e., both the project and the alternative would result in a less than significant impact). The actual degree of impact may be slightly different between the proposed project and each alternative, and this relative difference is the basis for a conclusion of greater or lesser impacts.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx

5.2 - Project Objectives
As stated in Section 2, Project Description, the objectives of the proposed project are to:

1. Promote positive contribution to the local and regional economy through new capital investment, creation of new employment and housing opportunities, and expansion of the tax base.

2. Develop a mix of new residential uses in proximity to a regional job center.

3. Continue to attract new businesses to the City of Patterson by providing adequate, available land and infrastructure.

4. Facilitate buildout of the City of Patterson General Plan.

5. Maintain a high quality of life in the City of Patterson through the provision of schools, parks, open spaces, and trails in residential areas.

6. Facilitate the development of the South County Corridor by reserving land for the future alignment of this transportation corridor and limiting new connections from the Master Plan area.

7. Promote land use compatibility with the Ranchette area by appropriately citing roadway connections and affording property owners the option of maintaining their existing land use activities or developing low density residential uses.

8. Ensure that the Patterson city limits are expanded in an orderly and logical manner.

9. Avoid the premature conversion of viable agricultural land through the use of buffers and by affording property owners the ability to continue to farm their land until the time is right for development.

10. Work with PID and WSID to protect groundwater resources and their irrigation canals as the Master Plan area transitions from agricultural/rural residential to urban use.

5.3 - Alternative 1—No Project Alternative
CEQA Guidelines 15126.6(e) requires EIRs to evaluate a ‘No Project’ alternative, which is the “circumstance under which the project does not proceed.” The purpose is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project.

Because the Master Plan areas are currently in agricultural production—an economically viable land use activity—the No Project Alternative entails the continuation of these land use activities for the foreseeable future. As such, the Master Plan areas would remain in unincorporated Stanislaus County and retain its current agricultural land use designations.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx

5.3.1 - Impact Analysis
The Master Plan areas would remain in agricultural production for the foreseeable future. As such, this alternative would avoid all of the proposed project’s significant unavoidable impacts and potentially significant impacts that can be reduced to a level of less than significant after mitigation.

5.3.2 - Conclusion
The No Project Alternative would avoid all of the proposed project’s significant unavoidable impacts and significant impacts that can be mitigated to a level of less than significant.

The No Project Alternative would not advance any of the project objectives. For example, it would not (1) promote positive contribution to the local and regional economy; (2) develop a mix of new residential uses near a regional job center; (3) attract new businesses to Patterson; (4) facilitate buildout of the City of Patterson General Plan; (5) maintain a high quality of life through provision of schools, open spaces, and trails; and (6) facilitate the development of the South County Corridor.

5.4 - Alternative 2—Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative Under the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative, the Zacharias Master Plan would be implemented as contemplated and the Baldwin Master Plan would not be pursued. The Zacharias Master Plan contemplates 4,781 dwelling units, 7,765,000 square feet of nonresidential uses, two schools, and 59 acres of parks. The 1,161-acre Zacharias Master Plan area would be annexed into the City of Patterson while the 66-acre Baldwin Master Plan area would remain in unincorporated Stanislaus County.

Table 5-1 summarizes the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative. The purpose of the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative is to evaluate the Master Plan is that is expected to develop first.

Table 5-1: Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative
Scenario Acres
Dwelling
Units
NonResidential Other Characteristics
Zacharias Master Plan Only
Alternative 1,161 4,781 7,765,000 2 schools (elementary and middle); 59acres of parks Proposed Project 1,227 5,086 7,765,000 2 schools (elementary and middle); 63 acres of parks
Difference (66) (305) – (4 acres of parks)
Source: FCS 2020.

5.4.1 - Impact Analysis
Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
This alternative would result in the development of the Zacharias Master Plan as contemplated by the proposed project and the elimination of the Baldwin Master Plan. The proposed project was

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-5
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx found to have a less than significant impact on aesthetics, light, and glare, because the Master Plans set forth design standards and guidelines that provide certainty that visual character would not be degraded and that new sources of light and glare would not adversely affect daytime or nighttime views. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of light and glare impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on aesthetics, light, and glare than the proposed project.

Agricultural Resources
The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable impact on agricultural resources.

Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity but would not necessarily avoid all agricultural resources impacts associated with the project as proposed.

Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on agricultural resources than the proposed project.

Air Quality
The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable impact on air quality from construction and operational emissions. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity but not necessarily avoid of air quality impacts associated with the project as proposed. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on air quality than the proposed project.

Biological Resources
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on biological resources that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of biological resources impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on biological resources than the proposed project.

Cultural Resources
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on cultural resources that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of cultural resources impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on cultural resources than the proposed project.

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on geology, soils, and seismicity that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-6 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx project, it would further lessen the severity of geology, soils, and seismicity impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on geology, soils, and seismicity than the proposed project.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable impact on greenhouse gas emissions from construction and operational emissions that cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on greenhouse gas emissions than the proposed project.

Hazards and Hazardous Material
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on hazards and hazardous materials that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of hazards and hazardous materials impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on hazards and hazardous materials than the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of hydrology and water quality impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on hydrology and water quality than the proposed project.

Land Use
The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on land use. The removal of the Baldwin Master Plan would reduce the annexation by 66 acres, which would further lessen the severity of land use impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on land use than the proposed project.

Noise
The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on noise from construction and operational activities that could be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would result in a reduction of 66 acres and 305 dwelling units relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity of noise impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on noise than the proposed project.

Population and Housing
The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on population and housing.

The removal of the Baldwin Master Plan would reduce the buildout population, which would further

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-7
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx lessen the severity of population and housing impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on population and housing than the proposed project.

Public Services and Recreation
The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on public services and recreation. The removal of the Baldwin Master Plan would reduce the buildout population, which would further lessen the severity of public services and recreation impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on public services and recreation than the proposed project.

Transportation
Table 5-2 summarizes the trip generation of the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative as compared to the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have significant unavoidable impacts associated with intersection, roadway, and freeway operations. Because the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would generate fewer peak hour trips relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity but not necessarily avoid the proposed project’s significant unavoidable transportation impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on transportation than the proposed project.

Table 5-2: Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative Trip Generation Scenario
Peak Hour Trip Generation
AM PM
Zacharias Master Plan Alternative 6,865 7,825
Proposed Project 7,047 8,047
Difference (182) (222)
Source: AMG 2020.

Utilities and Service Systems
The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on utilities and service systems. The removal of the Baldwin Master Plan would reduce the buildout population, which would further lessen the severity of utilities and service systems impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on utilities and service systems than the proposed project.

5.4.2 - Conclusion
The Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would advance all of the project objectives, although some would be advanced to a lesser degree than the proposed project. For example, it would (1) promote positive contribution to the local and regional economy by creating new housing opportunities and jobs, but the 305 fewer dwelling units would not (2) develop a mix of new residential uses near a regional job center to same degree as the proposed project. However, it would fully advance the project objectives associated with (3) attracting new businesses to Patterson; (4) facilitating buildout of the City of Patterson General Plan; (5) maintaining a high quality

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-8 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx of life through provision of schools, open spaces, and trails; and (6) facilitating the development of the South County Corridor.

5.5 - Alternative 3—Reduced Density Alternative
Under the Reduced Density Alternative, a 25 percent reduction would be applied to the buildout values of both the Baldwin Master Plan and Zacharias Master Plan. This would result in 3,815 dwelling units and 5,823,000 square feet of non-residential uses. The two school sites would be developed under this alternative. To offset the reduction in development, 75 acres of parks would be developed within the Master Plan boundaries, which would allow both Master Plans to satisfy their parkland development requirements.

Table 5-3 summarizes the Reduced Density Alternative. The purpose of the Reduced Density Alternative is to evaluate an alternative that reduces the buildout potential of the Master Plans in the interests of avoiding or reducing impacts associated with air pollution, traffic congestion, and water consumption.

Table 5-3: Reduced Density Alternative
Scenario Acres
Dwelling
Units
NonResidential Other Characteristics
Reduced Density
Alternative 1,227 3,815 5,823,000 2 schools (elementary and middle); 75 acres of parks Proposed Project 1,227 5,086 7,765,000 2 schools (elementary and middle); 63 acres of parks
Difference – (1,271) (1,942,000) 12 acres of parks
Source: FCS 2020.

5.5.1 - Impact Analysis
Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on aesthetics, light, and glare, because the Master Plans set forth design standards and guidelines that provide certainty that visual character will not be degraded and that new sources of light and glare would not adversely affect daytime or nighttime views. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would have the same amount of disturbance as the proposed project and would have a similar amount of change to the visual landscape. Therefore, this alternative would have a similar impact on aesthetics, light, and glare than the proposed project.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-9
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx Agricultural Resources
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable impact on agricultural resources. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would have the same amount of disturbance as the proposed project and would result in an equivalent conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use.

Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on agricultural resources as the proposed project.

Air Quality
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable impact on air quality from criteria and toxic air contaminant emissions. Because this alternative would have a smaller buildout potential, it would reduce the severity of, but not necessarily avoid, the proposed project’s significant unavoidable air quality impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on air quality than the proposed project.

Biological Resources
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on biological resources that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would disturb the same amount of acreage, and would have the same biological resources impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on biological resources as the proposed project.

Cultural Resources
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on cultural resources that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would disturb the same amount of acreage, and would have the same cultural resources impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on cultural resources as the proposed project.

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on geology, soils, and seismicity that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would disturb the same amount of acreage, and would have the same geology, soils, and seismicity impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on geology, soils, and seismicity as the proposed project.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-10 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant unavoidable greenhouse gas emissions impacts from construction and operational activities that cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Because this alternative would have a smaller buildout potential, it would reduce the severity of greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on greenhouse gas emissions than the proposed project.

Hazards and Hazardous Material
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on hazards and hazardous materials that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance.

Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would disturb the same amount of acreage, and would have the same hazards and hazardous materials impacts.

Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on hazards and hazardous materials as the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on hydrology and water quality that could be mitigated to a level of less than significance. Because this alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project, it would disturb the same amount of acreage, and would have the same hydrology and water quality impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on hydrology and water quality as the proposed project.

Land Use
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on land use. This alternative would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project and would affect the same amount of acreage as the proposed project. Therefore, this alternative would have similar impact on land use as the proposed project.

Noise
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a significant impact on noise from construction and operational activities that could be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Because this alternative would have a smaller buildout potential, it would reduce the severity of noise impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on noise than the proposed project.

Population and Housing
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a less than

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-11
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx significant impact on population and housing. This alternative would reduce the buildout population, which would further lessen the severity of population and housing impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on population and housing systems than the proposed project.

Public Services and Recreation
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on public services and recreation. This alternative would reduce the buildout population, which would further lessen the severity of public services and recreation impacts.

Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on public services and recreation than the proposed project.

Transportation
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. Table 5-4 summarizes the trip generation of the Reduced Density Alternative as compared to the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have significant unavoidable impacts associated with intersection, roadway, and freeway operations.

Because the Reduced Density Alternative would generate fewer peak hour trips relative to the proposed project, it would further lessen the severity but not necessarily avoid the proposed project’s significant unavoidable transportation impacts. Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on transportation than the proposed project.

Table 5-4: Reduced Density Alternative Trip Generation
Scenario
Peak-hour Trip Generation
AM PM
Reduced Density Alternative 5,479 6,987
Proposed Project 7,047 8,047
Difference (1,568) (1,086)
Source: AMG, 2020.

Utilities and Service Systems
This alternative would result in a 25 percent reduction in buildout potential but would occupy the same footprint as the proposed project. The proposed project was found to have a less than significant impact on utilities and service systems. This alternative would reduce the buildout population, which would further lessen the severity of utilities and service systems impacts.

Therefore, this alternative would have less impact on utilities and service systems than the proposed project.

5.5.2 - Conclusion
The Reduced Density Alternative would advance all of the project objectives, but to a lesser degree than the proposed project. For example, it would (1) promote positive contribution to the local and

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-12 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx regional economy by creating new housing opportunities and jobs, but the 25 percent reduction in dwelling units and nonresidential square footage not realize the same benefits as the project.

Likewise, would not (2) develop a mix of new residential uses near a regional job center to same degree as the proposed project or (3) attract new businesses to Patterson. This alternative would (4) facilitate buildout of the City of Patterson General Plan, (5) maintain a high quality of life through provision of schools, open spaces, and trails, and (6) facilitate the development of the South County Corridor to the same extent as the proposed project.

5.6 - Alternative 4—Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative
Under the Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative, both the Baldwin Master Plan and the Zacharias Master Plan would be pursued as contemplated and Ivy Avenue would provide a through connection to Ward Avenue. This alternative’s buildout potential is identical to the proposed project.

Ivy Avenue would provide a second through connection between Ward Avenue and the portion of the Zacharias Master Plan area located west of the PID Lateral M Canal. This would provide a second direct connection to SR-33 via the segment of Ivy Avenue east of Ward Avenue and improve access to the Keystone Ranch portion of the Zacharias Master Plan. The Ivy Avenue through connection was initially contemplated as the primary access point to the Zacharias Master Plan area from Ward Avenue and SR-33 until the New East-West Connector was identified as the preferred option.

Development of the Ivy Avenue Connection alternative would require the existing unpaved segment west of Ward Avenue to be upgraded to a paved, all-weather surface with curb, gutter, and sidewalk.

The intersection of Ward Avenue/Ivy Avenue would be improved with a signal and turn lanes. Rightof-way acquisition would be required along Ivy Avenue for these improvements.

The Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative is summarized in Table 5-5. The purpose of the Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative is to evaluate a circulation option that was initially considered during the planning process of the Zacharias Master Plan.

Table 5-5: Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative
Scenario Acres
Dwelling
Units
Non-Residential
Square Feet Roadway Network
Ivy Avenue Connection
Alternative 1,227 5,086 7,765,000
East-West Connector from PID Canal to
SR-33
Ivy Avenue Through Connection from PID
Canal to Ward Avenue
Proposed Project 1,227 5,086 7,765,000
East-West Connector from PID Canal to
SR-33
Ivy Avenue cul-de-sac at PID Canal with
gated Emergency Vehicle Access
Source: FCS 2020

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-13
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx

5.6.1 - Impact Analysis
Aesthetics, Light, and Glare
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar changes to visual character and light and glare. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on aesthetics, light, and glare as the proposed project.

Agricultural Resources
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on agricultural resources as the proposed project.

Air Quality
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions. The Ivy Avenue through connection may reduce vehicle miles traveled by providing a more direct route from certain portions of the Zacharias Master Plan to destinations in central Patterson such as the plaza; however, it would be too speculative to meaningfully quantify the reduction in emissions. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on air quality as the proposed project.

Biological Resources
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on biological resources. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on biological resources as the proposed project.

Cultural Resources
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on cultural resources. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on cultural resources as the proposed project.

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on geology. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on geology, soils, and seismicity as the proposed project.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar significant unavoidable greenhouse gas emissions. The Ivy Avenue through

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-14 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx connection may reduce vehicle miles traveled by providing a more direct route from certain portions of the Zacharias Master Plan to destinations in central Patterson such as the plaza; however, it would be too speculative to meaningfully quantify the reduction in emissions or fuel consumption.

Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on greenhouse gas emissions and energy as the proposed project.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on hazards and hazardous materials. The Ivy Avenue through connection may improve emergency evacuation and response by having a permanent through route as opposed to a gated emergency vehicle access; however, it would be too speculative to meaningfully quantify the improvement in response. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on hazards and hazardous materials as the proposed project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on hydrology and water quality. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on hydrology and water quality as the proposed project.

Land Use
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on land use. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on land use as the proposed project.

Noise
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar noise impacts. The Ivy Avenue through connection may reduce vehicle miles traveled by providing a more direct route from certain portions of the Zacharias Master Plan to destinations in central Patterson such as the plaza; however, it would be too speculative to meaningfully quantify the reduction in roadway noise. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on noise as the proposed project.

Population and Housing
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on population and housing. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on population and housing as the proposed project.

Public Services and Recreation
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on public services and recreation. The Ivy Avenue through connection would

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-15
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on public services and recreation as the proposed project.

Transportation
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project and, thus, generate the same number of daily and peak hour trips. However, as shown in Table 5-6, the two through connections would better distribute trips generated within the Zacharias Master Plan area. As such, it would reduce the number of through and turn lanes needed for the East-West Connector.

Furthermore, the enhanced distribution of trips may allow for shorter trips lengths, thereby reducing vehicle miles traveled; however, it would be too speculative to meaningfully quantify this potential reduction. Nevertheless, based on better trip distribution and reduced need for turn lanes, this alternative would have less impact on transportation than the proposed project.

Table 5-6: Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative Average Daily Trip Comparison Scenario
Average Daily Trips Between Ward Avenue and PID Lateral M Canal East-West Connector Ivy Avenue
Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative 9,000 6,000
Proposed Project 15,500 0
Source: AMG 2020.

Utilities and Service Systems
This alternative would have the same buildout potential as the proposed project. As such, it would result in similar impacts on utilities and service systems. The Ivy Avenue through connection would not increase the severity of any impacts. Accordingly, this alternative would have similar impacts on utilities and service systems as the proposed project.

5.6.2 - Conclusion
The Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative would advance all of the project objectives to the same degree as the proposed project because it would have the same buildout potential. For example, it would (1) promote positive contribution to the local and regional economy by creating new housing opportunities and jobs; (2) develop a mix of new residential uses near a regional job center to same degree as the proposed project; (3) attract new businesses to Patterson; (4) facilitate buildout of the City of Patterson General Plan; (5) maintain a high quality of life through provision of schools, open spaces, and trails; and (6) facilitate the development of the South County Corridor.

5.7 - Environmentally Superior Alternative
The qualitative environmental effects of each alternative in relation to the proposed project are summarized in Table 5-7

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-16 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx Table 5-7: Summary of Alternatives
Environmental Topic Area
No Project
Alternative
Zacharias Master Plan
Only Alternative
Reduced Density
Alternative
Ivy Avenue Connection
Alternative
Aesthetics, Light, and
Glare
Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact
Agricultural Resources Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact Air Quality Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Biological Resources Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact Cultural Resources Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact Geology, Soils, and
Seismicity
Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact
Land Use Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Similar Impact Noise Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Population and Housing Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact Public Services and
Recreation
Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact
Transportation Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Utilities and Service
Systems
Less Impact Less Impact Less Impact Similar Impact
Source: FCS 2020.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(e)(2) requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior alternative. If the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR must also identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives.

The No Project Alternative avoids all of the proposed project’s significant unavoidable impacts and has less impact on all topical areas. Of the three remaining alternatives, both the Reduced Density Alternative and Ivy Avenue Connection Alternative would disturb the same acreage as the proposed project, whereas the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would reduce disturbance by 66 acres.

Thus, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(e)(2), the Zacharias Master Plan Only Alternative would be the Environmentally Superior Alternative.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-17
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx

5.8 - Alternatives Rejected from Further Consideration

5.8.1 - Alternative Location
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2) sets forth considerations to be used in evaluating an alternative location. The section states that the “key question” is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by relocating the project. The CEQA Guidelines identify the following factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of an alternative location:
1) Site suitability
2) Economic viability
3) Availability of infrastructure
4) General Plan consistency
5) Other plans or regulatory limitations
6) Jurisdictional boundaries
7) Whether the project applicant can reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site
The CEQA Guidelines establishes that only locations that would accomplish this objective should be considered as alternative locations for the proposed project.

FCS’ primary criteria for identifying alternative locations included: (1) providing at least 1,000 acres of developable land; and (2) being within 2 miles of a current or planned Interstate 5 interchange.

Table 5-8 assesses the feasibility of two alternative locations for the proposed Master Plans near Patterson. These sites are shown on Exhibit 5-1.

Table 5-8: Alternative Location Feasibility Analysis
Site Description Analysis
Del
Puerto
Canyon
Approximately 1,200 acres on the west side of
Interstate 5 (I-5) in unincorporated Stanislaus
County along Del Puerto Canyon Road. This area
is privately owned and is used for agricultural
land use activities. This area is designated
‘Agriculture’ by the Stanislaus County General
Plan and zoned ‘General Agriculture – 40 Acre
Minimum’ by the Stanislaus County Zoning
Ordinance. The City of Patterson General Plan
contemplates ‘Hillside Mixed Use’ development
and land use activities within this area.

The Del Puerto Water District has proposed
developing a reservoir within this area and has
initiated planning efforts. The reservoir is
contemplated to flood the lower part of the
Not Feasible: This area is poorly suited to support
5,000 dwelling units and 7.7 million square feet
of non-residential uses. It is non-contiguous to
the existing Patterson city limits and is not served
with urban infrastructure or services. The
extension of infrastructure into this area would
be considered ‘growth inducing’ and would
leapfrog areas of Patterson that are not yet
developed.

Furthermore, due to the Del Puerto Water
District’s ongoing reservoir planning efforts,
developing a master planned community within
this area would be contrary to sound planning
principles.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Alternatives to the Proposed Project Draft EIR
5-18 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx Site Description Analysis
canyon near I-5, necessitating the relocation of
Del Puerto Canyon Road.

Naval Air
Station
Crows
Landing
Approximately 1,528 acres consisting of a
former military airfield approximately 5 miles
south of Patterson in unincorporated Stanislaus
County. The County of Stanislaus owns the
facility and has pursued planning efforts to
redevelop it as an airport and business park.

This area is designated ‘Agriculture’ by the
Stanislaus County General Plan and zoned
‘General Agriculture – 40 Acre Minimum’ by the
Stanislaus County Zoning Ordinance. This area
is outside the City of Patterson General Plan’s
Planning Area.

Not Feasible: The County envisions aviation,
light industrial, logistics, and business park uses
on this site. It is non-contiguous to the existing
Patterson city limits and is not served with
urban infrastructure or services. The extension
of infrastructure into this area would be
considered ‘growth inducing.’ Furthermore, this
site would not be desirable for 5,000 dwelling
units due to the planned general aviation
airport at this site. Finally, because this site is
outside City of Patterson General Plan’s
Planning Area, the City would need to
undertake a General Plan Update to include it,
an expensive and time-consuming process.

Source: FCS 2020.

5.8.2 - Baldwin Master Plan Only Alternative
The Baldwin Master Plan Only Alternative was initially considered. Under this scenario, the 68.7-acre Baldwin Master Plan area would be annexed into the City of Patterson and developed as 305 singlefamily dwelling units with 5 acres of parks, trails, and stormwater basins, while the Zacharias Master Plan would not be pursued.

The Baldwin Master Plan Only Alternative was rejected from further consideration because it must be paired with the Zacharias Master Plan (or other Master Plan with non-residential uses) in order to work. As a low-density residential development at the southern edge of the city limits, it would be fiscal net negative for the City of Patterson because there is no commercial or industrial component.

Furthermore, it is non-contiguous to existing residential development, which increases service delivery costs. Thus, the Baldwin Master Plan in isolation from another Master Plan that includes a significant non-residential component would not be viable.

5.8.3 - Ranchette Triangle Annexation Alternative
An alternative consisting of annexing and developing only the 143.7-acre Ranchette Triangle was initially considered. The Ranchette Triangle is the only portion of the Zacharias Master Plan that is within the Patterson Sphere of Influence. As such, is considered to be within the ‘probable future’ boundaries of the City of Patterson and annexation would face a lower threshold of review from Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission than the balance of the Master Plan area.

This alternative would consist of developing the Ranchette Triangle at 3.0 dwelling units per acre, which would yield 431 single-family dwelling units. Vehicular access would be provided from Ward Avenue. Both Ivy Avenue and Rose Avenue would be upgraded to City standards.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR Alternatives to the Proposed Project
FirstCarbon Solutions 5-19
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec05-00 Alternatives.docx The Ranchette Triangle Annexation Alternative was rejected from further consideration for the following reasons:

Lack of property owner interest
Low density residential at 3.0 dwelling units/acre would be a fiscal net negative for the City of Patterson and not achieve highest-and-best use of land
Planning only the Ranchette Triangle preclude comprehensive community planning with the remainder of the Zacharias Master Plan area (e.g., circulation) Developing exclusively residential uses within the Ranchette Triangle would preclude opportunities for needed employment-creating, fiscal net positive land uses at the SR33/Ward Avenue entry way to Patterson

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) S
p
er
ry
Av
e
Zacharia
sRd
·|}þ33
%&'(5 I Del Puerto Canyon
Naval AirStationCrowsLanding
Legend
PattersonCityLimits
PlanningAreas
ZachariasMasterPlan
BaldwinMasterPlan

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Other CEQA Considerations
FirstCarbon Solutions 6-1
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec06-00 Other CEQA.docx SECTION 6: OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 - Significant Unavoidable Impacts
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.2(a)(b) requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to identify and focus on the significant environmental effects of the proposed project, including effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed project were implemented.

This section describes significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of less than significant. Where there are impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing a project alternative, their implications, and the reason why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding their effect, is described. With implementation of the proposed Master Plans, the following significant avoidable impacts that cannot be avoided would occur:

Important Farmland: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would convert 1,246 acres of Important Farmland to non-agricultural use. Mitigation is proposed consisting of farmland preservation elsewhere in Stanislaus County; however, preservation would still result in the net loss of farmland. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Consistency With Air Quality Plan: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in ozone precursor and particulate matter emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, would be inconsistent with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s air quality plan. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Cumulative Criteria Pollutant Emissions Impacts: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in ozone precursor and particulate matter emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, have a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional air pollution. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Generation: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in greenhouse gas emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds. Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Consistency With Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan: Buildout of the proposed Master Plans would result in greenhouse gas emissions that would exceed adopted thresholds and, therefore, would be inconsistent with State greenhouse gas reduction strategies.

Mitigation is proposed requiring air emissions reduction measures; it would not reduce emissions to acceptable levels. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic Conditions: The proposed Master Plans would contribute new vehicle trips to intersections, roadway segments, and freeway segments that would operate at unacceptable levels under Existing Plus Approved Plus Project Traffic

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan Project / Zacharias Master Plan Project Other CEQA Considerations Draft EIR
6-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec06-00 Other CEQA.docx Conditions. Mitigation is proposed consisting of improvements to affected facilities; however, in certain cases, it would not restore operations to acceptable levels or is considered uncertain because the facilities are outside the jurisdictional control or the City of Patterson. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.
2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions: The proposed Master Plans would contribute new vehicle trips to intersections, roadway segments, and freeway segments that would operate at unacceptable levels under 2040 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions.

Mitigation is proposed consisting of improvements to affected facilities; however, in certain cases, it would not restore operations to acceptable levels or is considered uncertain because the facilities are outside the jurisdictional control or the City of Patterson. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

6.2 - Growth-Inducing Impacts
There are two types of growth-inducing impacts that a project may have: direct and indirect. To assess the potential for growth-inducing impacts, the project’s characteristics that may encourage and facilitate activities that individually or cumulatively may affect the environment must be evaluated (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(e)).

Direct growth-inducing impacts occur when the development of a project imposes new burdens on a community by directly inducing population growth, or by leading to the construction of additional developments in the same area. Also included in this category are projects that remove physical obstacles to population growth (such as a new road into an undeveloped area or a wastewater treatment plant with excess capacity that could allow additional development in the service area).

Construction of these types of infrastructure projects cannot be considered isolated from the development they facilitate and serve. Projects that physically remove obstacles to growth, or projects that indirectly induce growth may provide a catalyst for future unrelated development in an area such as a new residential community that requires additional commercial uses to support residents.

Development of new area has potential to attract new residents and employment opportunities as buildout progresses, based on prior growth patterns and economic development goals within the City of Patterson. Any additional expansion or population increase caused by the buildout, not anticipated by the Master Plans, would have to undergo further planning and environmental review at the time the City initiates any such process.

At buildout, both Master Plans would support an estimated 19,988 new residents and 8,670 employees on existing agricultural land that would be annexed into the City of Patterson.

Additionally, both Master Plans contemplate a network of urban infrastructure including roads and utilities. Each Master Plan is discussed separately.

Baldwin Master Plan
The Baldwin Master Plan would support a population of 1,199 at buildout. Because of its small size and single use, the Baldwin Master Plan would buildout over a period of 5 years. When compared to the historical population growth totals shown in Table 3.12-2, the Baldwin Master Plan would be in line with past growth periods.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Other CEQA Considerations
FirstCarbon Solutions 6-3
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec06-00 Other CEQA.docx The City of Patterson General Plan contemplates a buildout population of 66,673 persons. Given that the City’s existing population (23,764) is roughly half of the projected buildout population, the Baldwin Master Plan would be within the General Plan’s growth projections.

The Baldwin Master Plan would include the extension of roads, storm drainage, water, sewer, electricity, and natural gas services to the Master Plan area. These connections would occur at Baldwin Road or Sperry Avenue. No off-site infrastructure connections would occur through areas unserved by urban infrastructure. As such, the proposed Master Plan would not result in growth inducement.

Zacharias Master Plan
The Zacharias Master Plan would support a population of 18,789 and 8,670 employees at buildout.

Because of its size and scale, the Zacharias Master Plan would buildout over a period of 20 years.

When broken down into 5-year increments, this averages to 4,695 additional persons and 2,168 additional employees every 5 years. When compared to the historical population growth totals shown in Table 3.12-2, the Zacharias Master Plan would be in line with past growth periods.

The City of Patterson General Plan contemplates a buildout population of 66,673 persons and 32,196 employees. Given that the City’s existing population (23,764) is roughly half of the projected buildout population and existing employment (9,500) is roughly a third of the projected buildout employment, the Baldwin Master Plan would be within the General Plan’s growth projections.

The Zacharias Master Plan would include the extension of roads, storm drainage, water, sewer, electricity, and natural gas services to the Master Plan area. These connections would occur at Keystone Pacific Parkway, Baldwin Road, and Ward Avenue. No off-site infrastructure connections would occur through areas unserved by urban infrastructure. As such, the proposed Master Plan would not result in growth inducement.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Effects Found not to be Significant
FirstCarbon Solutions 7-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec07-00 EFNTBS.docx SECTION 7: EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT

7.1 - Introduction
This section is based on the Notice of Preparation (NOP), dated December 21, 2018, and contained in Appendix A of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The NOP was prepared to identify the potentially significant effects of the proposed project and was circulated for public review between December 21, 2018, and January 22, 2019. In the course of this evaluation, certain impacts were found to be less than significant because the proposed project’s characteristics would not create such impacts. This section provides a brief description of effects found not to be significant or less than significant, based on the NOP comments or more detailed analysis conducted as part of the EIR preparation process. Note that a number of impacts that are found to be less than significant are addressed in the various EIR topical sections (Sections 3.1 through 3.16) to provide more comprehensive discussion of why impacts are less than significant, in order to better inform decision makers and the general public.

7.2 - Effects Found not to be Significant

7.2.1 - Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Septic or Alternative Wastewater Disposal Systems
The Master Plan area currently contains rural residences that use septic disposal systems. As the Master Plan area buildouts, the existing septic disposal systems would be abandoned or removed in accordance with County requirements. The Master Plan uses would be served with wastewater collection and treatment provided by the City of Patterson. As such, buildout of the Master Plan would not increase use of septic or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impact would occur.

7.2.2 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Airports
The nearest active airport to the Baldwin / Zacharias Master Plans is Modesto City-County Airport located 14 miles to the northeast. This distance precludes the possibility of the Master Plans exposing persons residing or working in the project vicinity to aviation noise associated with Modesto City-County Airport.

The currently inactive Crows Landing airfield is located 3.2 miles southeast of the Baldwin Master Plan area and 4.4 miles of the Zacharias Master Plan area. The County of Stanislaus is planning to reactivate the airfield as a general aviation facility. The planned Crows Landing Airport is sufficiently far enough away from the Master Plan areas that aviation activities would not expose persons to aviation safety hazards. No impact would occur.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Effects Found not to be Significant Draft EIR
7-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec07-00 EFNTBS.docx

7.2.3 - Hydrology and Water Quality
Levee or Dam Failure
The California Aqueduct and Delta-Mendota Canal are protected with levees. Both facilities are concrete-lined and buttressed by earthen embankments. These characteristics make it highly unlikely that levee failure would occur. No impacts would occur.

The dam failure inundation area for the San Luis Reservoir encompasses the area within the eastern portion of Patterson, between Elm Avenue and the San Joaquin River. Both Master Plan areas are located approximately 3 miles to the west of this area. This condition precludes the possibility of the project site being inundated by floodwaters as a result of dam failure. No impacts would occur.

Seiches, Tsunamis, or Mudflows
There are no inland bodies of water near the project site, a condition that precludes the possibility of seiche inundation. The project is approximately 70 miles from the Pacific Ocean, a condition that precludes the possibility of tsunami inundation. The project site is not located in a volcanically active area or adjacent to steep slopes, a condition that precludes mudflow inundation. No impacts would occur.

7.2.4 - Noise
Aviation Noise
The nearest active airport to the Baldwin / Zacharias Master Plans is Modesto City-County Airport located 14 miles to the northeast. This distance precludes the possibility of the Master Plans exposing persons residing or working in the project vicinity to aviation noise associated with Modesto City-County Airport.

The currently inactive Crows Landing airfield is located 3.2 miles southeast of the Baldwin Master Plan area and 4.4 miles of the Zacharias Master Plan area. The County of Stanislaus is planning to reactivate the airfield as a general aviation facility. Aviation noise contours published in the Crows Landing Industrial Business Park Specific Plan Draft EIR indicate that the Master Plan area is outside the 55 dBA CNEL aviation noise contour. Thus, the Master Plans would not expose persons residing or working in the project vicinity to aviation noise associated with the planned Crows Landing Airport.

7.2.5 - Wildfire
Emergency Response or Evacuation
The Master Plan areas contains agricultural land and is adjacent to the Patterson city limits. The Master Plan areas are not with a State responsibility area or classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The closest area susceptible to wildfires is more than 1 mile to the west on the opposite side of Interstate 5. As such, the Master Plan areas are not susceptible to wildfires.

Regardless, the Master Plans contemplate a roadway network would have multiple connections to roadways such as Rogers Road, Zacharias Road (future South County Corridor), Baldwin Road, and

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR Effects Found not to be Significant
FirstCarbon Solutions 7-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec07-00 EFNTBS.docx Ward Avenue. As such, adequate emergency response and evacuation routes would be available in the event of an emergency. No impact would occur.

Exposure to Wildfire
The Master Plan areas contain agricultural land and is adjacent to the Patterson city limits. The Master Plan areas are not with a State responsibility area or classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The closest area susceptible to wildfires is more than 1 mile to the west on the opposite side of Interstate 5. As such, the Master Plan area are not susceptible to wildfires. Thus, persons or structures would not be exposed to wildfire hazards. No impact would occur.

Fire Infrastructure
The Master Plan areas contain agricultural land and is adjacent to the Patterson city limits. The Master Plan areas are not with a State responsibility area or classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The closest area susceptible to wildfires is more than 1 mile to the west on the opposite side of Interstate 5. As such, the Master Plan areas are not susceptible to wildfires. Thus, no wildfire suppression infrastructure would be required. No impact would occur.

Post-Fire Flooding or Landslides
The Master Plan areas contain agricultural land and is adjacent to the Patterson city limits. The Master Plan areas are not with a State responsibility area or classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The closest area susceptible to wildfires is more than 1 mile to the west on the opposite side of Interstate 5. As such, the Master Plan areas are not susceptible to wildfires and, thus, it would not be susceptible to post-fire flooding or landslides. No impact would occur.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Persons and Organizations Consulted/ Draft EIR List of Preparers
FirstCarbon Solutions 8-1
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec08-00 Persons and Orgs Consulted.docx SECTION 8: PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED/LIST OF

PREPARERS

8.1 - Lead Agency

8.1.1 - City of Patterson
Community Development Department
Community Development Director .............................................................................David James, AICP City Planner .........................................................................................................................Joel Andrews City Manager’s Office
City Manager ............................................................................................................................. Ken Irwin Public Works Department
Public Works Director.............................................................................................................Mike Willet Director of Engineering, Building, and Capital Projects / City Engineer.....................Fernando Ulloa, PE

8.1.2 - Public Agencies
Federal Agencies
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority
Assistant Executive Director............................................................................................Frances Mizuno State Agencies
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
Environmental Scientist....................................................................................................Jordan Hensley Department of Conservation
Conservation Program Support Supervisor....................................................................Monique Wilber Department of Transportation, District 10
Intergovernmental Review / CEQA........................................................................................ Tom Dumas Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse Director............................................................................................................................... Scott Morgan Native American Heritage Commission
Staff Services Analyst......................................................................................................... Sharaya Souza Public Utilities Commission
Utilities Engineer ............................................................................................................. Matt Cervantes

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) Persons and Organizations Consulted/ City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project List of Preparers Draft EIR
8-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec08-00 Persons and Orgs Consulted.docx Local Agencies
County of Stanislaus
Assistant Executive Officer.....................................................................................................Keith Boggs Senior Management Consultant..................................................................................... Patrick Cavanah Del Puerto Health Care District
J.B. Anderson Land Use Planning ......................................................................................John Anderson Patterson Irrigation District
Herum Crabtree Suntang ...................................................................................................Jeanne Zolezzi Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission
Executive Officer ........................................................................................................... Sara Lytle-Pinhey Turlock Irrigation District
Supervising Engineering Technician, Civil ............................................................................. Todd Troglin West Stanislaus Fire Protection District
Law Office of William D. Ross............................................................................................... William Ross West Stanislaus Irrigation District
Herum Crabtree Suntang ...................................................................................................Jeanne Zolezzi

8.1.3 - Private Parties and Organizations
Jack Schreder Associates
President.............................................................................................................................Jack Schreder Sarasqueta Properties
President.......................................................................................................................... Phil Sarasqueta Private Citizens
Henry Gnesa
Jill Gnesa
Donald Hess
Barabara Vega

8.2 - List of Preparers

8.2.1 - Lead Agency
Community Development Department
Community Development Director............................................................................. David James, AICP City Planner......................................................................................................................... Joel Andrews

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Persons and Organizations Consulted/ Draft EIR List of Preparers
FirstCarbon Solutions 8-3
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec08-00 Persons and Orgs Consulted.docx City Manager’s Office
City Manager ............................................................................................................................. Ken Irwin Public Works Department
Public Works Director.............................................................................................................Mike Willet Director of Engineering, Building, and Capital Projects / City Engineer.....................Fernando Ulloa, PE

8.2.2 - Lead Agency’s Environmental Consultant
FirstCarbon Solutions
Project Director ..............................................................................................................Jason Brandman Project Director .......................................................................................................................Mary Bean Project Manager..................................................................................................................Grant Gruber Senior Noise Analyst....................................................................................................................Phil Ault Senior Project Archaeologist .................................................................................... Dana DePietro, PhD Senior Biologist......................................................................................................................Kevin Derby Biologist............................................................................................................................Alec Villanueva Senior Editor.......................................................................................................................... Susie Harris Word Processor .............................................................................................................. Melissa Ramirez GIS/Graphics................................................................................................................ Karlee McCracken Reprographics..................................................................................................................... Octavio Perez

8.2.3 - Lead Agency’s Technical Subconsultants
Advanced Mobility Group
Principal................................................................................................................. Christopher Thnay, PE Balance Hydrologics
Principal Engineer............................................................................................................. Ed Ballman, PE Geomorphologist/Hydrologist...................................................................................... Anne Senter, PhD Hydrologist ............................................................................................................................Scott Brown Mitchell Air Quality Consulting
Principal.............................................................................................................................. Dave Mitchell

8.2.4 - Lead Agency’s Planning Consultant
MIG
Contract Planner........................................................................................................ Tricia Stevens, AICP Contract Planner............................................................................................................... Scott Davidson

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) Persons and Organizations Consulted/ City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project List of Preparers Draft EIR
8-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec08-00 Persons and Orgs Consulted.docx

8.2.5 - Lead Agency’s Legal Counsel
Churchwell White LLP
Partner ........................................................................................................................... Barbara Brenner

8.2.6 - Master Plan Team
Property Owner Representatives
Lakeside Hills...................................................................................................................... Keith Fichtner Baldwin Ranch / Zacharias Ranch ....................................................................................... Joe Hollowell TFP...................................................................................................................................... Dave Romano Keystone Ranch............................................................................................................... Keith Schneider GDR Engineering, Inc.

Principal ............................................................................................................................Max Garcia, PE Assistant Planner.................................................................................................................. Josh Janz, PE Civil Engineer............................................................................................................. Jason Chapman, PE

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR References
FirstCarbon Solutions 9-1
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec09-00 References.docx SECTION 9: REFERENCES
Advanced Mobility Group (AMG). 2020. Traffic Impact Study for proposed Zacharias and Baldwin Master Plan, prepared for the City of Patterson.

Balance Hydrologics. 2017. Federal Emergency Management Agency Letter Of Map Revision for the Villages of Patterson.

Balance Hydrologics. 2020. Summary of Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling of Del Puerto Creek for the Zacharias Master Planning Area Annexation, City of Patterson. January 6.

Ballard, R.D and Krause, T.A. 2019. Preliminary percolation tests results, Zacharias master planning area, east of Baldwin Road, Patterson, California, prepared by CTE CAL, Inc. for the LDC Group.

Ballard, R.D and Krause, T.A. 2019. Preliminary percolation tests results, Zacharias master planning area, west and south of Baldwin Road, Patterson, California, prepared by CTE CAL, Inc. for the LDC Group.

Ballard, R.D and Krause, T.A., 2019. Preliminary percolation tests results, Zacharias master planning area, flood control basin north of Zacharias Road, Patterson, California, prepared by CTE CAL, Inc. for the LDC Group, 5 p.

Ballard, R.D and Krause, T.A. 2020. Preliminary percolation tests results, Zacharias master planning area, recharge basin north of Zacharias Road, Patterson, California, prepared by CTE CAL, Inc. for the LDC Group, 20 p.

Beardsley, R.K. 1948. Cultural Sequences in Central California Archaeology. American Antiquity 14:1-

28. Bennyhoff, J. 1950. Californian Fish Spears and Harpoons. Berkeley: University of California Anthropological Records 9(4):295-338.

California Air Resources Board (ARB). 2017c. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, the Proposed Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. January 17, 2017.

Website: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf. Accessed February 5, 2020.

California Department of Finance. 2018. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State—January 1, 2011-2019. May.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2020. ‘SWIS Facility Detail:

Fink Road Landfill (50-AA-0001).’ Website:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/50-AA-0001/Detail/.

California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 1999. California Irrigation Management Information System Reference Evapotranspiration. Website:
https://cimis.water.ca.gov/App_Themes/images/etozonemap.jpg

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project References Draft EIR
9-2 FirstCarbon Solutions
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec09-00 References.docx California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2020. Groundwater Information Center Interactive Map Application. Website: https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/gicima/.

California Employment Development Department (EDD). 2020. Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Places. February.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2017. California Electric Transmission Line Geospatial Data.

Accessed: October 22, 2019. Website: https://cecgiscaenergy.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/california-electric-transmission-line?geometry=- 121.311%2C37.421%2C-120.768%2C37.516.

California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS), 2019, Reference ETo data. Website:
https://cimis.water.ca.gov/App_Themes/images/etozonemap.jpg. Accessed February 26, 2019.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB). 2014. TMDL – Development of the 2014 Integrated Report. Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/tmdl/impaired_waters_list/20 14_int_rpt_dev/.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB), 2016, 2014-2016 303(d) list. Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/tmdl/impaired_waters_list/20 14_int_rpt_dev/. Approved December 5, 2016.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB), 2018, Water quality control plan (Basin Plan).

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB), 2019, 2016-2018 303(d) list, in progress. Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/tmdl/impaired_waters_list/20 19june/final_staff_rpt.pdf.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB). 2019. Section 303(d) 2018 Impaired Waters List Updates For the Central Valley Region–Final Staff Report. June.

Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/tmdl/impaired_waters_list/20 19june/final_staff_rpt.pdf.

Chartkoff J.L. and K.K. Chartkoff. 1984. The Archaeology of California. Menlo Park: Stanford University Press.

City of Patterson General Plan (2010), Public Services and Facilities Element chapters. Website:
https://www.ci.patterson.ca.us/145/General-PlanCity-Maps.

City of Patterson, 2018, Annual Water Quality Report. Website:
https://www.ci.patterson.ca.us/667/Water-Quality, 1 p.

City of Patterson, 2018, Patterson Municipal Code. Website:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Patterson/.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR References
FirstCarbon Solutions 9-3
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec09-00 References.docx City of Patterson. 2009. The City of Patterson Sustainability Plan. Website:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2bf8/0829dd89f54544afc12f6876b19f38e04011.pdf.

Accessed April 5, 2020.

City of Patterson. 2010. Air Resources and Climate Change. November 30. Website:
https://www.ci.patterson.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/149. Accessed February 25, 2020.

City of Patterson. 2010. City of Patterson General Plan.

City of Patterson. 2012. West Patterson Business Park Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2011082016). Certified July 31.

City of Patterson. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan.

City of Patterson. 2018. Consumer Confidence Report–Water.

City of Patterson. 2018. Draft Water Master Plan.

City of Patterson. 2018. Patterson Municipal Code.

City of Patterson. 2018. Storm Drainage Master Plan.

City of Patterson. 2020. ‘Water Quality Control Facility.’ Website:
https://www.ci.patterson.ca.us/201/Sewer-Treatment.

Cook, S.F. 1976. The Population of the California Indians 1769–1970. University of California Press.

Berkeley, California.

Debler, T., and Chapman, J., 2020, Basin sizing calculations for Zacharias master planning area, prepared by GDR Engineering for the LDC Group, 11 p.

Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2006. San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, DeltaMendota Subbasin, California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118, 5 pages.

Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2013. California’s Groundwater Update 2013, San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region, 122 pages.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2020. Air Quality / Energy / Greenhouse Gas Emissions Resources Supporting Information.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2020. Baldwin Master Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2020. Biological Resources Supporting Information.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2020. Noise Supporting Information.

FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS). 2020. Zacharias Master Plan Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 929 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson— Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project References Draft EIR
9-4 FirstCarbon Solutions
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec09-00 References.docx Fredrickson, D.A. 1973. Early Cultures of the North Coast of the North Coast Ranges, California. PhD dissertation.

GDR. 2020. Baldwin Master Plan Set. March.

GDR. 2020. Zacharias Master Plan Set. March.

Gooch, Kathleen M.B. 1988. Stanislaus County: An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Modesto, California.

Heizer, Robert F. 1978. ‘Handbook of North American Indians, V. 8: California.’ Washington, DC:

Smithsonian Institution.

Johnson, J.J. 1976. Archaeological Investigations at the Blodgett Site (CA-SAC-267), Sloughhouse Locality, California.

Jones, T.L. and Kathryn A. Klar. 2007. California Prehistory. Lanham: AltaMira Press; Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Kleinfelder. 2007. Preliminary Report for Geotechnical Services. May 23.

Kroeber, A.L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bulletin 78. Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.

Larry Walker Associates, 2018, Multi-agency post-construction stormwater standards manual (MAPCSSM), prepared for the cities of Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Patterson and Tracy, and portions of the County of San Joaquin, 291 p.

Lillard, J.B. and W.K. Purves. 1936. The Archaeology of the Deer Creek-Cosumnes Area, Sacramento Co., California. Sacramento. Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology Bulletin 1.

Lillard, J.B., R.F. Heizer, and F. Fenenga. 1939. An Introduction to the Archaeology of Central California. Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology, Bulletin 2.

Moratto, M.J. 1984. California Archaeology. San Diego: Academic Press.

National Marine Fisheries Service Western Regional Climate Center (NOAA WRCC). 2019.

Precipitation and temperature data. Website: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?ca6168. Accessed February 26, 2019.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Order 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/constpermits.shtml.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) (Order 2013-0001-DWQ). Website:

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 930 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson—Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR References
FirstCarbon Solutions 9-5
Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/17900003 Sec09-00 References.docx https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/phase_ii_municipal. html.

Patterson Irrigation District (PID). 2016. Water Management Plan.

Ragir, S.R. 1972. The Early Horizon in Central California Prehistory. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 15. Berkeley, CA.

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District). 2002. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts.

Schenck, W.E. and E. J. Dawson. 1929. Archaeology of the Northern San Joaquin Valley. American Archaeology and Ethnology 25:286–413.

Shoup, L.H., and R.T. Milliken. 1999. Inigo of Rancho Posolmi: The Life and Times of a Mission Indian.

Novato. Ballena Press.

Soares, A.R., 2013, Percolation testing APN 021-023-026 and 021-023-027 Baldwin Road Patterson California, prepared by North American Technical Services for Commercial Architecture, Inc., 2 p.

Stanislaus Council of Governments. 2016. Final South County Corridor Feasibility Study. May 18.

Website: http://www.stancog.org/pdf/final-south-county-corridor-feasibility-study.pdf.

Stanislaus County Agricultural Commissioner. 2018. 2017 Crop Report.

Storm Water Consulting, Inc. and Stantec, 2018, City of Patterson Storm Drainage Master Plan.

Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). 2017. Getting Involved in Groundwater: A Guide to California’s Groundwater Sustainability Plans. Published October 20, 2017. Website:
https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/ca-and-western-states/groundwater-toolkit.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. Characterization of Building Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the United States. June.

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1978. Patterson, California 7.5-Minute Topographical Map.

Wallace, William J. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology: 9000–2000 B.C.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2020. Newman, California (046169) Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Website: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca6168.

Woodard & Curran and Provost and Pritchard, Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Northern and Central Delta-Mendota Regions (GSP), 2019, consultant report prepared for the DeltaMendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies, 642 pages.

Woodard & Curran. 2018. Northern & Central Delta-Mendota Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

Woodard & Curran. 2020. Zacharias Water Supply Assessment. March.

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 931 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.c
Packet Pg. 932 Attachment: 17900003 Baldwin-Zacharias Master Plan Draft EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA
WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM
FINAL
Environmental Impact Report
Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project
City of Patterson, Stanislaus County, California
State Clearinghouse No. 2018122052
Prepared for:

City of Patterson
1 Plaza, P.O. Box 667
Patterson, CA 95363
209.895.8020
Contact: Joel Andrews, City Planner
Prepared by:

FirstCarbon Solutions
1350 Treat Boulevard, Suite 380
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
925.357.2562
Contact: Jason Brandman, Project Director
Grant Gruber, Project Manager
Date: July 1, 2021

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 933 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 934 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson–Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR Table of Contents
FirstCarbon Solutions iii https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/5 - Final EIR/17900003 Sec00-01 TOC.docx Table of Contents
Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1-1 Section 2: Master Responses....................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 - List of Master Responses................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 - Master Responses .......................................................................................................... 2-1 Section 3: Responses to Written Comments................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 - List of Authors ................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.2 - Responses to Comments................................................................................................ 3-1 Section 4: Errata.......................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 - Changes to the Draft EIR ................................................................................................ 4-1

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 935 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 936 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson–Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR Introduction
FirstCarbon Solutions 1-1 Https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/5 - Final EIR/17900003 Sec01-00 Introduction.docx SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088, the City of Patterson (Lead Agency) has evaluated the comments received on the Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, this Final EIR includes a list of persons, organizations, and agencies that provided comments on the Draft EIR; responses to the comments received regarding the Draft EIR; and errata, or revisions to the Draft EIR; as well as a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for use by the City of Patterson during its review.

This document is organized into three sections:
• Section 1—Introduction. Provides an introduction to the Final EIR. • Section 2—Master Responses. Provides a single, comprehensive response to similar comments about a particular topic.
• Section 2—Responses to Written Comments. Provides a list of the agencies, organizations, and individuals who commented on the Draft EIR. Copies of all of the letters received regarding the Draft EIR and responses thereto are included in this section. • Section 3—Errata. Includes an addendum listing refinements and clarifications on the Draft EIR, which have been incorporated.

The Final EIR includes the following contents:
• Draft EIR (provided under separate cover)
• Draft EIR Appendices (provided under separate cover)
• Responses to Written Comments on the Draft EIR and Errata (Sections 2 and 3 of this document) • Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (provided under separate cover)

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 937 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 938 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson–Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR Master Responses
FirstCarbon Solutions 2-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/5 - Final EIR/17900003 Sec02-00 Master Responses.docx SECTION 2: MASTER RESPONSES
Master responses address similar comments made by multiple public agencies, businesses, organizations, or individuals through written comments submitted to the City of Patterson. Master responses are provided in the order in which they are referenced in the responses in Section 3.

2.1 - List of Master Responses
• Master Response 1—Request For Extension of Time Period

2.2 - Master Responses
Master Response 1—Request For Extension of Time Period
Summary of Relevant Comments
Both the County of Stanislaus and Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) indicated that they became aware that the Draft EIR was circulating for public review weeks after it was released on December 3, 2020. Both agencies requested that the City of Patterson re-notice the availability of the Draft EIR and establish a new 45-day review period.

Response
The Draft EIR was released on December 3, 2020. The document was submitted to the State Clearinghouse and was posted on the CEQAnet database. The Draft EIR was also posted on the City of Patterson’s website. The applicant team, with City staff in attendance, held a virtual meeting with the various Ranchette Triangle property owners on December 10, 2020, to advise them of the availability of the Draft EIR and discuss various aspects of the proposed Master Plans.

The City of Patterson was advised on January 5, 2020, that certain parties did not receive notice of the Draft EIR’s availability. In accordance with the procedures set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, the City extended the Draft EIR review period by 15 days, which created a 60-day review period. That 60- day window closed on February 4, 2021. Both the County of Stanislaus and LAFCO submitted letters by the February 4, 2021, deadline and those comments are addressed in this Final EIR.

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 939 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 940 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) City of Patterson–Baldwin Master Plan / Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR Responses to Written Comments
FirstCarbon Solutions 3-1 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/1790/17900003/EIR/5 - Final EIR/17900003 Sec03-00 Responses to Written Comments.docx SECTION 3: RESPONSES TO WRITTEN COMMENTS

3.1 - List of Authors
A list of public agencies, organizations, and individuals that provided comments on the Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project Draft EIR is presented below. Each comment has been assigned a code. Individual comments within each communication have been numbered so comments can be crossed-referenced with responses. Following this list, the text of the communication is reprinted and followed by the corresponding response.

Author Author Code
State Agencies
California Department of Fish and Game....................................................................................... CDFW California Department of Toxic Substances Control .........................................................................DTSC Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board ..................................................................RWQCB Local Agencies
Stanislaus County Environmental Review Committee........................................................................ ERC Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (January 14, 2021)..........................................LAFCO.1 Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (February 3, 2021) ..........................................LAFCO.2 Patterson Irrigation District .................................................................................................................PID San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District............................................................................. APCD Private Parties
Hank Gnesa.................................................................................................................................... GNESA

3.2 - Responses to Comments

3.2.1 - Introduction
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088, the City of Patterson, as the lead agency, evaluated the comments received on the Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2018122052) for the Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project, and has prepared the following responses to the comments received. This Response to Comments document becomes part of the Final EIR for the project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132.

3.2.2 - Comment Letters and Responses
The comment letters reproduced in the following pages follow the same organization as used in the List of Authors.

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 941 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project)

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7.2.d
Packet Pg. 942 Attachment: Baldwin Zacharias Master Plan Project Final EIR (Zacharias and Baldwin Ranch Master Plan Project) State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director Central Region
1234 East Shaw Avenue
Fresno, California 93710
(559) 243-4005
www.wildlife.ca.gov
Conserving California’s Wildlife Since 1870
January 19, 2021
Joel Andrews, City Planner
City of Patterson Community Development Department
1 Plaza Circle
Patterson, California 95363
[email protected]
Subject: Baldwin Master Plan/Zacharias Master Plan Project (Project) Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
SCH No. 2018122052
Dear Mr. Andrews:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a DEIR from the City of Patterson Community Development Department for the above-referenced Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.1 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, CDFW appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under Fish and Game Code.

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statue for all the people of the State (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a)). CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

1 CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The “CEQA Guidelines” are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000. 









 




CDFW