City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority
September 12, 2023

Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 1 of 5
AGEND

AMENDED AGENDA
( ITEM 10.1- ATTACHMENT 1 )
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2023 – 6:00 P.M.
(THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. FLAG SALUTE

3. INVOCATION

4. ROLL CALL

5. AGENDA CHANGES

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

7. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)
Item 7.1
Presentation from StanCOG (Stanislaus Council of Governments) on the Unmet Transit Needs (UTN)- It is recommended that City council receive a presentation from Jean Foletta, Director of Mobility Programs.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

PLEASE SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE.

Refer to the last page of this agenda for the Public Comment Procedures via ZOOM.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

CITY OF RIVERBANK
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Meetings
Council Chambers, 6707 Third Street,
Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Council/Authority Members
District 1 - Luis Uribe
District 2 - Rachel Hernandez
District 3 - Leanne Jones Cruz
District 4 - Darlene Barber-Martinez
City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda September 12, 2023 Next City Council Resolution: 2023-098 Next Ordinance: 2023-005 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2023-003 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 2 of 5
Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Item 9.2 Approval of the City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes for August 22, 2023.

Item 9.3 Acceptance of the Castleberg Park Trail Project and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion
Item 9.4 Acceptance of the Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion
Item 9.5 Resolution to Approve a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Ward Villas (River Terrace) with McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement.

Item 9.6 Resolution to approve Final Map 03-2021 Ward Villas – APN: 132-036- 003.

Item 9.7 Resolution to Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Professional Services Agreement for a Housing Element Update to the General Plan with JB Anderson Land Use Planning.

Item 9.8 Resolution Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to the Recent Fire at the Riverbank Public Works Corporation Yard.

10. PUBLIC HEARING
The Public Notice for Item 10.1 was published on August 30, 2023 in the Riverbank News.

Item 10.1 Aemetis Conditional Use Permit Appeal- Review the provided documents, take public comment, and approve the Addendum to the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Environmental Impact Report (“RAAP EIR”) and Use Permit 01-2023 for Aemetis Advanced Products Riverbank, Inc. (“Aemetis”), subject to the conditions in the Resolution.

11. NEW BUSINESS
Item 11.1 Cheese & Wine Festival Discussion- It is recommended that the City Council receive additional information and provide direction to staff on the boundary map and other concerns regarding the 2023 Cheese & Wine Festival.

Item 11.2 American Rescue Plan Act Spending Plan Update- It is recommended that the City Council receive an update regarding the ARPA Spending Plan Projects and provide direction to staff on possible amendments.

Item 11. 3 Resolution to Approve the McRoy Wilbur Communities Reimbursement of PLHA Grant and Former Redevelopment Low-Moderate Income City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda September 12, 2023 Next City Council Resolution: 2023-098 Next Ordinance: 2023-005 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2023-003 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 3 of 5
Housing Funds for the River Terrace Subdivision- It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution approving the reimbursement of PLHA Grant and Former Redevelopment Low-Moderate Income Housing Funds by McRoy-Wilbur Communities for the River Terrace (formerly Ward Villas) subdivision to be collected via escrow at property closing.

12. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made.

The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 12.1 Staff
Item 12.2 Council/Authority Member
Item 12.3 Mayor/Chair

13. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session
Item 13.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL– Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation, (Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)) Number of Potential Cases: 1

14. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Item 14.1 Report from Closed Session Item 13.1
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL– Anticipated Litigation
Significant Exposure to Litigation, (Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)) Number of Potential Cases: 1

15. ADJOURNMENT
• The Next Regular City Council Meeting will be on:

Tuesday, September 26, 2023 at 6:00 P.M.

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted at the meeting location, on the North City Hall public exterior bulletin board, South City Hall public exterior Bulletin, Riverbank Community Center exterior bulletin, and the City’s website 72 hours prior to the meeting in accordance to the California Ralph M. Brown Act.

Posted this 8
th Day of September, 2023
/s/Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk
City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda September 12, 2023 Next City Council Resolution: 2023-098 Next Ordinance: 2023-005 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2023-003 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 4 of 5

ADA COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, the City will make every effort to make reasonable modifications or accommodations from individuals with disabilities. Contact the Administration Dept. at (209) 863-7122 or the City Clerk at [email protected] at least (48) hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for accessibility.

NOTICE REGARDING NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS
Pursuant to California Constitution Article III, Section IV, establishing English as the official language for the State of California, and in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedures Section 185, which requires proceedings before any State Court to be in English, notice is hereby given that all proceedings before the City of Riverbank City Council/LRA Board shall be in English and anyone wishing to address the Council is required to have a translator present who will take an oath to make an accurate translation from any language not English into the English language.

PUBLIC “LIVE” VIEWING
• Government Channels: Charter– 2 and AT&T U-VERSE – 99 • YouTube Live – City of Riverbank
• Via ZOOM Platform (See instructions below)

SUBMITTING PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD

Written comments must be received before 4:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting in order for them to be distributed to the Council prior to consideration of the matter. Written comments will not be read aloud at the meeting, but will be reported as received for the record. If you do not receive an acknowledgement of receipt within an hour of submission or by 5:00 pm, please call the City Clerk’s Office at (209) 863-7198 or the Administration Dept. at (209) 863-7122.

ACCEPTABLE METHODS OF SUBMITTING COMMENTS BEFORE THE 4:00 PM DEADLINE ● Via Mail Service: Mail comments to City of Riverbank, Attn. City Clerk, 6707 Third Street, Suite A, Riverbank, CA 95367. (Call 209-863-7198 / 209-863-7122 to ensure they were received.) ● Via Email: Mail to [email protected] (Note: This technology is not a guaranteed method.) • Indicate Agenda Item # in the subject line. (Call 209-863-7198 /209-863-7122 to ensure receipt) ● Oral Comments In-Person: The Mayor will ask the public if anyone wishes to comment, at that time you may approach the podium.
● Oral Comments Via Zoom: The Mayor will announce when public comments may be made for a limit of 3 minutes on the agenda item being considered, at which time you will:
(please make sure the volume on your video device or any nearby device is turned down.) o Using a computer – click on the “raise hand” feature in the webinar controls. This will alert staff that you wish to speak, and you will be unmuted.
o Using a Phone – press *9 to “raise the hand”. This will alert staff that you wish to speak, and you will be unmuted.

Teleconference Phone Number (This system is a backup for ZOOM technical difficulties only when providing oral comments.) If there are technical difficulties or disconnection with ZOOM while making oral comments, please immediately call the teleconference phone number (209) 863-7151 so that Council may receive your comments. Council will be waiting for your call. Thank you

JOIN THE MEETING VIA ZOOM PLATFORM
Join by this link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/82963329089 Join by accessing website: https://zoom.us/join , enter Webinar ID: 829 6332 9089 • Join by telephone:1 669 444 9171 OR 1 669 900 9128, plus Webinar ID: 829 6332 9089 Learn about using ZOOM - Visit https://zoom.us/j/94943925973?status=success for a free account or to download the app.

TELECONFERENCE/VIRUAL PLATFORM PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

COMMENT PROCEDURES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN

CONFORMANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT

Item 7.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.1
SECTION 7: PRESENTATIONS
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Presentation from StanCOG (Stanislaus Council of Governments) on the Unmet Transit Needs (UTN)
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted By: Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City council receive a presentation from Jean Foletta, Director of Mobility Programs with the Stanislaus Council of Government (StanCOG) regarding the Unmet Transit Needs (UTN).

SUMMARY
Every year, as established by the California Transportation Development Act (TDA), StanCOG is required to identify any "unmet transit need" that may exist in the Stanislaus region before TDA funds are distributed to local jurisdictions for non-transit purposes. If an "unmet transit need" is identified, a further determination is needed to establish whether or not that need is "reasonable to meet".

The StanCOG Policy Board has adopted the following definitions for both "unmet transit need" and "reasonable to meet": Unmet Transit Need - Unmet Transit Need - is a need for transportation/transit service(s) for an individual or group of individuals within any part of Stanislaus County, which has not either been programmed to receive TDA funds or implemented under existing programs that currently receive TDA funds.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact associated with this report.

ATTACHMENTS
No Attachments.

Item 9.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.1
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Waiver of Readings
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk/LRA Secretary

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council / LRA Board approve the waiver of readings of any proposed ordinances and resolutions for consideration, except by title.

SUMMARY
In lieu of reading the entire text of a proposed ordinance or resolution that is introduced for consideration for adoption and approval, by majority vote, the City Council/LRA Board may waive the reading of the text and introduce the ordinance or resolution by title only for the record.

The full text of the proposed ordinances and resolutions, and any related documents that are part of the agenda packet, are available for review by the public on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s office at City Hall (North) upon distribution to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board; typically 72 hours prior to the scheduled date and time of the meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENTS
There are no attachments to this report.

Item 9.2 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELPOMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.2
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Approval of the August 22, 2023 City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk/LRA Secretary

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/ Local Redevelopment Authority Board approve the City Council/LRA Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2023 as presented.

SUMMARY
The Draft Minutes of the City Council and the Local Redevelopment Authority Board meeting have been prepared for review and approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENTS

1. The August 22, 2023 City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes.

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023

MINUTES
TUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2023 – 6:00 P.M.
(THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER - Mayor / Chair O’Brien called the meeting to order at 6:00P.M.

2. FLAG SALUTE –Mayor / Chair O’Brien led the pledge of allegiance.

3. INVOCATION – Reverend Randy Richardson provided the invocation.

4. ROLL CALL – City Clerk Hernandez conducted Roll Call.

Members of the City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority Board present:

Council Member / Authority Member District 1 Luis Uribe Council Member / Authority Member District 3 Leanne Jones Cruz Council Member / Authority Member District 4 Darlene Barber-Martinez Vice Mayor / Vice Chair District 2 Rachel Hernandez
Mayor / Chair Richard D. O’Brien

5. AGENDA CHANGES
No Agenda Changes.

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

No Conflicts Declared at this time.

7. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)
Item 7.1 Presentation from SMA Entertainment on the Marketing Plan for the 2023 Cheese & Wine Festival- It is recommended that the City Council review the marketing plan that will be presented by SMA Entertainment for the 2023 Cheese & Wine Festival.

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Richard D. O’Brien
Council/Authority Members:

District 1 -Luis Uribe
District 2- Rachel Hernandez
District 3- Leanne Jones Cruz
District 4 -Darlene Barber-Martinez

CITY OF RIVERBANK
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Meetings
Council Chambers, 6707 Third St
Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
Steven Alexander, with SMA Entertainment provided a handout along with his presentation on the Cheese & Wine Festival Marketing Plan.

Item 7.2 Presentation by Dave White, Chief Executive Officer for Opportunity Stanislaus- It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from Dave White, Chief Executive Officer of Opportunity Stanislaus regarding the resources and assistance they have provided to the City of Riverbank and its businesses.

Dave White, CEO of Opportunity Stanislaus gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding the assistance they have provided to the City of Riverbank businesses.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

Mayor O’Brien Opened Public Comment at 6:53 P.M.

City Manager, Garcia provided flowers to Sue Fitzpatrick, Director of Parks and Recreation as a thank you from herself, City Staff and city council for her 24 years of service to the City of Riverbank and all the wonderful projects that she was able to bring to fruition. We wish her well on her retirement.

Vicki Holt, with Riverbank Library gave an update on all the classes and events being held at the library, which can be found on the Library website at stanislauslibrary.org and are provided thanks to the 1/8 of a cent tax.

Dr. Constantino Aguilar, Superintendent of Riverbank Unified School District would like to formerly introduce himself, came on board about 5 months ago. Commented on his goals, and core values, for our schools. Would like to invite all of City Council to attend the Riverbank unified School District and the University of California, Merced Automatic Admissions Program, that will be held at Fauria Gym at Riverbank High School on September 21st.

Dave Romano, Developer with Riverwalk Project gave an update from the development team. The Riverwalk project that is now in the planning process, it’s in your General Plan that you adopted in 2009, when cities were thinking what areas do we grow and how do we grow, the city has prepared infrastructure master plans based on that general plan, how do we serve that area. McHenry Bridge has been widened, so there is good circulation there in that area. And while there were activities to plan this area 20 years ago, this is a different project. This is a project that has a mixture of land uses, will serve mixture of different economic and age groups. A project like this takes development over time, it doesn’t occur overnight, will be developed in phases. All of the issues associated with this project will be analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report, you will have an opportunity to review that, and ultimately this council based on all the input that you get, will get an opportunity to act on this project. We hope affirmatively, but that’s a decision

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
with you. Your staff has been wonderful, we appreciate working with them. We just wanted to come and give you a little update on the project and thank you for the consideration so far and your consideration in the future.

Jamie Aggers, Modesto Resident spoke in opposition of the Riverwalk Project.

David Anthony-Avila, Oakdale Resident commented on the Cheese and Wine Festival in reference to cost of the fencing and proposed business store fronts be used as fencing for the vendors, that will help with some of the cost.

Annabel Gammon, Modesto Resident commented regarding the Riverwalk Project.

Tim Mellencamp, Riverbank Resident commented on the signage out in front of a home on Patterson Road with inappropriate foul language. It is outside City Limits and might be county, but would like to know if there is any type of ordinance against this type of signage.

There being no further public comments, Mayor O’Brien closed the Public Comment period 7:15 P.M.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Item 9.2 Approval of the City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes for July 25, 2023.

Item 9.3 Authorization for Out of State Travel Request to have Finance Staff Attend the Caselle Annual Conference in Salt Lake City, UT.

Item 9.4 Authorization for Out of State Travel Request to have Finance Staff Attend the Itron Conference in San Antonio, Texas.

Item 9.5 Resolution to Approve Final Map 02-2022 Countryside III – APN: 062-022-020.

Item 9.6 Resolution 2023-093 to Approve Final Map 01-2023 for BDC Riverbank II L.P. in the Crossroads West Specific Plan – APN: 074-140-007.

Item 9.7 Resolution 2023-094 approving the City Manager to enter into a Cost Sharing Agreement between the City of Riverbank and the County of Stanislaus for the construction of the Claribel Road Overlay Project.

City Manager, Garcia commented at the request of staff, we are requesting that Item 9.5 be pulled from the consent calendar to be considered at future meeting.

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
There being no public comments, Mayor O’Brien brought the item back to City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Jones Cruz / Barber-Martinez 5/0) to approve the consent calendar as amended with the exception of item 9.5.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Hernandez, Jones Cruz, Barber-Martinez, and Mayor O’Brien NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Public Notice for Item 10.1 was published on August 9, 2023 in the Riverbank News.

Item 10.1 A Resolution to Adopt the 2023-2024 schedule of Park Amenity Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Facility Rental Fees for the City of Riverbank - It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution to approve the 2022-2023 fees for Park Amenity Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Facility Rentals. The recommended fee increases, and new classes/programs offered with associated fees are highlighted in Exhibit A.

Recreation Supervisor Lemonds gave a comprehensive staff report on the recommended fee increases, and new classes/programs and to approve the proposed 2023-2024 schedule of Park Amenity Rentals, Recreation Programs, and facility rental fees for the city.

City Council discussed the item with staff.

Mayor O’Brien opened the Public Hearing at 7:20 P.M.

Mayor O’Brien closed the Public Hearing at 7:20 P.M.

There being no further public comments, Mayor O’Brien brought the item back to the City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe/ Hernandez 5/0) to approve Resolution 2023-095 to Adopt the 2023-2024 schedule of Park Amenity Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Facility Rental Fees for the City of Riverbank.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Hernandez, Jones Cruz, Barber-Martinez, and Mayor O’Brien NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

11. NEW BUSINESS
Item 11.1 Resolution to Approve the McRoy Wilbur Communities Deferral of System Development Fees for the River Terrace Subdivision- It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution approving the deferral of the McRoy-Wilbur Communities System

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
Development Fees assessed on the construction of dwelling units in the River Terrace subdivision from building permit issuance to final inspection.

Building and Planning Manager Kenney presented a comprehensive staff report and power point presentation on the deferral of the McRoy-Wilbur Communities System Development Fees for the River Terrace Subdivision.

City Council discussed the item with staff.

Cary Pope, original developer of the Ward Villas, now River Terrace commented on his appreciation of consideration of deferral of fees. We really wanted to stress the affordability of this project. Unfortunately, we have not been able to achieve that. As of today, interest rates are at a 23-year high. It does not bode well with the first-time home buyers.

David Anthony Avila, Oakdale Resident asked where do all those fees go? Do they actually pay for any of the hardware, does it go to water, paving, sidewalks, does any of that money go to those costs?
Building and Planning Manager Kenney clarified, yes all of these fees go to the system.

Water goes to water, wastewater goes to wastewater they are not interchanged, unless there is some specific reason and the council agrees to move some of those funds. So, they go where they are supposed to go.

There being no further public comments, Mayor O’Brien brought the item back to the City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Jones Cruz / Uribe 5/0) to approve Resolution 2023-096 approving the deferral of the McRoy-Wilbur System Development Fees for the River Terrace Subdivision.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Hernandez, Jones Cruz, Barber-Martinez, and Mayor O’Brien NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 11.2 Consideration of the Options for the Appointment of a Riverbank Representative to the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Board (SCFPD): 1) Adopt a Resolution to Reappoint Mr. Charles E.

Neal for a Four-Year Term, 2) Adopt a Resolution to Reappoint Mr.

Charles E. Neal for Less than a Four-Year Term; or 3) Open a Recruitment to Select a Representative for a Term Beginning January 1, 2024 - It is recommended that City Council evaluate and discuss the options for the appointment of a Riverbank Representative to the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District. (SCFPD). Should the City Council decide to re-appoint the existing representative, Council should consider approval of a Resolution to appoint Mr. Charles E. Neal to a new term.

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
City Clerk Hernandez presented a comprehensive staff report on the options for the appointment of a Riverbank Representative to the Stanislaus consolidated Fire Protection District Board (SCFPD).

City Council discussed the item with staff.

There being no further public comments, Mayor O’Brien brought the item back to the City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Jones Cruz / Barber-Martinez 5/0) to approve Resolution 2023-097 to reappoint Charles E. Neal to a 4 yearterm as the Riverbank Representative on the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Board.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Hernandez, Jones Cruz, Barber-Martinez, and Mayor O’Brien NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

12. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made. The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 12.1 Staff
City Manager Garcia reported on the following:
• Building and Planning Manager Kenney will be providing some response on the issue that Resident Mr. Mellencamp brought up earlier. Our Senior Code Enforcement Officer Michel Garcia has received several complaints about the sign that was mentioned on Patterson Road, she did the research and it is in county property, so we don’t have any jurisdiction there. She does have a counterpart that she works closely with in the county. She did contact them, and made a referral and they agreed they would follow up on it.

Item 12.2 Council/Authority Member
Councilmember Jones Cruz reported on the following:
• We need to strive for excellence in the city. I remember making comments down there, before I was elected up here. We can’t just settle for good, we can just settle for great. We need to strive for excellence, and in all those things, we need to focus on that. Because Riverbank is a fabulous place.
• Would like to Chief Ridenour for the helicopter fly along, thank for giving me a whole another fabulous view.

Councilmember Uribe reported on the following:
• Would like to invite everyone to the Grand opening of Moxie Salon and Spa, Glam down on Santa Fe has been here for 6 years, will be relocating to Atchison, the address is 3331 Atchison Street on September 9th at 4:00pm, hope to see you all there.

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
Councilmember Barber-Martinez reported on the following:
• Would like to thank the community and the Chief for sponsoring our National Night Out, we Central Valley Resource gave away 300 snow cones in about 45 minutes, I think everyone had a great time.
• The SHA (Stanislaus Homeless Alliance) Meeting is a regional effort to tackle Homelessness, the meetings are recorded and can be viewed online.

Vice Mayor Hernandez reported on the following:
• Would like to thank Chief Ridenour for the fly along the helicopter, it was an awesome experience.

Item 12.3 Mayor/Chair
Mayor O’Brien reported on the following:
• The Stanislaus and Jackson RFP has been issues and closes on Thursday. • Would like an update from Sitelogiq, on where we are with the project, if possible at the next meeting.

13. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session.

Item 13.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
(Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54957)
Title: Chief of Police
Item 13.2 LIABILITY CLAIMS
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54961)
Claimant: Cari McCormick -Aiman-Smith & Marcy
Agency Claimed Against: City of Riverbank
Item 13.3 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8)
Property: 6436 Oakdale Road, Riverbank (APN 075-026-040) Agency Negotiator: City Manager Marisela H. Garcia
Property Negotiator: High, Price & Leffler Associates
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both.

There being no public comments, Mayor O’Brien moved to Closed Session at 7:40 P.M.

Reconvened from Closed Session at 8:10 P.M.

14. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Item 14.1 Report from Closed Session Item 13.1

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
(Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54957)
Title: Chief of Police

CC / LRA Minutes – 08/22/2023
ACTION: Direction was provided to staff.

Item 14.2 Report from Closed Session Item 13.2

LIABILITY CLAIMS
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54961)
Claimant: Cari McCormick -Aiman-Smith & Marcy
Agency Claimed Against: City of Riverbank
ACTION: Vote of 5/0 to deny the claim.

Item 14.3 Report from Closed Session Item 13.3

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8)
Property: 6436 Oakdale Road, Riverbank (APN 075-026-040) Agency Negotiator: City Manager Marisela H. Garcia
Property Negotiator: High, Price & Leffler Associates
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both.

ACTION: Direction was provided to staff.

15. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair O’Brien adjourned the regular meeting at 8:11 P.M.to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting of September 12, 2023 at 6:00 P.M.

ATTEST: (Adopted 09/12/2023) APPROVED:

Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor/ Chair

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.3
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Acceptance of the Castleberg Park Trail Project and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Kathleen Cleek, Development Services Administration Manager Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council accept the completion of the Castleberg Park Trail Project and authorize staff to file a Notice of Completion.

SUMMARY:

Consolidated Engineering Inc. completed the construction of the Castleberg Park Trail Project. William Kull, City Engineer and City staff have completed a final inspection and determined that construction has been completed per the plans and specifications.

The contract was awarded on March 14, 2023 to Consolidated Engineering Inc. in the amount of $225,439.00. Three contract change orders were issued for this project in the amount of $15,916.22. The total cost of construction is $241,355.22.

It is recommended that the Council accept the Castleberg Park Trail Project as complete and authorize the Senior Project Coordinator to record the Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Funding was programmed for this project with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds - $135,000.00 and Fund 156 - $148,388.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Notice of Completion

2. Before & After Photos

3. Site Map

CITY OF RIVERBANK
ATTN: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES6707 THIRD STREETRIVERBANK, CA 95367 City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street, Riverbank, CA 95367
X
N/A
N/A
September 12, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Riverbank
Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
City of Riverbank
Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
Riverbank Stanislaus California
Stanislaus California
Riverbank
12th September 2023
12th September 2023
Castleberg Park Trail Project
Consolidated Engineering Inc.
construct all asphalt paving, sidewalk, striping
and ADA improvements .
5845 8th Street, Riverbank, CA 95367
Castleberg Park Trail Project
Photos
During After
Before After
ATTACHMENT 2
Site Map
Castleberg Park Trail Project
ATTACHMENT 3

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.4
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Acceptance of the Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Kathleen Cleek, Development Services Administration Manager Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council accept the completion of the Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project and authorize staff to file a Notice of Completion.

SUMMARY:

Taylor Backhoe Service Inc. dba TBS Contractors completed the construction of the Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project. William Kull, City Engineer and City staff have completed a final inspection and determined that construction has been completed per the plans and specifications.

The contract was awarded on November 8, 2022 to Taylor Backhoe Service Inc. dba TBS Contractors in the amount of $280,993.99. There were several unforeseen issues that arose during construction such as PG&E shallow gas transmission lines and five (5) water services needed to be hot tapped. Ten contract change orders were issued for this project in the amount of $90,520.08. The total cost of construction is $371,514.07.

It is recommended that the Council accept the Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project as complete and authorize the Senior Project Coordinator to record the Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Costs to be covered by Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) - $280,000.00, Measure L - $100,000.00 and Water Fund #116 - $35,400.00.

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Notice of Completion

2. Before & After Photos

3. Site Map

CITY OF RIVERBANK
ATTN: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES6707 THIRD STREETRIVERBANK, CA 95367 City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street, Riverbank, CA 95367
X
N/A
N/A
September 12, 2023
ATTACHMENT 1
City of Riverbank
Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
City of Riverbank
Laura Graybill, Senior Project Coordinator
Riverbank Stanislaus California
Stanislaus California
Riverbank
Taylor Backhoe Service Inc. dba TBS Contractors
12th September 2023
12th September 2023
Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project
construct all asphalt paving, curb, gutter,
sidewalk, storm systems, striping and traffic control .

Roselle Avenue on the east side between
north of Turpin Ave and south of Talbot Ave in Riverbank, CA 95367 Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project Photos
During After
Before After
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3

Item 9.5– CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.5
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Riverbank, California, to Approve a Subdivision Improvement Agreement for Ward Villas (River Terrace) with McRoy Wilbur
Communities, Inc and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement.

From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Donna M. Kenney, Planning and Building Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider the attached resolution approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement with McRoy Wilbur Communities for Ward Villas (River Terrace) and directing the City Manager to execute the agreement.

SUMMARY
On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-008, approving a General Plan Amendment for the Ward Villas property, which re-designated 2.42 acres to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and allows for a net density of eight to sixteen (8- 16) dwelling units per acre.

On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-009, approving Tentative Subdivision Map No. 01-2015 (“the Ward Villas Tentative Map”) and related conditions of approval, which set forth the infrastructure obligations and conditions related to the development and build out of 28 residential lots on 2.45 acres. Condition of Approval #7 requires that a Home Owner’s Association (“HOA”) be formed for the maintenance of the basin and common landscaped areas. This condition is no longer necessary and will not be applied to the proposed Final Map. This property was one of the original properties that formed and was annexed into Community Facilities District (“CFD”) 2016-01, which will maintain these areas. In addition, Resolution 2016-009 (Exhibit A) states Chavez Street will be a private street. That is no longer the case – it is proposed to be a public street.

Item 9.5– CC/LRA 09/12/2023
On February 23, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-010 approving the Rezone 01-2015. This action rezoned the property to Planned Development (PD) and allows for a net density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per acre. The developer is providing three (3) amenities within the subdivision for the PD zoning, including decorative garage doors, decorative exterior lights at garage doors, and enhanced landscaping, consisting of larger plants and trees than required.

On October 13, 2020 and with Ordinance No. 2020-012, the City Council approved a Development Agreement for Ward Villas with Ammo Plant Management, Inc (“AP Management”).

One of the last steps in the subdivision map process is the approval of a final map which subdivides the parcel into the individual lots planned for homes, streets, utilities, and parkland or other public areas. Commonly, there are two ways to achieve a final map. The first way is for the developer to install all required infrastructure improvements (roads, street lighting, water/sewer lines, etc.) in advance of requesting the final map.

The second way is to enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement (“SIA”) and submit bonds, which provide security for the City that the improvements will be completed as required by the tentative map conditions of approval. In the past, the City has used both methods depending on the individual needs and timelines of each project.

On March, 14, 2023, the City Council approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for the project, then found out the property was sold to McRoy Wilbur just before the final map was approved. It was determined that final map is invalid and McRoy Wilbur had to take the final map to Council for re-approval under their name.

AP Management has completed the on-site grading and has completed all infrastructure improvements except the completion of the joint trench (PGE). McRoy Wilbur has requested that Council consider approving their final map (also agendized for this Council meeting). As such, the Riverbank Municipal Code (“RMC”) requires that a Subdivision Improvement Agreement be approved in advance of the approval of a final map.

Exhibit A is a standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement that lays out many of the bonding and insurance requirements set forth in the Riverbank Municipal Code. Specific items in the agreement have been tailored to fit the circumstances of Ward Villas.

Approval of this document will allow the developer to request final map consideration by Council.

The estimated cost of the required infrastructure improvements for Ward Villas was approximately $477,795.10. This estimate was reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. RMC §152.076 requires that two specific improvement securities be filed with the City: the first security (bond) shall secure faithful performance of the agreement in an amount equal to 100% of the estimated cost of the improvements and the second security shall secure the obligations set forth in Cal Govt. Code §66499.3(b) of payment

Item 9.5– CC/LRA 09/12/2023
of the contractor, his subcontractors and to persons renting equipment or furnishing labor or materials to them for the improvements, and shall be in an amount equal to 50% of the total estimated cost of the improvements. As mentioned above, the infrastructure is all but complete; therefore, the faithful performance bond is not required.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no direct financial impact as a result of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. However, approval of the SIA will allow the review and approval of the Final Map and facilitate the development of single-family residential units and associated amenities.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution 2023 - TBD
Exhibit A - Subdivision Improvement Agreement between the City of Riverbank and McRoy Wilbur Communities Inc for Ward Villas (River Terrace).

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK

APPROVING A SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR WARD VILLAS (RIVER TERRACE) WITH MCROY WILBUR COMMUNITIES, INC. AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc is the property owner of Ward Villas (River Terrace), a proposed 28 lot subdivision on approximately 2.42 acres; and WHEREAS, on February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016- 009 to approve Tentative Subdivision Map 01-2015 and related conditions of approval, which set forth the infrastructure obligations and conditions of approval related to the development and build out of 28 residential lots on 2.42 acres; and WHEREAS, Tentative Map Condition of Approval #7 will not apply to the Final Map because the property was annexed into CFD 2016-01 and does not need a Home Owners Association to maintain the basin and common landscaped areas; and WHEREAS, Chavez Court will not be a private street as originally proposed, but will be a public street; and
WHEREAS, Ammo Plant Management, Inc. (seller) has completed all infrastructure for Ward Villas except the completion of the utility trench; and WHEREAS, McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc. (owner) will be requesting that Council consider approval of a final map for Ward Villas at tonight’s City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Riverbank Municipal Code requires that if improvements are not complete when the final map is considered for approval, a subdivision improvement agreement be entered into; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivision Improvement Agreement has been developed in cooperation with McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc. and City of Riverbank staff.

WHEREAS, this Resolution supersedes and takes the place of City council Resolution 2023-018 adopted on March 14, 2023. City Council Resolution 2023-018 shall no longer have any force or effect.

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby declares the following:

1. The City Council approves the Subdivision Improvement Agreement as presented (Exhibit A); and

2. The City Council directs the City Manager to execute the attached Subdivision Improvement Agreement subject to verification and receipt of the securities required within the agreement and any other requirements as set forth by the agreement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 12
th day of September 2023; motioned by Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, and upon roll call was carried by the following vote of ___:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ________________________
Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A – Subdivision Improvement Agreement

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT

FOR THE WARD VILLAS SUBDIVISION
This SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ____ day of _____________ 2023, by and between the City of Riverbank, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc (“Subdivider”, “McRoy Wilbur”). City and Subdivider may herein be referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. There are no other parties to this Agreement. This Agreement is made with reference to the following:

RECITALS
A. Subdivider is possessed of a tract of land consisting of approximately 2.42 acres, lying in the City of Riverbank, County of Stanislaus, California, originally known as “Ward Villas” (the “Subdivision”) and to be known as “River Terrace”.

B. On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-008, approving a general plan amendment redesignating 2.42 acres to medium density residential (MDR) which allows for a net density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per acre.

C. On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-009, approving Tentative Subdivision Map No. 01-2015 (“the Ward Villas Tentative Map”) and related conditions of approval, which set forth the infrastructure obligations and conditions related to the development and build out of 28 residential lots on 2.42 acres. Resolution No. 2016-009 is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

D. The Tentative Map is subject to the Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code § 66410 et seq.) and the City’s ordinances and regulations related to the filing, approval, and recordation of subdivision maps (together, the “Subdivision Laws”) and the requirements and conditions contained in the Resolution of Approval.

E. On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-010 approving Rezone 01-2015. This action rezoned the property to Planned Development (PD) and allows for a density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per net acre.

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:

City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: City Clerk
Exempt from recording fees
(Gov. Code §§ 6103 and 27383)
(Space above this line for Recorder’s use)

EXHIBIT A

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

F. On October 13, 2020 and with Ordinance No. 2020-012, the City Council approved a Development Agreement for Ward Villas with Ammo Plant Management, Inc (“AP Management”).

G. On March, 14, 2023, the City Council approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for the project, then found out the property was sold to McRoy Wilbur before AP Management (seller) obtained final map approval. It was determined that final map is invalid and McRoy Wilbur had to take the final map to Council for re-approval under their name.

They also request the removal of Tentative Map Condition of Approval #7 (HOA requirement) and that Chavez Court is a public street instead of private.

H. Complete improvement plans for the construction, installation, and completion of the improvements (“Improvement Plans”) have been prepared by Subdivider and approved by the City of Riverbank City Engineer (“Engineer”) and Planning and Building Manager or her designee (“Manager”).

I. Subdivider has presented to the City a proposed final map (“Final Map”) for the Subdivision, pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Laws for approval and recordation.

J. In order for the City to approve and record a Final Map for the Subdivision, the Subdivider must either complete all of the improvements required by the Subdivision Laws, Resolution of Approval, Improvement Plans and Tentative Map (“Improvements”), or execute an agreement with the City to complete the Improvements within a specified period of time.

K. In order for the City to approve and record a Final Map for the Subdivision, Subdivider desires to enter into this Agreement, whereby Subdivider promises to install and complete, at Subdivider’s sole cost, expense and risk, all of the Improvements required in connection with the Subdivision, including but not limited to grading work, constructing and installing the Improvements, and all labor that is required to complete these tasks to the satisfaction of the City (“Improvement Work”).

L. Subdivider has secured this Agreement by depositing security with the City consisting of a cash deposit, bond, or letter of credit in form acceptable to the City to secure a oneyear warranty of workmanship in accordance with the terms provided herein (the “Securities”).

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Recitals. The recitals above (“Recitals”) are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into and made part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between the Recitals and Sections 1 through 23 of this Agreement, Sections 1 through 23 shall prevail.

2. Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall only become effective on the date that both Subdivider and the City have executed this Agreement (the “Effective Date”), and shall

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

terminate only after the release of all Securities, unless this Agreement is terminated in writing signed by both Parties.

3. Dedication. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or in the action of the City Council approving the Final Map, the City hereby rejects all lands, rights-of-way and easements offered for dedication on the Subdivision Map or by separate instrument. Such offers, however, shall remain open and constitute irrevocable offers of dedication in accordance with Government Code section 66477.2. All such offers of dedication may be accepted by the City in its sole discretion at any later date without any further notice to the Subdivider.

4. Installation of Required Improvements. Subdivider agrees to furnish, construct and install at Subdivider’s own expense the Improvements, as shown on the Improvement Plans, which are to be installed to the sole satisfaction of the Manager and will be on file in the Development Services Department. The Improvement Plans may only be modified by the Subdivider subject to prior written approval by the Manager.

In-lieu of providing a performance bond and payment bond, Subdivider agrees to construct all of the required Improvements prior to the approval and recordation of the final map. As such, the ordinary requirements for providing a performance bond and payment bond has been waived in this Agreement.

5. Subdivider’s Obligations. Subdivider shall perform each of the following, at all times, throughout the term of this Agreement:

A. Complete, at Subdivider’s sole cost and expense in a good and workmanlike manner, all of the Improvements in conformance with the Resolution of Approval (and any amendments thereto), the Subdivision Laws, and all applicable standards under City codes and ordinances and the City’s general plan related to the Improvements (collectively, the “Improvement Standards”).

B. Commence construction of the Improvements within three (3) months from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Subdivider shall notify the Manager in writing three days before the commencement of construction of the Improvements.

C. Complete all Improvements within twelve (12) months from the Effective Date of this Agreement, unless otherwise approved or extended in writing by the City Manager for good cause, after written application by Subdivider. Such application shall state fully the grounds and facts showing good cause for such extension to be grated. In granting any extension of time, the City may require a new or amended subdivision improvement agreement to reflect increases in the costs of constructing the Improvements or other conditions related to the extension of time.

D. Furnish and pay for all necessary equipment, labor and materials to complete the Improvements in conformity with the Improvement Standards.

E. Replace or repair all public improvements, private property, public utility facilities, and surveying or subdivision monuments that are destroyed or damaged in the performance of any work related to this Agreement. Subdivider shall bear the entire cost of

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

replacement or repairs of any and all public or private property damaged or destroyed in the performance of any work related to this Agreement. Any repair or replacement work shall be to the satisfaction, and subject to the approval, of the Manager.

F. Provide safe access for inspection by the City to the Improvements.

G. Give good and adequate warning to the public of each and every dangerous condition existing on or near the Improvements, and take reasonable action to protect the public from any such dangerous condition.

H. Perform all construction work related to installing the Improvements between 6:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends and legal holidays, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Manager.

I. Require each contractor and subcontractor to have a competent foreman on the job at all times when that contractor or subcontractor, or any employee or agent thereof, is performing any work related to the Improvements. Subdivider shall maintain an office with a telephone and Subdivider or a person authorized to make decisions and act for Subdivider in Subdivider’s absence shall be available at the site of any Improvements within three (3) hours of being called at such office by the City at any time when construction work is being performed on the Improvements.

J. Assume all costs for utility and cable television undergrounding or relocation which is not the responsibility of the cable television, gas, electric, telephone or other utility company under the terms of any franchises with the City or otherwise imposed upon the utility companies by law.

K. Obtain and comply with all necessary permits and licenses for the construction and installation of the Improvements, give all necessary notices, and pay all fees and taxes required by law.

6. Estimated Cost of Improvements. The total estimated cost of the Improvements, as provided by Subdivider and reviewed and confirmed by the Engineer and Manager, is four hundred seventy-seven thousand, seven hundred and ninety-five dollars and ten cents ($477,795.10).

7. Title to Improvements. The City shall not accept any property to be dedicated or the Improvements unless they are constructed in conformity with the Improvement Plans and Improvement Standards, to the satisfaction of the Engineer and Manager. Subdivider shall retain title to, shall be responsible for, and shall bear the risk of loss to, any of the Improvements constructed or installed, until such time as the Improvements are accepted by the City. Title to and ownership of the Improvements and any real property to be dedicated shall vest absolutely in the City upon completion and acceptance of such Improvements by the City Council. The City shall not accept the Improvements unless title to the Improvements is entirely free from all liens. Prior to acceptance, at City’s request, Subdivider shall supply the City with appropriate lien releases, at no cost to and in a form acceptable to the City.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

8. Acquisition and Dedication of Easements or Rights-of-Way. If any of the Improvements are to be constructed or installed on land not within the Subdivision or an already existing public right-of-way, no construction or installation shall commence before:

A. The irrevocable offer of dedication or conveyance to City of appropriate rights-of-way, easements or other interests in real property, and appropriate authorization from the property owner to allow construction or installation of the Improvements; or B. The issuance of an order of possession by a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the State Eminent Domain Law (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1230.010 et seq.). Subdivider shall comply in all respects with any such order of possession.

9. Final Acceptance of Work. Acceptance of the Improvement Work on behalf of the City shall be made by the City Council upon recommendation of the Engineer and Manager, after satisfactory completion and inspection of all Improvements. Such acceptance shall not constitute a waiver by the City of any defects or deficiencies in the Improvements.

10. Repair of Defective Work. If, however, within a period of one (1) year after final acceptance by the City Council of the Improvements, any portion of the Improvements or any work done under this Agreement fails to fulfill any of the requirements of this Agreement, the Improvement Plans or the Improvement Standards, Subdivider shall without delay and without any cost to City, repair, replace or reconstruct any defective or otherwise unsatisfactory part or parts of the Improvements or work. If the Subdivider fails to act promptly in accordance with this requirement, or if the exigencies of the situation require repairs or replacements to be made before Subdivider can be notified or correct the situation, then the City may, at its option, make the necessary repairs or replacements or perform the necessary work, and Subdivider shall pay to City the actual cost of such repairs plus fifteen percent (15%) within thirty (30) days of the date of billing for such work by City.

11. Securities. Concurrently with or before the Effective Date of this Agreement, Subdivider shall furnish to the City:

A. Faithful Performance Security. [omitted; see Section 4 above] B. Payment Security. [omitted; see Section 4 above]
C. Guarantee and Warranty Security. Securities to guarantee workmanship shall be in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the Improvements, as stated in Section 6 above, to guarantee and warrant the Improvements for a period of one (1) year following their completion and acceptance against any defective work or labor done, or defective materials.

D. Bonds. Any bonds submitted as Securities shall be executed by a surety company authorized to conduct a surety business in California and shall be in a form as specified by the Subdivision Laws and approved by the City. All Securities deposited as bonds under this Agreement shall be irrevocable, shall not be limited as to time (except as to the guarantee and warranty period), and shall provide that they may be released, in whole or part, only upon the written approval of the Director, as provided under the Subdivision Laws and in Section 12 below.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

All Securities shall expressly obligate the surety for any extension of time authorized by the City for Subdivider’s completion of the Improvements, whether or not the surety is given notice of such an extension by the City. No change, alteration or addition to the terms of this Agreement or the plans and specifications incorporated herein shall in any manner affect the obligation of the sureties, except as required by the Subdivision Laws.

E. Records. Evidence of the Securities required by this Agreement shall be kept on file with the City Clerk. If the City Council gives specific, written approval to replace the Securities by another approved security, such replacement Securities shall be filed with the City Clerk and, upon filing, shall be deemed to be incorporated into this Agreement. Upon filing of replacement Securities with the City Clerk, the replaced Securities may be released.

12. Release of Securities. The Securities required by this Agreement shall be released in accordance with the Subdivision Laws and the following provisions:

A. Faithful Performance Securities. [omitted]
B. Payment Security. [omitted]
C. Guarantee and Warranty Securities. The Securities provided for guarantee and warranty of workmanship shall be released after one (1) year following the completion and acceptance of the Improvements, and inspection thereof by the City’s Construction Inspector and approved by the Engineer. If, however, the Engineer and Manager determine there are defects in the Improvements that require correction pursuant to Section 10 above, the Manager shall utilize the Securities to make all necessary corrections, including payment of reasonable expenses and fees and attorney’s fees.

13. Inspections.

A. The City reserves the right to inspect all Improvements at any time.

Subdivider shall at all times maintain safe access for inspection of the Improvements.

B. Upon completion of the Improvements the Subdivider may request a final inspection by the City’s Construction Inspector. If the Construction Inspector determines that the Improvements have been completed in accordance with all Improvement Standards and Subdivision Laws, then the Manager shall certify the completion of the Improvements to the City Council, to accept or reject in their sole discretion. The City bears no liability for any costs or expenses resulting from delays in inspections.

C. Subdivider shall bear all costs of inspection and certification, including but not limited to the direct costs of all third-party inspection agencies and City inspection consultants.

14. Default of Subdivider.

A. Default of Subdivider. Events of default by (“Default”) by Subdivider may include, but shall not be limited to, any of the following:

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

i. Subdivider’s failure to timely complete construction of the Improvements;
ii. Subdivider’s failure to timely cure any defect in the Improvements to the satisfaction of the Manager;
iii. Subdivider’s failure to timely deposit additional Securities as may be required by this Agreement;
iv. Subdivider’s insolvency, appointment of a receiver, or the filing of any petition in bankruptcy either voluntary or involuntary which Subdivider fails to discharge within thirty (30) days;
v. the commencement of a foreclosure action against the Subdivision or a portion thereof, or any conveyance in-lieu or in avoidance of foreclosure; or vi. Subdivider’s failure to perform any material obligation under this Agreement.

B. Notice of Default. In the event of Subdivider’s default, Subdivider shall be deemed to be in breach of this Agreement and the City may serve written notice upon Subdivider and Subdivider’s surety, if any, of the breach of this Agreement. Subdivider shall have fifteen (15) days from receipt of written notice by City to cure any default.

C. Remedies; Performance by City.
i. In the event of Subdivider’s default under this Agreement, and the applicable cure period set forth in this Paragraph has expired without such default having been cured, the City may thereafter deliver a notice of breach to Subdivider and Subdivider’s surety, if any. If the default remains uncured within fifteen (15) days from receipt of the written notice of breach, Subdivider authorizes the City to complete all work on the Improvements at the sole expense of Subdivider, and Subdivider authorizes to utilize the Securities to complete all work on the Improvements and to pay all labor costs of contractors, subcontractors and workers related to the Improvements. The City may take over the Improvements and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method the City may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of Subdivider, and Subdivider shall be liable to City for any excess cost or damages incurred by the City thereby. In the event the City takes over the Improvements or prosecutes the same to completion, the City, without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize such materials, appliances, equipment, plant and other property belonging to Subdivider as may be necessary for completion of the Improvements.
ii. The City reserves to itself all remedies available to it at law or in equity for breach of Subdivider’s obligations under this Agreement. The right of the City to draw upon or utilize the Securities is additional to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to the City.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

iii. Failure of Subdivider to comply with the terms of this Agreement shall constitute consent to the filing by the City of a notice of violation against all the lots in the Subdivision, or to rescind the approval or otherwise revert the Subdivision to acreage. The remedy provided by this Subsection is in addition to and not in lieu of other remedies available to the City, and is not required to implement other available remedies. Subdivider agrees that the choice of remedy or remedies for Subdivider’s default shall be at the discretion of the City. iv. In the event that Subdivider fails to perform any obligation hereunder, Subdivider agrees to pay all costs and expenses incurred by the City in securing performance of such obligations, including but not limited to costs of suit and attorney’s fees, costs of Improvements in the event of failure of performance, and all administrative costs. Such costs and fees shall be a proper charge against the Securities of Subdivider. v. The failure of the City to take an enforcement action with respect to a default or breach, or to declare a default or breach, shall not be construed as a waiver of that default or breach or any subsequent default or breach of Subdivider.

D. Lien. In accordance with the Subdivision Laws (Gov. Code § 66499), the recordation of this Agreement creates a lien attached to the property underlying the Subdivision and has the priority of a judgment lien in the amount necessary to complete the Improvements.

15. Environmental Warranty.

A. For purposes of this Agreement, the terms below have the following meanings:
i. “Environmental Laws” shall mean any federal, state, or local law, rule, regulation administrative or court order, ordinance, regulatory guidance document, standard, or requirements of any government authority regulating, relating to, or imposing liability standards of conduct concerning Hazardous Substances, or that pertains to the protection of human health or the environment, including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Conservation and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et seq.); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. §§6901 et seq.); the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §§1251 et seq.); the Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq.); the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (29049 U.S.C. §§ 1801 et seq.); the Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. §§ 136 et seq.); the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et seq.); the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 et seq.); the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 300f et seq.); the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et seq.); the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (30 U.S.C. §§ 1201 et seq.); the Occupational Safety and Health Act (29 U.S.C. §§ 655, 657); the California Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 25280 et seq.); the California Hazardous Waste Control Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 25100 et seq.); the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 24249.5 et seq.); and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code §§ 13000 et seq.); together with any amendments of or regulations promulgated under the statutes cited above.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

ii. “Hazardous Substances” or “Hazardous Substance” shall include any hazardous, toxic or dangerous waste, substance or material, pollutant or contaminant, as so defined under any Environmental Laws or any substance which is toxic, explosive, corrosive, flammable, infectious, radioactive, carcinogenic, mutagenic or otherwise hazardous, or any substance which contains gasoline, diesel fuel or other petroleum hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), radon gas, urea formaldehyde, asbestos, lead, or electromagnetic waves.

Hazardous Substances include any hazardous or toxic substance, material or waste which is regulated by the State of California, the United States government, or any other governmental authority with jurisdiction over the Property. Hazardous Materials include asbestos and any other hazardous waste or substance which has, as of the date hereof, been determined to be hazardous or a pollutant by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Transportation, or any instrumentality authorized to regulate substances in the environment which has jurisdiction over the Property which substance causes the Property (or any part thereof) to be in material violation of Environmental Laws.

B. Prior to acceptance of any Improvements by the City, Subdivider shall provide the City with a written warranty that:
i. Subdivider and the property being dedicated are in compliance with all Environmental Laws and are not subject to any existing, pending or threatened investigation by a federal, state, or local governmental authority regarding violations of Environmental Laws. ii. Subdivider and its third-party agents, contractors and subcontractors have not used, generated, manufactured, produced, discharged, or released on, under, or about the property to be dedicated, any Hazardous Substance except in accordance with all applicable Environmental Laws.
iii. Subdivider has not caused or permitted the release or discharge of, and has no knowledge of the release, discharge, or presence of Hazardous Substances on the property to be dedicated or the migration of any Hazardous Substances from or to any other property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the property to be dedicated.

C. Throughout the term of this Agreement, Subdivider shall give written notice within fifteen (15) days to the City of:
i. Any proceeding or investigation by any federal, California, or local governmental authority regarding the presence of Hazardous Substances on the property to be dedicated or the migration thereof from or to any other property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, the property to be dedicated;
ii. Any claims made or threatened by any third party against the City or property to be dedicated regarding any loss or injury resulting from any Hazardous Substances; and
iii. Subdivider’s discovery of any occurrence or condition on any property to be dedicated or any property adjacent to, or in the vicinity of the property to be dedicated that could cause the property to be dedicated or any part thereof to be subject to any

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

restrictions on its ownership, occupancy, use for the purpose for which it is intended, transferability, or suit under any Environmental Law.

16. Design or Construction Defect.

A. After acceptance of the Improvements, the Subdivider shall remain obligated to eliminate any defect in design or dangerous condition caused by a latent design or construction defect.

B. Provisions of this section shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance of the Improvements by the City.

C. It is the intent of this section that Subdivider shall be responsible for all liability for design and construction of the Improvements and that the City shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any Improvement Work. The Securities shall not be required to cover the provisions of this paragraph.

17. No Agency Relationship. Neither Subdivider nor any of Subdivider’s agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of the City in connection with the performance of Subdivider’s obligations under this Agreement. City elected and appointed councils, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives (“City Agents”) shall not, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of the cause, happening or occurring to the Improvement Work or Improvements specified in this Agreement prior to the completion and acceptance of the Improvement Work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of and are hereby expressly assumed by Subdivider.

18. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude the City from expending monies pursuant to agreements concurrently or previously executed between the Parties, or from entering into agreements with other subdividers for the apportionment of costs of water and sewer mains, or other improvements, pursuant to the provisions of the City ordinances providing therefore, nor shall anything in this Agreement commit the City to any such apportionment.

19. Indemnity/Hold Harmless.

A. The City and City Agents shall not be liable and Developer agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City and City Agents from any and all claims, costs, and liability for claims of damage, for any property damage or personal injury, including death, which may arise as a result of any negligent acts or omissions by Developer or Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, or operation, of the Improvements, including all claims, demands, causes of action, liability, or loss because of, or arising out of, in whole or in part, the design or construction of the Improvements.

This indemnification and agreement to hold harmless shall extend to injuries to persons and damages or taking of property resulting from the design or construction of the Subdivision and the Improvements as provided herein, and in addition, to injuries to adjacent property owners as a

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

consequence of the diversion of waters from the design or construction of public drainage systems, streets and other Improvements.

B. Acceptance by the City of the Improvements shall not constitute an assumption by the City of any responsibility for any damage or taking covered by this Section.

C. Provisions of this paragraph shall remain in full force and effect for ten (10) years following the acceptance by the City of the Improvements. It is the intent of this section that Subdivider shall be responsible for all liability for design and construction of the Improvements installed or Improvement Work done pursuant to this Agreement and that City shall not be liable for any negligence, nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance in approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or in approving, reviewing or inspecting any Improvement Work. The Security shall not be required to cover the provisions of this section.

D. City shall not be liable for approving, reviewing, checking, or correcting any plans or specifications or for approving, reviewing or inspecting any Improvement Work.

Nothing contained in this section is intended to, or shall be deemed to, limit or waive any protections or immunities afforded by law to the City or City Agents for the approval of the plan or design of the Improvements, including but not limited to the protections and immunities afforded by Government Code section 830.6. Subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and City’s Agents from any claim, action, or proceeding against City or City Agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City or City Agents concerning the Subdivision.

20. Insurance. Without limiting Subdivider’s duty to indemnify the City, Subdivider shall maintain in effect throughout this Agreement a policy or policies of insurance with the specifications and limits of liability specified herein.

A. Proof of Insurance.
i. Subdivider shall provide to the City a properly executed certificate of insurance, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney for commercial general liability coverage; automobile liability, worker’s compensation insurance, professional liability insurance, and course of construction coverage from an insurance provider approved by the City and licensed by the California Department of Insurance (“Certificates”).
ii. Each Certificate shall provide that such insurance will not be cancelled, reduced in coverage, or allowed to expire without thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to the City.

B. Minimum insurance limits. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
i. General Liability. Subdivider shall maintain such commercial general liability insurance with an insurance company admitted in California with an AM Best Rating of not less than A+, as shall protect the City, the City’s Agents, Subdivider, contractors, and subcontractors from claims for damages for personal injury, including death, as well as from claims of property damage which may arise from acts or omissions from Subdivider, contractors,

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

or subcontractors for in relation to this Agreement. The amount of such insurance shall not be less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence with umbrella liability coverage of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00). Such insurance shall also:

1. Name the City and the City Agents as insured by
endorsement with respect to performance of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special limitation on the scope of its protection afforded to the above-listed additional insured; and

2. Be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering the City and City Agents.
ii. Automotive Liability Insurance. Subdivider shall maintain automotive liability insurance covering all motor vehicles, including owned, leased, non-owned, and hired vehicles, used in providing services or performing work under this Agreement for bodily injury and property damage with a limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for each occurrence. Such insurance shall also:

1. Name City and City Agents as insured by endorsement with respect to performance of this Agreement. The coverage shall contain no special limitation on the scope of its protection afforded to the above-listed additional insured; and

2. Be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering the City and City Agents.
iii. Worker’s Compensation Insurance.

1. Subdivider shall maintain worker’s compensation insurance in accordance with California Labor Code Section 3700, and with a limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence for employer’s liability.

2. In the event any work is sublet, Subdivider shall require any contractor or subcontractor to provide worker’s compensation insurance for all contractor’s employees or subcontractor’s employees, unless such employees are covered by the protection afforded by Subdivider.

C. Course of Construction. Subdivider shall maintain course of construction insurance for a value of not less than the completed value of the Subdivision and the Improvements.

D. Professional Liability Insurance. Subdivider shall maintain professional liability insurance, as applicable, in the amount of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) per claim and three million dollars ($3,000,000.00) in the aggregate, to cover liability for malpractice or errors or omissions made in the course of rendering professional services.

21. No Vesting of Rights. Performance of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest Subdivider’s rights with respect to any change in any zoning or building law or ordinance.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

22. Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City and Subdivider must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal Express, UPS or other similar couriers providing overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. If given by registered or certified mail, such notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (a) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the Party to whom notices are to be sent, or (b) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Any Party may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other Party, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below:

If to City: City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
With copies to: Brenner White, LLP
1414 K Street, 3
rd Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
Attn: Douglas L. White, Esq.

If to Subdivider: McRoy-Wilbur Communities, Inc
2909 Coffee Road Suite 12A
Modesto, CA 95355
Attn: Ian M. Wilbur, Secretary
and

23. General Provisions:

A. Governing Law. The validity, interpretation and performance of this Agreement shall be controlled by and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of California.

B. Compliance with Laws. Subdivider, its agents, employees, contractors, and subcontractors shall comply with all federal, state and local laws in the performance of the work required by this Agreement, including but not limited to all Improvement Standards or any other applicable land use approvals. Subdivider shall be responsible for obtaining all applicable licenses and permits.

C. Venue. Venue for any legal proceedings initiated in connection with this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court for the County of Stanislaus.

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

D. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, or if any provision of this Agreement is rendered invalid or unenforceable according to the terms of any federal or state statute, which becomes effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect and shall be construed to give effect to the intent of this Agreement.

E. Waiver. The waiver by either Party of a breach by the other of any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or a different provision of this Agreement. No Party shall be deemed to have made any such waiver unless it is in writing and signed by the Party so waiving.

F. Approvals by the City. Any approval or consent that is to be given by the City under this Agreement shall be in writing, and any approval or consent that is not in writing shall not be binding on the City.

G. Integration. This Agreement, together with its specific references, attachments and Exhibits, constitute all of the agreements, understandings, representations, conditions, warranties and covenants made by and between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. Neither Party shall be liable for any representations made, express or implied, not specifically set forth herein. It is the intention of the Parties that this Agreement shall supersede any prior agreements, discussions, commitments, representations or agreements, written, electronic or oral, between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.

H. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to explain, modify, amplify or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of the provisions of this Agreement.

I. Mandatory and Permissive. “Shall” and “will” and “agrees” are mandatory. “May” or “can” are permissive.

J. Successors and Assigns – Covenant Running With the Land. Subdivider shall not assign any of its obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City. Notwithstanding the above, all representations, covenants and warranties specifically set forth in this Agreement, by or on behalf of or for the benefit of any or all of the Parties, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of such Party, its successors and assigns. This Agreement, however, shall not be binding on any lot that has been conveyed to an individual homebuyer and for which a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued by the City.

K. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously and in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

L. Other Documents. Parties agree that they shall cooperate in good faith to accomplish the objectives of this Agreement and to that end, agree to execute and deliver such

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

other instruments or documents as may be necessary and convenient to fulfill the purposes and intentions of this Agreement.

M. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement in each covenant and term and condition herein.

N. Authority. The Parties warrant and represent that they have the power and authority to enter into this Agreement and the names, titles and capacities herein stated on behalf of any entities, persons, states or firms represented or purported to be represented by such entities, persons, states or firms and that all former requirements necessary or required by the state or federal law in order to enter into this Agreement have been fully complied with.

O. Construction and Interpretation. It is agreed and acknowledged by Subdivider that the provisions of this Agreement have been arrived at through negotiation, and that Subdivider has had a full and fair opportunity to revise the provisions of this Agreement and to have such provisions reviewed by legal counsel. Therefore, the normal rule of construction that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply in construing or interpreting this Agreement.

P. Advice of Legal Counsel. Each Party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement with its own legal counsel, and based upon the advice of that counsel, freely entered into this Agreement.

Q. Attorney Fees and Costs. If any action at law or in equity, including action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees and costs, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which such Party may be entitled.

R. No Monetary Damages Against the City. In the event of the City’s default under this Agreement, Subdivider agrees that Subdivider may not seek, and shall forever waive any right to, monetary damages against the City.

S. Modification. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument signed by the Parties. Subdivider shall bear all costs of amendments to this Agreement that are requested by Subdivider.

T. Exhibits. All exhibits attached hereto are incorporated into this Agreement:
[Signatures on following page]

SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank & McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and between Subdivider and City as of the day and year first above written.

SUBDIVIDER:

McRoy-Wilbur Communities, Inc
By:

Ian M. Wilbur, Secretary
CITY:

CITY OF RIVERBANK, a California
municipal corporation:

By:

Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
ATTEST:

By:

Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Tom Hallinan, City Attorney
California All-Purpose Acknowledgment
State of California )
)
County of Stanislaus )
On , before me , a Notary
Public, personally appeared ___________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.
(Signature)
(Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

California All-Purpose Acknowledgment
State of California )
)
County of Stanislaus )
On , before me , a Notary
Public, personally appeared _________________ who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.
(Signature)
(Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

EXHIBIT A
Tentative Map Resolution of Approval

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION NO. 2016-009

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK

APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TROY WRIGHT FOR TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 01- 2015 TO SUBDIVIDE 2.42 ACRES INTO 28 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LOCATED SOUTH OF WARD AVENUE, WEST OF ROSELLE AVENUE APN: 132- 036- 003
WHEREAS, a development application has been received from Troy Wright representing the real property owners: Rachel Garcia and Mary Chavez for a Tentative Subdivision Map to divide 2.42 acres into 28 planned development single family residential lots, a private street lot and a drainage/EVA lot of lands more particularly described as:

The East half of Lot 96 of Riverbank Acreage Tract as per Map filed March 23, 1912 in Vol. 6 of Maps, Page 33, Stanislaus County Records.

Stanislaus County Assessor Parcel Number 132-036- 003.

WHEREAS, the City Subdivision Ordinance, Section 152. 037, states that as condition of approval of a tentative map, the subdivider shall dedicate and develop parkland, pay a fee in lieu thereof, or both, at the option of the City. In this case the City has chosen to accept the payment of an in -lieu fee for parkland dedication based on values of land at the time the Final map is recorded. The obligation for this project is 0.24 acres of park land pursuant to the General Plan Policy PUBLIC - 11. 1 which requires a dedication obligation of five acres of parkland per 1, 000 residents; and WHEREAS, public facilities represent the public's investment in the development of the complex, urban infrastructure that is necessary to support the physical operation of the city; and
WHEREAS, the proposed tentative map is consistent with General Plan Goal CONS -4.2 which states " Approved projects, plans and subdivisions shall provide for collection, conveyance, treatment, detention, and other storm water management measures in a way that does not decrease water quality or alter hydrology in the Stanislaus River or associated groundwater recharge areas"; and WHEREAS, the proposed tentative map is consistent with General Plan Goal CONS -8. 6 which states " The City will encourage compact development to achieve more efficient use of resources and provision of public facilities and services"; and

CC/ LRA — 02/09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016-009
WHEREAS, the proposed tentative map is consistent with General Plan Goal CONS -8. 9 which states that "Approved projects, plans, and subdivision requests shall include native, drought -tolerant landscaping"; and
WHEREAS, the proposed tentative map is consistent with General Plan Goal DESIGN -2. 5 which states that "The City will require visually attractive streetscapes with street trees and sidewalks on both sides of streets, planting strips, attractive transit shelters, benches and pedestrian -scale streetlights in appropriate locations"; and WHEREAS, the proposed tentative map is consistent with General Plan Goal DESIGN -2. 8 which states that "The City will coordinate with transit providers and, as appropriate, require land and amenities to accommodate transit"; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with the general plan and applicable specific plans of the city.
1) The Planning Commission has considered the effect of its actions on the housing needs of the region in which the local jurisdiction is situated and balance those needs against the public service needs of the city's residents and available fiscal and environmental resources.
2) The proposed tentative map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
3) The site is physically suitable for the type of development. 4) The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of the development. 5) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
6) The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not cause serious public health problems.
7) The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

WHEREAS, the location, size, timing, and financing of major streets, water, sewer, and drainage systems, parks and playgrounds, police and fire stations, and libraries must be planned well in advance of their construction. This advance planning is an essential to minimizing project costs, optimizing project need and usefulness, and maximizing the public benefits and private sector support; and WHEREAS, Riverbank' s investments in public facilities are designed to respond to the identified needs of the forecasted population and how these improvements relate to other existing public facilities; and

CC/ LRA — 02/09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016- 009
WHEREAS, newly developed properties must be adequately serviced with parks, sewerage, water, electricity, gas, street lighting and telecommunications in a timely, cost-effective coordinated and efficient manner; and WHEREAS, Tentative Map 01- 2015 was reviewed by the Riverbank Planning Commission at a regular meeting held on January 19, 2016 in the manner prescribed by law; and.

WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is located on land that is within the City limits of the City of Riverbank and is within an area anticipated for urban land uses; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission has determined that the proposed VTM is exempt pursuant to Section 15332 ( Class 32, In -Fill Development Projects) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed Vesting Tentative Map meets the conditions prescribed by CEQA Section 15332( a -e); and
WHEREAS, the Riverbank City Council approves the requested Tentative Map as prepared by Hawkins and Associates Engineering, Inc. and dated January 13, 2016 presented by Troy Wright as depicted in attached exhibit "A", incorporated herein as a part of this City Council Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby finds and adopts the following findings:

A. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan in that the project directly implements adopted policies of the General Plan Land Use and Housing Elements.

B. Notice to the general public and adjoining neighbors in the time and in the manner required by State Law and City Code.

C. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, it has been determined that the proposed VTM is exempt pursuant to Section 15332 ( Class 32, In -Fill Development Projects) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed Vesting Tentative Map meets the conditions prescribed by CEQA Section 15332(a -e) and a Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Recorder.

D. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and intensity of development in that the site is generally flat with no unique geologic characteristics visible and construction of the project will result in adequate infrastructure available to the site to handle the anticipated development.

CC/ LRA — 02/ 09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016-009
E. The circulation of the Tentative Subdivision Map to all responsible and trustee agencies has provided sufficient opportunity to review the proposed development plan and ensure minimal impacts on surrounding properties in that the hearing was held in the manner prescribed by law and surrounding properties are not expected to be impacted by the additional residential housing units.

F. The approval of the Tentative Map 01- 2015 for the establishment of 28 planned development single family dwelling units will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood in that proposed are similar to, and compatible with, neighboring uses in the area.

WHEREAS, the request and plans of Troy Wright are hereby approved by the City Council of the City of Riverbank, subject to the following conditions:

1. Applicant shall comply with the City of Riverbank Standard Conditions as contained in Planning Commission Resolution 2013-014, including annexing into a Community Facilities District, or receive confirmation from the Community Development Director that a specific condition or conditions does not apply to the subject project; and

2. All frontage improvements ( curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Ward Avenue and the private street shall be designed, completed, and inspected by the City prior to Final Map Recordation.

3. Fencing along the east, west, and south property lines and separating individual lots shall be six ( 6) feet tall. If adjacent neighbor fences need replacement during construction, vinyl shall be replaced with vinyl and wood shall be replaced with wood or vinyl. A decorative wall meeting city standards shall be installed on the two parcels fronting Ward Avenue to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Any new fencing visible from Ward or Chavez shall be vinyl.

4. A Major Tree Conservation Permit including a Tree Removal Permit Application, Tree Survey and Tree Protection Plan is required before a grading permit can be issued.

5. The private street name, Chavez Street shall be approved by City Council unless a street with that name already exists in Stanislaus County.

6. The developer shall minimize driveway and garage widths where possible.

CC/ LRA — 02/ 09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016-009

7. The required Home Owner's Association shall be responsible for maintenance of the basin and common areas, landscaping ( including front yards), and walls and fences ( including graffiti removal and re -staining wooden fencing when it fades from sprinklers).

8. The Park -in -lieu fee obligation for this project is . 24 acres to be paid based on values of land at the time the Final Map is recorded.

9. Three ( 3) sets of landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared and submitted with fee for review and approval by the City's contract landscape architect.

10. The developer shall provide functionally opening windows on all elevations to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

11. The developer shall install sidewalks on both sides of the private street.

12. The developer shall install a concrete pad on Ward Avenue for school children to wait on to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.

13. All structures shall be designed and oriented for passive energy savings.

14. The developer shall record a ten ( 10) foot water line easement between Lot 10 and Lot 11, from Rocky Lane to the private street to loop the water system

15. Pursuant to RMC section 153. 162 ( E)( 3) the developer shall provide seven ( 7) amenities for the seven ( 7) deviations from standard ordinance requirements:

1.) enhanced landscaping ( i. e. larger size plants, more dense plantings); 2.) a colored concrete or brick crosswalk across the private street at Ward Avenue;

3.) A decorative block wall and vinyl fencing instead of wooden fencing where fencing is visible from the streets; 4.) upgraded garage ( carriage) doors; 5.) French doors instead of sliding doors in the living rooms; 6.) outdoor outlets to support electric mowers, trimmers, and Christmas lights; and 7.) two ( 2) benches at the storm water basin.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves the Tentative Map Application No. 01- 2015, subject to those aforementioned conditions established herein, to be built as illustrated in Exhibit " A" incorporated herein to this Resolution entitled TM dated January 13, 2016.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the
9t" day of February, 2016; motioned by Councilmember Leanne Jones Cruz, seconded by Vice Mayor Jeanine Tucker, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of 4- 1:

CC/ LRA — 02/09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016-009
AYES: Barber -Martinez, Jones Cruz, Tucker, and Mayor O' Brien NAYS: Campbell
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST: APP aVED:

Annabelle Aguilar, CMV Richard D. O' Brien
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A — Tentative Map prepared by Hawkins and Associates Engineering, Inc. and dated 1- 13- 16

CC/ LRA — 02/ 09/ 16
CC Resolution No. 2016-009
ul
m.
1 As— ggOX
ih'AitPAVP15ll d
a
g:
g
Exhibit A

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
L
T _ WARD AVENUE VILLAS dak HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES - a
w
y
VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ENGINEERING, INC.

III A C111L1. ROAD - —
A. P. N. 132- 036- 003 mooesTo, CA 95154
2912 WARD AVENUE P11 ( 209) 575 - 4295
ft[ W 10 G% XX, CAJ. I R HI NIA fx ( 20) 574- 4295 — —
CCII RA - 0? ldg11 F Attachment to CC Recnll Itinn 7f11 F- nnq cgo ,
moon m
o
M n
uoo
Bm
x
p
Y
92; i%

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
L
T _ WARD AVENUE VILLAS dak HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES - a
w
y
VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ENGINEERING, INC.

III A C111L1. ROAD - —
A. P. N. 132- 036- 003 mooesTo, CA 95154
2912 WARD AVENUE P11 ( 209) 575 - 4295
ft[ W 10 G% XX, CAJ. I R HI NIA fx ( 20) 574- 4295 — —
CCII RA - 0? ldg11 F Attachment to CC Recnll Itinn 7f11 F- nnq cgo ,
moon m
o
M n
uoo
Bm
x
p

EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
L
T _ WARD AVENUE VILLAS dak HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES - a
w
y
VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ENGINEERING, INC.

III A C111L1. ROAD - —
A. P. N. 132- 036- 003 mooesTo, CA 95154
2912 WARD AVENUE P11 ( 209) 575 - 4295
ft[ W10 G%XX, CAJ. I R HI NIA fx (20) 574- 4295 — —
CCII RA - 0?ldg11 F Attachment to CC Recnll Itinn 7f11 F- nnq Exhibit A
r
mN4Qa
ag
T;- - WARt7r 4, AVERiLiE= g a
7^
1 s bz- kO . gam$
as m o m
C !* e exon aq`,
1 H2T
Rl
na
AC
gj 4A, a"" YR RW mi
a o0
a, A o'¢
ROCKY
LANE
DON RAPAEL AVEU ' a gX
n

GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN
WARD AVENUE VILLAS HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES R 31.."IE a
VESTING TENTATIVE MAP ENGINEERING, INC"
e
w N
1M MITCHRLf. ROAD -
A P N. 132- 036-003 Moucsro, cn 95151 v
2912 WARD AVENUE PIC( 209) 575- 1295
RJ VI MIANK"CAIJFORNIA PX (209) 575- 1295
iwa. rn
COLRA ( 32/ b911Fi Attachment to CC Resolution 2016-009 Exhibit A
z- - - - - - " ... v
m............... o
a
AVENUE
R
I o'
qR x
P }
be I @ € g0 a
A-pl
mm Angio og
7 Ilk ........... w. 1 Y ., 8 iia Nn"
1 T' N a ox BSS
mz
O . ; C
nam s Nin'^ na? R 7 a c
r
namz^$ Q a <
80 1
o
ROCK 1
LANE
6ON RAFAEL AVENUI' I o M
L.. r
e
V l
a 43- 11
M € g +
1 • I ` i f
T
Bm gs gyo

UTILITY PLAN
WARD AVENUE VILLAS HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ;
VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP ENGINEERING, INC.
w
wI
436 Ml ICH LL ROA()
A P.N. 132- 036- 003 MODES 10, CA 95354
2912 WARD AVENUE PII:( 209) 575- 4295
1U 41:3 lWNX. VAl I O WMA. PX: ( 209) 578 - 4295
CCII RA - 9 dgl1F; Attanhmant to RC Rasnhltinn gfN R -M9

Item 9.6 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.6
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject/ Title: Resolution to approve Final Map 03-2021 Ward Villas (River Terrace)– APN: 132-036-003
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Donna M. Kenney, Planning and Building Manager

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Final Map (“FM”) for McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc. and Ward Villas (River Terrace) based on the required finding that the map is in conformity with the provisions of subdivision law and city code.

BACKGROUND
On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-008, approving a General Plan Amendment redesignating 2.42 acres to Medium Density Residential (MDR) which allows for a net density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per acre.

On February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-009, approving Tentative Subdivision Map No. 01-2015 (“the Ward Villas Tentative Map”) and related conditions of approval, which set forth the infrastructure obligations and conditions related to the development and build out of 28 residential lots on 2.45 acres (Attachment 2).

On February 23, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016-010 approving Rezone 01-2015. This action rezoned the property to Planned Development (PD) and allows for a density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per net acre. Since 2016, the property owner applied for and received yearly extensions by the Planning Commission to keep the tentative map from expiring until a Development Agreement was approved for Ammo Plant Management, Inc. (“AP Management”) on October 13, 2020 with Ordinance 2020-012, which extended the map for five years.

Item 9.6 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
On March 14, 2023, the City Council approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for the project for AP Management. Staff subsuquently learned that the property was sold by AP Management to McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc. (“McRoy Wilbur”) a few weeks before these approvals occurred. Therefore, these approved documents are invalid and need to be approved for the actual owner, McRoy Wilbur.

Pursuant to Riverbank Municipal Code Section §152.074 (C)(2), the City Council shall, at the meeting at which it receives the map or at its next regular meeting after the meeting at which it receives the map, approve the map if it is determined to be in conformity with the provisions of law and of this chapter. The Council shall disapprove the map if it is determined not to be in conformity with the provisions of law and of this chapter and shall advise the subdivider of its disapproval, and the reason or reasons thereof.

The City Engineer and Planning and Building Manager have reviewed the final map (Exhibit A) and have determined that the plans are in substantial compliance with city standards and with the conditions placed upon the tentative map. The Project is compliant with CEQA – the Project qualified for a Notice of Exemption for Infill Development.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft City Council Resolution 2023-
Exhibit A to Attachment 1 - Final Map

2. Tentative Map

CC/LRA – 9/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA
APPROVING FINAL MAP 03-2021 FOR MCROY WILBUR COMMUNITIES, INC FOR WARD VILLAS (RIVER TERRACE) AT 2912 WARD AVENUE (APN 132- 036-003)

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc. is the property owner and applicant for Ward Villas (River Terrace) Final Map 03-2021; and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016- 008, approving a General Plan Amendment redesignating 2.42 acres to Medium Density Residential (MDR); and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016- 009, approving Tentative Subdivision Map No. 01-2015 (“the Ward Villas Tentative Map”) and related conditions of approval, which set forth the infrastructure obligations and conditions related to the development and build out of 28 residential lots on 2.45 acres; and
WHEREAS, Tentative Map Condition of Approval #7 will not apply to the Final Map because the property was annexed into CFD 2016-01 and does not need a Home Owners Association to maintain the basin and common landscaped areas; and WHEREAS, Chavez Court will not be a private street as originally proposed, but will be a public street; and
WHEREAS, on February 23, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2016- 010 approving Rezone 01-2015. This action rezoned the property to Planned Development (PD) and allows for a density of eight to sixteen (8-16) dwelling units per net acre; and
WHEREAS, the property owner requested and received yearly extensions from the Planning Commission to extend the tentative map in 2017, 2018, and 2019; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 2020 and with Ordinance No. 2020-012, the City Council approved a Development Agreement for Ward Villas with Ammo Plant Management, Inc (“AP Management”); and
ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 9/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
WHEREAS, on March, 14, 2023, the City Council approved a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for the project, then found out the property was sold to McRoy Wilbur before AP Management (seller) obtained final map approval. It was determined that final map is invalid and McRoy Wilbur had to take the final map to Council for re-approval under their name; and
WHEREAS, the City has now received a Final Map application to subdivide the approximately 2.42 acre site into twenty-eight (28) lots at 2912 Ward Avenue; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer and Planning and Building Manager have reviewed the final map and have determined that the plans are in substantial compliance with city standards and with the conditions placed upon the tentative parcel map; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Riverbank Municipal Code Section §152.074 (C)(2), the City Council shall, at the meeting at which it receives the map or at its next regular meeting after the meeting at which it receives the map, approve the map if it is determined to be in conformity with the provisions of law and of this chapter.

WHEREAS, this Resolution supersedes and takes the place of City council Resolution 2023-019 adopted on March 14, 2023. City Council Resolution 2023-019 shall no longer have any force or effect.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby authorizes the City Engineer to record Final Map 03-2021 (Exhibit A) for Ward Villas (River Terrace) and McRoy Wilbur Communities, Inc upon determination that the map is in conformity with the provisions of state law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 12
th day of September 2023; motioned by Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, and upon roll call was carried by the following vote of ___:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ________________________
Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A - Final Map

AMENDED MAP OF
WARD AVENUE VILLAS (45-M-30)
CONSISTING OF 3 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST HALF OF LOT 96 OF
RIVERBANK ACREAGE TRACT, AS PER MAP FILED MARCH 23,
1912, IN VOLUME 6 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 33, STANISLAUS
COUNTY RECORDS, LYING IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH,
RANGE 9 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN, CITY OF

RIVERBANK, COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUGUST, 2023

HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING
436 MITCHELL RD. MODESTO,
CALIFORNIA 95354
SHEET 1 OF 3
VTSM MAP APPLICATION #01-2015

NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT

OWNER'S STATEMENT SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT

CITY ENGINEER'S & SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT

CITY CLERK'S STATEMENT

RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR'S CERTIFICATE:

BENEFICIARY'S STATEMENT:

NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT
TAX COLLECTOR'S CERTIFICATE:

PLANNING COMMISSION & CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATE

EXHIBIT A

ROSELLE AVENUE

WARD AVENUE DON CARLOS AVENUE DON RAMON STREET
DON RAFAEL AVENUE CHAVEZ COURT PALMER AVENUE 123456789
10 11
12 13
14 15
17 16
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28A

REFERENCES

BASIS OF BEARINGS
LEGEND

AMENDED MAP OF
WARD AVENUE VILLAS (45-M-30)
CONSISTING OF 3 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST HALF OF LOT 96 OF
RIVERBANK ACREAGE TRACT, AS PER MAP FILED MARCH 23,
1912, IN VOLUME 6 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 33, STANISLAUS
COUNTY RECORDS, LYING IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH,
RANGE 9 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN, CITY OF

RIVERBANK, COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUGUST, 2023

HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING
436 MITCHELL RD. MODESTO,
CALIFORNIA 95354
SHEET 2 OF 3
VTSM MAP APPLICATION #01-2015

WARD AVENUE DON RAFAEL AVENUE

CHAVEZ COURT
PALMER
AVENUE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 A 20 19 18 17

CURVE TABLE

RADIAL TABLE

REFERENCES

BASIS OF BEARINGS

AMENDED MAP OF
WARD AVENUE VILLAS (45-M-30)
CONSISTING OF 3 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE EAST HALF OF LOT 96 OF
RIVERBANK ACREAGE TRACT, AS PER MAP FILED MARCH 23,
1912, IN VOLUME 6 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 33, STANISLAUS
COUNTY RECORDS, LYING IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH,
RANGE 9 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN, CITY OF

RIVERBANK, COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUGUST, 2023

HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING
436 MITCHELL RD. MODESTO,
CALIFORNIA 95354
SHEET 3 OF 3
VTSM MAP APPLICATION #01-2015 LEGEND
HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, INC. 436 MITCHELL ROAD MODESTO, CA. 95354 PH: (209) 575 - 4295FX: (209) 578 - 4295
OF
SHEET1
DATE: DATE SYM. APPD. DESCRIPTION OF REVISION RODRICK H. HAWKINS CROLIE E. LINDSAY R.C.E. 31900 , P.L.S. 4709 R.C.E. 50188 KEVIN J. GENASCI P.L.S. 8660 CHK:

BY:

DATE: SITE

VICINITY MAP
GENERAL NOTES: OWNER
STATEMENT OF SUBDIVIDER:

SUBDIVIDER:

ENGINEER: A.P.N. 132-036-003 2912 WARD AVENUE RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA 3 3232
APRIL 2015 WARD AVENUE VILLAS VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP RCS

RHH EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

ATTACHMENT 2
HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, INC. 436 MITCHELL ROAD MODESTO, CA. 95354 PH: (209) 575 - 4295FX: (209) 578 - 4295
OF
SHEET2
DATE: DATE SYM. APPD. DESCRIPTION OF REVISION RODRICK H. HAWKINS CROLIE E. LINDSAY R.C.E. 31900 , P.L.S. 4709 R.C.E. 50188 KEVIN J. GENASCI P.L.S. 8660 CHK:

BY:

DATE: A.P.N. 132-036-003 2912 WARD AVENUE RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA 3 3232
APRIL 2015 WARD AVENUE VILLAS VESTING TENTATIVE MAP
RCS
RHH
GENERAL NOTES: OWNER
STATEMENT OF SUBDIVIDER:

SUBDIVIDER:

ENGINEER:
32' STREET SECTION

SECTION A-A

FLOOD ZONE CLASSIFICATION SECA SECA GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN SECB SECB

CROSS SECTION - BB

LOT SUMMARY

STORM DRAIN PROFILE
HAWKINS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING, INC. 436 MITCHELL ROAD MODESTO, CA. 95354 PH: (209) 575 - 4295FX: (209) 578 - 4295
OF
SHEET3
DATE: DATE SYM. APPD. DESCRIPTION OF REVISION RODRICK H. HAWKINS CROLIE E. LINDSAY R.C.E. 31900 , P.L.S. 4709 R.C.E. 50188 KEVIN J. GENASCI P.L.S. 8660 CHK:

BY:

DATE: A.P.N. 132-036-003 2912 WARD AVENUE RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA 3 3232
APRIL 2015 WARD AVENUE VILLAS VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP RCS
RHH
GENERAL NOTES: OWNER STATEMENT OF SUBDIVIDER:

SUBDIVIDER:

ENGINEER:

TYPICAL SETBACKS & SIDEWALK LAYOUT UTILITY PLAN

Item 9.7- CC / LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.7
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Resolution to Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Professional Services Agreement for a Housing Element
Update to the General Plan with JB Anderson Land Use
Planning and Allocate Funding from the General Fund
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Donna Kenney, Planning and Building Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting the attached Resolution for planning services to update the Housing Element and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement (Attachment 2) with JB Anderson Land Use Planning (“JB Anderson”).

BACKGROUND
The Housing Element of the General Plan identifies Riverbank’s housing needs and opportunities and establishes clear goals and objectives to inform future housing decisions. In February 2016, the City Council adopted its 2014-2023 Housing Element.

State law requires the City to update its Housing Element every eight years and demonstrate it has sufficiently zoned property to accommodate the number of units identified in the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”).

The State determines how much housing will be constructed in each County and sends StanCOG the RHNA numbers. StanCOG then works with the County and cities to allocate those numbers to each jurisdiction. Riverbank’s RHNA share for the next 8 years (Cycle 6 of the Housing Elements) is:
• Very Low Income – 970 units
• Low Income – 642 units
• Moderate Income – 594 units
• Above Moderate Income – 1,355 units
• Total share – 3,561 units

Item 9.7- CC / LRA 09/12/2023
The Planning and Building Manager released a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to update Riverbank’s Housing Element to eleven consultants. Three of those consultants stated they were going to submit a proposal before the deadline. Two of these three consultants did submit a proposal. After reviewing the proposals and consulting with the City Manager, it was determined that the consultant best able to meet the City’s timeline and budget is JB Anderson Land Use Planning (“JB Anderson”) in Ripon. JB Anderson completed the City’s current Housing Element and their proposal is Exhibit A to Attachment 2.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Project will require an estimated $156,703.00 from the General Fund. When the REAP 2.0 housing related grant applications are released by StanCOG in Fall 2023, staff will apply for funding to reimburse the General Fund.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft City Council Resolution 2023-TBD

2. Consultant Services Agreement
Exhibit A – JB Anderson Land Use Planning Proposal

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE

HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE WITH JB ANDERSON LAND USE PLANNING AND

ALLOCATE THE FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, Riverbank (“City”) is required by California State Law to update the Housing Element of its General Plan every eight (8) years and its current Housing Element covers 2014-2023; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Manager released a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to update the Housing Element to eleven (11) consultants; and WHEREAS, three (3) consultants replied they would be submitting proposals but only two (2) consultants submitted their proposals by the deadline; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the proposals and consulting with the City Manager, it was determined that the consultant best able to meet the City’s timeline and budget is JB Anderson Land Use Planning (“JB Anderson”) in Ripon; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves the following:

1. Approve the use of a Professional Service Agreement for the Housing Element Update.

2. Authorize the City Manager to enter into the Agreement with JB Anderson Land Use Planning to update the Housing Element for the City of Riverbank pursuant to their proposal (Exhibit A).

3. Allocate approximately $156,703.00 from the General Plan to fund the Agreement to account number 101-405.000-702.034.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of September, 2023; motioned by Councilmember __________, seconded by Councilmember __________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of _____:

AYES:

NAYS:

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ _______________________ ___
Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment – Consultant Services Agreement
ATTACHMENT 2

Item 9.8 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.8
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject: Resolution Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency in Response to the Recent Fire at the Riverbank Public Works Corporation Yard
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution declaring the existence of a local emergency in response to the August 26, 2023 fire at the Public Works Corporation Yard.

SUMMARY
On August 26, 2023 a fire, which began on the BNSF Railroad right-of-way adjacent to the Public Works Corporation Yard, caused major damage to City property and equipment. In order to begin the remediation and replacement process staff require the ability to contract necessary services immediately rather than going through the lengthy process of bidding and requesting proposals. The declaration of the local emergency will allow staff to respond quickly to this item as stated in the Riverbank Municipal Code Section 37.13(6)(b) which would allow the Director and Assistant Director of Emergency Services to “obtain vital supplies, equipment, and such other properties found lacking and needed for the protection of life and property and to bind the city for the fair value thereof and, if required immediately, to commandeer the same for public use…”

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is directly related to the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goals to Ensure Financial Stability and Improve Public Safety.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Initial damage estimates are $500,000. Staff will be working with the Central Valley Risk Management Authority to identify insurance coverage for this incident.

Item 9.8 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

ATTACHMENTS

1. CC Resolution 2023-

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA

DECLARING THE EXISTANCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE FIRE

AT THE RIVERBANK PUBLIC WORKS CORPORATION YARD

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the dry conditions or threatened conditions caused by the hot weather give rise to conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City; and
WHEREAS, on August 26, 2023 a fire which began on the BNSF Railroad rightof-way adjacent to the Public Works Corporation Yard on High Street caused major damages to City property and equipment, and
WHEREAS, it is imperative that the City staff be able to quickly respond to the remediation and replacement efforts and be able to contract necessary services without requiring a request for proposal or bidding process; and WHEREAS, Riverbank Municipal Code Section 37.13(6)(b) allows the Director and Assistant Director of Emergency Services to obtain vital supplies, equipment, and such other properties found lacking and needed for the protection of life and property and to bind the city for the fair value thereof and, if required immediately, to commandeer the same for public use in the event of a declared emergency; and WHEREAS, city staff believes it prudent to declare a local state of emergency within the City of Riverbank based on the current conditions; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 8630 generally requires the City Council to review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every sixty (60) days; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does herby find that the dry conditions or threatened conditions caused by the hot summer weather warrant and necessitate the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency in the City, and these present conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank does hereby declare as follows:

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – __/__/____
CC Resolution 2023-

1. The City Council does Proclaim the Existence of a Local Emergency.

2. The City may request any available funding as a result of this proclamation of a local emergency.

3. The local emergency must be revisited by the City Council at least once every sixty (60) days.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of September, 2023; motioned by Councilmember __________, seconded by Councilmember __________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of ______:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk Mayor

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.1
SECTION 10: PUBLIC HEARING
Meeting Date: September 12, 2023
Subject/ Title: Aemetis Conditional Use Permit Appeal
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Donna M. Kenney, Planning and Building Manager

RECOMMENDATION
Review the provided documents, take public comment, approve the the Addendum to the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Environmental Impact Report (“RAAP EIR”), and approve Use Permit 01-2023 for Aemetis Advanced Products Riverbank, Inc. (“Aemetis”), subject to the conditions in the proposed Resolution.

BACKGROUND
Aemetis proposes to construct and operate a production plant plant that will recycle oils and fats into sustainable aviation fuel and renewable diesel fuel (SAF/RD). With proper conditions the proposed use is not anticipated to adversely impact neighboring businesses at the Riverbank Industrial Complex nor its residential neighbors.

This item was heard at the Planning Commission meeting of August 15, 2023. After reviewing the materials and taking public comment, a motion was made and seconded to approve the Use Permit. Upon a call for a vote, the Planning Commission with a 2-3 vote did not pass the motion. Prior to the vote, individual Commission members expressed opinions about traffic, noise, and odors. Subsequently, Aemetis timely filed an appeal as per Riverbank Municipal Code Section 153.219 within the proper 10-day timeframe for this item to be considered by the City Council.

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
Site History:

The Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant (“RAAP”) was formerly “… a federal, governmentowned, contractor-operated industrial installation under the jurisdiction of the United States Army. The Plant began operation in 1943 as an aluminum reduction plant supplying military requirements. It closed in 1944 and was used for storage for the 8 years that followed. In 1952, the Norris Thermador Corporation, known as NI Industries, Inc. (“NI”) was contracted by the US Army to manage the property and produce ammunition supplies for use by the military. As production waned, NI was permitted to lease excess space on the site to private tenants through the US Army’s Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support (“ARMS”) program. Tenants are mostly involved in light and heavy industry, including plastics recycling, steel rebar coating, filtration systems manufacturing, and oil recycling” (Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Base Reuse Plan 2008, “Reuse Plan”). The Reuse Plan envisions an industrial business park where traditional and new “green” and environmentally-conscious businesses can thrive and grow.

In more recent years, the US Army negotiated an Interim Lease to the City of Riverbank allowing us to become the property manager of the site. The City will be receiving the main portion of the property via an Economic Development Conveyance from the Army after plant contamination remediation is complete. In 2018, the City released a Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) and Aemetis was selected to become the property manager and Master Developer. A Lease Disposition and Development Agreement between the City of Riverbank and Aemetis Properties Riverbank, Inc. was formally executed in December 2021. In April 2022, the existing tenant leases were transferred to Aemetis.

While previous improvements needed by these tenants were reviewed and approved solely by the Army, improvements are now applied for and permitted through the City with final approval by the Army until it no longer controls the site. The City has a contract with West Coast Code Consultants (“WC-3”) to conduct plan checks and then inspect the tenant improvements as they are constructed. The Riverbank Public Works Director is currently the Interim Executive Director of the site.

Project Description:

The entire Riverbank Industrial Complex (“RIC”) is approximately 140 acres in total size (Exhibit A). The proposal is to construct a SAF/RD production facility on about 29 acres of the RIC, to be located primarily in the undeveloped portion of the RIC south of the Hetch Hetchy power lines and north of the existing structures. The facility will also include 3,500 square feet (“sf”) of office space and 13,665 sf of warehouse space (Exhibit B). The construction is expected to be complete approximately 24 months after it begins. The plan is to operate the plant 24 hours per day and 7 days per week. Approximately 50 employees are expected to be hired once the plant becomes operational, and substantially more during construction.

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
Water:

One source of the facility’s process water will be from the onsite recycling of processed wastewater. Aemetis currently plans to obtain the additional process water it needs from onsite wells at the RIC. The facility may also include a connection to the City’s water supply at Claus Road at the north end of the property as a back-up to the wells. Estimated water usage for the facility is 432,000 gallons per day (“gpd”) at 300 gallons per minute (“gpm”) which includes 60 gpm of recycled water and 240 gpm from existing on-site wells.

A project is currently on-going to upgrade the water distribution system at the RIC, including a study of the existing water tower and an analysis of the amount of water required for fire safety. More details are provided in the Fire District section below.

Fire District:

The US Army has historically excluded local Fire personnel from reviewing projects or participating in site visits at the RIC. This has deprived local Fire agencies of the fees/funding for the resources it would need to respond to an industrial fire at the plant.

Now that the City is the permitting agency, it includes Stanislaus Consolidated Fire District (“Fire District”, “Fire”) in its RIC project review process. The Fire District is now an active City partner in project reviews and has toured the site with Aemetis representatives on many occasions.

The Fire District is requiring that the facility be designed in accordance with the 2022 California Fire Code and with National Fire Protection Association (“NFPA”) 20, 22, 24, and 30 Guidelines. As part of the design, the facility will have its own on-site firefighting equipment and fire protection features like a water storage tank and a new firewater loop.

The final design and requirements will be submitted to the City and Fire District for review and approval as part of the building permit process. A list of requirements from Fire on this Use Permit application have been included in the Conditions of Approval of the Resolution (Attachment 1). Fire has recently shared that they have approved the water tower project they have been reviewing for the site.

Sewage:

The site will have its own wastewater treatment plant for processing wastewater. Cleaned water is to be reused in the manufacturing process. There will be no discharge of this waste to the City’s facility except as emergency back-up. Sanitary usage from the restrooms and breakroom will connect to the City’s facility as is the current process.

Storm Water:

Stormwater will be captured in dedicated stormwater storage ponds and used to supply water to the facility. The facility’s wastewater treatment plant will be designed to treat any hydrocarbons or contaminants found in the stormwater.

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
Noise and Odors:

The City of Riverbank’s Municipal Code includes a noise ordinance with applicable noise limits. Aemetis is incorporating these limits into the planning and design of the facility and will ensure the facility fully complies with these limits. If required to meet the limits, the design will include dampening or soundproofing.

Aemetis will include several design features for its facility to minimize the potential for odors from feedstocks or products, including:
• Tanks will either be floating roof with double seals (meaning no contact with the atmosphere so no odor release) or have a vapor capture system (for fixed roofs) that will capture and eliminate any odors.
• Loading and unloading stations for both truck and rail will have a vapor recovery system to capture vapors which might have odor.
• Captured vapors from the facility will be routed through a thermal oxidizer that will destroy the compounds which might have odors.
• The facility will have an ongoing fugitive emissions testing program to detect and repair emissions from valves and flanges.

The exact features will be detailed on plans for building permit applications to the City.

Traffic:

The plant will use feedstock from local sources as well as from as far away as the existing Aemetis plant in India. The Riverbank facility will be able to receive this feedstock by train (16 rail cars/day) or truck (86 iso-container trucks/day or 68 tanker trucks/day). If the feedstock is received by train, there will be two deliveries per day. The train cars would arrive by Burlington Northern Santa Fe (“BNSF”) switchyard in Riverbank and then be transported to the site on the Sierra Northern railroad spur. The BNSF cars may arrive through any of its lines or affiliates’ lines throughout California and may vary over time.

The plant will have two entrances for feedstock trucks – one at the main gate to the RIC and a second entrance farther north on Claus Road. The area at the main gate, including the primary traffic route to the gate, will be widened and improved as part of the North County Corridor Project (“NCC”). Aemetis will monitor and coordinate with Stanislaus County Public Works on those NCC improvements. The NCC Phase I will build the ultimate alignment from Oakdale Road to Claus Road. Phase I will include the construction of a new four-lane access-controlled expressway which will facilitate the movement of trucks and vehicles to Highway 99.

In addition, the conditions in the proposed Resolutions require Aemetis to engage a traffic engineer to determine whether an additional turn lane is needed at the northern entrance and the best design for it. Applications for City building permits will include that design for approval by the City, and Aemetis will implement any improvements required by the Cityapproved plans.

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
Hazardous Materials:

Spill prevention plans are required by several federal and state laws. Aemetis will submit applications and/or plans as required by those laws to all applicable agencies and comply with all laws including submitting to the Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources and Environmental Health Services a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, an Emergency Action Plan, and a Spill Prevention, Control & Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan (as applicable).

Aemetis will eventually own the site and has the ability to decommission it if operations cease. If operations cease and the site is sold, the site will be safely decommissioned, moth-balled, or demolished by removing all the equipment and electrical systems. All soil, roads, and foundations will be tested for contamination and remediated, if necessary.

Permits and Regulatory Programs:

The Use Permit is just the first step in the approval process – to determine if the Aemetis project, with conditions, is a good fit in this zoning district. If the Use Permit is approved, the facility will be subject to or potentially subject to the permit requirements and regulatory programs listed below. All of the agencies below were contacted during the staff review process and asked to provide comments on the application and/or conditions of approval:
 City of Riverbank Use Permit (this application and public hearings)  City of Riverbank Architecture and Site Plan Review
 City of Riverbank Parcel Map or Lot Line Adjustment
 City of Riverbank Building Permits
 City of Riverbank Business License
 City of Riverbank Tree Ordinances (where applicable)
 City of Riverbank Water and Sewer connections
 Stanislaus County and/or City of Riverbank Encroachment Permit  Stanislaus County, Department of Environmental Resources, Environmental Health Services: Hazardous Materials Business Plan, Emergency Action Plan, SPCC plan (as applicable)
 Stanislaus County, Department of Agriculture & Weights and Measures: Scale Permit
 Stanislaus County Consolidated Fire District: California Fire Code  San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD): Air Emissions Permits (authorities to construct and permits to operate)  San Francisco Public Utility Commission (SFPUC): Application for Land or Rightof-Way Access Permit for new pipes (if needed)  California Air Resources Board (CARB): Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), Pathway Certification
 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB):

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (construction and operation), Waters of

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
the State permit (wetlands disturbance if applicable), Wastewater Discharge Permits (if applicable)
 CalOSHA: Construction permits for structures and pits; operating permits for pressure vessels; compliance with design standards and regulatory programs  California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC): California Accidental Release Program (CalARP) and Federal Risk Management Program (RMP) CalARP/RMP plan (if applicable)
 California Energy Commission: Award of grant funds (if applicable)  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Renewable Fuels Standard Facility Registration; Fuel Registrations; Low Carbon Renewable Fuel Pathway Approval (if applicable)
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA): Hazardous Waste Generator ID  U.S. EPA, DTSC, RWQCB, U.S. Army: Soils Management Plan  U.S. Army: Compliance with lease provisions, including approval of physical modifications
I. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Aemetis project is consistent with the following general plan policies:

Policy LAND-4.4 “Industrial uses that create noise, air emissions, traffic or other substantial incompatibilities with residential uses shall be buffered or otherwise designed to avoid such impacts to new and existing residential uses.” The location of the Aemetis facility is entirely within the existing Riverbank Industrial Complex site. The footprint of Aemetis’ facility is generally more than 150 feet from the east property line and further from the other property lines. When the County’s buffer policy applies (which it does not in this case), it regulates uses within the 150-foot buffer zone between industrial and residential uses. County buffers only apply to other County agency projects.

Policy LAND-4.5 “The City will review industrial development applications and apply appropriate conditions to ensure compatibility with nearby existing and planned land uses.” After reviewing the Aemetis application, the City is requiring a Use Permit to ensure compatibility with adjacent existing and future uses. The resulting conditions of approval are listed in the Resolution (Attachment 1).

Policy LAND-6.2 “Development applications shall be reviewed and approved only if consistent with the Riverbank General Plan.” The Aemetis project is consistent with Land and Circulation policies in the General Plan.

Policy CIRC-4.1 “The City will work with relevant public agencies and the railroad to appropriately regulate the movement of truck traffic and hazardous materials throughout the City.” The City has been working with relevant public agencies during the project review process and will continue to work with them during the post-approval process if this Use Permit is approved.

II. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Item 10.1 – CC/LRA 09/12/2023
At the time that it adopted the Specific Plan for the Riverbank Industrial Complex, the City Council also approved an Environmental Impact Report that analyzed the environmental impacts of development pursuant to the Specific Plan. An Addendum to the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Specific Plan Final EIR (Attachment 2) has been prepared by Trinity Consultants, Inc. pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. The purpose of the Addendum (Attachment 3) is to describe the facility and its impacts and to analyze them in the context of the Specific Plan EIR. As a general matter, once an EIR has been certified for a proposed project, “no subsequent EIR shall be prepared” unless specific criteria in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines are met.

This Addendum applies the Section 15162 standard to each significance threshold that is normally included within a CEQA checklist. Based on the analysis provided in the Specific Plan EIR, the Facility does not include changes from the Specific Plan that would require major changes to the existing EIR due to new significant adverse environmental effects over those determined by the City in the Specific Plan EIR. Based on this, CEQA states the “lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions [to the EIR] are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a). In addition, “[t]he decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(d).

FISCAL IMPACT
The project is expected to provide at least 50 full time jobs, a substantial number of construction jobs, and contribute to the tax base of the City.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 2023-TBD
Exhibit A – Site Plan

2. Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Specific Plan EIR, which includes:
• March 28, 2013, Public Review Draft EIR
• November 2013, Final EIR
• November 2013, RAAP Specific Plan
• City of Riverbank, City Council Resolution 2014-006, certifying the RAAP Specific Plan EIR, making CEQA findings, and adopting a Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program

3. Addendum to the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Specific Plan Final EIR

4. Planning Commission Resolution 2023-010

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2023-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AEMETIS ADVANCED PRODUCTS RIVERBANK, INC. LOCATED AT 5300 CLAUS ROAD APNS: 062-031-005 & -011

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

Whereas, the proposed business location for a Sustainable Aviation Fuel/Renewable Diesel Production Plant (the “Facility”) is located within the City of Riverbank at 5300 Claus Road (APNs: 062-031-005 & -011) (the “Property”); and Whereas, Applicant submitted an application to the City of Riverbank for a Use Permit on January 23, 2023, and responded to several requests for additional information, as well as comments from City staff and from other regulatory agencies; and Whereas, the City of Riverbank Planning Commission considered the application at its August 15, 2023, meeting, reviewed the submitted materials, and took public comment; at the Planning Commission, a motion was made and seconded to approve the permit, then with a vote of 2 in favor and 3 against the Commission did not approve the motion, following which Applicant timely appealed the matter to the City Council; and Whereas, the property has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Industrial / Business Park (I/BP); and
Whereas, Industrial / Business Park is the primary land use category for Riverbank to accommodate industrial uses located along major roadways on the periphery of existing and planned neighborhoods during the buildout of the General Plan; and Whereas, the proposed Use Permit for Aemetis Advanced Products Riverbank, Inc. (“Aemetis”) would allow a Sustainable Aviation Fuel/Renewable Diesel Production Plant use at the Riverbank Industrial Complex on Claus Road, north of Claribel Road and the proposed North County Corridor; and
Whereas, the property has a zoning designation of Riverbank Industrial Complex (RIC) Specific Plan RAAP-1, RAAP-2, RAAP-R, and the proposed use is consistent with the uses that are listed in the Specific Plan as permitted and/or conditional uses within those zones;
ATTACHMENT 1
(Amended)

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
Whereas, permitted and conditional uses in the RIC District include commercial and industrial uses which are “green” and environmentally-conscious; and Whereas, the Aemetis project is consistent with the General Plan and specifically, Policies LAND-4.4, LAND-4.5, LAND-6.2, and CIRC-4.1, as well as with the Specific Plan for the Riverbank Industrial Complex and with Title XV of the Riverbank City Code; and Whereas, the City Council has reviewed the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Specific Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 2011022015), including (a) the March 28, 2013, Public Review Draft EIR, (b) the November 2013, Final EIR, (c) the November 2013, RAAP Specific Plan, and (d) the City of Riverbank, City Council Resolution 2014- 006, certifying the RAAP Specific Plan EIR, making CEQA findings, and adopting a Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program; and
Whereas, the City of Riverbank is the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA for the project, and the City Council has decision making authority for the City of Riverbank with respect to the project; and
Whereas, the City Council has reviewed the CEQA Addendum to the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant EIR that has been prepared for the Aemetis project; and Whereas, the establishment, maintenance and operation of the Facility will not, under the circumstances of the particular case (location, size, design, and operating characteristics), be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city, the proposed use meets the minimum requirements of Title XV of the Riverbank City Code and of the Specific Plan that are applicable to the use, and the use will comply with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations of the city and state; and Therefore, Be It Resolved that the City Council (i) adopts the findings and resolutions of the previous City Council Resolution 2014-006 and incorporates them by reference herein, and (ii) approves the CEQA Addendum to the RAAP Specific Plan EIR that has been prepared for the Project, and (iii) directs and authorizes the City of Riverbank Planning department to add the Addendum to the EIR and to certify the document as approved by the City of Riverbank as lead agency; Be It Further Resolved that the City Council hereby approves Use Permit Number 23-0001 for Aemetis Advanced Products Riverbank, Inc. to allow a Sustainable Aviation Fuel/Renewable Diesel Production Plant at the Property, which Use Permit shall be evidenced by a duly signed copy of this Resolution; and Be It Further Resolved that this Use Permit #23-0001 is subject to the following conditions:

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

1. The Facility shall comply with the City of Riverbank Standard Conditions as contained in the Planning Commission Resolution 2013-014 and/or receive confirmation from the City of Riverbank Planning or Development Services departments that a specific condition or conditions do not apply to the subject project.

2. The Facility shall comply with the 2022 California Building Standards Code (Cal. Code Regs., Title 24) and energy standards, as may be updated or amended and applicable at the time of Facility construction.

3. The extent of disabled access requirements is based on the new use, project valuation, and extent of upgrades. All new interior construction is required to comply with applicable accessibility requirements of California Building Code, Chapter 11B. It will be determined during building permit submittal whether full accessibility is required or whether the project qualifies for an “Unreasonable Hardship Application” or other exemption or exclusion from Chapter 11B.

4. The Facility shall comply with all applicable mitigation measures in the Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program that was adopted by City Council Resolution 2014-006.

5. The Facility shall obtain all required permits and is subject to all regulatory programs of the City of Riverbank, any Special Districts such as Stanislaus Consolidated Fire District, Stanislaus County, the State of California, and the Federal Government.

6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the Facility, the applicant shall determine, to the satisfaction of the Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources (“DER”), that a site containing structures has been fully investigated via Phase 1 and/or if necessary, a Phase 2 study. Any discovery of underground storage tanks, former storage tank locations, buried chemicals, buried refuse, or contaminated soil shall be brought to the immediate attention of DER.

7. The applicant shall contact the DER regarding appropriate permitting requirements for hazardous materials and/or wastes. Applicant and/or occupants handling hazardous materials or generating hazardous wastes must notify the DER relative to the following: (CA H&S, Division 20) A. Requirements for registering as a handler of hazardous materials in the County and submittal of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) into the California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) by handlers of materials in excess of 55 gallons, 500 pounds of a hazardous material, or of 200 cubic feet of compressed gas;

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
B. Generators of hazardous waste must notify DER relative to the:
(1) quantities of waste generated; and
(2) proposed waste disposal practices;
Generators of hazardous waste shall also use the CERS data base to submit chemical and facility information to the DER.

C. The handling of acutely hazardous materials may require the preparation of a Risk Management Prevention Program which must be implemented prior to operation of the facility. The list of acutely hazardous materials can be found in SARA, Title III, Section § 302;
D. If applicable, notify DER for storing hazardous materials in aboveground tanks;
E. Requirement to obtain and maintain an active EPA ID number with the California Environmental Protection Agency Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) using Permanent State ID Number Application DTSC Form 1358 (https://dtsc.ca.gov/permanent-state-epa-id-numbers/).

8. The Facility shall provide fire prevention and fire protection resources to the satisfaction of the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District. These resources are expected to include the following:

A. Firefighting water storage tank (size to be determined by firewater review); B. New firewater loop with hydrants around the site;
C. Targeted firewater monitors for tanks and critical equipment; D. Cooling water spray on critical tanks for cooling;
E. Foam stations for monitors at fuel storage tanks;
F. Firewater pumps (electric and diesel in case of power outage); G. Firewater jockey pumps (electric and diesel).

The final design and requirements will be submitted to the City and Fire District for review and approval as part of the building permit process.

9. Pursuant to Stanislaus County Department of Public Works, no access from Claribel Road and no new access south of the proposed improvements shall be allowed in connection with the Facility as they would be in conflict with an existing plan (North County Corridor).

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-

10.Aemetis shall provide the City Planning Department with report from a Traffic Engineer to document whether any traffic improvements are necessary for the operation of the Facility, which report shall include evaluations of whether Claus Road needs to be widened to accommodate deceleration lanes and stacking areas for vehicles and trucks to stage prior to entering the project’s security building, and the location of the security building set back from the roadway to accommodate entering trucks and vehicles without impacting Claus Road traffic.

11.A plan shall be provided indicating how the Facility will be reclaimed if and when operations cease.

12.The City of Riverbank Municipal Code includes a noise ordinance with applicable noise limits. Aemetis shall incorporate these limits into the planning and design of the Facility to ensure the facility fully complies with these limits.

If required to meet the limits, the design will include dampening or sound proofing.

13.To the extent required by any lease, deed conditions, or other applicable requirements for a particular parcel of land on which the Facility is located, Aemetis shall prepare a Soil Management Plan for activities that require soil movement and comply with any provisions of the applicable requirement that require submittal of the plan to regulatory agencies for approval before implementing soil disturbance activities. The plan shall contain appropriate procedures for sampling and disposal of soil to account for potential contamination.

14.Aemetis is required to continue coordination with SFPUC Power to resolve the feasibility of adding the additional power load to the location. The existing infrastructure may not support the proposed increased power load. Aemetis will need to resolve the addition of any new power infrastructure and work with the SFPUC to identify and mitigate impacts to the power grid.

15.A SFPUC/HHWP Project Review and Land Use Application must be submitted to Hetch Hetchy Water and Power for any proposed new crossing or work on the SFPUC Right of Way (ROW) prior to commencement. A completed application shall be emailed to: http//[email protected].

16.The facility will include several design features to minimize the potential for odors from feedstocks or products, including:

A. Tanks will either be floating roof with double seals (meaning no contact with the atmosphere, and therefore no odor release) or have a vapor capture system (for fixed roofs) that will capture and eliminate any odors.

CC/LRA – 09/12/2023
CC Resolution 2023-
B. Loading/unloading stations for both truck and rail will have a vapor recovery system that will capture vapors that might have odors.

C. Captured vapors from the plant will be routed through a thermal oxidizer that will destroy the compounds that might cause odors.

D. The Facility will have an ongoing fugitive emissions testing program to detect and repair emissions from valves and flanges.

Definitive plans will be described in the building permit applications submitted for the City’s review and approval.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 12th day of September 2023; motioned by Councilmember ______, seconded by Councilmember ______, and upon roll call was carried by the following vote of ___:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ________________________
Gabriela Hernandez Richard D. O’Brien
City Clerk Mayor

MARCH 28, 2013 | PUBLIC REVIEW

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RIVERBANK ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT EIR
State Clearinghouse Number: 2011022015
ATTACHMENT 2
(DRAFT EIR- Public Review)

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RIVERBANK ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT EIR
March 28, 2013 | Public Review
State Clearinghouse Number: 2011022015

TABLE OF CONTENTS
i

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1-1

2. REPORT SUMMARY................................................................................. 2-1

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 3-1

4. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION............................................................... 4-1

4.1 AESTHETICS.................................................................................. 4.1-1

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ...................................... 4.2-1

4.3 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................ 4.3-1

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES................................................................ 4.4-1

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES.................................................................. 4.5-1

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS.................................................................... 4.6-1

4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ........................................................ 4.7-1

4.8 MINERAL RESOURCES .................................................................... 4.8-1

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ........................................ 4.9-1

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY .............................................. 4.10-1

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING............................................................ 4.11-1

4.12 NOISE.......................................................................................... 4.12-1

4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING ......................................................... 4.13-1

4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES ........................................................................... 4.14-1

4.15 RECREATION ................................................................................ 4.15-1

4.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC.................................................... 4.16-1

4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ..................................................... 4.17-1

5. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................. 5-1

6. CEQA REQUIRED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS ........................................ 6-1

7. LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................. 7-1

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii
Appendices
Appendix A – Notice of Preparation
Appendix B – Air Quality
Appendix C – Historical Resource Assessment
Appendix D – Water Supply Assessment
Appendix E – Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix F – Operation and Infrastructure Assessment
Appendix G –Wetland Delineation Report

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iii
List of Figures
Figure 3-1 Regional Location.................................................................. 3-3 Figure 3-2 Local Location....................................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-3 Specific Plan Area .................................................................. 3-5 Figure 3-4 Land Use Concept................................................................. 3-9 Figure 3-5 Roadway Plan...................................................................... 3-12 Figure 3-6 Typical Street Cross-Section................................................ 3-13 Figure 3-7 Potential OID Realignment ................................................ 3-15 Figure 3-8 Proposed GP LU Designations ........................................... 3-18 Figure 4.1-1 Views within the RAAP Site.............................................. 4.1-7 Figure 4.2-1 Important Farmland ........................................................... 4.2-7 Figure 4.3-1 Project Site, Roadway Links for Dispersion Modeling, and Receptor Locations....................................4.3-35 Figure 4.4-1 Potential Jurisdictional Wetlands......................................4.4-12 Figure 4.5-1 Eligible CRHP Historical District ....................................4.5-19 Figure 4.6-1 Fault Lines in the Project Area........................................... 4.6-9 Figure 4.9-1 Environmental Remediation Requirements....................... 4.9-6 Figure 4.11-1 Riverbank General Plan Land Uses...................................4.11-3 Figure 4.12-1 Noise Measurement Locations ........................................4.12-15 Figure 4.12-2 Noise Levels at LT1.........................................................4.12-16 Figure 4.12-3 Noise Levels at LT 2........................................................4.12-17 Figure 4.12-4 Noise Levels at LT3.........................................................4.12-18 Figure 4.12-5 Noise Levels at LT4.........................................................4.12-20 Figure 4.16-1 Study Intersection Locations.............................................4.16-4 Figure 4.16-2 Railroad Crossings...........................................................4.16-12 Figure 4.16-3 Existing (2011) Lane Configurations, Traffic Control and Peak Hour Volumes .................................................4.16-15 Figure 4.16-4 Project Trip Distribution Percentages.............................4.16-25 Figure 4.16-5 Near-Term Project Trip Assignment ..............................4.16-26 Figure 4.16-6 Cumulative Project Trip Assignment .............................4.16-27 Figure 4.16-7 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Control and Peak Hour Volumes........................................................4.16-29

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv
Figure 4.16-8 Cumulative Without Project Lane Configurations, Traffic Control Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................. 4.16-34 Figure 4.16-9 Cumulative With Project Lane Configurations, Traffic Control Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................. 4.16-36

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
v
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures..................... 2-5 Table 3-1 Specific Plan Development Estimates ................................... 3-8 Table 4.1-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Aesthetics..... 4.1-2 Table 4.2-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to
Agriculture.......................................................................... 4.2-5 Table 4.3-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Air Quality...............................................................................4.3-13 Table 4.3-2 Ambient Air Quality Standards – February 2012a............4.3-15 Table 4.3-3 Highest Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations..............4.3-18 Table 4.3-4 Summary of Measured Air Quality Exceedances..............4.3-18 Table 4.3-5 Project Area Attainment Status.........................................4.3-20 Table 4.3-6 Riverbank Specific Plan Policies Related to Air Quality...............................................................................4.3-26 Table 4.3-7 Specific Plan Operational Period Emissions .....................4.3-30 Table 4.4-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Biological Resources............................................................................ 4.4-6 Table 4.4-2 Special-Status Plant Species Known to Occur in the Region of RAAP ...............................................................4.4-16 Table 4.4-3 Special-Status Wildlife Species With Potential to Occur at RAAP Areas.......................................................4.4-18 Table 4.5-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Cultural Resources............................................................................ 4.5-5 Table 4.5-2 RAAP Site Properties Eligible for NRHP Listing ............4.5-13 Table 4.6-1 Riverbank General Plan Goal and Policy Related to Geology and Soils............................................................... 4.6-5 Table 4.6-2 Soil Series Found in Riverbank .........................................4.6-13 Table 4.6-3 Expansive Soils Found in Riverbank.................................4.6-16 Table 4.7-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to
Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................. 4.7-9 Table 4.7-2 Annual Operational GHG Emissions (CO2E) .................4.7-15

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
v i
Table 4.7-3 Riverbank Specific Plan Policies Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................... 4.7-16 Table 4.8-1 Riverbank General Plan Goal and Policy Related to Mineral Resources............................................................... 4.8-4 Table 4.9-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to
Hazardous Materials........................................................... 4.9-7 Table 4.11-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Land Use .... 4.11-4 Table 4.11-2 Existing Site Characteristics.............................................. 4.11-6 Table 4.12-1 Definition of Acoustical Terms........................................ 4.12-3 Table 4.12-2 Typical Sound Levels........................................................ 4.12-4 Table 4.12-3 Reaction of People and Damage to Buildings for Continuous Vibration Levelsa .......................................... 4.12-5 Table 4.12-4 Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria ........................ 4.12-8 Table 4.12-5 Noise and Land Use Compatibility Criteria .................. 4.12-10 Table 4.12-6 Non-Transportation Noise Source Criteria ................... 4.12-11 Table 4.12-7 Non-Transportation Noise Source Criteria ................... 4.12-12 Table 4.12-8 Exterior Noise Level Standards ...................................... 4.12-13 Table 4.12-9 Short-Term Noise Level Data......................................... 4.12-19 Table 4.12-10 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipmenta . 4.12-25 Table 4.12-11 Traffic Noise Level Increases.......................................... 4.12-28 Table 4.12-12 Noise Levels for Multiple Scenarios at 50 feet from Roadways........................................................................ 4.12-31 Table 4.12-13 Substantial Increases to Traffic Noise Levels in the Plan Area and Its Vicinity .............................................. 4.12-32 Table 4.13-1 Riverbank General Plan Goals, Policies, and Programs Related to Population and Housing ................. 4.13-3 Table 4.14-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Pertaining to Law Enforcement Services........................................................ 4.14-2 Table 4.14-2 Riverbank General Plan Policies Pertaining to Fire Protection and Emergency Rescue Services ..................... 4.14-8 Table 4.14-3 Riverbank General Plan Goals and Policies
Pertaining to Schools...................................................... 4.14-16 Table 4.14-4 Riverbank General Plan Policies Pertaining to Library Services and Facilities ........................................ 4.14-22

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii
Table 4.15-1 Riverbank General Plan Policies Related to Recreation..........................................................................4.15-3 Table 4.15-2 Park and Recreational Facilities in Riverbank ..................4.15-5 Table 4.16-1 Project Consistency with City of Riverbank General Plan Policies: Transportation and Traffic .........................4.16-5 Table 4.16-2 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria .............4.16-16 Table 4.16-3 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria ........4.16-17 Table 4.16-4 Existing (2011) Peak Hour Level of Service ....................4.16-18 Table 4.16-5 Claus Road at Terminal Avenue Peak Period Railroad Crossing Vehicle Queues.................................................4.16-21 Table 4.16-6 Project Trip Generation Estimates..................................4.16-23 Table 4.16-7 Existing and Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ..........................................4.16-30 Table 4.16-8 Cumulative Without and With Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ..........................................4.16-37 Table 4.16-9 Existing Plus Project With Mitigation Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary ...........................4.16-40 Table 4.16-10 Cumulative With Project With Mitigation Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Summary ...........................4.16-43 Table 4.17-1 Future Sewer Flow Projections for the General Plan Areas and the City Service Areas ......................................4.17-4 Table 4.17-2 General Plan Goals and Policies Relevant to Wastewater ........................................................................4.17-5 Table 4.17-3 General Plan Goals and Policies Relevant To Water Supply..............................................................................4.17-18 Table 4.17-4 Water Well Information..................................................4.17-20 Table 4.17-5 WSA Estimated Demand.................................................4.17-21 Table 4.17-6 UWMP Supply and Demand (Acre-Ft/Year) .................4.17-22 Table 4.17-7 General Plan Goals and Policies Relevant To Stormwater......................................................................4.17-29 Table 4.17-8 General Plan Goals and Policies Relevant to Solid Waste ...............................................................................4.17-37 Table 5-1 Comparison of Alternatives.................................................. 5-3

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

TABLE OF CONTENTS
viii
1 INTRODUCTION
1-1
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared to assess the potential environmental consequences of adopting and implementing the RAAP Specific Plan (Specific Plan). This Draft EIR is intended to inform City decision-makers, other responsible agencies, and the public of the nature of the project. This Draft EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Riverbank Local Redevelopment Authority (RLRA) is the lead agency for this project. The Notice of Preparation is included in Appendix A.

The Specific Plan covers an approximately 146-acre area in the southeast portion of Riverbank. The Specific Plan is a planning and regulatory tool available to local governments in the State of California and provides a greater level of specificity than the General Plan. As allowed under California State law (Government Code 65450 et seq.), the City would use the Specific Plan, in part, to implement its adopted General Plan. Although the Specific Plan is broadly consistent with the adopted General Plan, the City will need to adopt minor revisions to the General Plan to ensure that it is fully consistent with the Specific Plan as required under State law.

The project also includes adoption of amendments to the Riverbank General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, changing the current land use designations in the Plan Area and establishing new development standards to replace some of the current zoning provisions applicable to the Plan Area. These amendments must be completed to ensure consistency between the Specific Plan, General Plan, and Zoning Ordinance. This EIR will be used by decision-makers in determining whether or not to adopt the Specific Plan, as well as by the public to clearly understand the environmental implications associated with adoption and implementation of the Specific Plan.

This EIR does not assess the impacts associated with the implementation of the North County Corridor Project (NCC). The purpose of the NCC is to connect SR-99 to SR-120, and one proposed alignment would be located along Claribel Road, adjacent to the RAAP site. Because the location of NCC roadways has not been fully determined, assessing the impacts of the NCC in

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

INTRODU CTION
1-2
the context of buildout of the RAAP Specific Plan would be premature and speculative.

This document is a programmatic EIR, as described in Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines. A program-level document is appropriate when a project consists of a series of smaller projects or phases that may be implemented separately. Under the programmatic EIR approach, future projects or phases may require additional, project-specific environmental analysis. In order to identify whether additional analysis would be necessary when the project is implemented, the Lead Agency will need to determine the following:
¨ Whether the planned characteristics of the project are substantially different from those defined in the Programmatic EIR; ¨ Whether the project would require additional mitigation measures; or ¨ Whether specific impacts were not evaluated in sufficient detail in the Program EIR.

If any of these conditions apply, then a project-specific Initial Study or EIR would be necessary to identify how the impacts of the project differ from those identified in this EIR or what additional mitigation measures would be necessary. This EIR is anticipated to provide a basis for future project-level CEQA analysis.

A. Proposed Action
The proposed project, the RAAP Specific Plan, contains land use goals, policies, and development standards for the form and physical design of new development within the Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan serves as a guide to investment and development of the RAAP site of Riverbank over the next 20 years. The Plan is described in more detail in Chapter 3, Project Description. Since release of the Notice of Preparation, the Evaporation/Percolation Ponds, located on a non-contiguous parcel, has been removed as a project component.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

INTRODUCTION
1-3
B. Report Organization
This EIR is organized into the following chapters:
¨ Chapter 1: Introduction. Provides a preface and overview describing both the intended use of the document and the review and certification process of both the Plan and the EIR.
¨ Chapter 2: Report Summary. Summarizes environmental consequences that would result from the Plan; describes recommended mitigation measures; and indicates the level of significance of environmental impacts before and after mitigation. A Summary Table is also included for clarity. ¨ Chapter 3: Project Description. Describes the Plan in detail, including the Plan Area location and characteristics; Plan objectives; the planning process used to create the Plan; proposed capital improvements; and implementation. ¨ Chapter 4: Environmental Evaluation. Provides an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Plan and presents recommended mitigation measures, if required, to reduce their significance. ¨ Chapter 5: Alternatives to the Proposed Project. Considers three alternatives to the proposed project, including the CEQA-required “No Project Alternative.”
¨ Chapter 6: CEQA-Required Assessment Conclusions. Discusses growth inducement, unavoidable significant effects, and significant irreversible changes as a result of the project. ¨ Chapter 7: List of Preparers. Lists the individuals and firms who prepared the EIR.

C. Environmental Review Process
This Draft EIR will be available for review by the public and interested parties, agencies, and organizations for a 45-day comment period. During the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

INTRODU CTION
1-4
comment period, the public is invited to submit written or e-mail comments on the Draft EIR and/or requested entitlements to the RLRA. The RLRA will also hold one or more public hearings on the Draft EIR during the review period. The public is invited to attend the hearing(s) to offer oral comments on the Draft EIR. Written comments should be submitted to:

Debbie Olson, Executive Director
Riverbank Local Redevelopment Authority
5300 Claus Road
Riverbank, CA 95367
2 REPORT SUMMARY
2-1
This summary presents an overview of the analysis contained in Chapter 4.0, Environmental Evaluation. CEQA requires that this chapter summarize the following: 1) areas of controversy; 2) significant impacts; 3) unavoidable significant impacts; 4) implementation of mitigation measures; and 5) alternatives to the project.

A. Project under Review
This Draft EIR provides an assessment of the potential environmental consequences of adoption and implementation of the RAAP Specific Plan (the Plan). This includes development of the site according to adopted land use policies, and development of supporting transportation and utilities infrastructure.

B. Areas of Controversy
The following is a discussion of issues that are likely to be of particular concern to agencies and interested members of the public during the environmental review process. This list does not necessarily identify all areas of concern, but attempts to capture those that are likely to generate greatest interest based on the input received during the scoping process.
¨ Air Quality. The Plan Area is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). As such, this Draft EIR will need to examine existing and post-project emissions of criteria, nuisance odors, and potential health impacts associated with toxic air contaminants. This Draft EIR must also discuss the methodology, model assumptions, inputs and results relating to air quality impacts; emission projections of Plan components, and Plan design elements, mitigation measures, and whether the Plan would cumulatively contribute to a net increase of criteria pollutants or precursor for which the area is in nonattainment. Further, the Plan itself would be subject to a variety of SJVAPCD rules and regulations.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

R AAP SPECIFIC PLAN EI R

REPORT SUMMARY
2-2
¨ Biological Resources. The Plan Area includes riparian habitats and wetlands that could be impacted by buildout under the Specific Plan. There are also several special-status animals on the RAAP site, such as Swainson’s hawks and the western burrowing owl. Potential impacts to these species should be addressed.
¨ Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The Plan Area has industrial sites that have been contaminated by past activities. Impact to humans from the redevelopment of these parcels should be addressed. ¨ Hydrology and Water Quality. The Plan Area includes Oakdale Irrigation District lateral, which eventually drains into the Modesto Irrigation District main canal. Runoff impacts and impacts to drainage facilities are concerns that have been requested to be addressed in the EIR. ¨ Transportation and Traffic. Implementation of the Plan would result in new vehicle and truck trips to and from the RAAP site, which have the potential to impact operations at intersections and along roadway segments in the surrounding area, including the State Highway System.

In addition, the Plan would increase vehicular traffic volumes at at-grade highway-rail crossings. The Draft EIR will need to consider mitigation measures to reduce impacts on traffic safety, particularly at railroad crossings.

C. Alternatives to the Project
According to CEQA, an EIR must evaluate a reasonable range of feasible alternatives to the proposed project that would achieve most of the basic project objectives and would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the project. Chapter 5 compares the impacts of three alternatives to those of the project, the No Project Alternative, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the Mixed Use Alternative. The Reduced Density Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative.
¨ Alternative 1 – No Project Alternative. Under this alternative, which is required to be analyzed under CEQA, the RAAP site would retain its

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
2-3
existing zoning designations and land uses. Since the existing structures could be leased in their current condition, without any further discretionary approval from the City, this alternative assumes re-occupancy of the existing buildings in their current condition.
¨ Alternative 2 – Reduced Density Alternative. This alternative would reduce the intensity of proposed land uses in order to reduce impacts to air quality, cultural resources, noise, and traffic. This alternative would also prohibit demolition of the existing structures, which contribute to the eligibility of a historic district, to avoid impacts to cultural resources. ¨ Alternative 3 – Reconfigured Site Plan Alternative. This alternative would reconfigure the site in order to reduce impacts to biological resources and cultural resources. Specifically, the existing structures would not be demolished, and new buildings would have smaller footprints and heights compared to the proposed project.

D. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by a project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance.

The proposed Plan has the potential to generate environmental impacts in a number of areas that could be significant:
¨ Air Quality
¨ Biological Resources
¨ Cultural Resources
¨ Greenhouse Gas Emissions
¨ Noise
¨ Public Services
¨ Transportation and Traffic
¨ Utilities and Service Systems

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

R AAP SPECIFIC PLAN EI R

REPORT SUMMARY
2-4
In Sections 4.1 through 4.17, significant impacts that have been identified for the Plan are numbered. Each numbered impact is considered significant prior to mitigation, unless it is specifically identified as less than significant. Mitigation measures have been suggested to reduce the effects of significant impacts.

As shown in Table 2-1, most of the significant impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level if the mitigation measures recommended in this report were implemented. However, in some instances the mitigation measure that is recommended would not be sufficient to reduce a significant impact to a less-than-significant level (for example, Impact AIR-1); these impacts are identified as significant and unavoidable after mitigation.

CEQA allows environmental issues for which there is no likelihood of a significant impact to be “scoped out” during the EIR scoping process, and not analyzed further in the EIR. However, all issues have been analyzed in this Draft EIR.

Table 2-1 presents a summary of impacts and mitigation measures identified in this report. It is organized to correspond with the environmental issues discussed in Chapter 4.

The table is arranged in four columns: 1) environmental impacts, 2) significance prior to mitigation, 3) mitigation measures, and 4) significance after mitigation. A series of mitigation measures is noted where more than one measure may be required to achieve a less-than-significant impact. For a complete description of potential impacts and suggested mitigation measures, please refer to the specific discussions in Chapter 4. Additionally, this summary does not detail the timing of mitigation measures. Timing will be further detailed in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-5
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Aesthetics
Since there are no significant impacts related to aesthetics as a result of the RAAP Site Specific Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Since there are no significant impacts related to agricultural and forest resources as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Air Quality
AQ-1: Construction of the Specific Plan could emit
significant levels of criteria pollutants, potentially
contributing to an existing or projected air quality
violation. Because of the project size and the uncertainty of the construction schedule, construction period emissions would be considered to remain
significant with mitigation.

S AQ-1a: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant construction period air quality impacts. For each project-level analysis, a construction emissions estimate will be made using the latest SJVAPCD accepted methodology and will be compared to accepted thresholds of significance. Means of mitigating construction period impacts to a less-thansignificant level include, but are not limited to, Mitigation Measures AQ-1b through AQ-1e.

SU
AQ-1b: SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Control Measures. The following controls shall be required to be implemented at all construction sites:
¨ All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover; ¨ All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; ¨ All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking; ¨ With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition;

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-6
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
¨ When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inched of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained; ¨ All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden);
¨ Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; ¨ Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday; and ¨ Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout.

AQ-1c: Enhanced Control Measures. The following measures should be implemented at construction sites when required to mitigate significant PM10 impacts (note, these measures are to be implemented in addition to Regulation VIII requirements):
¨ Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; and
¨ Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-7
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
AQ-1d: Additional Control Measures. The following control measures are strongly encouraged by the SJVAPCD at construction sites that are large in area, located near sensitive receptors, or which for any other reason warrant additional emissions reductions:
¨ Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site; ¨ Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction areas; ¨ Suspend excavation and grading activity when wind exceeds 20 mph (Regardless of wind speed, and owner/operator must comply with Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation.); and
¨ Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time.

AQ-1e: The following measures may be implemented to mitigate emissions from construction equipment exhaust:
¨ Use of alternative-fueled or catalyst-equipped diesel construction equipment; ¨ Minimize idling time (e.g. 5-minute maximum);
¨ Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use;
¨ Replace fossil-fueled equipment with electrically-driven equivalents (provided they are not run via a portable generator set);
¨ Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during the peak-hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways; and ¨ Implement activity management (e.g. rescheduling activities to reduce shortterm impacts).

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-8
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
AQ-2: Operation of the Specific Plan could emit
significant levels of criteria pollutants, potentially
contributing to existing or projected air quality
violations.

S AQ-2: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant construction period air quality impacts. For each project-level analysis, an operational emissions estimate will be made using the latest SJVAPCD accepted methodology and will be compared to accepted thresholds of significance. Means of mitigating operational period impacts to a less-thansignificant level include, but are not limited to, improving transportation and transit design (e.g. improved bikeways, transit infrastructure, and pedestrian enhancements); contributing a project’s fair share to the Air Quality Mitigation Fee Fund; and contributing a project’s fair share towards Transportation Control Measures implementation programs.

SU
Biological Resources
BIO-1: Buildout of the Plan would involve the
demolition or redevelopment of buildings on the
RAAP site where the maternity roosts of Townsend's big-eared bats are potentially present. This could result in the destruction, disturbance, or interference with the maternity roots of a special-species bat.

S BIO-1: Implementation of the Plan shall avoid disturbance to the maternity roosts of special-status bats during the breeding season in accordance with the following procedures for Pre-Construction Special-Status Bat Surveys and Subsequent Actions. No more than two weeks in advance of any demolition or construction activity involving concrete breaking or similarly noisy or intrusive activities, that would commence during the pup-rearing season (April 15 through August 31), or winter hibernacula season (October 15 through March 1, depending on weather conditions) a qualified bat biologist, acceptable to the CDFG, shall conduct pre-demolition surveys of all potential special-status bat breeding habitat in the vicinity of the planned activity. Depending on the survey findings, the following actions shall be taken to avoid potential adverse effects on breeding special-status bats:

1. If active roosts are identified during pre-construction surveys, a no disturbance buffer will be created by the qualified bat biologist, in consultation with the CDFG, around active roosts during the breeding season. The size of the buffer will take into account factors such as the following:
¨ Noise and human disturbance levels at the project site and the roost site LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-9
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity;
¨ Distance and amount of vegetation or other screening between the project site and the roost; and ¨ Sensitivity of individual nesting species and the behaviors of the bats.

2. If pre-construction surveys indicate that no roosts of special-status bats are present, or that roosts are inactive or potential habitat is unoccupied, no further mitigation is required.

3. Pre-construction surveys are not required for demolition or construction activities scheduled to occur during the non-breeding and winter hibernacula season (September 1 through October 15, and March 1 through April 15).

4. Noisy demolition or construction activities as described above (or activities producing similar substantial increases in noise and activity levels in the vicinity) commencing during the non-breeding season and continuing into the breeding season do not require surveys (as it is assumed that any bats taking up roosts would be acclimated to project-related activities already under way). However, if trees are to be removed during the breeding season, the trees would be surveyed for roosts prior to their removal, according to the survey and protective action guidelines 1a through 1c, above.

5. Bat roosts initiated during demolition or construction activities are presumed to be unaffected by the activity, and a buffer is not necessary.

6. Destruction of roosts of special-status bats and overt interference with roosting activities of special-status bats shall be prohibited.

7. The noise control procedures for maximum noise, equipment, and operations identified in Chapter 4.12, Noise, of this EIR shall be implemented.

Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to the maximum extent practicable.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-10
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Cultural Resources
CUL-1: Implementation of the RAAP Specific Plan
would alter the significance of an historic resource.

By removing individual structures that contribute to
the eligibility of an historic district, the RAAP’s
ability to convey its importance to local and national history is significantly altered, the resource may not be eligible for inclusion on the CRHR.

S CUL-1: Prior to the demolition of buildings and structures comprising the eligible district, an Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) recordation shall be conducted for the affected structures. HABS/HAER recordation could include archiving of original plans, undertaking archival research for preparation of a report, making measured drawings, and completing a photographic study of the structures.SU Geology and Soils
Since there are no significant impacts related to land use as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1: Development and operation of the Specific Plan could generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

S GHG-1: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant GHG impacts. For each project-level analysis, appropriate BPS will be implemented or a 29 percent GHG emission reduction compared to BAU will be demonstrated. Means of mitigating GHG impacts to a less-thansignificant level include, but are not limited to, technological controls for stationary sources (such as for boilers, generators, and process heaters) and the GHG emission reduction measures (such as energy efficiency, transportation, and site design measures) for development projects listed in the SJVAPCD CCAP.

LTS
Mineral Resources
There are no significant impacts related to agricultural resources as a result of the proposed Plan. Therefore no mitigation measures are required.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Since there are no significant impacts related to hazardous materials as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-11
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Hydrology and Water Quality
There are no significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality as a result of the proposed Plan. Therefore no mitigation measures are required.

Land Use and Planning
Since there are no significant impacts related to land use as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Noise
NOISE-1: The nearest residential land uses are 110
feet west of the plan area, across Claus Road. Noise
levels resulting from on-site activities may exceed
City standards for stationary noise sources, as described in General Plan Tables NOISE-2 and NOISE-3 (Tables 4.12-6 and 4.12-7 in this EIR), at
nearby residential receivers if the noise generated by
such uses are not regulated or adequately mitigated.

S NOISE-1: In order to reduce noise generated by activities occurring within the RAAP site, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
¨ Project level acoustical analyses shall be constructed for noise-generating land uses proposed as part of the Specific Plan. Exterior noise levels at residential land uses interfacing active parks, commercial land uses, or industrial land uses shall be maintained in accordance with the standards presented in the General Plan and Municipal Code. ¨ Parking lot cleaning activities in commercial and industrial areas shall be limited to daytime and evening hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.). ¨ Trash compactors in commercial and industrial areas shall be located away from adjacent residential receivers or shielded with noise barriers. ¨ Loading dock hours of operation shall be limited to daytime and evening hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.).

LTS
NOISE-2: Existing noise environments at outdoor
activity areas of residences along Claus Road are
greater than 65 dBA Ldn, and would increase by
more than 1.5 dBA as a result of transportation
noise following implementation of the Specific Plan.

S NOISE-2: Noise reduction methods shall be implemented to reduce generated by activities resulting from the Specific Plan. These measures shall include, but are not limited to the following:
¨ Paving streets with "quieter" pavement types such as Open-Grade Rubberized Asphaltic Concrete would reduce noise levels by 2 to 3 dBA depending on the existing pavement type, traffic speed, traffic volumes, and other factors.

SU

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-12
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
¨ New or larger noise barriers could reduce noise levels by 5 dBA Ldn. Final design of such barriers, including an assessment of their feasibility and reasonableness, should be completed during project level review. ¨ Sound insulation treatments to affected buildings, such as sound rated windows and doors, could reduce noise levels in interior spaces. ¨ Installing traffic calming measures to slow traffic along Claus Road could provide qualitative improvement by smoothing out the rise and fall in noise levels caused by speeding vehicles.

NOISE-3: While the duration and phasing of construction activities for the Specific Plan is unknown at this time, it is conceivable that a particular receiver or group of receivers would be subject to construction noise levels in excess of 60 dBA Leq and the ambient by 5 dBA for durations exceeding one construction season.

S NOISE-3: To reduce noise levels generated by construction, the following standard construction noise control measures shall be included in all construction projects within the plan area:
¨ Limit construction to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no noise-generating construction on Sundays or holidays.
¨ Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. ¨ Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited. ¨ Locate stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA.
¨ Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.
¨ Route all construction traffic to and from the project site via designated truck routes where possible. Prohibit construction related heavy truck traffic in LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-13
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
residential areas where feasible.
¨ Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. ¨ The contractor shall prepare and submit to the City for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. ¨ Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule.

NOISE-4: Traffic volume increases in the vicinity
of the Specific Plan vicinity will result with the development of the plan area and other planned developments in the southeast portion of the City of Riverbank.

S NOISE-4: Implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-2. SU
Population and Housing
Since there are no significant impacts related to cultural resources as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Public Services
PUB-1: In order to improve response times and ISO
ratings, a new fire station is required either in the
Bruinville planning area or in the RAAP Plan Area.

The addition of a new Fire Station on the east side
of the City near the RAAP would be necessary as
the proposed Plan builds out. The new station
S PUB-1: The additional personnel, station, and apparatus shall be incorporated into the RAAP Specific Plan and have benchmarks for when the staffing and facilities are added.

LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-14
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
would need at least nine personnel hired for staffing
purposes (3 per shift), and the station would need a
new Type 1 Engine, Type 3 Engine, and a Water
Tender for apparatus. This would be a significant
impact.

Recreation
Since there are no significant impacts related to parks and recreational facilities as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

Transportation and Traffic
TRANS-1: The Claribel Road/Coffee Road intersection operates at LOS F during both the AM and PM peak hours and signal warrants are met during
both peak hours in the Existing Condition. The
addition of project traffic would worsen operations
and increase delay.

S TRANS-1: Future developers within the RAAP area shall contribute their fair share, through the payment of local and regional fees, towards the construction of left-turn pockets on all approaches with appropriate storage and deceleration length, and signalization of the intersection. This improvement would improve the service level to LOS C or better (the level of service standard for this intersection) in both peak hours, as shown on Table 4.16-9. Stanislaus County plans to signalize this intersection as part of the Claribel Road widening project. Funding for signalization is provided from Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Federal funding. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2013.

LTS
TRANS-2: The Claribel Road/Roselle Avenue
intersection operates at LOS F during both the AM
and PM peak hours and signal warrants are met
during both peak hours in the Existing Condition.

The addition of project traffic would worsen operations and increase delay.

S TRANS-2: Future developers within the RAAP area shall contribute their fair share, through the payment of local and regional fees, towards the construction of left-turn pockets on all approaches with appropriate storage and deceleration length, and signalization of the intersection. This improvement would improve the service level to LOS D or better (the level of service standard for this intersection) in both peak hours, as shown on Table 4.16-9. Signalization of this intersection is programmed in the Stanislaus County 2011-2012 budget using CMAQ funding and is scheduled for construction in 2015/2016.

LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-15
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
TRANS-3: Future development within the RAAP
area would add truck traffic to intersections on State
Route 108, specifically at the intersections of
Atchison Street (State Route 108)/1st Street, State
Route 108/Claus Road and State Route 108/
Patterson Road. As these intersections do not currently accommodate the turning movements of large trucks, this is considered a potentially significant
impact based on the significance criteria.

S TRANS-3: Future developers within the RAAP area shall contribute their fair share towards improvements at the intersections identified above, though the payment of local and regional traffic fees, that improve turning radii for large trucks. No improvements have been identified for these intersections.

SU
TRANS-4: Future Development in the RAAP Specific Plan area could substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses.

S TRANS-4: Although construction impacts are expected to be temporary and less-than-significant, for all future development in the plan area, the following is recommended to minimize the effects of construction related activity:
¨ Prepare a construction management plan, including:

Ÿ Project staging plan to maximize on-site storage of materials and equipment.

Ÿ A set of comprehensive traffic control measures, including scheduling of major truck trips and deliveries to avoid peak hours; lane closure proceedings; signs, cones, and other warning devices for drivers; and designation of construction access routes.

Ÿ Permitted construction hours.

Ÿ Location of construction staging.

Ÿ Provision of on-site parking for all construction employees, site visitors, and inspectors.

Ÿ Provisions for street sweeping to remove construction related debris on public streets.

LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-16
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
TRANS-5: The Claribel Road/Coffee Road intersection is projected to operate at LOS F during the AM and LOS E during the PM peak hours. The
addition of project traffic would worsen deficient
operations in both peak hours. This is considered
significant based on the significance criteria, as LOS
C is the standard for this intersection.

S TRANS-5: Construction of Phase 2 of the North County Corridor Project, which would connect the Phase 1 project, which is planned to terminate at McHenry Avenue, to State Route 99, is expected to shift sufficient traffic from this intersection that LOS C would be achieved. Alternatively, intersection improvements beyond the cross-section identified in the General Plan could be provided to improve peak hour operations, such as dual left-turn lanes and rightturn only lanes on all approaches. This improvement would improve the service level to LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour, as shown on Table 4.16-10. These service levels are considered deficient for this intersection. Given the uncertainly of constructing parallel capacity or the feasibility of additional improvements beyond the planned General Plan cross section, this impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.

SU
TRANS-6: The Claribel Road/Oakdale Road intersection is projected to operate at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours. The addition of project
traffic would worsen LOS F operations. This is
considered significant based on the significance criteria, as LOS D is the standard for this intersection.

S TRANS-6: Construction of Phase 2 of the North County Corridor Project, which would connect the Phase 1 project, which is planned to terminate at McHenry Avenue, to State Route 99, is expected to shift sufficient traffic from this intersection that LOS D would be achieved. Alternatively, construction of additional improvements at this intersection that would result in acceptable service levels, including dual left-turn pockets on the northbound, westbound, and eastbound approaches could be constructed. This improvement would improve the service level to LOS D or better (the level of service standard for this intersection) in both peak hours, as shown in Table 10 of the TIA, reducing this impact to a less-than-significant level. However, given the uncertainly of constructing parallel capacity or the feasibility of additional improvements beyond the planned General Plan cross section, this impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.

SU
Utilities and Service Systems
UTIL-1: Buildout of the Plan would require improvements to existing stormwater facilities. The existing stormwater pipes have areas where there are
S UTIL-1: The Stormwater Master Plan for the proposed Plan recommends the following measures:
¨ Manholes should be repaired to ensure the lids seal properly to prevent inflow LTS

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-17
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
improperly functioning gravity systems, cracked or
offset joins, or vertical and/or horizontal pipe
cracks. Other deficiencies in the existing stormwater system include the squirrel hole in the reservoir and the undersized main line piping. With the existing deficiencies, the proposed Plan would have
the potential to increase flooding. This would be a
significant impact.
and infiltration of storm water during rain events.
¨ In order to mitigate the possible contamination of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) within the storm drain, one of the following options could be implemented:

Ÿ Clean and apply a lining or coating to all affected storm drain pipes; Ÿ Replace affected storm drain pipes with larger pipes; Ÿ A combination of lining a portion of the storm drain pipes and replacing other storm drain pipes: this involves adding a second pipe between the north reservoir lift station and the diversion structure located near Gate

10. Also includes replacing storm drain piping, with larger pipe size, from the diversion structure to the Building Group.
¨ Current County Standards require new systems to have a capacity to convey storm events equal to the 10-year return period or larger. Lining the interior of affected piping is a cost effective way to mitigate potential contamination of pipes while providing approximately the same (slightly improved) level of service in relation to stormwater conveyance.
¨ If there are opportunities to upgrade the lift station pumping capacity in the future, the LRA should use that opportunity to significantly increase lift station capacity. Increasing size (i.e. conveyance capacity) of storm drain piping upstream from the north lift station will not be effective unless the lift station capacity is increased.
¨ Improvements to the existing north reservoir should be completed at the LRA’s earliest opportunity. The squirrel hole(s) in the reservoir bank should be repaired and the lower outlet valve returned to the normal operating position (i.e. closed). This would allow more storage capacity of the reservoir prior to discharge, which would allow more time for suspended soils to settle out in stormwater traveling through the reservoir during rainfall events.

Currently, the exterior bank slope is approximately 2:1 (horizontal to verti-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT S UMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-18
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
cal). The slopes may be reduced as much possible within the constraints of space allotted to the reservoir (i.e. approximately 3:1) to reduce the possibility of the rodent holes extending through the bank. Additionally, the repaired slopes may be hardened with rock or crushed brick to make it more difficult for rodents to penetrate the surface.
¨ To determine the performance of the reservoir outlets, a detailed hydraulic analysis of the OID piping would need to be accomplished. The 10-year and 50-year storm events produce approximately 4.0 MGAL and 4.2 MGAL, respectively. Therefore, the combined outlet piping would need to discharge approximately 1.0 to 1.2 MGAL to prevent the reservoir from becoming full and having water overtopping the banks during these types of storm events.

In order to discharge 1.2 MGAL, the outlet piping would need to discharge at an average rate of 3.2 cubic feet per second (cfs) over a 24-hour period. This is a relatively small flow rate and most likely the discharge piping connected to the OID piping and overflow piping would prevent the reservoir from reaching maximum capacity during these types of storms events (i.e. approximately

3.2 cfs is the minimum required and unrestricted gravity flow to OID piping would be approximately 10 cfs, if the OID piping was empty and able to accept full gravity flow). ¨ If the properties around the reservoir are developed, additional analysis to determine the OID piping hydraulic capacity should be conducted and, if needed, the north reservoir should be increased in size to prevent potential flooding of the newly developed sites. By removing the earthen divider and extending the basin to the northeast by approximately 120 feet, the reservoir capacity could be increased to approximately 4.5 MGAL. This would provide the additional capacity necessary to ensure the basin can adequately store stormwater runoff from larger events even if the OID has little or no capacity to receive water from the reservoir outlets.
¨ Based on the results of percolation testing, the soils within the site appear to

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact 2-19
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significant Impact
Significance
Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
have adequate capacity to infiltrate stormwater directed into basins, swales, or rain gardens. Final design for these areas of the site should include additional percolation testing in order to estimate infiltration rates at the locations and depths of final design basins and other LID components proposed within these areas.
¨ Future development should include LID features to the maximum extent practical, and at a minimum LID components (in additional to large infiltration basins) should cover 15 percent of the total site area. This minimum percentage is based on the example site layout conducted as part of this study that incorporates LID features into a practical commercial site layout. The LID components may include, but not be limited to the following:

Ÿ Shallow infiltration basins
Ÿ Bioretention basin / rain gardens
Ÿ Porous concrete within parking stalls
Ÿ Rainwater harvesting system (cisterns and/or rain barrels) ¨ In addition to structural LID components, sites should be designed to minimize continuous impervious surfaces where possible. This includes providing landscaping around buildings and breaks between roadways and sidewalks.

This also includes generally reducing the amount of impervious surfaces around sites.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

REPORT SUMMARY
2-20
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-1
The Specific Plan is a planning and regulatory tool available to local governments in the State of California. As allowed under California State law (Government Code 65450 et seq.), the City of Riverbank would use the Draft Riverbank Army Ammunition Plan (RAAP) Specific Plan, in part, to implement its adopted General Plan. The Specific Plan, which must be consistent with the City’s General Plan, is intended to provide a greater level of specificity in planning on the RAAP site.

This draft programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzes the potential impacts of adopting and implementing the Draft RAAP Specific Plan (Specific Plan), which covers an approximately 146-acre area in the southeast portion of Riverbank. As a programmatic EIR, this document will help streamline the environmental review required for future development projects within the Specific Plan Area. Specifically, environmental review for future projects will be permitted to “tier” from this EIR if certain criteria are met, as provided by State law (Public Resources Code 21094).

The project also includes adoption of amendments to the Riverbank General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, changing the current land use designations in the Plan Area and establishing new development standards to replace current zoning provisions applicable to the Plan Area. These amendments must be completed to ensure consistency between the Specific Plan, General Plan, and Zoning Ordinance. This EIR will be used by decision-makers in making their determination of whether or not to adopt the Specific Plan, as well as by the public to clearly understand the environmental implications associated with adoption and implementation of the Specific Plan.

This chapter describes the proposed project. It discusses the overall location and character of the Specific Plan Area, the land use changes proposed in the Specific Plan, potential new roadways and other infrastructure, and the regulatory actions that must follow adoption of the Specific Plan. For greater detail and clarification, please refer to the Specific Plan.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-2
The applicant for the proposed project is the Riverbank Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA).

A. Plan Area
This section describes the regional and local setting of the Specific Plan Area, as well as the characteristics of the Specific Plan Area itself.

1. Regional and Local Location
The City of Riverbank is located in the heart of California’s Central Valley in Stanislaus County. The City is located 5 miles northeast of the City of Modesto, 90 miles east of Oakland and 70 miles southeast of Sacramento. Figure 3-1 shows Riverbank’s location within the region, and Figure 3-2 shows the RAAP site in the most southeastern portion of Riverbank’s city limits.

2. Specific Plan Area
The RAAP site is located at the corner of Claus Road and Claribel Road, as shown in Figure 3-3, and was formerly owned and operated under control of the United States Army. From 1952 to 2009, the U.S. Army used the site to manufacture shell casings, mortar grenades and other ammunition components. However, the RAAP site was selected for closure as part of the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) 2005 round, and the Army decided to move Riverbank’s munitions production facilities to Illinois. The site is approximately 146 acres in area. The northern and southern areas of the site remain undeveloped, and the central portion of the site contains the RAAP’s existing buildings and infrastructure.

3. Plan Area Characteristics
The developed portion of the RAAP site contains approximately 150 existing structures, most of which are industrial in character. These structures are generally single-story, utilitarian buildings designed to house manufacturing activities. Areas between buildings are generally paved and used for parking, storage, or circulation. The undeveloped areas to the north and south of the §¨¦5
§¨¦80
§¨¦5
§¨¦580
§¨680
§¨¦505
Napa
|1
|49
|4
|99
|50
|99
§¨¦880 ¦
§¨¦152
Modesto
Turlock
Merced
Sacramento
San Jose
Tracy
Salinas
Stockton
San
Francisco
Oakland
Fairfield
101
Davis
£
Napa
Alpine
Marin
Sonoma
Stanislaus
San Joaquin
Merced
Fresno
Madera
Tuolumne
Yolo
San Benito
Solano
Santa Clara
Calaveras
Sacramento
Alameda
Amador
Contra Costa
San Mateo
Santa Cruz
0 10 20 miles

RIVERBANK

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

REGIONAL LOCATION
FIGURE 3-1
0 10 20 Miles NORTH

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY

CITY OF RIVERBANK

STANISLAUS COUNTY

TERMINAL AVENUE CLAUS ROAD
RAAP
SITE

ROSELLE AVENUE

PATTERSON ROAD

MORRILL ROAD

CRAWFORD ROAD

CLARIBEL ROAD
108
108
108

STANISLAUS RIVER

STANISLAUS RIVER
0 1,200 2,400 feet

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LOCAL LOCATION
FIGURE 3-2
0 1,200 2,400 Feet NORTH
Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct
Oakdale Irrigation District
[ 0 300 600 Feet
Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
0 300 600 Feet

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
FIGURE 3-3
0 300 600 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-6
existing RAAP site facilities are generally grasslands. Portions of the northern area serve as grazing land.

4. Surrounding Uses
The existing industrial area on the RAAP site is bordered on the north, east, and south by pasture land and rural residential uses. Low-density residential uses are located across Claus Road on the northern half of the site. A small vehicle storage lot is located across Claus Road between Minniear and Van Dusen Avenues. The Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct runs roughly east-west across the site and is approximately 100 feet wide. The Oakdale Irrigation District Canal runs northeast-southwest through the site and is approximately 60 feet wide. An active rail line with a 50-foot easement enters the site at the northwest corner, crosses both the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct and Oakdale Irrigation District Canal, and continues into the site where it serves many of the existing buildings.

B. Purpose of the Specific Plan
The Specific Plan is intended to serve as the primary document and reference guide for future development and redevelopment at the RAAP site. The Specific Plan provides the community and decision-makers with clear documentation of the vision for the RAAP site. Furthermore, it provides a clear policy and regulatory framework for the review of future development projects and public improvements. The Specific Plan also provides guidance on design, potential public investments, and implementation.

C. Specific Plan Objectives
The City of Riverbank and its LRA conducted a community-driven planning process to develop a clear vision for the Specific Plan Area. This process involved members of the community, tenants at the RAAP site, and other stakeholders. It resulted in a Base Reuse Plan for the RAAP site that was approved by the LRA on October 30, 2008. The Environmental Assessment

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-7
for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of the RAAP site was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and approved in March 2009. Based on feedback received during the Base Reuse Plan process, the Draft Specific Plan was developed to accomplish the following objectives:
¨ Define the vision for the future of the Specific Plan Area. ¨ Create goals and policies intended to facilitate achievement of the vision. ¨ Designate land for uses that implement the vision.
¨ Create development standards for the form and physical design of new development within the Specific Plan Area.
¨ Provide recommendations for circulation and infrastructure improvements required to support future buildout of the Specific Plan Area. ¨ Provide an implementation strategy for achieving the goals in the Specific Plan and putting the policies in the Specific Plan into action.

D. Draft RAAP Specific Plan
This section summarizes the key components and recommendations of the Specific Plan.

The Specific Plan would permit a mix of industrial, office/research and development (R&D), and retail uses within the Specific Plan Area. Table 3-1 shows development estimates for future buildout of the RAAP site. Overall, the redevelopment project is expected to create between 825 and 1,650 permanent jobs on-site in the next ten to fifteen years, both by attracting tenants to existing buildings and through development of the undeveloped portions of the site.

It is assumed that development would occur over the course of a 20-year period, which is considered the Plan Horizon. The rate and timeframe for

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-8
TABLE 3-1 SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES
Existing (2010)
(Square Feet)
Specific Plan
Buildout (2030)
(Square Feet)
Difference
(Square Feet)
Commercial/Retail 0 119,058 119,058
Industrial 673,625 1,411,542 737,917
Office/R&D 0 116,637 116,637
development within the Plan Area are subject to variation based on market demands, the regional economy, and other socioeconomic factors.

1. Land Use and Urban Form Concepts
This section describes the land uses envisioned for the Plan Area, and the approach to implementation. Figure 3-4 illustrates the land use concept for the RAAP site.
¨ Existing Industrial Areas. The Specific Plan recommends that existing industrial areas should generally be retained as they are now. The Specific Plan does allow for additional buildings, and removal of and modifications to existing buildings in this area, with policies in place to maintain the historic character and preserve the viability of this area for future industrial uses. Additional landscaping is also recommended for this area in the Specific Plan, both for improved aesthetics and to implement principles of low-impact development (LID). It is anticipated that new development in this area would be of a similar character to existing development and not exceed 70 feet in height. ¨ North End Cap. The Specific Plan recommends a mix of R&D and industrial uses in this area, which would be planned for collectively as an R&D/industrial park. Recommended uses range from industrial uses to higher-end office and R&D uses. The Specific Plan recommends that more intensive industrial uses be located in the interior of the North End

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LAND USE CONCEPT
FIGURE 3-4
NORTH
Industrial
Retail
Research and Development

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-10
Cap and that less intensive uses be located closer to Claus Road, in consideration of the adjacent rural residential land uses. R&D/Industrial buildings would not exceed 55 feet in height.
¨ Retail. New retail uses are proposed on the west side of the RAAP site along Claus Road, between the Van Dusen Avenue and Minniear Avenue intersections, and at the prominent corner of Claribel and Claus Roads.

Retail with surface parking is envisioned for this area with building heights not exceeding 55 feet.
¨ South End Cap. Most of the southern undeveloped area on Claribel Road is proposed for R&D/industrial uses. Higher-end R&D and office development is proposed at this location with building height not exceeding 55 feet. ¨ Open Space: Northeast Detention Pond. A large stormwater pond could be accommodated on the northeastern corner of the RAAP site, to serve as the primary stormwater management mechanism for the project.

While the Specific Plan calls for the LRA to investigate this concept further, it does not commit the City to its construction. ¨ Open Space: Public Open Spaces. While the exact location of publicly accessible open space is not known at this time, it is recommended in the North End Cap area, near Claus Road. This space would provide a new resource for the community and improve the aesthetic character of the North End Cap. Programming could include passive recreational space, a dog park, small play fields, or other similar uses.
¨ Private Open Spaces. The Specific Plan encourages employers to provide open space for employees where feasible. In addition to providing break areas for employees, these areas could enhance the aesthetic character of the RAAP site as a whole. The location, size, and character of these spaces would be decided on a project-by-project basis.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-11

2. Circulation Concepts
This section describes recommended circulation improvements within the Plan Area. The exact configuration of future transportation infrastructure and roadways may vary.
¨ Exterior Roadway Concepts. It is recommended that the western and southern project frontages, along Claribel and Claus Roads, be widened to their ultimate widths and the appropriate turn-pockets, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian amenities provided. It is recommended that four 12-foot lanes be provided for primary vehicular circulation with a two-way turn lane or possible median separating travel directions. This lane configuration will support heavier truck movement. The streetscape should include a 20-foot planter strip at the outside edge that provides a landscape buffer and a 10-foot minimum wide sidewalk/bike path. Trees should be planted within the buffer to provide shade, shield pedestrians from traffic, and enhance the aesthetic character of the RAAP site. Northbound rightturn lanes into the site from Claus Road should be constructed where heavy truck movements are expected to facilitate their movements into the site. Given the length of the site, over ½ mile, several potential transit stops should be included along the project frontage on both Claus and Claribel Roads.
¨ North End Cap Roadway Plan. As shown in Figure 3-5, a loop road is proposed that would serve new industrial development in the Northern Industrial Park. As shown in the cross-section in Figure 3-6, it is proposed that this roadway provide two 18-foot lanes, one in each direction.

These wide lanes would allow for occasional truck queuing on the roadway without impeding through traffic. Additionally, these wider lanes would allow ample room for bicyclists and vehicles to travel along the roads simultaneously.
¨ Pedestrian Circulation. Sidewalks are recommended on the western and southern edges of the RAAP site to provide for safe pedestrian circulation.

Furthermore, sidewalks are recommended within the street right-of-way on interior roads in the North End Cap. Sidewalks will be buffered from vehicular circulation through planting strips and street trees.

LEGEND
Vehicle Circulation
Vehicle Access
V Not to Scale
Claus Rd
Van Dusen Ave
Minniear Ave
Davis Ave
Townsend Ave
Claribel Rd

Source: Fehr & Peers

VEHICLE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
FIGURE 6-1

RIVERBANK ARMY AMMUNITION PLANT

NAME OF PUBLICATION RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

ROADWAY PLAN
FIGURE 3-5
26’ 12’
Travel Lane
74’ Travel Way
Travel Lane
12’
Travel Lane
20’
Planter
Strip
20’
Planter
Strip
12’
Travel Lane
12’
2-WayTurn Lane
or Median
(possible)
114’ R.O.W.

Sidewalk/ Travel Way
Bike Lane
Planter
Strip
Landscaping
12’ 6’ 36’ 6’
60’ R.O.W.

Property
Line
Property
Line

MAIN ACCESS ROADWAYS

TYPICAL CR
ers

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

TYPICAL STREET CROSS-SECTION
FIGURE 3-6

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-14
¨ Bicycle Circulation. Roadway design should accommodate bicycles by providing wide lanes that accommodate bicycles and permit vehicular traffic to safely pass bicyclists. Public bicycle parking should be provided as part of private development and any public open space or amenity. ¨ Parking. Parking would likely be provided in surface parking lots for all future development. The Specific Plan requires parking areas to be landscaped and to provide for safe pedestrian access and vehicular circulation.

The Specific Plan also limits parking between buildings and streets to improve the aesthetic character of streets and create a more pleasant pedestrian experience for workers and visitors to the RAAP site. As such, the Specific Plan calls for larger parking areas to be provided behind buildings within the interior of sites.

3. Infrastructure Concepts
This section discusses infrastructure improvements proposed for the Specific Plan Area.
¨ Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct. The Specific Plan does not propose any changes to the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct, which is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). New development will avoid the 100-foot-wide parcel that is reserved for this infrastructure feature. ¨ Relocated Oakdale Irrigation District Canal. The Specific Plan calls for the City to work with the Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) to explore relocating the Oakdale Irrigation Canal, an underground irrigation canal traversing the site, to create more viable development parcels.

There are several possible options for relocating the Canal in the northwestern portion of the RAAP site before connecting to its current alignment west of Claus Road as shown in Figure 3-7. While the Specific Plan does not commit the City to implementation of this concept, it does set aside land where the Canal could be relocated in the future.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

POTENTIAL OID REALIGNMENT
FIGURE 3-7
0 300 Feet
Southern Industrial/R&D
Claus/Claribel Retail
Kentucky Avenue
Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct
Existing Oakdale Irrigation Canal
0 300 Feet
Southern Industrial/R&D
Claus/Claribel Retail
Kentucky Avenue
Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct
Proposed Oakdale Irrigation Canal
0 300 Feet
Southern Industrial/R&D
Claus/Claribel Retail
Kentucky Avenue
Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct
Proposed Oakdale Irrigation Canal
0 300 Feet
Southern Industrial/R&D
Claus/Claribel Retail
Kentucky Avenue
Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct
Proposed Oakdale Irrigation Canal
Existing Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
0 300 600 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-16
¨ Stormwater Pond. The Specific Plan proposes a number of stormwater management strategies, which could be employed on a project-by-project basis. As discussed above, the City will explore creation of a new stormwater pond at the northeast corner of the RAAP site, which would collect much of the on-site runoff. At present, the Specific Plan proposes expanding the existing on-site stormwater pond, which collects runoff from the existing industrial areas, to accommodate future development. ¨ On-Site Stormwater Management Concepts. The Specific Plan proposes several on-site stormwater management strategies that could be employed on a project-by-project basis, depending on project-specific issues and conditions. The Specific Plan recommends several LID techniques, including rain catchments, cisterns, rain gardens, and permeable paving. ¨ Rail Infrastructure. The Specific Plan proposes to retain the existing rail line that connects the Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) rail line to the privately operated rail line on the RAAP site. If feasible, the rail line could be improved or expanded to create additional spurs that connect to buildings. It could also potentially be expanded to create a “team track” that allows for the loading and unloading of shipments between trucks and rail cars. While the Specific Plan does not call for any of these improvements, it acknowledges that they may be desired in the future.

4. Specific Plan Goals, Policies and Standards
The following goals, policies, and standards are set forth in the Specific Plan to implement the concepts and recommendations discussed above. ¨ Goals and Policies. The Specific Plan outlines a clear set of goals and policies addressing future development in the Plan Area. Goals are statements that represent a specific condition or end state that would fulfill the vision and concepts outlined in the Specific Plan. Each goal is accompanied by a set of policies that help guide decision-making as statements of City regulation. Goal and policy topics include economic development, land use and community design, transportation and circulation, and public facilities and services. Future development proposals and public im-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-17
provements in the Specific Plan Area would be evaluated for consistency with the Plan’s goals and policies.
¨ Land Use Designations. The proposed land use designations, shown in Figure 3-8, specify a range of typical allowed land uses. ¨ Land Use Regulations and Development Standards. To implement the design goals for the Specific Plan Area, the Specific Plan contains tailored development standards that regulate the permitted uses and conditional uses and provide parameters for the physical character of buildings, site design, landscaping, and other components of site planning and architectural design. ¨ Design Standards and Guidelines. The Specific Plan also provides a set of required design standards, as well as flexible design guidelines for public improvements and private development. The design standards and guidelines provide a range of design recommendations, including guidance on public rights-of-way, site planning, building materials and design, landscaping, signage and other features.

E. General Plan Amendments
The proposed project includes amendments to the Riverbank General Plan, to ensure consistency between the Specific Plan and the existing General Plan, as required by State law. For the purposes of analysis in this EIR, it is assumed that the General Plan Amendments only apply to the Specific Plan Area. The proposed General Plan land use designations for the Specific Plan Area are shown in Figure 3-8.

In addition, a revision to General Plan Figure DESIGN.36 is required to add the Claus/Claribel intersection as an additional gateway. 0 300 Feet
Industrial/Business Park (I/BP)
Community Commercial (CC)
Buffer/Greenway/Open Space (B/G/OS)
an.

Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
*
* Old canal may be relocated without
further amendment of the General Plan.
0 300 Feet
Industrial/Business Park (I/BP)
Community Commercial (CC)
Buffer/Greenway/Open Space (B/G/OS)
* Old canal may be relocated without
further amendment of the General Plan.

Townsend Avenue
Van Dusen Avenue
Minniear Avenue
Davis Avenue
Claus Road
Claribel Road
*

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROPOSED GP LU DESIGNATIONS
FIGURE 3-8
0 300 600 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-19
F. Zoning Amendments
This section describes amendments to the Zoning Ordinance necessary to implement the vision outlined in the Specific Plan.

The Specific Plan contains a chapter identifying development standards for new projects within the Plan Area. The development standards will modify the allowable uses and development standards in the existing Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project includes a zoning overlay district that will be added to the existing Zoning Ordinance. The zoning overlay district boundaries will be consistent with the Specific Plan Area. For those provisions not modified by the Specific Plan, the similar zoning classifications in the City’s existing Zoning Ordinance will apply. Should conflicts exist between the Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the provisions in the Specific Plan will apply.

G. Agency Consultation Requirements
California Senate Bill 18 (2004) mandates that Cities contact and consult with California Native American tribes in preparation of Specific Plans. Tribal consultation has been undertaken for the Specific Plan.

The City and its LRA will pursue delisting the RAAP site as a Superfund site by working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA), and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).

H. Required Permits and Approvals
The proposed project will require the following permitting and approval actions:
¨ Certification of the EIR by the Riverbank City Council.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-20
¨ Adoption of the RAAP Specific Plan by the Riverbank City Council. ¨ Adoption of a series of General Plan amendments by the City Council to ensure required consistency between the Riverbank General Plan and the Specific Plan.
¨ Adoption of the Specific Plan’s Development Standards by the City Council as a zoning overlay district for the Plan Area. 4 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
4-1
This chapter evaluates the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts of the Plan by examining the following environmental issue areas:
¨ Aesthetics
¨ Agriculture and Forestry Resources
¨ Air Quality
¨ Biological Resources
¨ Cultural Resources
¨ Geology and Soils
¨ Greenhouse Gas Emissions
¨ Mineral Resources
¨ Hazards and Hazardous Materials
¨ Hydrology and Water Quality
¨ Land Use and Planning
¨ Noise
¨ Population and Housing
¨ Public Services
¨ Recreation
¨ Transportation and Traffic
¨ Utilities and Service Systems
A. Chapter Organization
This chapter consists of 17 sections that evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed Project. Each issue area uses the same format and consists of the following subsections:
¨ The Regulatory Setting section describes which local, State and/or federal regulations are applicable to the Plan.
¨ The Existing Conditions section describes current conditions with regard to the environmental factor reviewed.
¨ The Standards of Significance section describes how an impact is judged to be significant in this EIR. These standards are derived from CEQA Appendix G Guidelines unless stated otherwise.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUA TION
4-2
¨ The Impact Analysis assesses potential impacts (direct and indirect), and tells why impacts were found to be significant or less than significant.

The impact determination is summarized at the end of the checklist heading, and impact statement, as SU (Significant and Unavoidable), LTS with Mitigation (Less than Significant with Mitigation), LTS (Less than Significant), and NI (No Impact). ¨ The Cumulative Impacts section analyzes impacts that the Plan may have when considered in addition to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects. (See further discussion below.) ¨ The Impacts and Mitigation Measures section numbers and lists identified impacts, and presents measures that would mitigate each impact. In each case, the significance following mitigation is also explained.

B. Cumulative Impact Analysis
A cumulative impact consists of an impact created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR, together with other reasonably foreseeable projects causing related impacts. Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect is “cumulatively considerable.” Where the incremental effect of a project is not “cumulatively considerable,” a Lead Agency need not consider that effect significant, but must briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable. Where the cumulative impact caused by the project's incremental effect and the effects of other projects is not significant, the EIR must briefly indicate why the cumulative impact is not significant.

The CEQA Guidelines provide two approaches to analyzing cumulative impacts. The first is the “list approach,” which requires a listing of past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects producing related or cumulative impacts. The second is the projections-based approach, which summarizes the relevant growth projections contained in an adopted General Plan or re-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUA TION
4-3
lated planning document that is designed to evaluate regional or area-wide conditions. A reasonable combination of the two approaches may also be used.

The cumulative impact analysis in this Draft EIR uses a projections-based approach. For some environmental topics (such as traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions), a greater geographic extent is used for the cumulative analysis and foreseeable development projects outside of the City of Riverbank are taken into consideration.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUA TION
4-4

4.1 AESTHETICS

4.1-1
This chapter discusses the existing aesthetic character of the Plan Area and evaluates the potential impacts to aesthetics associated with the RAAP Specific Plan. The following evaluation assesses visual character, scenic vistas, scenic highways, and light, and glare.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes key State and city regulations and programs related to aesthetics at the RAAP site. There are no federal regulations pertaining to aesthetics that apply to this project.

1. California Scenic Highway Program
The California Scenic Highway Program, maintained by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), protects scenic State highway corridors from changes which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to the highways. According to the California Scenic Highway Program, there are no State-designated scenic highways within the Planning Area.1

2. City of Riverbank General Plan
The Riverbank General Plan includes several goals and policies that relate to aesthetics. Table 4.1-1 lists these goals and policies.

3. Riverbank Municipal Code
In addition to the existing General Plan, the City of Riverbank’s Municipal Code regulates the form and character of development in the city through the Land Use Code, the Building and Construction Code, and the Grading Ordinance.

1 California Department of Transportation website, Officially Designated State Scenic Highways, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/schwy.htm, accessed March 10, 2010.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-2
TABLE 4.1-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

AESTHETICS
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal DESIGN-2
Amenities and features along neighborhood residential
and commercial streets that accommodate all travel
modes
Policy
DESIGN- 2.5
The City will require visually attractive streetscapes with street trees and sidewalks on both sides of streets, planting strips, attractive transit shelters, benches, and pedestrian scale streetlights in appropriate locations.

Goal DESIGN-11 Urban design of commercial projects and neighborhood centers enhance the character of the city
Policy
DESIGN- 11.1
The City will support urban design programs that incorporate public and semi-public improvements to enhance the connections among special activity districts. Improvements may include, but should not be limited to, public spaces, parks and plazas, pedestrian walkways, and crosswalk definition.

Policy
DESIGN- 11.2
The City will require the use of durable, high quality building materials to lower maintenance and replacement needs and ensure the aesthetic appeal of new development.

Goal DESIGN-13 New industrial and bulk retail developments consider human scale
Policy
DESIGN- 13.1
Approved plans, projects, and subdivision requests shall reduce the overall perceived size and scale of large projects through such means as sensitive massing, articulation, and organization of buildings; the use of color and materials; and the use of landscaped screening.

Policy
DESIGN- 13.2
The City will encourage the use of public art, in particular murals and integrated designs in wall architecture, to add visual interest and to break up the monotony of unarticulated walls of large industrial buildings.

Policy
DESIGN- 13.3
The City will encourage small-scale, pedestrian-oriented commercial uses that serve the industrial district's employee population with sensitivity to potential conflicts with truck and automobile transportation modes.

Policy
DESIGN- 13.4
New industrial projects shall incorporate innovative site design and treatment of surface parking areas in order to avoid the appearance of a sea of asphalt and reduce storm water runoff and increase percolation.

RIVERB ANK LOCAL REDEVELOPM ENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS
TABLE 4.1-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

AESTHETICS (CONTINUED)

4.1-3
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal DESIGN-14
Site and building design of industrial and bulk retail
projects, consider the context and potential linkages to surrounding area
Policy
DESIGN- 14.1
The City will arrange streets in industrial districts as an interconnecting network that facilitates access.

Policy
DESIGN- 14.2
Where appropriate, the City will require alternative arrangement or design of buildings to respect the scale of neighboring nonindustrial buildings.

Policy
DESIGN- 14.3
When new development, re-development, or maintenance of industrial and bulk retail complexes occurs, the City will require aesthetic and landscaping improvements of facades and entry features oriented to the street that will strengthen the identity of
Riverbank.

Policy
DESIGN- 14.4
When new development, re-development, or maintenance of industrial and bulk retail complexes occurs adjacent to environmentally-sensitive areas, the City will require landscaping improvements that will maintain or strengthen existing aesthetic qualities and environmental functions.

Goal DESIGN-16 Riverbank protects its natural features.

Policy
DESIGN- 16.2
The City will encourage the preservation of healthy, attractive native vegetation during land development. Where this is not possible, the City will require site landscaping that uses appropriate native plant materials.

Goal DESIGN-17 Environmental sensitivity and low-impact development principles in the design and construction of all projects.

Policy
DESIGN- 17.2
Lighting in development projects shall include low, pedestrian scaled, ornamental street lights, and shall otherwise design lighting as to prevent glare and spillover onto adjacent properties and to prevent any glare that could affect motorists or bicyclists.

Goal DESIGN-18 Renewable resource use and energy-efficiency in site and architectural design
Policy
DESIGN-18.1
The City will promote safe and sustainable energy collection and distribution systems that draw from renewable energy sources.

Policy
DESIGN-18.2 The City will encourage passive and natural lighting systems in architectural design to conserve electricity.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS
TABLE 4.1-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

AESTHETICS (CONTINUED)

4.1-4
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Policy
DESIGN-18.3
The City will encourage building-site orientation, articulated windows, roof overhangs, appropriate insulation materials and techniques, and other architectural features that allow for improved passive interior climate control.

Policy
DESIGN-18.4
The City will ensure that municipal buildings are LEEDTM certified and promote LEEDTM certification of multifamily, commercial, and industrial properties.

Goal DESIGN-19 Water quality is protected throughout the development process and occupation of the site
Policy
DESIGN-19.1
The City will establish site design criteria for allowing natural hydrological systems to function with minimum or no modification.

Policy
DESIGN-19.2
The City will promote the use of rain gardens, open ditches or swales, and pervious driveways and parking areas in site design to maximize infiltration of storm water and minimize runoff into environmentally critical areas.

Policy
DESIGN-19.3
The City will promote inclusion of passive rainwater collection systems in site and architectural design for non-potable water (gray-water) storage and use, thereby saving potable (drinking) water for ingestion.

Goal CONS-7 Maintain and increase public access to Riverbank’s scenic resources
Policy
CONS- 7.5
The City will coordinate with the City of Oakdale to implement policies to preserve open space for scenic and other benefits in the Scenic Highway 108 corridor (see Figure CONS-2).

Policy
CONS- 7.6
Lighting shall be designed to avoid glare, prevent light spillage onto adjacent properties, avoid adverse impacts to nocturnal wildlife, and avoid light pollution that would contribute light to the nighttime sky. a. Land Use Code
Title 15, Chapter 153 of the Riverbank Municipal Code establishes eleven classes of district which regulate the heights and bulk of buildings, as well as the area of yards and other open spaces around buildings. Development standards for the Light Industrial Zone include a requirement that proposed

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE V ELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-5
buildings be subject to site plan review by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit.
b. Building and Construction Code
Title 15, Chapter 150 of the Riverbank Municipal Code regulates the building and construction requirements in the city. Several standard codes have been incorporated by reference, including the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Housing Code, the Uniform Code for Building Conservation, the Uniform Code for Building Conservation, and the Uniform Code for Solar Energy Installations. c. Grading Ordinance
Title 15, Chapter 155 of the Riverbank Municipal Code regulates grading and excavation activities in the city, establishing performance standards applicable on public and private lands. These regulations are designed to conserve the general visual character of grading/clearing sites and settings; enhance the aesthetic value of new development; conserve the aesthetic value of surrounding properties; and reduce propagation of noxious weeds.

B. Existing Conditions

1. Visual Character
The project site is located on Claus Road, north of Claribel Road. In total, the site occupies 146 acres. The Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant itself occupies only 98 acres of the total area. The remainder is made up of former grazing lease land and other undeveloped areas. The Oakdale Irrigation Canal and Hetch Hetchy Pipeline both run through undeveloped portions of the site. The area to the south and east of the site contains farmlands in active use. To the west of the site there are medium and low-density residential neighborhoods within the City of Riverbank.

In total, there are 191 structures on the site. The production facilities are located at the south end of the site. Buildings 1 to 6, which housed aluminum production and later shell casing production lines, are laid out from east to

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-6
west in parallel lines. The majority of the remaining buildings are clustered nearby to the north. Near the main gates on Claus Road is a grouping of administrative buildings and on-site visitor parking.

With the exception of the administrative buildings, which show greater attention to architectural detail, the buildings on the site are stark, utilitarian, and industrial, mostly constructed of corrugated steel with steel-frame construction and large, open interior spaces. While Buildings 1 to 6 are strikingly repetitive in scale and design, they do not dominate views on the ground. The property is characterized by dense construction, a variety of building heights, forms, and materials, and the myriad network of pipes, tanks, machines, rail lines, roads, and other utilities serving and connecting the structures. Views of within the RAAP site are shown in Figure 4.1-1. Support structures on the site include a series of small buildings and sheds, most of them entirely of steel construction with minimal or no windows. These support structures are notable for their utilitarian design. Their placement is almost exclusively functional, sometimes a short distance from a much larger building and sometimes isolated in an open area.

The administration building grouping is unique in its form and location.

These brick gable- and hip-roof buildings are domestic in scale, at one standard story, as well as in form. Regular fenestration, originally matching typical double-hung windows, and a prominent location just inside the gate to the plant give the buildings a civilian and non-industrial character, which acts in part as a buffer between the large scale manufacturing buildings and structures of the plant and the agrarian and residential landscape outside it.

2. Scenic Vistas
The Riverbank General Plan emphasizes the importance of scenic views along the Stanislaus River and includes Policy CONS-7.1 which aims to improve public access to areas along the Stanislaus River where scenic views are available. The General Plan does not designate any other scenic vistas.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

AESTHETICS

VIEWS WITHIN THE RAAP SITE
FIGURE 4.1-1

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-8

3. Scenic Highways
The 28-mile stretch of Interstate 5, running through Stanislaus County from the Merced County Line north to the San Joaquin County Line, is an Officially Designated State Scenic Highway. Interstate 5, which is about 20 miles west of the project site, runs parallel to the Delta-Mendota Canal and the California Aqueduct, which transformed portions of the Central Valley from semi-desert land into a thriving agricultural area. No other roadway segments in the county are officially designated or identified as eligible for designation as a scenic highway in the California Scenic Highway Mapping System.2

4. Light and Glare
Light pollution refers to all forms of unwanted light in the night sky, including glare, light trespass, sky glow, and overlighting. Excessive light and glare can also be visually disruptive to humans and nocturnal animal species, and often indicate an unnecessarily high level of energy consumption. Current sources of light at the RAAP site include the existing structures and security lighting.

Glare is mainly the result of the sun reflecting off surfaces such as glass windows in buildings, the windshields of vehicles in surface parking lots, or warehouse roof-tops and other light-colored surfaces. Trees or vegetative cover can serve to lessen the effects of glare. The southern portion of the site has almost no vegetative cover, and there are many sources of glare on-site, including vehicles in surface parking lots, metallic structures on the roofs of site buildings, large expanses of concrete between buildings, silver-colored hazardous waste storage tanks, glass windows, and flat, light-colored rooftops.

2 CalTrans, California Scenic Highway mapping System,
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm, accessed on February 15, 2012.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE V ELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-9
C. Standards of Significance
The RAAP Site Specific Plan would have a significant aesthetics impact if they would:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. b. Substantially degrade the view from a scenic highway, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings. c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
d. Expose people on- or off-site to substantial light or glare.

D. Impact Discussion
The following discussion provides an analysis of potential project and cumulative aesthetic impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the RAAP Site Specific Plan.

1. Project Impacts
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

The Plan would have a significant environmental impact if it would substantially, demonstrably, and negatively affect the scenic views identified in the Riverbank General Plan. As described above, the General Plan emphasizes the importance of scenic views along the Stanislaus River, but no other scenic views are identified in the Riverbank General Plan. Implementation of the Plan would not impact scenic views along the Stanislaus River, and therefore there would be no impact on General-Plan-designated scenic views. b. Substantially degrade the view from a scenic highway, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings.

The Plan Area is located approximately 20 miles to the east of Interstate 5, an Officially Designated State Scenic Highway, as it runs through Stanislaus County from the Merced County Line north to the San Joaquin County

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-10
Line. It is not visible from Interstate 5. Therefore, buildout of the Plan would have no impact on views from a scenic highway.
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

The existing visual character of the RAAP site is predominantly industrial.

The site’s visual character is composed of corrugated metal warehouses, chillers, smokestacks, water and gas storage tanks, the metal tubing, and electrical wiring. Viewing the site is possible from all directions surrounding the property, through barbed wire fences.

Surrounding the RAAP site are low- and medium-density residential neighborhoods. The boundary between the RAAP site limits and the adjacent residences is abrupt and striking. The industrial warehouse character of the RAAP site is buffered from the neighboring residences by fallow grass fields and fences. The character of the industrial site presents a significant contrast to the surrounding residential area. The single-family homes belong to recently-built subdivisions, with architectural appeal and maintained landscaping.

The RAAP Site Specific Plan contains several policies that address potential aesthetic impacts. Policy LUD-2 ensures that new development follows standards and guidelines for architectural and landscape design included in the Specific Plan. Additionally, Policy LUD-3 ensures that new development should respond appropriately to adjacent development, particularly residential neighborhoods through screening, setbacks, and other mechanisms. Policy LUD-4 encourages significant climate-appropriate landscaping along frontages as part of private development, and Policy LUD-5 encourages appropriate setbacks, screening, and landscaping along Claus Road, Claribel Road, and the anticipated Central Avenue extension. Finally, Policy LUD-6 states that all entries to the North End Cap property and Riverbank Industrial Complex should be accentuated with gateway features, such as special landscaping, building accents, signage, open space, or other design features. Taken together, the implementation of the RAAP Site Specific Plan would provide a

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE V ELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-11
beneficial impact to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
d. Expose people on- or off-site to substantial light or glare.

Development and improvements recommended in the Specific Plan could have an adverse effect on day or nighttime views by contributing to substantial light or glare. New development could introduce additional nighttime lighting, particularly for commercial uses. As described above, the southern portion of the site has many sources of glare on-site, including vehicles in surface parking lots, metallic structures on the roofs of site buildings, large expanses of concrete between buildings, silver-colored hazardous waste storage tanks, glass windows, and flat, light-colored roof-tops.

However, the Riverbank General Plan contains policies that would mitigate these potential impacts. As listed in Section A.2 above, Policy DESIGN-17.2 states that lighting in development projects shall include low, pedestrian scaled, ornamental street lights, and shall otherwise prevent glare and spillover onto adjacent properties and to prevent any glare that could affect motorists or bicyclists. Additionally, Policy CONS-7.6 states that lighting shall be designed to avoid glare, prevent light spillage onto adjacent properties, avoid adverse impacts to nocturnal wildlife, and avoid light pollution that would contribute light to the nighttime sky. The Design Guidelines of the RAAP provides significant guidance for exterior lighting, including design, height, and operation. The Design Guidelines call for at least 75 percent of a building’s front façade and at least 25 percent of all other building façades to consist of non-metallic surfaces and encourage trees and vegetation on-site, which would lessen the effects of glare. Taken together, implementation of the Riverbank General Plan and the RAAP Site Specific Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact from substantial light or glare.

2. Cumulative Impacts
This section analyzes potential impacts to aesthetics and visual quality that could occur from a combination of the Plan with other reasonably foreseeable projects in the surrounding area. For this analysis, the area of potential

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AESTHETICS

4.1-12
effect is taken as the City of Riverbank and the unincorporated portions of Stanislaus County to the south and east of the Plan Area. A cumulative impact would be considered significant if, taken together with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects in area of potential effect, it would result in a substantial adverse effect on a designated scenic vista, a degradation of the view from a scenic highway, exposure of people on- or off-site to substantial light or glare, or if it would result in a substantial degradation of the visual quality or character of the Plan Area and its surroundings.

As noted above, the Specific Plan would have no impact on scenic vista or views from a scenic highway, so it would not contribute to cumulative impacts. The Riverbank General Plan policies listed in Table 4.1-1 in the Riverbank General Plan are enhanced by the policies included in the Specific Plan with respect to aesthetics. The requirements and recommendations in the RAAP Site Specific Plan are intended to improve the visual and aesthetic character of the site, resulting in beneficial impacts. Therefore, the RAAP Site Specific Plan would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact on aesthetic resources.

E. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Since there are no significant impacts related to aesthetics as a result of the RAAP Site Specific Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

4.2-1
This chapter discusses agricultural resources in and around the Plan Area and evaluates the potential impacts to agricultural and forest resources associated with implementation of the RAAP Specific Plan. The following evaluation assesses farmland and forestland conversion, Williamson Act contracts, and changes in the physical environment that could contribute to farmland and forestland conversion.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes key State and local regulations, policies and programs pertaining to agriculture and forestry in the RAAP Plan Area.

1. State Regulations
a. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Within the California Natural Resources Agency, the State Department of Conservation provides services and information that promote informed landuse decisions and sound management of the state’s natural resources. The Department manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), which supports agriculture throughout California by developing maps and statistical data for analyzing land use impacts to farmland. FMMP rates the production potential of agricultural land according to the following classifications:
¨ Prime Farmland has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. Prime Farmland has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agriculture production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. ¨ Farmland of Statewide Importance is similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as steeper slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-2
¨ Unique Farmland consists of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. ¨ Farmland of Local Importance is land that is important to the local agricultural economy. It is determined by each county's board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. ¨ Grazing Land is the land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock.
¨ Urban and Built-Up Land is occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10- acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures. ¨ Other Land is land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments, brush, timber, wetlands, riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing, confined livestock, poultry, aquaculture facilities, and strip mines. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as other land.
¨ Water is used to describe perennial water bodies with an extent of at least 40 acres.
b. Williamson Act
The California Land Conservation Act, better known as the Williamson Act, preserves agricultural and open space lands through property tax incentives and voluntary restrictive use contracts administered by the County under State regulations. Private landowners voluntarily restrict their land to agricultural and compatible open space uses under minimum 10-year rolling term contracts, with counties and cities also acting voluntarily. In return, restricted parcels are assessed for property tax purposes at a rate consistent with their

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-3
actual use, rather than potential market value.1
Local governments receive an
annual subvention of forgone property tax revenues from the State via the Open Space Subvention Act of 1971.
c. Z’Berg Nejedly Forest Practice Act
The 1973 Z’Berg Nejedly Forest Practice Act (FPA) is the primary governing statute on matters related to forestry in the State of California. The FPA requires an owner of timberland who wishes to harvest timber for commercial purposes to submit one of several types of timber harvest plans, depending on the nature of the operation and the type of landowner involved, to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF) for its review and approval.
d. Timberland Productivity Act
California has also enacted the 1976 Timberland Productivity Act (TPA), which establishes a special zoning designation for commercial timberland that restricts the use of such land to timberland production and compatible uses and which offers certain tax advantages.
e. California Forest Practice Rules
The purpose of the Forest Practice Rules is to implement the provisions of the Z’Berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act in a manner consistent with other laws, including but not limited to, the Timberland Productivity Act, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Porter Cologne Water Quality Act, and the California Endangered Species Act. The California Forest Practice Rules protect the forest and associated resources on non-Federal lands from depletion and degradation through specific rules applicable to timber harvest planning and operations. These detailed rules apply whenever forest products are sold, bartered, exchanged, or traded.

1 California Department of Conservation, 2002. California Land Conservation (Williamson) Act Status Report, page 1.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-4

2. Local Regulations
a. City of Riverbank General Plan
The Riverbank General Plan includes several goals and policies that relate to agricultural resources. Table 4.2-1 lists these goals and policies. b. Sustainable Agricultural Strategy
General Plan Policy CONS-3.1 calls for the City to prepare a Sustainable Agricultural Strategy so as to minimize the loss of agricultural production to urban development through annexation to Riverbank and to ensure that, on a regional level, there is no significant net loss of agricultural production within the Stanislaus River Watershed. The Strategy would provide a roadmap for decision-makers, laying out guidance for reasonably balancing the economic, social, and environmental benefits of a proposed project with the need to conserve the agricultural production of the Stanislaus Watershed.

As of April 2011, the Sustainable Agricultural Strategy had not yet been prepared; however, a Draft Sustainable Agricultural Strategy Report was produced by the Sustainable Agricultural Committee in January 2010. The Draft Report recommends the use of the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an objective-based system for identifying impacts to agricultural resources. Appendix G of CEQA also recommends the LESA Model for determining the significance of impacts to agricultural resources.

B. Existing Conditions
This section discusses the existing conditions pertaining to agricultural and forest resources in the Plan Area.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-5
TABLE 4.2-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

AGRICULTURE
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal CONS-3 Support the practice of agriculture and the resources associated with farming in the riverbank planning area and beyond.

Policy
CONS-3.1
The City will prepare a comprehensive Sustainable Agricultural Strategy intended to conserve agricultural production in the Stanislaus River Watershed, herein defined as the area within Stanislaus County and San Joaquin County between the Tuolumne and Calaveras Rivers, attributable to implementation of the 2025 General Plan. This strategy should provide flexibility so that it can be tied to land-use and regional agricultural preservation policies, and is intended to be funded on a fair-share basis by those projects that have a significant impact on the conversion of Important Farmlands, a non-renewable resource, to urban use. In determining a level of significance, it is the intent of the City to use quantifiable, measurable inputs and if a project has a significant impact on Farmland resources, then the project will mitigate for this impact.

Policy
CONS-3.2
Ongoing agricultural practices on fertile lands in the western portion of the Riverbank Planning Area shall be protected from encroachment of urban use through the use of buffers. The buffers should also protect residential development from the effects of existing agricultural operations. The buffer shall be designed to protect the feasibility of ongoing agricultural activities on nearby lands and reduce the effects of noise, dust and the application of agricultural chemicals on residential development. The width of the buffer shall be 300 feet, except that the width of the buffer may be reduced where a project applicant demonstrates that a narrower buffer would protect the feasibility of ongoing agricultural activities on nearby lands and reduce the effects of noise, dust, and the application of agricultural chemicals on residential development.

Buffer areas may remain as open space or may be used for stormwater management; renewable energy production; community recreation amenities; or any other allowed use consistent with this policy.

Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-6
Riverbank and the Plan Area are located in California’s Central Valley, one of the most highly productive agricultural regions in the world.2 The region
produces high-value agricultural products, including fruits, vegetables, nuts, meats, and dairy products.3
Sales of agricultural commodities from the Central Valley account for 6.5 percent of all agricultural commodities sold nationwide. The economic productivity and diversity of agricultural commodities from the Central Valley is a result of the region’s high quality agricultural land.

Generally in Riverbank, soils on the west side of the city are more conducive to long term agricultural production than those on the east side.4 East side
soils are generally less productive as farmland, and as a result, east side property owners have tended to subdivide their land into ranchettes so as to maximize investment return. By contrast, west side properties have generally remained in large parcels and in active agricultural use.

1. Farmland of Concern
Agricultural land exists within and surrounding the City of Riverbank. Under CEQA, farmland of concern is Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland. These categories are defined according to the United States Department of Agriculture land inventory and monitoring criteria, as modified for California. Approximately 62 percent (5,351 acres) of land within the City of Riverbank sphere of influence is made up of farmland of concern, including almost 40 percent (3,431 acres) consists of Prime Farmland as defined by the FMMP.5 As shown in Figure 4.2-1, most land to the
west of Riverbank is Prime Farmland, while land to the east and southeast of

2 For the purposes of this EIR, the Central Valley is comprised of the following eleven California counties: Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tulare, and Yolo.
3 United States Department of Agriculture, 2009. 2007 Census of Agriculture. 4 City of Riverbank, 2010. Draft Sustainable Agricultural Strategy Report. 5 City of Riverbank, 2005. City of Riverbank General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, page 4.3-10.

Important Farmland Source: EDAW 2007
Exhibit 4.3-1
EDAW City of Riverbank General Plan Recirculated DEIR Important Farmland Source: EDAW 2007 Exhibit 4.3-1
FIGURE 4.2-1

IMPORTANT FARMLAND

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Source: City of Riverbank General Plan EIR.

RAAP Site 0 2,000 4,000 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-8
the city is generally Farmland of Local Importance or Unique Farmland.6

Farmland to the west of Riverbank is generally used for fruit and nut orchards; to the south and east it is used as pastureland. There is no farmland of concern in the Plan Area.

2. Williamson Act Land
There is no land under active Williamson Act contract in the Plan Area.

However, parcels to the north, east, and south of the Plan Area are protected under the Williamson Act. Stanislaus County has almost 700,000 acres protected by the Williamson Act, by a Farmland Security Zone, by an agricultural conservation easement, or by some other restriction on the conversion of agricultural uses.7
Stanislaus County ranks seventh among California
counties for the most acres protected under the Williamson Act.

3. Other Agricultural Land
Historically, before the establishment of the RAAP, the Plan Area was used for agriculture.8
After military purchase in 1942, the majority of the agricultural land on the site was developed; however, 20 acres at the northern end of the Plan Area remained as open space. Since closure of the base, the area has been leased to local farmers as grazing land. Under the FMMP, this land is designated as Farmland of Local Importance.
9 Adjacent land immediately to
the north and east of the Plan Area is similarly designated.

6 City of Riverbank, 2005. General Plan Update Background Report: Land Use, Population, and Agricultural Resources, page LAND-14.
7 City of Riverbank, 2005. City of Riverbank General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, page 4.2-2. 8 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Mobile District, 2009. Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-4.
9 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, “Northern Stanislaus County,” http://redirect.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/fmmp/county_info_results.asp, accessed on April 12, 2011.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-9

4. Forest Land
Forest land is defined, according to the California Public Resources Code Section 12220, as land that can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.

The Plan Area currently contains very few trees and there is no forest land meeting this definition within the Plan Area.

C. Standards of Significance
The RAAP Specific Plan would have a significant impact on agriculture if it would:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (or “farmlands of concern under CEQA”), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g)). d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or of conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-10
D. Impact Discussion
The following discussion provides an analysis of potential project and cumulative agricultural and forest resource impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the RAAP Site Specific Plan.

1. Project Impacts
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (or “farmlands of concern under CEQA”), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

As shown in Figure 4.2-1, the Plan Area does not contain any areas of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The areas of Farmland of Local Significance in the Plan Area are not considered farmland of concern under CEQA. Therefore implementation of the Plan would result in no impact with respect to conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

The General Plan land use designation for the principal site is Industrial/Business Park (I/BP). Surrounding land use designations include Medium Density Residential (MDR), Low Density Residential (LDR), and Community Commercial (CC). There are no Agricultural Resource Conservation Areas (AG) in the immediate vicinity of the Plan Area. Further, neither of the two non-contiguous sites that make up the Plan Area contains Williamson Act parcels. Therefore, implementation of the Plan would no conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts and there would be no impact.
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production.

There are no timber resources in Riverbank, so the City of Riverbank Zoning Ordinance (Municipal Code Title XV, Chapter 153) does not establish zoning for either forest or timberland. Therefore, implementation of the Plan would

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-11
not conflict with existing zoning for forest or timberland and there would be no impact.
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

The Plan Area currently contains very few trees and buildout of the Plan would not result in conversion of forest land in this area. Consequently, there would be no impact with respect to conversion of forest land as a result of Plan implementation.
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or of conversion of forest land to non-forest use. i. On-site conversion of farmland.

As described above, a portion of the Project Area, approximately 20 acres in size, is designated as Farmland of Local Importance under the FMMP. This land is currently leased to local farmers for grazing; however, with implementation of the proposed Plan, this land would be redeveloped as an industrial/business park, featuring light industrial uses, landscaping, and structures housing research and development activities as described in Chapter 3 of this EIR. In order to determine whether this conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses would be considered a significant environmental impact, the LESA model was used, pursuant to CEQA Appendix G and the City of Riverbank Draft Sustainable Agricultural Committee Report of January 2010.

The LESA model is a point-based system used to rate the relative value of agricultural land resources. The model measures two separate sets of factors:

Land Evaluation (LE) factors, which includes factors that measure the inherent soil based qualities of land as they relate to agricultural suitability; and Site Assessment (SA) factors, which includes factors that are intended to measure social, economic, and geographic attributes that also contribute to the overall value of agricultural land. For a given project, each factor is separately rated on a 100 point scale, then weighted relative to the others, and combined to derive a single numeric score out of a maximum attainable score

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-12
of 100 points. A LESA score of 39 points or less is not considered significant under CEQA. A significant environmental impact would result with a score of:
¨ 40 to 59 points, only if LE and SA sub-scores are each greater than or equal to 20 points
¨ 60 to 79 points, unless either LE or SA sub-score is less than 20 points ¨ 80 to 100 points
The conversion of the 20-acre portion of the Plan Area designated as Farmland of Local Importance would not result in a significant LESA score. Based on the land capability classification and the storie index rating, conversion of the 20-acre portion of the Plan Area would result in an LS subscore of 17.5.

It was not possible to determine the SA subscore given the amount of information available related to water availability and surrounding uses. However, because a weighted factor rating for the project size was determined to be 6, and assuming the other factor areas achieved the highest point values (for a total of 35 points), under a worst case scenario, the SA subscore would total no more than 41 points.

Adding the LS subscore (17.5) to the SA subscore (41) results in a Total LESA Score of 58.5. Accordingly, based on the LESA Model Scoring Threshold above, conversion of the 20-acre portion of the Plan Area would not be considered significant because the point total would be less than 60 and only one subscore is greater than 20 points. As a result, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
ii. Off-site conversion of farmland.

Agricultural uses on neighboring lands would not be adversely affected by the establishment of conversion of Farmland of Local Importance in the Plan Area because Williamson Act contracts are in place to preserve agricultural use on these neighboring parcels. Additionally, the Industrial Design Guidelines proposed in the Plan include a stipulation that landscaping be used to buffer and merge various uses. Compliance with these design guidelines

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-13
would further reduce the effects of Plan buildout on neighboring agricultural activity.

2. Cumulative Impacts
This section analyzes potential impacts to agricultural and forest resources that could occur from a combination of the Plan with other reasonably foreseeable projects in the surrounding area. The geographic scope of this analysis is taken as the City of Riverbank sphere of influence, as defined in the 2005-2025 Riverbank General Plan. A cumulative impact would be considered significant if, taken together with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the City of Riverbank sphere of influence, it would result in the conversion of farmland of concern to non-agricultural use, the conversion of forest land to non-forest use, a conflict with existing zoning for agricultural or forest use, a conflict with a Williamson Act contract, or otherwise involve changes in the existing environment which could cause the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use.

As described above, implementation of the Plan would not directly result in the conversion of farmland of concern to non-agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use, and therefore would not cause or contribute to an associated cumulative impact. Neither would implementation of the Plan result in a conflict with existing zoning for agricultural or forest use or with a Williamson Act contract on land in the Plan Area. As such, implementation of the Plan would not cause or contribute to a cumulative impact related to conflict with existing zoning or Williamson Act contracts. Implementation of the Plan would not cause rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, and therefore there would be no cumulative impact.

A 20-acre portion of the Plan Area is currently designated as Farmland of Local Importance under the FMMP, and parcels to the north and east of the Plan Area, also designated as Farmland of Local Importance, are under Williamson Act contract. In and of itself, the conversion of the 20-acre portion of the Plan Area to non-agricultural use would not be considered significant

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SITE SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AGRICULTURE AND FORE STRY RESOURCES

4.2-14
under CEQA by virtue of its LESA score, as detailed above. Additionally, the General Plan designated the RAAP site and surrounding parcels as industrial and anticipated conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses.

Although the General Plan EIR determined this loss of agricultural land to be a significant and unavoidable impact, this conversion has already been anticipated through the General Plan.

However, other projects in the vicinity of the RAAP site could convert to non-agricultural use through the implementation of the General Plan for the City of Riverbank. The General Plan EIR identified a significant unavoidable impact resulting from the loss of important farmland resulting from buildout under the General Plan. For this reason, implementation of the RAAP Specific Plan would contribute to a significant impact resulting from the conversion of farmland. Overall, cumulative impacts to agricultural and forest resources would be consider less than significant.

E. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Since there are no significant impacts related to agricultural and forest resources as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

4.3 AIR QUALITY

4.3-1
This section assesses the air quality impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan. Included in this section is background information on air quality and criteria air pollutants, a summary of the regulatory framework that pertains to the Specific Plan, and a summary of existing air quality conditions.

A. Background Information

1. Topographic Considerations
The City of Riverbank (City) is located in the northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) defines the boundaries of the basin by the San Joaquin Valley within the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east, the Coast Ranges in the west, and the Tehachapi mountains in the south. The valley is basically flat with a slight down510sward gradient to the northwest. The valley opens to the ocean at the Carquinez Straits where the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay. The San Joaquin Valley, thus, could be considered a “bowl” with the primary opening to the north. The surrounding topographic features restrict air movement through and out of the basin and, as a result, impede the dispersion of air pollutants from the basin. Wind flow is usually down the valley from the north, but the Tehachapi Mountains block or restrict the southward progression of airflow. The Sierra Nevada is a substantial barrier from the usual winds that have a general westerly flow. The topographical features result in weak airflow. The flow is further restricted vertically by inversion layers that are common in the San Joaquin Valley air basin throughout the year. An inversion layer is created when a mass of warm dry air sits over cooler air near the ground, preventing vertical dispersion of pollutants from the air mass below. During the summer, the San Joaquin Valley experiences daytime temperature inversions at elevations from 1,500 to 3,000 feet above the valley floor. Airflow is considerably restricted since mountain ranges surrounding the valley are generally above the inversion. These inversions lead to a build-up of ozone and ozone precursor pollutants. During the fall and winter months, strong surface-based inversions occur from 500 to 1,000 feet above the valley floor (SJVAPCD, 1998). Win-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-2
tertime inversions trap very stable air near the surface and lead primarily to a build-up of particulate matter air pollutants. Very light winds are also characteristic with these wintertime surface-based inversions.

2. Air Basin Characteristics
The climate of the Specific Plan Area is characterized by hot dry summers and cool, mild winters. Clear days are common from spring through fall.

Daytime temperatures in the summer often approach or exceed 100 degrees, with lows in the 60s. In the winter, daytime temperatures are usually in the 50s, with lows around 35 degrees. Radiation fog is common in the winter, and may persist for days. Partly to mostly cloudy days are common in winter, as most precipitation received in the Valley falls from November through April.

Winds are predominantly up-valley (flowing from the north) in all seasons, but more so in the summer and spring months.1
In this flow, winds are usually from the north end of the Valley and flow in a south-southeasterly direction, through Tehachapi Pass, into the Southeast Desert Air Basin. Annually, up-valley wind flow (i.e. northwest flow with marine air) is most common, occurring about 40 percent of the time. This type of flow is usually trapped below marine and subsidence inversions, restricting outflow through the Sierra Nevada and Tehachapi Mountains. The occurrence of this wind flow is almost 70 percent of the time in summer, but less than 20 percent of the time in winter. Winter and fall are characterized by mostly light and variable wind flow. Pacific storm systems do bring southerly flows to the valley during late fall and winter. Light and variable winds, less than 10 mph, are common in the colder months.

Superimposed on this seasonal regime is the diurnal wind cycle. In the Valley, this cycle takes the form of a combination of a modified sea breeze-land breeze and mountain-valley regimes. The sea breeze-land breeze regime typically has a modified sea breeze flowing into the Valley from the north during

1 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 1984.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-3
the late day and evening and then a land breeze flowing out of the Valley late at night and early in the morning. The mountain-valley regime has an upslope (mountain) flow during the day and a down slope (valley) flow at night. These effects create a complexity of regional wind flow and pollutant transport within the Valley.

The pollution potential of the San Joaquin Valley is very high. The San Joaquin Valley has one of the most severe air pollution problems in the State and the Country. Surrounding elevated terrain in conjunction with temperature inversions frequently restrict lateral and vertical dilution of pollutants.

Abundant sunshine and warm temperatures in late spring, summer, and early fall are ideal conditions for the formation of ozone, where the Valley frequently experiences unhealthy air pollution days. Low wind speeds, combined with low inversion layers in the winter, create a climate conducive to high PM10 (particulate matter with a diameter less than 10 microns) concentrations and elevated carbon monoxide levels.

3. Criteria Air Pollutants and Their Health Effects
The primary criteria air pollutants emitted by the Specific Plan would include ozone (O3) precursors (NOx and ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), and suspended particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Other criteria pollutants, such as lead (Pb) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), would not be substantially emitted by the Specific Plan or associated traffic, and air quality standards for these criteria pollutants are being met throughout the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. Accordingly, Pb, and SO2 are not discussed further. a. Ozone (O3)
While ozone serves a beneficial purpose in the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) by reducing ultraviolet radiation potentially harmful to humans, when it reaches elevated concentrations in the lower atmosphere it can be harmful to the human respiratory system and to sensitive species of plants.

Ozone concentrations build to peak levels during periods of light winds, bright sunshine, and high temperatures. Research has shown that exposure to ozone damages the alveoli (the individual air sacs in the lung where the ex-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-4
change of oxygen and carbon dioxide between the air and blood takes place).

Ozone is a strong irritant that attacks the respiratory system, leading to the damage of lung tissue. Short-term ozone exposure can reduce lung function in children, make persons susceptible to respiratory infection, and produce symptoms that cause people to seek medical treatment for respiratory distress. Long-term exposure can impair lung defense mechanisms and lead to emphysema and chronic bronchitis. A healthy person exposed to high concentrations may become nauseated or dizzy, may develop headache or cough, or may experience a burning sensation in the chest. Sensitivity to ozone varies among individuals, but about 20 percent of the population is sensitive to ozone with exercising children being particularly vulnerable.

Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by a complex series of photochemical reactions that involve “ozone precursors” that are two families of pollutants:
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG). NOx and ROG are emitted from a variety of stationary and mobile sources. While NO2, an oxide of nitrogen, is another criteria pollutant itself, ROGs are not in that category, but are included in this discussion as ozone precursors. b. Carbon Monoxide (CO)
CO is a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas. Carbon monoxide’s health effects are related to its affinity for hemoglobin in the blood. Exposure to high concentrations of CO reduces the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and can cause dizziness and fatigue, and causes reduced lung capacity, impaired mental abilities and central nervous system function, and induces angina in persons with serious heart disease. Primary sources of CO in ambient air are passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and residential wood burning. The monitored CO levels in the Valley during the last 10 years have been well below ambient air quality standards.
c. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
The major health effect from exposure to high levels of NO2 is the risk of acute and chronic respiratory disease. NO2 is a combustion by-product, but it can also form in the atmosphere by chemical reaction. NO2 is a reddish-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-5
brown colored gas often observed during the same conditions that produce high levels of O3 and can affect regional visibility. NO2 is one compound in a group of compounds consisting of oxides of nitrogen (NOx). As described above, NOx is an O3 precursor compound. Monitored levels of NO2 in the Valley are below ambient air quality standards.
d. Particulate Matter (PM)
Respirable particulate matter, PM10, and fine particulate matter, PM2.5, consist of particulate matter that is 10 microns or less in diameter and 2.5 microns or less in diameter, respectively. PM10 and PM2.5 represent fractions of particulate matter that can be inhaled and cause adverse health effects. PM10 and PM2.5 are a health concern, particularly at levels above the Federal and State ambient air quality standards. PM2.5 (including diesel exhaust particles) is thought to have greater effects on health because minute particles are able to penetrate to the deepest parts of the lungs. Scientific studies have suggested links between fine particulate matter and numerous health problems including asthma, bronchitis, acute and chronic respiratory symptoms such as shortness of breath and painful breathing. Children are more susceptible to the health risks of PM2.5 because their immune and respiratory systems are still developing. These fine particulates have been demonstrated to decrease lung function in children. Certain components of PM are linked to higher rates of lung cancer. Very small particles of certain substances (e.g. sulfates and nitrates) can also directly cause lung damage or can contain absorbed gases (e.g. chlorides or ammonium) that may be injurious to health.

Particulate matter in the atmosphere results from many kinds of dust- and fume-producing industrial and agricultural operations, fuel combustion, and atmospheric photochemical reactions. Some sources of particulate matter, such as mining and demolition and construction activities, are more local in nature, while others, such as vehicular traffic, have a more regional effect. In addition to health effects, particulates also can damage materials and reduce visibility. Dust comprised of large particles (diameter greater than 10 microns) settles out rapidly and is more easily filtered by human breathing pas-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-6
sages. This type of dust is considered more of a soiling nuisance rather than a health hazard.

In 1983, CARB replaced the standard for “suspended particulate matter” with a standard for suspended PM10 or “respirable particulate matter.” This standard was set at 50 µg/m3 for a 24-hour average and 30 µg/m3 for an annual average. CARB revised the annual PM10 standard in 2002, pursuant to the Children's Environmental Health Protection Act. The revised PM10 standard is 20 µg/m3 for an annual average. PM2.5 standards were first promulgated by the EPA in 1997 and were recently revised in late 2006 to lower the 24-hour PM2.5 standard to 35 µg/m3 for 24-hour exposures. That same action by EPA and revoked the annual PM10 standard due to lack of scientific evidence correlating long-term exposures of ambient PM10 with health effects. CARB has only adopted an annual average PM2.5 standard, which is set at 12 µg/m3 .

This is more stringent than the NAAQS of 15 µg/m3
.

4. Toxic Air Contaminants
Besides the "criteria" air pollutants, there is another group of substances found in ambient air referred to as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) under the Federal Clean Air Act and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) under the California Clean Air Act. These contaminants tend to be localized and are found in relatively low concentrations in ambient air. However, they can result in adverse chronic health effects if exposure to low concentrations occurs for long periods. They are regulated at the local, state, and federal level.

HAPs are the air contaminants identified by US EPA as known or suspected to cancer, serious illness, birth defects, or death. Many of these contaminants originate from human activities, such as fuel combustion and solvent use.

Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) are a subset of the 188 HAPS. Of the 21 HAPs identified by EPA as MSATs, a priority list of six priority HAPs were identified that include: diesel exhaust, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene. While vehicle miles traveled in the United States is expected to increase by 64 percent over the period 2000 to 2020, emissions of MSATs are anticipated to decrease substantially as a result of efforts to

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-7
control mobile source emissions (by 57 percent to 67 percent depending on the contaminant)2
.

California developed a program under the Tanner Toxics Act (AB 1807) to identify, characterize, and control toxic air contaminants (TACs). Subsequently, AB 2728 incorporated all 188 HAPs into the AB 1807 process.

TACs include all HAPs plus other containments identified by CARB. These are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (cancer risk). TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g. dry cleaners). Because chronic exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, State, and federal level.

Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about two-thirds of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the statewide average). According to California Air Resources Board (CARB), diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors, and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by ARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under State Proposition 65 or under the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs.

CARB reports that recent air pollution studies have shown an association that diesel exhaust and other cancer-causing toxic air contaminants emitted from vehicles are responsible for much of the overall cancer risk from TACs in California. Particulate matter emitted from diesel-fueled engines (diesel particulate matter [DPM]) was found to comprise much of that risk. CARB has adopted and implemented a number of regulations for stationary and mobile sources to reduce emissions of DPM. Several of these regulatory programs affect medium and heavy duty diesel trucks that represent the bulk of DPM emissions from California highways. These regulations include the solid

2 Federal Highway Administration, 2006. Interim Guidance on Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-8
waste collection vehicle (SWCV) rule, in-use public and utility fleets, and the heavy-duty diesel truck and bus regulations. In 2008 CARB approved a new regulation to reduce emissions of DPM and nitrogen oxides from existing onroad heavy-duty diesel fueled vehicles3 . The regulation requires affected vehicles to meet specific performance requirements between 2011 and 2023, with all affected diesel vehicles required to have 2010 model-year engines or equivalent by 2023. These requirements are phased in over the compliance period and depend on the model year of the vehicle.

Exposure to TACs is usually evaluated in terms of health risk or cancer risk.

For cancer health effects, the risk is expressed as the number of chances in a population of a million people who might be expected to get cancer over a 70- year lifetime.

B. Regulatory Framework
The Federal and California Clean Air Acts have established ambient air quality standards for different pollutants. National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) were established by the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970 (amended in 1977 and 1990) for six "criteria" pollutants. These criteria pollutants now include CO, ozone, N02, PM10, S02, and lead. In 1997, EPA added fine particulate matter or PM2.5 as a criteria pollutant. The air pollutants for which standards have been established are considered the most prevalent air pollutants that are known to be hazardous to human health. California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS) include the NAAQS pollutants and also hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles.

These additional CAAQS pollutants tend to have unique sources and are not typically examined in environmental air quality assessments. In addition, lead concentrations have decreased dramatically since it was removed from motor vehicle fuels.

3 http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-9

1. Federal Regulations
At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) administers and enforces air quality regulations. Federal air quality regulations were developed primarily from implementation of the Federal Clean Air Act. If an area does not meet NAAQS over a set period (three years), EPA designates it as a "nonattainment" area for that particular pollutant. EPA requires states that have areas that do not comply with the national standards to prepare and submit air quality plans showing how the standards would be met. If the states cannot show how the standards would be met, then they must show progress toward meeting the standards. These plans are referred to as the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Under severe cases, EPA may impose a federal plan to make progress in meeting the federal standards.

EPA also has programs for identifying and regulating hazardous air pollutants. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set standards for these pollutants and sharply reduce emissions of controlled chemicals. Industries were classified as major sources if they emitted certain amounts of hazardous air pollutants. The US EPA also sets standards to control emissions of hazardous air pollutants through mobile source control programs. These include programs that reformulated gasoline, national low emissions vehicle standards, Tier 2 motor vehicle emission standards, gasoline sulfur control requirements, and heavy-duty engine standards.

The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin is subject to major air quality planning programs required by the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) (1977, last amended in 1990, 42 United States Code [USC] 7401 et seq.) to address ozone, particulate matter air pollution, and carbon monoxide. The CAA requires that regional planning and air pollution control agencies prepare a regional Air Quality Plan to outline the measures by which both stationary and mobile sources of pollutants can be controlled in order to achieve all standards within the deadlines specified in the Clean Air Act. These plans are submitted to the State, which after approval, submits them to US EPA as the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-10

2. State Regulations
The California Clean Air Act of 1988, amended in 1992, outlines a program for areas in the State to attain the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the state air pollution control agency and is a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency. The California Clean Air Act sets more stringent air quality standards for all of the pollutants covered under national standards, and additionally regulates levels of vinyl chloride, hydrogen sulfide, sulfates, and visibility-reducing particulates. If an area does not meet CAAQS, CARB designates the area as a nonattainment area. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin does not meet the CAAQS for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5. CARB requires regions that do not meet CAAQS for ozone to submit clean air plans that describe measures to attain the standard or show progress toward attainment.

In addition to the US EPA, CARB further regulates the amount of air pollutants that can be emitted by new motor vehicles sold in California. Motor vehicle emissions standards have always been more stringent than federal standards since they were first imposed in 1961. CARB has also developed Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) and "Smog Check" programs with the California Bureau of Automotive Repair. Inspection programs for trucks and buses have also been implemented. CARB also sets standards for motor vehicle fuels sold in California.

In April 2005, CARB released the final version of its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. This handbook is intended to encourage local land use agencies to consider the risks from air pollution before they approve the siting of sensitive land uses, including residences, near sources of air pollution. CARB makes recommendations regarding the siting of sensitive land uses near freeways, truck distribution centers, rail yards, marine ports, dry cleaners, gasoline dispensing stations, and other air pollution sources. These “advisory” recommendations include general setbacks or buffers from air pollution sources. Unlike industrial or stationary sources of air pollution, the siting of new sensitive land uses does not require air quality

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-11
permits or approval by air districts. CARB recommends setbacks of 500 feet between freeways and new sensitive receptors, such as residences.4

3. Regional and Local Regulations
a. San Joaquin Valley
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is made up of eight counties in California’s Central Valley: San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings Tulare and the San Joaquin Valley portion of Kern. The primary role of the SJVAPCD is to develop plans and implement control measures in the San Joaquin Valley to control air pollution. These controls primarily affect stationary sources such as industry and power plants.

Rules and regulations have been developed by SJVAPCD to control air pollution from a wide range of air pollution sources. i. SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review Rule
On December 15, 2005, the SJVAPCD adopted the Indirect Source Review Rule (ISR or Rule 9510) to reduce ozone precursor (i.e. ROG and NOx) and PM10 emissions from new land use development projects. The rule is the result of state requirements outlined in the regions’ portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SJVAPCD’s SIP commitments are contained in the 2004 Extreme 1-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan, the 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan, the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and the 2008 PM2.5 Plan. New projects that would generate substantial air pollutant emissions, for which final discretionary approval was granted after March 1, 2006 are subject to this rule. The rule requires projects to mitigate both construction and operational period emissions by applying the SJVAPCD-approved mitigation measures and paying fees into the Air Quality Mitigation Fee Fund to support programs that reduce emissions. Fees apply to the unmitigated portion of the emissions and are based on estimated costs to reduce the emissions from other sources plus expected costs to cover administration of the program.

4 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, page 4.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-12
ii. Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10
SJVAPCD controls fugitive PM10 through Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions). The purpose of this regulation is to reduce ambient concentrations of PM10 by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic (human caused) fugitive dust emissions. This applies to activities such as construction, bulk materials, open areas, paved and unpaved roads, material transport, and agricultural areas. Sources regulated are required to provide dust control plans that meet the regulation requirements. Fees are collected by SJVAPCD to cover costs for reviewing plans and conducting field inspections. b. Riverbank General Plan
The overarching goal of the City’s General Plan5 in regards to air quality is to minimize Riverbank’s contribution to existing and potential future air quality problems, whether experienced locally, regionally, or globally. The following are goals and policies that relate to the Specific Plan (see Table 4.3-1):

4. National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards
The CAA and CCAA promulgate, respectively, national and state ambient air quality standards. Air quality standards have been established by US EPA (i.e. NAAQS) and California (i.e. CAAQS) for specific air pollutants most pervasive in urban environments. The NAAQS and CAAQS are shown in Table 4.3-2. Ambient standards specify the concentration of pollutants to which the public may be exposed without adverse health effects. Individuals vary widely in their sensitivity to air pollutants, and standards are set to protect more pollution-sensitive populations (e.g. children and the elderly). National and state standards are reviewed and updated periodically based on new health studies. California ambient standards tend to be at least as protective as national ambient standards and are often more stringent. For planning purposes, regions like the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin are given an air quality status designation by the federal and state regulatory agencies. Areas with monitored pollutant concentrations that are lower than ambient air quality

5 City of Riverbank, 2009. City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025. Adopted April 22, 2009.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-13
TABLE 4.3-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO AIR

QUALITY
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal AIR-1
Create and enhance development patterns that encourage people to walk, bicycle, or use public transit for a significant number of their daily trips.

Policy
AIR-1.2
Approved plans, subdivisions, and projects shall provide highlyconnected circulation networks that accommodate safe, direct, and convenient alternatives to vehicular travel.

Policy
AIR-1.7
New major activity centers, office, and commercial development shall accommodate alternatives to automobile access, including provision of secure bicycle storage and parking facilities.

Policy
AIR-1.10
Projects or portions of projects that implement a fine-grained mixinga of housing types and land uses, and that include other pedestrian, bicycle, and transit oriented design elements, which generate fewer vehicle trips, will have a correspondingly lower contribution towards any roadway or intersection improvement mitigation measures required in City environmental documents and conditions or approval.

Goal AIR-2 Construction practices and materials used in Riverbank minimize direct and indirect air pollutant emissions.

Policy
AIR-2.1
The City of Riverbank, in coordination with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, will require approved projects, plans, and subdivisions to reduce particulate emissions from construction, grading, excavation, and demolition to the maximum extent feasible.

Policy
AIR-2.2
The City of Riverbank will require all access roads, driveways, and parking areas serving new commercial and industrial development to be constructed with materials that minimize particulate and reactive organic gas emissions and are appropriate to the scale and intensity of use.

Policy
AIR-2.5
The City of Riverbank will require new residential, commercial, and industrial development to reduce air quality impacts from area sources and from energy consumption.

Goal AIR-3 Avoid land use incompatibility that causes local exposure to harmful and hazardous air pollutants.

Policy
AIR-3.1
The City will provide adequate sites for industrial development, while minimizing the health risks to people resulting from industrial toxic or hazardous air pollutant emissions.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY
TABLE 4.3-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO AIR

QUALITY (CONTINUED)

4.3-14
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Policy
AIR-3.3
The City of Riverbank will ensure that industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities that may produce toxic or hazardous air pollutants are located at an adequate distance from residential areas and other sensitive receptors. a
The term “grain” can be used to describe the degree to which land uses are mixed and the size of development blocks. “Fine grain” development involves land uses located in proximity with one another on relatively smaller parcel or development blocks, allowing residents and employees to walk or bicycle among different destinations to meet their daily or occasional needs without use of a private automobile. By contrast, “coarse grain” development involves land uses that isolated from one another, with non-residential land uses typically occurring on larger parcels.

This presents a situation in which residents and employees have a more difficult time traveling among destinations except by automobile. Public transit service is less feasible because transit routes would be located at a significant distance form potential transit users. standards are designated “attainment” on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.

When monitored concentrations exceed ambient standards within an air basin, it is designated “nonattainment” for that pollutant. US EPA designates areas as “unclassified” when insufficient data are available to determine the attainment status; however, these areas are typically considered to be in attainment of the standard.

C. Existing Conditions
Air quality is affected by the rate of pollutant emissions and by meteorological conditions such as wind speed, atmospheric stability, and mixing height, all of which affect the atmosphere's ability to mix and disperse pollutants.

Long-term variations in air quality typically result from changes in air pollutant emissions, while short-term variations result from changes in atmospheric conditions.

The Specific Plan Area is bordered by farmland to the north and east, Claribel Road the south, and Claus Road to the west. “Sensitive receptors” are defined as facilities where sensitive population groups, such as children, the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-15
TABLE 4.3-2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS – FEBRUARY 2012a

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY
TABLE 4.3-2 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS – FEBRUARY, 2012 (CONTINUED)

4.3-16
a California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2012. Available: http://www.arb.ca.gov. Accessed February 27, 2012.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-17
elderly, the acutely ill and the chronically ill, are likely to be located. These land uses include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. Sensitive receptors in the project vicinity include residences located across Claus Road on the northern half of the site.
a. Existing Air Pollutant Levels
As previously discussed, the San Joaquin Valley experiences poor air quality conditions, due primarily to elevated levels of ozone and particulate matter.

CARB, in cooperation with SJVAPCD, monitors air quality throughout the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The closest official monitoring station to Riverbank is located in Modesto on 14th Street.

Table 4.3-3 summarizes air quality monitoring data from the Modesto monitoring station. The values in the table reflect the highest air pollutant levels measured from 2008 to 2010. In addition, Table 4.3-4 provides the number of days in which measured concentrations exceeded the NAAQS or CAAQS.

These findings are discussed in greater detail below.
i. Criteria Air Pollutants in Riverbank
As indicated in Table 4.3-4, the NAAQS and CAAQS for one- and eight-hour ozone, and PM2.5 were exceeded multiple times in Modesto over the last three years. The CAAQS 24-hour standard for PM10 was exceeded 7 times in 2008, 6 times in 2009, and once in 2010. The highest carbon monoxide concentrations measured in Modesto have been well below the national and State ambient standards. However, since automobile emissions are the primary source of carbon monoxide, the highest concentrations would typically be found away from monitoring stations, near congested roadways that carry large volumes of traffic. These are referred to as “hot spots.” Other criteria pollutants, such as nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead, are typically found at low levels at the Modesto monitoring station, and should not pose a major air pollution concern in Riverbank.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-18
TABLE 4.3-3 HIGHEST MEASURED AIR POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS Pollutant
Average Time
Measured
Air Pollutant Levels
2008 2009 2010
O3
1-Hour 0.127 ppm 0.112 ppm 0.105 ppm
8-Hour 0.107 ppm 0.098 ppm 0.081 ppm
CO 8-Hour 1.94 ppm 2.41 ppm 1.78 ppm
NO2
a
1-Hour 0.063 ppm 0.058 ppm 0.05 ppm
Annual 0.012 ppm 0.012 ppm 0.01 ppm
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
24-Hour 107.2 ug/m3 61.5 ug/m3 44.7 ug/m3
Annual 16 ug/m3 13 ug/m3 12.2 ug/m3
Respirable Particulate
Matter (PM10)
24-Hour 111.1 ug/m3 68.2 ug/m3 58.9 ug/m3
Annual 31.3 ug/m3 26.6 ug/m3 22.1 ug/m3
Notes: ppm = parts per million ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. Values reported in bold italic exceed ambient air quality standard. a Data reported from Turlock – South Minaret Street monitoring location.

Source: CARB, 2012.

TABLE 4.3-4 SUMMARY OF MEASURED AIR QUALITY EXCEEDANCES Pollutant Standard
Days Exceeding Standard
2008 2009 2010
O3
NAAQS 1-hr NA NA NA
NAAQS 8-hr 18 7 3
CAAQS 1-hr 10 1 1
CAAQS 8-hr 24 14 9
PM2.5 NAAQS 24-hr 13 8 10
PM10
NAAQS 24-hr 0 0 0
CAAQS 24-hr 7 6 1
All Other (CO, NO2,
Lead, SO2) All Other 0 0 0
Notes: NA = Not applicable.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-19
b. Attainment Status
Violations of ambient air quality standards are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are judged for each air pollutant. Areas that do not violate ambient air quality standards are considered to have attained the standard.

The San Joaquin Valley as a whole does not meet State or federal ambient air quality standards for ground level ozone and PM2.5. The Valley is classified as attainment under the federal standards for PM10, however, it is classified as nonattainment under the more stringent State standard. The attainment status for the Valley with respect to various pollutants of concern is displayed in Table 4.3-5.
i. Air Quality Planning
In response to not meeting the NAAQS, the region is required to submit attainment plans to US EPA through the State, which are referred to as State Implementation Plans (SIP). The region submitted the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan to EPA in 2004, which addressed the old 1- hour national standard. The region’s 2007 Ozone Plan, addressing the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, was submitted to US EPA and approved in March 2012.

That plan predicts attainment of the standard throughout 90 percent of the district by 2020 and the entire district by 2024. To accomplish these goals, the plan would reduce NOx emissions further by 75 percent and ROG emissions by 25 percent. Among a wide variety of control measures included in these plans, the ones relevant to the Specific Plan include: Indirect Source Mitigation Programs; Energy Conservation Programs; Employer-Based Trip Reduction Programs; and Green Contracting Programs. In particular, Green Contracting Programs encourage use of low-emission vehicles, equipment and clean fuels to reduce or offset emissions from construction and traffic associated with land use developments.

On October 30, 2006, EPA issued a Final Rule determining that the San Joaquin Valley had attained the NAAQS for PM10 [71 FR 63642]. In response, SJVAPCD, CARB, and the Valley’s local Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) have developed the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-20
TABLE 4.3-5 PROJECT AREA ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutant Federal Status State Status
Ozone (O3) – 1-Hour Standard No Federal Standard Severe Nonattainment
Ozone (O3) – 8-Hour Standard Extreme Nonattainment Nonattainment Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainment-Maintenance Nonattainment Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
a Nonattainment Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Attainment-Maintenance Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Attainment Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Attainment Attainment
Sulfates and Lead No Designation Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide No Designation Unclassified
Visibility Reducing Particles No Designation Unclassified a The Valley is designated nonattainment for the 1997 federal PM2.5 standards. EPA released final designations for the 2006 PM2.5 standards (effective in 2009), designating the Valley as nonattainment.

Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012.

Request for Redesignation so that EPA can proceed with completing the redesignation process for PM10 for the Valley. In 2008, US EPA proposed to approve the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation and the region now meets the NAAQS for PM10.

The SJVAPCD adopted the 2008 PM2.5 Plan on April 30, 2008. The plan was approved by CARB on May 22, 2008 and US EPA on November 9, 2011.

This plan will assure that the Valley will attain the 1997 PM2.5 standard and make progress toward attaining the new 2006 standards as well as the state standard. The plan uses control measures to reduce NOx, which also leads to fine particulate formation in the atmosphere. The plan incorporates measures

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-21
to reduce direct emissions of PM2.5, including a strengthening of the woodburning rules. Recent and proposed action by CARB to reduce diesel particulate matter emissions from on- and off-road mobiles sources is contained in the plan. Attainment plans for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS are not required until December 2012.

Both the ozone and PM2.5 plans include all measures (i.e. federal, state, and local) that would be implemented through rule making or program funding to reduce air pollutant emissions. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of these plans. TCMs are strategies meant to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling, or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions. The plans described above addressing ozone also meet the state planning requirements.

D. Standards of Significance

1. CEQA Appendix G Standards
The Plan would have a significant effect on the environment with respect to air quality if it would:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any nonattainment pollutant.
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-22

2. Thresholds of Significance
The SJVAPCD has developed the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts, also known as the GAMAQI. 6
The following thresholds of
significance, obtained from the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI, are used to determine whether a proposed project would result in a significant air quality impact:
¨ Construction Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM). SJVAPCD recommends a qualitative evaluation of construction PM10 emissions that focuses on implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures. Construction impacts associated with a proposed project would be considered significant if the feasible control measures for construction are not included in the project. Construction projects are required to comply with Regulation VIII as listed in the SJVAPCD; however, the size of the project and the proximity to sensitive receptors may warrant additional measures.
¨ Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOX). Direct and indirect emissions associated with a proposed project would be considered significant if a project generates emissions of ROG or NOX that exceed 10 tons per year. SJVAPCD has not published thresholds for long-term emissions of Particulate Matter (PM). However, a PM10 emission level of 15 tons per year was used for this assessment,7 since this is the level at which SJVAPCD requires “offsets” for new stationary sources. Since PM2.5 am-

6 SJVAPCD, 1998. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Revised January 10, 2002. 7 While San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District CEQA guidance recognizes that particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) is a major air quality issue in the basin, it has to date not established numerical thresholds for significance for these pollutants. For the purposes of this analysis, a PM10 emission threshold of 15 tons per year was used as a measure of significance. This emission is the SJVAPCD threshold level at which new stationary sources requiring permits from the District must provide emissions "offsets." This threshold of significance for PM10 is consistent with the District’s ROG and NOX thresholds, which are also the offset thresholds established in SJVAPCD Rule 2201 New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-23
bient air quality standards are about 30 percent below the PM10 standard, a threshold of 10 tons per year for PM2.5 was used.8
¨ Local CO Concentrations. Traffic emissions associated with the proposed project would be considered significant if the project contributes to CO concentrations at receptor locations in excess of the ambient air quality standards (i.e. CAAQS of 9.0 ppm for 8 hours or 20 ppm for 1 hour). ¨ Toxic Air Contaminants or Hazardous Air Pollutants. Exposure to hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or toxic air contaminants (TACs) would be considered significant if the probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual would exceed 10 in 1 million or would result in a Hazard Index greater than one for non-cancer health effects. ¨ Odors. Odor impacts associated with the proposed project would be considered significant if the project has the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors through development of a new odor source or placement of receptors near an existing odor source.

SJVAPCD CEQA guidance does not require quantitative analysis of construction fugitive dust emissions. The Air District’s Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts states: “PM10 emitted during construction can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions, and other factors, making quantification difficult” (page 29). The SJVAPCD’s approach to CEQA analyses of construction PM10 impacts is to require implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures rather than to require detailed quantification of emissions. The SJVAPCD significance threshold for construction dust impacts is based on the appropriateness of construction dust controls. The SJVAPCD guidelines provide feasible control measures for construction emission of PM10 as specified in its Regulation VIII. The SJVAPCD has determined that implementation of the measures specified in Regulation VIII, along with additional or enhanced measures

8 The Federal 24-hour standard for PM2.5 (35 mg/m3
) is approximately 30 percent lower than the State 24-hour standard for PM10 (35 mg/m3 ).

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-24
which may be appropriate for particular projects, will constitute sufficient mitigation to reduce PM10 impacts to a level considered less-than-significant.

With respect to cumulative air quality impacts, Section 4.3.2 of the GAMAQI provides that any proposed project that would individually have a significant air quality impact (i.e. exceed significance thresholds for ROG, NOX, or PM10) would also be considered to have a significant cumulative impact. Although the GAMAQI does not provide guidance for evaluating cumulative air quality impacts in instances where project-specific emissions of criteria pollutants do not exceed the Air District’s significance thresholds, it does state:
“[a]ll but the largest individual sources emit ROG and NOX in amounts too small to have a measurable effect on ambient ozone concentrations by themselves.” In addition, the CEQA guidance provided by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) does address this condition, in both the District’s previous guidance document and in its recently updated guidance document. In the absence of guidance on this matter from the SJVAPCD, the current BAAQMD guidance document was therefore considered in establishing a threshold of significance for cumulative ozone emissions for purposes of this analysis, as follows. The recently updated BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines (updated May, 2011) states: “[n]o single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in non-attainment of regional air quality standards. Consequently, the thresholds of significance discussed above (for individual project impacts) are the amount of pollution that is deemed cumulatively considerable and, therefore, a significant adverse impact.” Based on the above, for purposes of this analysis, a project is considered to result in a cumulatively considerable air quality impact if the project emissions exceed the SJVAPCD significance thresholds for criteria pollutants/ozone precursors (ROG, NOX, or PM10), or the project is not consistent with the regional clean air plan.

E. Impacts Discussion

1. Plan Impacts
This section describes the impacts of the Specific Plan.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-25
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
i. Applicable Clean Air Plans
As described in Section C.b.i above, a wide variety of control measures are included in the 2004 extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration and 2007 Ozone Plans, such as reducing or offsetting emissions from construction and traffic associated with land use developments.

As previously noted, both the ozone and PM2.5 plans include all measures (i.e. federal, state, and local) that would be implemented through rule making or program funding to reduce air pollutant emissions. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of these plans. The plans described above in Section C.b.i, addressing ozone also meet the state planning requirements.

The Draft Specific Plan includes goals and policies intended to reduce the rate of vehicle trips or VMT associated with implementation of the Plan land uses (see Table 4.3-6).
ii. Consistency with Applicable Air Quality Plans
The GAMAQI does not include methodologies for assessing the effect of a project on consistency with clean air plans developed by the SJVAPCD. Regional clean air plans developed by SJVAPCD rely on local land use designations to develop population and travel projections that are the basis of future emissions inventories. Air pollution control plans are aimed at reducing these projected future emissions. As discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, it is anticipated that buildout of the Plan would result in the creation of between 827 and 1,654 new jobs over the course of 15 years. The increase in industrial and commercial/office square footage anticipated with buildout of the Plan is generally consistent with growth projections assumed in the Riverbank General Plan for the same time horizon. The General Plan projects the construction of approximately 1,999,540 square feet of space in industrial business parks, which would be concentrated largely along the railroad lines and in the southeastern portion of the city, including on the RAAP Main Site. The General Plan also projects construction of roughly 678,980 square feet of net new commercial/retail space on the northern portion of the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-26
TABLE 4.3-6 RIVERBANK SPECIFIC PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO AIR

QUALITY
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal LUD-1 A land use mix that contributes to job creation for Riverbank residents.

Policy LUD-1
Encourage a mix of new employment-intensive development types on undeveloped portions of the RAAP, including traditional industrial uses, R&D space, flex space, office uses, and supporting retail space.

Goal TRAN-1 A new industrial park and retail area that facilitates the safe circulation of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians.

Policy TRAN-1 Provide pedestrian crossings as appropriate to ensure that employees can safely walk between buildings and to areas off-site.

Policy TRAN-2 On new public streets built in the Specific Plan Area, use a landscaped planting strip to buffer sidewalks from roadways.

Policy TRAN-3 Ensure bicycles are accommodated through the provision of onsite bicycle parking.

Policy TRAN-4 Design roadways to accommodate all modes of travel safely.

Goal TRAN-3 An industrial park that provides for safe queuing of delivery vehicles.

Policy TRAN-8 Ensure that truck deliveries and movement do not inhibit pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation.

RAAP Main Site and along Claribel Road on either side of Oakdale Road.

Additionally, growth under the proposed Plan would come incrementally over a period of 20 years and would be dependent on market conditions. As such, the proposed Plan would not result in a substantial and unplanned level of growth and associated air quality impacts would therefore be consistent with population and vehicle related emissions projections contained in regional clean air planning efforts, and would not conflict with achievement of the control plans aimed at reducing these projected emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of efforts outlined in the region’s air pollution control plans to attain or maintain ambient air quality standards. This would be a less-than-significant impact.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-27
b. Violate Any Air Quality Standard or Contribute Substantially to an Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation i. Construction Emissions
Construction activities would temporarily affect local air quality, causing a temporary increase in particulate dust and other criteria pollutants. Dust emissions during periods of demolition and construction would increase particulate concentrations at neighboring properties, and emissions from construction equipment exhaust, and worker and vendor vehicle trips would increase pollutant concentrations locally and regionally. This impact is potentially significant, but normally mitigable.

Construction of the Plan Area would occur over the course of an approximate 20-year period. The North End and South End Cap areas have minimal planned demolition, while other existing areas would have varying degrees of demolition. Factors that will determine demolition or reuse include the quality of existing buildings, utilities, and security issues, economic feasibility in meeting seismic requirements, and flexibility for reuse.

The SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review Rule (Rule 9510) applies to construction of the proposed Projects and not specific plans. In accordance with Rule 9510, a detailed air impact assessment would have to be prepared for project components. It is likely that the plan would be constructed as separate projects, in terms of obtaining final grading plans and other discretionary approvals from local agencies. SJVAPCD would calculate the construction and operational emissions from each development phase submitted. Rule 9510 would require that the project reduce construction exhaust emissions by 20 percent for NOx and 45 percent for PM10 from the statewide average as estimated by the ARB. The basis for the reductions is use of URBEMIS2007 emissions for statewide construction fleets. Use of newer equipment could result in substantially lower emissions. SJVAPCD encourages reductions through on-site mitigation measures. Fees to purchase or sponsor off-site reductions through SJVAPCD apply when on-site mitigation measures do not achieve the requirements. Using less-polluting construction equipment, such as newer equipment or retrofitting older equipment reduces construction emissions on-site. A combination of on-site and off-site measures can be im-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-28
plemented to meet the overall emission reduction requirements. Based on the findings of the air impact assessment, the project would pay to the SJVAPCD a fee necessary to offset the required construction emissions not reduced by on-site measures identified in the permit application submitted to the District.

Offset fees would be calculated in accordance with the procedures identified in the Rule 9510 and approved by the SJVAPCD. This rule would not directly affect ROG emissions.

At this time, specific construction plans, schedules, and phasing related to the Specific Plan are not available and quantification of emissions from construction activities would be speculative. If one were to assume full reconstruction of the site over a 1- to 5-year period, then emissions of ozone precursor pollutants (i.e. ROG and NOx) would likely exceed the GAMAQI significance thresholds. Future projects within the Plan Area will be analyzed on an individual basis and mitigated (in accordance with Rule 9510), as necessary. Because it is not possible to quantify a construction emissions estimate for the Specific Plan, this impact is considered significant.
ii. Operational Emissions
Criteria air pollutant emissions associated with the development and operation of the Specific Plan were computed. This includes the computation of emissions from traffic (mobile sources), area sources (e.g. maintenance architectural coatings), and natural gas consumption. These emissions were computed using the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2011.1.1 (CalEEMod), as recommended by SJVAPCD.

CalEEMod is a computer model developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to estimate air pollutant and GHG emissions from land use development projects. The model is an update to the URBEMIS2007 model and uses the latest statewide emission inventory models for mobiles sources (i.e. EMFAC2007). The model is periodically updated to reflect most recent emissions estimates for source types and incorporate accuracies in estimating emission from land use activities. The latest version of this model (i.e. Version 2011.1.1) was used in this analysis.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-29
Trip generation rates produced by Fehr & Peers were input to CalEEMod.

The trip generation estimates include reductions for pass-by trips for retail uses, which trips are made by traffic already using the adjacent roadway that enter the site as an intermediate stop on the way from another destination.

They do not involve an extra vehicle trip. The methodology for developing the trip estimates is described in the Fehr & Peers report.9 Trip generation
represents the daily number of trips generated when the land uses are fully operational. Pass-by trips are subtracted from the proposed Retail land uses.

The adjusted trip rates were entered into CalEEMod, such that CalEEMod computed the same total number of daily trips generated as the Fehr & Peers study.

It is assumed that development of the Plan Area would occur over the course of a 20-year period; however, the rate and timeframe are subject to variation based on market demands, the regional economy, and other socioeconomic factors. The fully built-out plan operational emissions estimates were computed for the year 2030. Existing (2010 baseline) operational emissions were also computed and subtracted from 2030 emissions to determine the relative net contribution of implementation of the Specific Plan. Specific Plan operational period emissions estimates are presented in Table 4.3-7 and CalEEMod output worksheets are included in Appendix B.

Currently, there are no specific development projects proposed within the Specific Plan Area. Future projects would be subject to SJVAPCD’s Indirect Source Review or Rule 9510 (ISR) to reduce NOx and PM10 emissions. Under Rule 9510, future projects would be required to reduce operational NOx emissions by 33 percent and operational PM10 emissions by 50 percent of the project’s operational baseline emissions over 10 years. The actual required reductions would be determined by SJVAPCD when an application is submitted prior to “the last discretionary approval” for the proposed project.

9 Fehr & Peers, 2011. Administrative Draft Transportation Impact Analysis Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant. December.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-30
TABLE 4.3-7 SPECIFIC PLAN OPERATIONAL PERIOD EMISSIONS
Scenario
ROG
(Tons/
Year)
NOx
(Tons/
Year)
PM10
(Tons/
Year)
PM2.5
(Tons/
Year)
Existing Annual Emissions 4.98 5.95 1.50 0.26
2030 Annual Emissions 14.31 21.19 14.39 0.94
2030 Net Annual Emissions 9.33 15.24 12.89 0.68
SJVAPCD Thresholds 10 10 15 10
Significant No Yes No No
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012.

However, the methods used by SJVAPCD to determine the required mitigations are consistent with the methods used in this analysis (e.g. use of latest URBEMIS model using project size and trip generation rates). The mitigation measures required by ISR for this project would be determined at the time that final development plans are developed.

The emission projections shown in Table 4.3-7 do not reflect the reduction that would be required under ISR. Emissions of NOx and to some extent ROG emissions would be reduced with the required ISR mitigation. Unmitigated operational NOx emissions would have to be reduced by almost 35 percent from the project’s operational baseline emissions to meet the SJVAPCD thresholds. The project ROG emissions with application of Rule 9510 are predicted to remain be below the SJVAPCD thresholds. ISR only requires offsets to be effective for 10 years. Project emissions predicted for 2030 show that NOx emissions would be above the SJVAPCD thresholds.

As shown in Table 4.3-7, PM10 emissions would not exceed the emissions threshold of 15 tons per year. Like NOx emissions, these would also be subject to ISR. Unmitigated operational PM10 emissions would have to be re-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-31
duced by 50 percent of the project’s operational baseline emissions by on-site, off-site, or some combination of on- and off-site mitigation. The actual reductions incorporated into the proposed project would not be determined until the proposed project finalizes an Air Impact Assessment application. However, as indicated in Table 4.3-7, the projects submitted under the Specific Plan would have PM10 emissions below the SJVAPCD significance thresholds with or without the ISR emissions reduction of 50 percent.

Overall, as indicated in Table 4.3-7, operational period emissions are estimated to exceed project-level significance thresholds for NOX under the 2030 future cases. Therefore, this impact is considered significant. iii. Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots
Monitoring data from all ambient air quality monitoring stations in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that existing carbon monoxide levels are currently below national and California ambient air quality standards. The San Joaquin Valley has been designated as an attainment area for the CO standards. The highest measured level in Modesto (the closest monitoring stations to the Plan Area) during the past three years was 2.4 ppm for the eight-hour averaging periods.

Even though current CO levels in the San Joaquin Valley are well below ambient air quality standards, elevated levels of CO still warrant analysis. CO hotspots (occurrences of localized high CO concentrations) could still occur near busy congested intersections. Recognizing the relatively low CO concentrations experienced in the San Joaquin Valley, the GAMAQI states that a project would have a less-than-significant impact if the following criteria would not be met:
¨ A traffic study for the project indicates that the Level of Service (LOS) on one or more streets or at one or more intersections in the project vicinity will be reduced to LOS E or F; or
¨ A traffic study indicates that the project will substantially worsen an already existing LOS F on one or more streets or at one or more intersections in the project vicinity.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-32
According to the traffic report, no streets or intersections would operate at LOS E or F with traffic mitigation incorporated. Since no streets or intersections affected by the project would have LOS E or F, the impact of the project related to localized CO concentrations would therefore be less than significant. c. Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant As described above section D.1.b.i, Construction Emissions, and below in Impact AQ-2 in Section E, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, future projects in the Plan Area have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of construction period and operational period criteria pollutants and these impacts are considered significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 above would reduce this impact, but not to a level of less than significant. Therefore, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
d. Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations (LTS) The health risk evaluation for the Specific Plan involved the calculation of future diesel particulate matter (DPM) emissions and associated health risks for traffic on Claus Road, which is the main road adjacent to the project site.

Emissions were calculated using the latest version of the CARB EMFAC2011 emissions model. Potential cancer risks for residents along Claus Road were calculated using health risk assessment methods recommended by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment10 (OEHHA) and the SJVAPCD11. The health risk assessment method includes calculation of ambient DPM concentrations at residential receptor locations using an air quality dispersion model, and then calculating cancer risks using

10 OEHHA 2003. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 11 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling, Draft 01/07 Rev 2.0.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-33
the modeled concentrations along with appropriate DPM-specific risk factors.

Roadway and receptor coordinates, meteorological data, traffic volumes, and the emission factors were used with the AERMOD air quality dispersion model to predict annual DPM concentrations from roadway traffic which were then used to calculate lifetime cancer risks at the residential receptor locations.
i. Traffic Emissions
DPM emissions for traffic on Claus Road were calculated using emission factors from the CARB EMFAC2011 emissions model with default information for Stanislaus County along with future traffic volumes and vehicle mixes on Claus Road. EMFAC2011 is the most recent version of the CARB motor vehicle emission factor model. Emission factors were developed for the year 2020 using the projected mix of cars and trucks traveling on Claus Road north and south of the project site. Based on traffic data for the project there would be more traffic on Claus Road north of the site than south of the site. The average daily traffic volumes were estimated as 4,957 passenger vehicles and 428 trucks, or 54 percent of the total traffic, traveling north of the project site on Claus Road, and 4,223 passenger vehicles and 428 trucks, or 46 percent of the total traffic, traveling on Claus Road south of the site. In calculating emissions it was assumed that all trucks would be heavy duty trucks and the passenger vehicles would be comprised of light duty autos and trucks. An average travel speed of 45 mph (the posted speed limit on Claus Road) was assumed for all vehicles and used with the EMFAC2011 model in calculating DPM emission factors. These emissions were then used in the air quality dispersion modeling of vehicles traveling on Claus Road to predict DPM concentrations at residences along the roadway.

The DPM emission factor calculations are shown in Appendix B. ii. Roadway Dispersion Modeling
Dispersion modeling of roadway DPM emissions was conducted using the EPA’s AERMOD dispersion model. This model is recommended by the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-34
SJVAPCD for this type of analysis. The AERMOD model predicts pollutant concentrations at receptors located in areas of flat or complex terrain from a variety of emission source types including point, area, volume, and line sources. Emissions from these source types can be continuous or vary by hour, day of the week, month, or season. For this analysis the model was run using regulatory default dispersion options and rural dispersion coefficients due to the rural nature of the project area. Since there is little variation in terrain elevations in the project area, the model was run in flat terrain mode.

A 5-year set of hourly meteorological data (2005 - 2009), prepared by the

SJVAPCD,
12 from the Modesto Airport, located about 6.25 miles southsouthwest of the project site, was used in the modeling. Other inputs to the model included road geometry, receptor locations, and hourly emission rates.

Vehicle emissions were modeled as line sources (a series of volume sources along a path) along Claus Road. In the vicinity of the project site, Claus Road is a two-lane road and was modeled using one line source per travel direction. Since the traffic volumes and associated emissions on Claus Road are different north and south of the project site, two roadway segments were used in the modeling. One road segment represents traffic from the project site north on Claus Road to Kentucky Avenue and the other segment represents Claus Road from of the project site south to just beyond Plainview Road.

Emission source parameters used in modeling these line sources were consistent with SJVAPCD Air Quality Modeling Guidance13.

Locations of residential receptors along Claus Road were identified from aerial images and included in the modeling as locations for the model to calculate annual average DPM concentrations. Sixty-five residential receptors were identified and included in the modeling. An aerial view showing the project site, roadway segments modeled, and the locations of the residential receptors is provided in Figure 4.3-1. The maximum-modeled DPM concentration occurred along the road segment south of the project site, north of Plainview

12 http://www.valleyair.org/busind/pto/Tox_Resources/AirQuality Monitoring.htm.
13 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Guidance for Air Dispersion Modeling, Draft 01/07 Rev 2.0.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

AIR QUALITY

PROJECT SITE, ROADWAY LINKS FOR DISPERSION MODELING, AND RECEPTOR LOCATIONS FIGURE 4.3-1
Source: Illingworth_&_Rodkin, 2012.

RAAP Site
Claus Road, Roadway Link
Receptor Location

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-36
Road, at UTM coordinates 683,228.5 meters east, 4,175260.6 meters north and is shown in Figure 4.3-1. Inputs used for the modeling are included in Appendix B.
iii. Cancer Risk Prediction
Cancer risk to residents near Claus Road from roadway DPM emissions were assessed following the SJVAPCD recommended methods and their significance evaluated based on the SJVAPCD threshold of an incremental cancer risk of ten excess cases per million at the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). Exceeding this threshold would result in a significant impact. The ten-in-one-million risk level is also used by the Air Toxics “Hot Spots” (AB 2588) program and California’s Proposition 65 as the public notification level for air toxic emissions from existing sources.

Potential cancer risks from inhalation of toxic air contaminants are calculated based on the annual average concentration, an inhalation dose, and the cancer potency of the toxic air contaminant. The inhalation dose depends on a person’s breathing rate, exposure time and frequency of exposure, and the exposure duration over a 70-year lifetime period. These parameters vary depending on whether the exposure is considered to occur for a residential location, at a workplace, or at a school. For this analysis, potential exposures to DPM concentrations from traffic on Claus Road to residents along the roadway were evaluated. For residential exposures, the SJVAPCD recommends using a breathing rate of 393 liters per day per kilogram of body weight (L/kg-day).

Residential receptors are assumed to be exposed for 24 hours per day for 350 days per year over a 70-year lifetime.

Potential health risks to residents along Claus Road from roadway DPM emissions were evaluated assuming constant exposure to DPM concentrations based on emissions during 2020 for an entire 70-year lifetime exposure period (SJVAPCD recommended method). The maximum increased MEI cancer risk for a 70-year exposure was 6.5 in a million. Details on the cancer risk calculations are included in Appendix B.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-37
Under the GAMAQI, an incremental risk of greater than ten cases per million at the MEI would be considered a significant impact. The increased cancer risk associated with traffic along Claus Road is less than 10 in a million, and therefore would be a less-than-significant impact.
e. Create Objectionable Odors (LTS)
Odors are assessed based on the potential of the Plan to result in odor complaints. This could result from the Plan creating development that produces objectionable odors or places people near sources of objectionable odors.

Significant odor sources are not currently located within the Plan Area; therefore, new uses are not likely to be affected by existing odor sources. The Plan Area could include new restaurants, which can be a source of odor complaints. However, the Specific Plan would not site new restaurants directly adjacent to existing residences, so odor complaints are unlikely. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.

2. Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Plan would not contribute to a regional impact by increasing the rate of vehicle use at a greater rate than population growth. However, build out of the Specific Plan with mitigation may have NOx emissions that could exceed the GAMAQI thresholds. That would mean the project could have a cumulatively considerable increase in air pollutant emissions that may contribute to future violations of ozone ambient air quality standards. As a result, this cumulative impact would be considered significant.

F. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact AQ-1: Construction of the Specific Plan could emit significant levels of criteria pollutants, potentially contributing to an existing or projected air quality violation. Because of the project size and the uncertainty of the construction schedule, construction period emissions would be considered to remain significant with mitigation.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-38
Mitigation Measure AQ-1a: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant construction period air quality impacts. For each project-level analysis, a construction emissions estimate will be made using the latest SJVAPCD accepted methodology and will be compared to accepted thresholds of significance. Means of mitigating construction period impacts to a less-than-significant level include, but are not limited to, Mitigation Measures AQ-1b through AQ-1e.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1b: SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Control Measures. The following controls shall be required to be implemented at all construction sites:
¨ All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover; ¨ All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; ¨ All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking;
¨ With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition; ¨ When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inched of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained; ¨ All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-39
or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.

Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden);
¨ Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant; ¨ Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday; and
¨ Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1c: Enhanced Control Measures. The following measures should be implemented at construction sites when required to mitigate significant PM10 impacts (note, these measures are to be implemented in addition to Regulation VIII requirements):
¨ Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; and
¨ Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1d: Additional Control Measures. The following control measures are strongly encouraged by the SJVAPCD at construction sites that are large in area, located near sensitive receptors, or which for any other reason warrant additional emissions reductions:
¨ Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site;
¨ Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction areas; ¨ Suspend excavation and grading activity when wind exceeds 20 mph (Regardless of wind speed, and owner/operator must comply with Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation.); and

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-40
¨ Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1e: The following measures may be implemented to mitigate emissions from construction equipment exhaust:
¨ Use of alternative-fueled or catalyst-equipped diesel construction equipment;
¨ Minimize idling time (e.g. 5-minute maximum);
¨ Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use;
¨ Replace fossil-fueled equipment with electrically-driven equivalents (provided they are not run via a portable generator set); ¨ Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during the peak-hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways; and ¨ Implement activity management (e.g. rescheduling activities to reduce short-term impacts).

Significance after Mitigation. Fugitive dust emissions would be less than significant with adherence to SJVAPCD Regulation VIII requirements and Mitigation Measures AQ-1a through AQ-1d. There is no certainty that mitigated exhaust emissions would be less than the GAMAQI significance threshold with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 and Mitigation Measures AQ-1a through 1d. The potential to exceed these thresholds with mitigation in place is mostly dependent on the type of construction and the amount of construction that occurs in one year. These are likely to be dependent on future market conditions. The impact, therefore, would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Impact AQ-2: Operation of the Specific Plan could emit significant levels of criteria pollutants, potentially contributing to existing or projected air quality violations.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-41
Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant construction period air quality impacts. For each project-level analysis, an operational emissions estimate will be made using the latest SJVAPCD accepted methodology and will be compared to accepted thresholds of significance. Means of mitigating operational period impacts to a less-than-significant level include, but are not limited to, improving transportation and transit design (e.g. improved bikeways, transit infrastructure, and pedestrian enhancements); contributing a project’s fair share to the Air Quality Mitigation Fee Fund; and contributing a project’s fair share towards Transportation Control Measures implementation programs.

Significance after Mitigation. Individual projects would have emissions that would be lower than the total emissions predicted for the Specific Plan. However, large projects that become operation in the early phases could have emissions that exceed the GAMQI thresholds. It is likely that application of SJVAPCD Rule 9510 would reduce these emissions to less than significant. However, it cannot be certain that those emissions would be reduced accordingly until project plans and schedules are identified and included as part of future project Air Impact Assessments performed in accordance with Rule 9510. The impact, therefore, would be considered significant and unavoidable.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

AIR QUALITY

4.3-42

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-1
This chapter discusses the existing biological resources in and around the Plan Area and evaluates the potential biological resource impacts associated with the Draft RAAP Specific Plan. The following evaluation assesses specialstatus species, sensitive biological communities, wetlands, migratory species, and policies and plans intended to protect biological resources.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes key federal, State, regional and city regulations, and plans and programs that provide protection and management of sensitive biological resources within and around the Plan Area.

1. Federal Regulations
The federal laws that regulate the treatment of biological resources include the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Clean Water Act. The following sections outline the relevant principles of each. a. Federal Endangered Species Act
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) are responsible for implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Act protects fish and wildlife species that are listed as threatened or endangered and their habitats. Endangered species, subspecies, or distinct population segments are those that are in danger of extinction through all or a significant portion of their range, and threatened species, subspecies, or distinct population segments are those that are likely to become endangered in the near future.

Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the take of any fish or wildlife species listed as endangered, including the destruction of habitat that prevents the species’ recovery. Take is defined as an action or attempt to hunt, harm, harass, pursue, shoot, wound, capture, kill, trap, or collect a species. Section 9 prohibitions also apply to threatened species unless a special rule has been defined with regard to take at the time of listing.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-2
Under Section 9 of the ESA, the take prohibition applies only to wildlife and fish species. However, Section 9 does prohibit the unlawful removal and reduction to possession, or malicious damage or destruction, of any endangered plant from federal land. Section 9 prohibits acts to remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy an endangered plant species in nonfederal areas in knowing violation of any State law or in the course of criminal trespass. Candidate species and species that are proposed or under petition for listing receive no protection under Section 9.
b. Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The USFWS is also responsible for implementing the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA implements a series of treaties between the United States, Mexico, and Canada that provide for the international protection of migratory birds. Wording in the MBTA makes it clear that most actions that result in “taking” or possession (permanent or temporary) of a protected species can be a violation of the Act. The word “take” is defined as meaning “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or attempt to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect.” The provisions of the MBTA are nearly absolute; “except as permitted by regulations” is the only exception. Examples of permitted actions that do not violate the law are the possession of a hunting license to pursue specific game birds, legitimate research activities, display in zoological gardens, bird-banding, and similar activities. c. Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) is administered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

USACE is responsible for regulating the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States, including lakes, rivers, streams, and their tributaries, as well as wetlands. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas “inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.”

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-3
The discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States is subject to permitting under Section 404 (Discharges of Dredge or Fill Material) of the CWA. Section 401 (Certification) specifies additional requirements for permit review, particularly at the State level. Project proponents must obtain a permit from USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed action. USACE permits must be certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in order to be valid. Thus, certification from the SWRCB should be requested at the same time an application is filed with USACE.

Certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is also required when a proposed activity may result in discharge into navigable waters, pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and EPA 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
d. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program The 1972 amendments to the federal Water Pollution Control Act established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources (Section 402).

The NPDES Permit Program is the primary federal program that regulates point source and nonpoint-source discharges to waters of the United States.

The SWRCB issues both general and individual NPDES permits for certain activities. The NPDES is discussed in detail in Section A.1.c of Chapter 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR.

2. State Regulations
The most relevant State laws regulating biological resources are the California Endangered Species Act, the California Fish and Game Code, and the California Native Plant Protection Act (CNPPA), each of which is described below.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-4
a. California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) establishes State policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. CESA mandates that State agencies should not approve projects that jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. For projects that would affect species that are on the federal and State lists, compliance with the federal ESA satisfies CESA if the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) determines that the federal incidental take authorization is consistent with CESA under California Fish and Game Code Section 2080.1. For projects that would result in take of species that are only State listed, the project proponent must apply for a take permit under Section 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code.
b. California Fish and Game Code
Under the California Fish and Game Code, the DFG provides protection from “take” for a variety of species. The DFG also protects streams, water bodies and riparian corridors through the streambed alteration agreement process under Section 1601 to 1606 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The Fish and Game Code stipulates that it is “unlawful to substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream or lake” without notifying DFG, incorporating necessary mitigation and obtaining a streambed alteration agreement. DFG’s jurisdiction extends to the top of banks and often includes the outer edge of riparian vegetation canopy cover.
c. California Native Plant Protection Act
The CNPPA of 1977 prohibits importation of rare and endangered plants into California, “take” of rare and endangered plants and sale of rare and endangered plants. CESA defers to the CNPPA, which ensures that State-listed plant species are protected when State agencies are involved in projects subject to CEQA. In this case, plants listed as rare under the CNPPA are not protected under CESA but rather under CEQA.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-5

3. Local and Regional Regulations
This section discusses regulations pertaining to the San Joaquin Valley region and the City of Riverbank.
a. Recovery Plan for Upland Species of San Joaquin Valley, California The Recovery Plan for Upland Species of San Joaquin Valley was developed by the USFWS to restore sustainable populations of 34 plant and animal species native to the San Joaquin Valley. Of the 34 species, eleven are federallylisted species and 23 are State species of concern. The Plan envisions a network of interconnected conservation areas and reserves representing the range diversity of natural habitats in the San Joaquin Valley, including terrestrial and riparian habitats, with the main goals being to de-list the federally listed species and to ensure long-term conservation for State species of concern. b. City of Riverbank General Plan
The Riverbank General Plan includes several goals and policies that relate to biological resources within the City of Riverbank. Table 4.4-1 lists these goals and policies.
c. Oak and Landmark Tree Preservation Ordinance
Chapter 156 of the Riverbank Municipal Code lays out provisions intended to conserve and protect Oak and landmark trees within the community. Under the Ordinance, a landmark tree is any tree 6 inches or greater in diameter at breast height, in good health, and which is of significant value to the surrounding area due to qualities such as age, size, location, habitat value, beauty, and historical or cultural significance. All Oak trees 2 inches or greater in diameter at breast height are considered landmark trees. The Ordinance recognizes these trees as an essential part of the city infrastructure, placing high value on the role they play in enhancing the air quality, water quality, and beauty of Riverbank. Building and land development permits are

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-6
TABLE 4.4-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal CONS-4 Preserve habitat associated with the Stanislaus River while increasing public access.

Policy
CONS- 4.1
Approved projects, plans, and subdivisions shall avoid conversion of habitat within the existing Stanislaus River riparian corridor, including Great Valley Mixed Riparian Forest, Great Valley Willow Scrub, and Riparian Scrub areas, and shall preserve an open space buffer along the Stanislaus River and associated riparian areas. The open space buffer shall be designed to avoid impacts to habitat and special status species in the riparian corridor, as specified in Policy CONS 5.1, Policy CONS 5.2, Policy CONS 5.3, and Policy CONS 5.6, based on project specific biological resource assessment. The precise size of buffer from the river and associated riparian corridor is to be determined by site specific analysis. The riparian corridor preservation and open space buffer shall be provided through a permanent covenant, such as a conservation easement and shall also include an ongoing maintenance agreement with a land trust or other qualified nonprofit organization. The preservation of the riparian corridor and ongoing maintenance agreement is required prior to City approval of any subdivision of property or development project located in areas outside City limits as of January 1, 2007 (see Figure CONS-1). Low impact recreation could be allowed in this buffer area to the extent that impacts to these sensitive habitats are avoided or fully mitigated by demonstrating no net loss of habitat functions or value. Urban development shall not be allowed in this buffer area.

Policy
CONS- 4.3
The City will require compliance with the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan for projects to expand Jacob Myers Park, or other projects within San Joaquin County, as applicable.

Goal CONS-5 Preserve the natural diversity in the Riverbank planning area.

Policy
CONS- 5.1
Approved projects, plans, and subdivisions shall avoid urban development of the existing Stanislaus River riparian corridor and other habitat that is rare, declining, unique, or supportive of special status species.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.4-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (CONTINUED)

4.4-7
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Policy
CONS- 5.2
Development applications involving areas with important habitat shall submit site plans that specifically show how development will avoid impacts to habitat that is rare, declining, unique, or supportive of special-status species.

Policy
CONS- 5.4
When the loss of important habitat is unavoidable, mitigation measures will be designed to reduce impacts to the maximum extent feasible. This mitigation may include, but is not limited to off-site mitigation banking with restoration and enhancement components. For projects that would affect the function and value of river, stream, lake, pond, or wetland features, each of these features shall be delineated. For wetlands, the delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland Delineation Manual and verified by USACE. The project applicant shall determine the exact acreage of important habitat (including those protected by federal, state, regional, and/or local regulations) that would be impacted by project implementation. A mitigation plan to replace or rehabilitate affected habitats in a manner that ensures no net loss of habitat functions and values shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with applicable regulations. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies and all relevant permits and authorizations shall be obtained. Mitigation monitoring shall be conducted to ensure performance criteria are met.

Policy
CONS- 5.5
Approved projects, plans, and subdivisions shall comply with applicable federal and state laws and regulations (e.g., federal and State endangered species acts and California Fish and Game Code) that require the protection of special-status species.

Policy
CONS- 5.6
For all development projects involving discretionary review that have the potential to affect special status species, the project applicant shall be required to perform a reconnaissance level assessment of the project site for special-status species and their habitat. For projects with the potential to have a substantial adverse effect on special status species, their habitats, or movement corridors, or result in the fragmentation of their habitats, a Biological Inventory Report shall be prepared by a qualified biologist, to determine if, and to what extent special-status species and their habitat may be affected by a proposed project.

Projects shall be designed to avoid disturbance or fragmentation of important habitats and wildlife movement corridors. For

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.4-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (CONTINUED)

4.4-8
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
projects where avoidance is not possible, the project applicant shall be required to fully mitigate the effects the development on special-status species, and the loss and/or fragmentation of their habitat.

Policy
CONS- 5.7
A mitigation plan shall be prepared and reviewed and approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies for projects where avoidance of adverse effects to special-status species is not feasible, and authorization for take of listed species shall be obtained, if necessary. The mitigation plan shall include measures to minimize potential for effects during project construction (e.g., preconstruction surveys and timing of construction) and measures to compensate for loss of special-status species habitat. Loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat shall be compensated for by preservation and management of foraging habitat of at least a similar quality at an appropriate location. Mitigation plans shall identify an appropriate mitigation site, compensation acreage, performance criteria, and monitoring and management requirements to ensure the site provides suitable habitat for the applicable species. Long-term protection of mitigation lands shall be ensured through fee title acquisition, conservation easement, or other suitable mechanisms. Long-term management of mitigation lands shall be ensured by establishing a management endowment or other suitable funding source. Alternatively, it may be appropriate to contribute funds to existing mitigation programs. Use of such a program shall be approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies.

Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005 to 2025.
conditional on approval of a tree protection plan and issue of tree conservation permit by the City. Any permit may be voided if the terms of the Oak and Landmark Tree Ordinance are violated.

B. Existing Conditions
This section describes the existing biological resources on the RAAP site.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-9

1. Biological Communities
This section provides a general description of the biological communities present on the RAAP site. The biological communities in this section are described using lists of common or typical species of flora and fauna that are known or expected to occur in the area.

The RAAP Site is 146 acres and is bounded by Townsend Avenue and railroad tracks in the north, Claribel Road to the south, and Claus Road to the west. Under operation of the US Military, the RAAP Site was the primary manufacturing plant for the RAAP facility. The biological communities present at the site are discussed below. a. Ruderal Grassland
Ruderal grassland exists on the southern periphery of the RAAP site. This area was a former parking lot site that has become vegetated with non-native plant species. These include yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis), wildoat (Avena fatua), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), and dove weed (Eremocarpus setigerus).

Wildlife species observed within the ruderal grassland during a previous field study1 included the American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), lark sparrow (Chondestes grammacus), and killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). Ruderal grassland areas also provide foraging habitat for raptor species including the red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), whitetailed kite (Elanus leucurus), and Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni); and nesting habitat for the western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). Mammals observed include deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi); and reptile species observed include the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occi-

1 US Department of the Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-56.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-10
dentalis), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), and gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer).
b. Irrigated Pasture
The irrigated pasture on the RAAP site was formerly annual grassland, but is now irrigated to provide pasture as year-round forage for livestock. The irrigated pasture provides moderate habitat value for wildlife species; however, this area experiences a high level of disturbance from cattle and human traffic.

Plant species found in irrigated pastures on the site include Dallis grass (Paspalum dilatum), bird’s-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), curly dock (Rumex crispus), and a few sedge species (Carex sp.).

Wildlife species observed within the irrigated pasture include brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), western meadowlark, and western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis). The irrigated pasture may also provide foraging habitat for raptor species, and foraging and nesting habitat for western burrowing owls.
c. Emergent Marsh
Emergent marshes develop when areas of land are inundated with water, and are adapted by species such as Cattails (Typha latifolia) and arrowhead (Sagittaria cuneata), that thrive in water-saturated soils. Emergent marsh areas are important wildlife habitat areas for a variety of bird species, as well as other animals. There are two areas of emergent marsh that develop on the RAAP site; within the stormwater ditch on the southeastern portion of the site; and within the water detention basins in the northwestern portion of the site.

Animal species observed within the emergent marsh area include the redwinged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), great egret (Ardea alba), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), and Pacific treefrog (Hyla regilla).

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-11
d. Wetland
In 2012, WRA Environmental Consultants prepared a wetland delineation and determined that 1.3 acres of wetlands located within the RAAP site may be considered jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The wetland areas were seasonal wetlands dominated by facultative to facultative wet wetland species including wild rye, hyssop loosestrife, flat-leaf rush, rabbit’s foot grass, and nut sedge. Wetter portions of the wetlands were dominated by spike rush and in one case cattails. Soils in areas identified as seasonal wetlands generally consisted of native soils, and contained redoximorphic features such as iron concentrations. The WRA report concluded that the wetland areas appear to be isolated depressions as they are not tributary to a “navigable waters of the US” Therefore they may be exempt from Section 404 jurisdiction as isolated wetlands. Figure 4.4-1 shows the areas within the RAAP site that may be considered wetlands.
e. Developed Land
Developed land on the RAAP site is sparsely vegetated with non-native species that provide little, if any, habitat value to wildlife species. These buildings, particularly abandoned buildings, may provide structural habitat for bat species. Bat roosts may include day roosts or maternity roosts; however, the presence or absence has not been determined as the buildings have not been surveyed.
f. Riparian Woodland
The periphery of the ponds supports a healthy and diverse structure of mature riparian woodland. Riparian woodland habitat consists of tall, dense, deciduous, broadleaf trees that prefer the alluvial soils of riverbanks. In the San Joaquin Valley, typical riparian woodland species include Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), California box elder (Acer negundo ssp. californicum), black willow (Salix gooddingii), western sycamore (Planatus racemosa), and valley oak (Quercus lobata). Mature riparian woodland has a multilayered understory, which is comprised of species such as the arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana). Common herbaceous !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
P8
P7
P6
P5
P4
P3
P2
P1
W1: 0.92 acre
W4: 0.15 acre
W3: 0.07 acre W2: 0.14 acre
Appendix A. Potential Jurisdictional Wetlands in the
Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Study Area
.
0 200 400 100
1 inch = 200 feet
Study Area (48 acres)
!( Sample Points
Buried Pipelines
Potential Jurisdictional Features:

Wetlands (1.3 acres)
Potential Non-jurisdictional Features:

Stormwater Detention Ponds (1.1 acres)
Riverbank Lateral Canal -
Buried
Hetch Hetchy Aquaduct - Buried
Townshend Ave
Claus Rd

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
FIGURE 4.4-1
Source: WRA Environmental Consultants, 2011.
0 200 400 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-13
species at the bottom understory level include Mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), Mexican tea (Chenopodium ambrosioides), and California creek nettle (Urtica dioica ssp. garcilis var. californica).

Riparian woodland areas serve as foraging, nesting, and refuge habitat for a variety of bird species, including song birds, raptors, and water fowl. Mammals found in riparian woodland communities include the Western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), California vole (Microtus californicus), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), raccoon (Procyon lotor), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus). Bat species that roost in woodlands could establish day roosts and maternity roosts in established riparian forests.
2 g. Ruderal Grassland
The ponds are regularly maintained and are devoid of wild vegetation, except for ruderal grassland that is present around pond edges, as described in Section B.1.a.i, above.

2. Special-Status Species
Special-status species are plants and animals that are legally protected under the ESA, CESA, or other regulations, as well as species considered sufficiently rare by the scientific community to qualify for such listing. Special-status species are defined as:
¨ Species listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the ESA (50 CFR 17.11 [listed animals], 50 CFR 17.12 [listed plants], and various notices in the Federal Register [FR] [proposed species]). ¨ Species that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the ESA (72 FR 69034, December 6, 2007).

2 US Department of the Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-57.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-14
¨ Species listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the CESA (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 670.5).
¨ Species that meet the definitions of rare or endangered under CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15380).
¨ Plants listed as rare under the CNPPA (California Fish and Game Code 1900 et seq).
¨ Plants considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be “rare, threatened, or endangered in California” (California Native Plant Society, 2008).
¨ Plants listed by CNPS as plants about which more information is needed to determine their status, and plants of limited distribution, which may be included as special-status species on the basis of local significance or recent biological information (California Native Plant Society, 2008). ¨ Animal species of special concern to the CDFG (2009). ¨ Animals fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code 3,511 [birds], 4,700 [mammals], 5,050 [amphibians and reptiles], and 5,515 [fish]).

The following information on special-status species for the RAAP site is based on information from the US Army’s Environmental Assessment (EA). 3

There were no species-specific surveys conducted and no special-status wildlife species observed for the purposes of this EIR. The occurrence of these species was determined during field studies for the Biological Resource Study at the Riverbank Ammunition Plant and Wastewater Treatment Ponds, Stanislaus County, California, produced by Jones & Stokes in 2007 as a technical report for the EA.

3 US Department of the Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-58.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-15
The special-status plant species known or expected to occur in the RAAP region are listed in Table 4.4-2. The EA notes that these species were also identified based on a review of California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) occurrences for special-status plant species reported in the Riverbank USGS quadrangle and for Stanislaus County. As described in the column titled, Likelihood of Occurrence in the Study Area, none of the ten plant species having potential to occur in the project area are likely to be found there. The explanation for this is that the majority of the special-status species are associated with seasonal wetlands, such as vernal pools, which do not occur in the project area. Also, of the three species known to occur in annual grassland habitat, big tarplant, beaked clarkia, and Hartweg’s golden sunburst, two occur at elevations ranging between 95 and 1,640 feet, which are generally higher than the average elevation of the RAAP site of 135 feet. The Hartweg’s golden sunburst does occur at the RAAP elevation; however, the grassland habitat that supports this species is so heavily degraded and disturbed in the study area that is unlikely that this species exists at the RAAP installation.

The special-status animal species known or expected to occur in the RAAP region are listed in Table 4.4-3. The EA notes that the review of special-status animal species for the RAAP installation was based on CNDDB records, the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and the City of Riverbank General Plan. Of the 20 special-status wildlife species identified as having potential to occur within the project area, not all species have a strong likelihood of occurring. Six of these species – vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp, California tiger salamander, giant garter snake, greater western mastiff bat, and San Joaquin kit fox, are highly unlikely to occur in the vicinity of the Plan Area. The reason these species are unlikely to occur is because the project area either has no suitable habitat, such as vernal pool habitat, or the project area is outside of the species’ range.

In addition, a biological reconnaissance for special-status species was performed for the City of Riverbank General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-16
TABLE 4.4-2 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF RAAP Common &
Scientific Names
Legal Statusa
Federal/State/
CNPS
Geographic Distribution/
Floristic Province Habitat Requirements
Blooming
Period
Likelihood of Occurrence
in the Study Area
Big tarplant
Blepharizonia plumose –/–/1B.1
Western San Joaquin Valley, San
Francisco Bay area, South Coast
Ranges
Valley and foothill grassland; 30–
505 meters Jul–Oct Not present; study area is outside
elevational range of this species.

Succulent owl’s-clover
Castilleja campestris ssp.

Succulenta
T/E/1B.2 Southern Sierra Nevada foothills,
eastern San Joaquin Valley
Vernal pools (often acidic); 50–750
meters Apr–May
Not present; no suitable habitat
available, study area is outside
elevational range of this species.

Hoover’s spurge
Chamaesyce hooveri T/–/1B.2 Central Valley from Tehama to Tulare Counties Vernal pools; 25–250 meters Jul–Aug
Not present; no suitable habitat
available, study area is outside
elevational range of this species.

Beaked clarkia
Clarkia rostrata –/–/1B.3 Central Sierra Nevada foothills, San Joaquin Valley
Cismontane woodland, valley and
foothill grassland; 60–500 meters Apr–May Not present; study area is outsideelevational range of this species.

Legenere
Legenere limosa –/–/1B.1
Sacramento Valley, North Coast
Ranges, northern San Joaquin
Valley, and Santa Cruz mountains.

Vernal pools; below 880 meters May–Jun Not present; no suitable habitat available
Colusa grass
Neostapfia colusana T/E/1B.1
Central Valley with scattered
occurrences from Colusa to Merced
Counties
Adobe soils of vernal pools; 5–200
meters May–Aug Not present; no suitable habitat available San Joaquin Valley Orcutt
grass
Orcuttia inaequalis
T/E/1B.1 San Joaquin Valley from Solano to
Tulare Counties Vernal pools; 10–755 meters Apr–Sep Not present; no suitable habitat available Hairy Orcutt grass
Orcuttia pilosa E/E/1B.1 Central Valley from Tehama to
Madera Counties Vernal pools; 55–200 meters May–Sep
Not present; no suitable habitat
available; study area is outside
elevational range of this species.

Hartweg’s golden sunburst
Pseudobahia bahiifolia E/E/1B.1 Central Sierra Nevada foothills, eastern San Joaquin Valley
Clay soils in valley and foothill
grassland; 15–150 meters
Mar–Apr
Low; habitat conditions of poor quality
(i.e. ruderal annual grassland) and
suitable microhabitat (clay soils) may
not be present. No known occurrences
within 5 mi.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.4-2 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF RAAP (CONTINUED)

4.4-17
Common &
Scientific Names
Legal Statusa
Federal/State/
CNPS
Geographic Distribution/
Floristic Province Habitat Requirements
Blooming
Period
Likelihood of Occurrence
in the Study Area
Greene’s tuctoria
Tuctoria greenei E/–/1B.1
Scattered distribution along eastern
Central Valley and foothills from
Shasta County to Tulare County
Dry vernal pools; elevation
30-1070 meters May–Sep
Not present; no suitable habitat
available, study area is outside
elevational range of this species. a
Status explanations:

Federal
E = listed as endangered under the federal ESA.

T = listed as threatened under the federal ESA.
– = no listing.

State
E = listed as endangered under the California ESA.
– = no listing.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
1B =List 1B species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. .1 = seriously endangered in California
.2 = fairly endangered in California
.3 = not very endangered in California

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-18
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR AT RAAP AREAS Common &
Scientific Names
Statusa
Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Potential Occurrence in
the Study Area
Invertebrates
Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi T/--
Central Valley, central and south Coast
Ranges from Tehama County to Santa
Barbara County. Isolated populations
also in Riverside County.

Common in vernal pools; also found in
sandstone rock outcrop pools.

None. No suitable habitat in
study area.

Vernal pool tadpole shrimp
Lepidurus packardi E/-- Shasta County south to Merced County Vernal pools and ephemeral stock Ponds None. No suitable habitat in study area.

Amphibians
California tiger salamander
Ambystoma californiense T/SSC
Central Valley, including Sierra Nevada
foothills, up to approximately 1,000 feet,
and coastal region from Butte County
south to northeastern San Luis Obispo
County.

Small ponds, lakes, or vernal pools in grasslands and oak woodlands for larvae; rodent burrows, rock crevices, or fallen logs for
cover for adults and for summer dormancy.

None. No suitable habitat in
study area.

Reptiles
Giant garter snake
Thamnophis couchii gigas T/T
Central Valley from the vicinity of Burrel
in Fresno County north to near Chico in
Butte County; has been extirpated from
areas south of Fresno
Sloughs, canals, low-gradient streams and
freshwater marsh habitats where there is a
prey base of small fish and amphibians; also
found in irrigation ditches and rice fields;
requires grassy banks and emergent vegetation for basking and areas of high ground protected from flooding during winter.

None. No suitable habitat in
study area.

Birds
Swainson’s hawk
Buteo swainsoni --/T
Lower Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, the Klamath Basin, and Butte Valley.

Highest nesting densities occur near Davis
and Woodland, Yolo County
Nests in oaks or cottonwoods in or near
riparian habitats. Forages in grasslands, irrigated pastures, and grain fields.

High potential to nest in riparian forests along Stanislaus River and forage in ruderal grassland
and irrigated pasture.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR AT RAAP AREAS (CONTINUED)

4.4-19
Common &
Scientific Names
Statusa
Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Potential Occurrence in
the Study Area
Tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor --/SSC
Permanent resident in the Central Valley
from Butte County to Kern County.

Breeds at scattered coastal locations from
Marin County south to San Diego County; and at scattered locations in Lake, Sonoma, and Solano Counties. Rare nester in Siskiyou, Modoc, and Lassen Counties Nests in dense colonies in emergent marsh
vegetation, such as tules and cattails, or upland sites with blackberries, nettles, thistles, and grainfields. Habitat must be large
enough to support 50 pairs. Probably requires water at or near the nesting colony.

Low potential to nest in emergent marsh.

Western burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia hypugaea --/SSC
Lowlands throughout California, including the Central Valley, northeastern plateau, southeastern deserts, and coastal areas. Rare along south coast Level, open, dry, heavily grazed or low stature grassland or desert vegetation with available burrowsHigh potential to nest and forage in ruderal grassland at ammunition plant.

White-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus --/FP
Lowland areas west of Sierra Nevada from
the head of the Sacramento Valley south,
including coastal valleys and foothills to
western San Diego County at the Mexico
border.

Low foothills or valley areas with valley or
live oaks, riparian areas, and marshes near
open grasslands for foraging
High potential to nest in riparian forests along Stanislaus River and forage in ruderal grassland
and irrigated pasture.

Mammals
Greater western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis californicus --/SSC
Occurs along the western Sierra primarily
at low to mid elevations and widely distributed throughout the southern coast ranges. Recent surveys have detected the
species north to the Oregon border.

Found in a wide variety of habitats from
desert scrub to montane conifer. Roosts and
breeds in deep, narrow rock crevices, but
may also use crevices in trees, buildings, and
tunnels.

None. No suitable habitat in
study area.

San Joaquin kit fox
Vulpes macrotis mutica E/T
Principally occurs in the San Joaquin
Valley and adjacent open foothills to the
west; recent records from 17 counties
extending from Kern County north to
Contra Costa County.

Saltbush scrub, grassland, oak, savanna, and
freshwater scrub
None. No suitable habitat in
study area.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

R AAP SPECIFIC PLAN EI R

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR AT RAAP AREAS (CONTINUED)

4.4-20
Common &
Scientific Names
Statusa
Federal/State Geographic Distribution Habitat Requirements Potential Occurrence in
the Study Area
Townsend’s western big-eared
bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
townsendii
--/SSC Coastal regions from Del Norte County
south to Santa Barbara County
Roosts in caves, tunnels, mines, and dark
attics of abandoned buildings. Very sensitive
to disturbances and may abandon a roost
after one on-site visit.

Low potential to roost in buildings at ammunition plant. a
Status explanations:

Federal
E = listed as endangered under the federal ESA.

T = listed as threatened under the federal ESA.
– = no listing.

State
E = listed as endangered under the California ESA.

T = listed as threatened under the California ESA.

FP = fully protected under the California Fish and Game Code.

SSC = species of special concern in California.
– = no listing.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIO LOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-21
determined that the snowy egret and the black-shrouded kite are likely to occur at the RAAP site and within its immediate surroundings.

The RAAP site does, however, provide suitable habitat for special-status animals. The ruderal grassland and irrigated pasture communities provide nesting and foraging habitat for the western burrowing owl and foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk and white-tailed kite. The emergent marsh located in the detention pond provides marginal nesting habitat for the tricolored blackbird. No survey for bats has been conducted in the existing buildings, however, possible bat habitat does exist. The potential for the Western Townsend’s big-eared bat, a state species of special concern, and Mexican freetail bats (Tadarida brasiliensis) and Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis), other non-special-status bat species, to roost in the numerous large buildings on the site is dependent on the lack of human activity in some of the older buildings.

C. Standards of Significance
Implementation of the Draft RAAP Site Specific Plan would result in future development that would have a significant biological resource impact if they would:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS, or as defined under CEQA Guidelines Section 15380a. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-22
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinances. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan..

D. Impact Discussion
The following discussion provides an analysis of potential project and cumulative biological resource impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the Draft RAAP Site Specific Plan.

1. Project Impacts
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on a plant or animal population, or essential habitat, defined as a candidate, sensitive or special-status species.

There are ten special-status plant species and eleven special-status animal species known to be present in the general vicinity of the two non-contiguous sites which make up the Plan Area. Potential impacts to special-status plant and animal species on each of the two sites are discussed below. i. Special-Status Plant Species
Although there are special-status plant species known to occur in the general vicinity of the RAAP site, as shown on Table 4.4-2, the site does not contain suitable habitat for the majority of these plants, which occur in seasonal wetland areas that do not exist inside the boundaries of the Plan Area. The big tarplant and beaked clarkia, for example, occur on grasslands at higher elevations than in the Plan Area. Habitat conditions for the tenth species, Hartweg’s golden sunburst (Pseudobahia bahiifolia), are poor as the grassland area

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIO LOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-23
located within the RAAP site is heavily degraded and disturbed. Consequently, the Plan Area is unlikely to support this species. Buildout of the Plan would therefore result in a less-than-significant impact to special-status plant species.
ii. Special-Status Animal Species
None of the 11 special-status animal species found in the surrounding area are known to occupy the Plan Area and the property is not known to provide nesting or important hunting areas for any special-status animal. Additionally, as shown in Table 4.4-2, vernal pool fairy shrimp, vernal pool tadpole shrimp, California tiger salamander, giant garter snake, greater western mastiff bat, and San Joaquin kit fox are all highly unlikely to be present because the site does not contain suitable habitat or elevation to support them. However, several migratory or transient species could potentially pass through the RAAP site.

Sections of the RAAP site with ruderal grassland and irrigated pasture provide suitable habitat for western burrowing owl and suitable foraging habitat for Swainson's hawk and white tailed kite. Future development in the Plan Area would remove these sections of suitable habitat, although none of the potentially affected species are known to occupy the Plan Area. In compliance with General Plan Policy CONS-5.7, lost Swainson's hawk foraging habitat would be compensated by preservation and management of foraging habitat of similar quality at an appropriate location as approved by CDFG.

Implementation of the Plan could also involve the preservation of the existing wetlands area adjacent to the northeast stormwater retention pond on the site, which would increase the amount of potential nesting habitat available to tricolored blackbirds and red-winged blackbirds. This would be a beneficial effect and, overall, buildout of the Specific Plan would not result in a significant adverse impact to any special-status birds.

The eaves of many buildings in the RAAP site, particularly those buildings that have been abandoned, could offer roosting habitat to Townsend's bigeared bats. Future development in the Specific Plan Area could involve dem-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-24
olition and redevelopment of many buildings on the site, and as such, could destroy, disturb, or interfere with the maternity roosts of this special-status bat species. This is a potentially significant impact.
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community type.

The Plan Area does not contain riparian habitat. As discussed above, the Specific Plan would include the preservation of important open spaces containing biological habitat. As a result, implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less-than-significant impact on riparian habitat and sensitive natural community types. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally-protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

As shown in Figure 4.4-1, 1.3 acres of wetlands are located within the project site. However, these areas appear to be isolated depressions as they are not tributary to a “navigable waters of the US” Furthermore, vegetation within the Study Area consists primarily of cut hay, and uncultivated areas were dominated by ruderal, non-native grass and herbaceous species. Therefore the wetlands located within the RAAP site may be exempt from Section 404 jurisdiction because they are considered isolated wetlands. As a result, a lessthan-significant impact would occur. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, their wildlife corridors or nursery sites.

Buildout of the Plan would involve development of RAAP site that is currently undeveloped ruderal grassland and emergent marsh. Although the RAAP site is already largely built out, additional development in this area would diminish foraging grounds for raptors and other migratory bird species.

However, the northwest stormwater retention pond, shown in Figure 4.4-1, would be preserved and would provide habitat for tricolored blackbirds and red-winged blackbirds. Additionally, open space and agricultural land in the vicinity of the RAAP site would remain in its current condition, accessible to

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIO LOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-25
migratory birds. Potential impacts to migratory bat species would be precluded to the maximum extent practicable by Mitigation Measure BIO-1, described below. Therefore, overall, impacts to migratory species and wildlife corridors from the Plan would be less than significant. e. Conflict with any local ordinances or policies protecting biological resources.

As described above, buildout of the Plan would comply with General Plan Policy CONS-5.4 with respect to the delineation and net protection of wetlands and with Policy CONS-5.7 regarding loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat. As required in General Plan Policy CONS-5.7, future project applicants in the Plan Area would prepare a mitigation plan for review and approval by the appropriate regulatory agencies, including the CDFG, to minimize the potential impacts during construction and to compensate for loss of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat by identifying an appropriate mitigation site, compensation acreage, performance criteria, and monitoring requirements. There would be no conflict with other General Plan policies protecting biological resources. There are no Oak or landmark trees on the RAAP site. Therefore, overall, there would be no conflicts with local ordinances or policies protecting biological resources and impacts would be less than significant. f. Conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.

The Plan would have a significant impact if it would conflict with the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of San Joaquin Valley (RPUSSJV). Three species protected under the RPUSSJV are potentially present in the Plan Area: the San Joaquin kit fox, Riparian (San Joaquin Valley) woodrat, and Riparian brush rabbit. As described above, San Joaquin kit fox is highly unlikely to be present inside the boundaries of the RAAP site because the site does not contain suitable habitat for this species. Additionally, Riparian (San Joaquin Valley) woodrat and Riparian brush rabbit are restricted to mature riparian forests on the Central Valley floor and are not known to be present inside the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-26
boundaries of the Plan Area. Buildout of the Plan would not adversely affect these species and therefore no conflict with the RPUSSJV would result, therefore, no impact would occur.

2. Cumulative Impacts
This cumulative analysis considers the implementation of the Draft RAAP Specific Plan in the context of the City of Riverbank General Plan. The Specific Plan proposes development that includes an increase in industrial, office and retail space within a large parcel that currently contains industrial uses.

Much of this development would occur in areas currently vacant and not containing sensitive habitat. Some filling of wetland areas within the RAAP site may result from development under the Specific Plan; however, these activities are expected to be limited.

Land uses surrounding the RAAP site include residential commercial, and agriculture. Development as proposed under the Specific Plan does not extend services in a way that would increase development pressure on natural or open space areas in the region because the site is currently being used as an industrial installation. Furthermore, primary biological resources of importance are located along the San Joaquin River, over a mile north of the project site. The Specific Plan would not result in a significant cumulative loss of biological resources due to direct loss of resources, increased use near the resources, or development pressure that would remove the resources.

There would be a less-than-significant cumulative impact.

E. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact BIO-1: Buildout of the Plan would involve the demolition or redevelopment of buildings on the RAAP site where the maternity roosts of Townsend's big-eared bats are potentially present. This could result in the destruction, disturbance, or interference with the maternity roots of a specialspecies bat.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIO LOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-27
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Implementation of the Plan shall avoid disturbance to the maternity roosts of special-status bats during the breeding season in accordance with the following procedures for Pre-Construction Special-Status Bat Surveys and Subsequent Actions. No more than two weeks in advance of any demolition or construction activity involving concrete breaking or similarly noisy or intrusive activities, that would commence during the pup-rearing season (April 15 through August 31), or winter hibernacula season (October 15 through March 1, depending on weather conditions) a qualified bat biologist, acceptable to the CDFG, shall conduct pre-demolition surveys of all potential special-status bat breeding habitat in the vicinity of the planned activity. Depending on the survey findings, the following actions shall be taken to avoid potential adverse effects on breeding special-status bats:

1. If active roosts are identified during pre-construction surveys, a no disturbance buffer will be created by the qualified bat biologist, in consultation with the CDFG, around active roosts during the breeding season. The size of the buffer will take into account factors such as the following:
¨ Noise and human disturbance levels at the project site and the roost site at the time of the survey and the noise and disturbance expected during the construction activity;
¨ Distance and amount of vegetation or other screening between the project site and the roost; and
¨ Sensitivity of individual nesting species and the behaviors of the bats.

2. If pre-construction surveys indicate that no roosts of special-status bats are present, or that roosts are inactive or potential habitat is unoccupied, no further mitigation is required.

3. Pre-construction surveys are not required for demolition or construction activities scheduled to occur during the non-breeding and winter hibernacula season (September 1 through October 15, and March 1 through April 15).

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.4-28

4. Noisy demolition or construction activities as described above (or activities producing similar substantial increases in noise and activity levels in the vicinity) commencing during the non-breeding season and continuing into the breeding season do not require surveys (as it is assumed that any bats taking up roosts would be acclimated to project-related activities already under way). However, if trees are to be removed during the breeding season, the trees would be surveyed for roosts prior to their removal, according to the survey and protective action guidelines 1a through 1c, above.

5. Bat roosts initiated during demolition or construction activities are presumed to be unaffected by the activity, and a buffer is not necessary.

6. Destruction of roosts of special-status bats and overt interference with roosting activities of special-status bats shall be prohibited.

7. The noise control procedures for maximum noise, equipment, and operations identified in Chapter 4.12, Noise, of this EIR shall be implemented.

Implementation of the above mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to the maximum extent practicable.

Significance After Mitigation: Less than Significant

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-1
This chapter discusses cultural resources in the Plan Area and evaluates the potential cultural resource impacts associated with the draft RAAP Site Specific Plan. The following evaluation assesses historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources, as well as potential impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes key federal and State regulations and policies that apply to historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources and human remains.

1. National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) is the most influential federal law dealing with historic preservation. In addition, Congress has enacted numerous other statutes that affect historic properties. One of the most important provisions of the NHPA is the establishment of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the official designation of historical resources. Districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects are eligible for listing in the Register. Nominations are listed if they are significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and/or culture. The NRHP is administered by the National Park Service. To be eligible for the NRHP, a property must be significant under Criterion A (history), Criterion B (persons), or Criterion C (design/construction); possess integrity; and ordinarily be 50 years of age or more.

Listing in the NRHP does not entail specific protection or assistance for a property, but it does guarantee recognition in planning for federal or federally-assisted projects (see Section 106), eligibility for federal tax benefits and qualification for federal historic preservation assistance.1 The NRHP is influ-

1 The National Parks Service. Website http://www.nps.gov/history/locallaw/nhpa1966.htm accessed on September 3, 2009. 2 2009 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(c), page 126.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-2
ential beyond its statutory role because it achieves uniform standards of documentation and evaluation. Additionally, project effects on properties listed in the NRHP must be evaluated under CEQA.

2. California Register of Historic Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) establishes a list of those properties that are to be protected from substantial adverse change (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1). A historical resource may be listed in the CRHR if it meets any of the following criteria:
¨ It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. ¨ It is associated with the lives of persons important in California’s past. ¨ It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic value.
¨ It has yielded or is likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.

The CRHR includes properties that are listed or have been formally determined to be eligible for listing in the NRHP, State Historical Landmarks and eligible Points of Historical Interest. Other resources require nomination for inclusion in the Register. These may include resources contributing to the significance of a local historic district, individual historical resources, historical resources identified in historic resource surveys conducted in accordance with State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) procedures, historic resources or districts designated under a local ordinance consistent with State Historic Resources Commission procedures and local landmarks or historic properties designated under local ordinance.2

2 The California Environmental Resources Evaluation System. Website http://ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/more/tas/page2.html, accessed on September 3, 2009.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-3
The CRHR was been created to allow local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify and register California’s historic resources so that they may be recognized and protected. The CRHR is modeled closely on the National Register of Historic Places, the primary federal inventory of historic properties. A resource may be eligible to the CRHR at a local, state, or national level. The eligibility criteria state that a site must be considered significant under Criterion 1 (history), Criterion 2 (persons), Criterion 3 (design), or Criterion 4 (potential to yield information); possess integrity; and be classified as a building, structure, object, site, or district.

3. California Public Resources Code
Section 5097 of the Public Resources Code specifies the procedures to be followed in the event of the unexpected discovery of human remains on nonfederal land. The disposition of Native American burial falls within the jurisdiction of the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Section 5097.5 of the Code states the following:

No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological, or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

As used in this section, “public lands” means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the State or any city, county, district, authority or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, the City of Riverbank is required to comply with Public Resource Code Section 5097.5 for its activities on publicly-owned land.3

3 California Department of Transportation. Website http://www.dot.ca.gov/ ser/vol1/sec3/physical/Ch08Paleo/chap08paleo.htm#statelaws, accessed December 3, 2009.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-4

4. California State Health and Safety Code
Section 7052 of the California State Health and Safety Code states that the disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony. Section 7050.5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC.4

5. California State Senate Bill 18
Implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 18, which went into effect January 1, 2005, set forth new requirements for local governments (cities and counties) to consult with Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal cultural places through local land use planning.5
The intent of SB 18 is to
provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early stage of planning for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places. The purpose of involving tribes at these early planning stages is to allow consideration of cultural places in the context of broad local land use policy, before individual site-specific, project-level land use designations are made by a local government.

6. City of Riverbank
The Riverbank General Plan includes several goals and policies that relate to preservation of cultural resources within the city. Table 4.5-1 provides a list of these goals and policies.

4 The California Environmental Resources Evaluation System. Website http://ceres.ca.gov/nahc/has.html, accessed on December 3, 2009. 5 SB 18 amends Government Sections (GC) 65040.2, 65092, 65351, and 65560, while adding GC Sections 65352.3, 65352.4 and 65562.5.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-5
TABLE 4.5-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal CONS-1 Maintain Riverbank’s historic resources.

Policy
CONS-1.1
Historically significant buildings shall not be demolished or changed in way that affects their historic value, except to protect public health and safety, or where saving the structure is infeasible.

Policy
CONS-1.2
Buildings and other cultural resources that are not historically significant, but have historical or architectural value should be preserved or relocated, wherever feasible. Where this is not feasible, the resource shall be documented and the information retained in a secure, but publicly accessible location. An acknowledgment of the resource should be incorporated in historic signage and the reuse or display of historic materials and artifacts.

Policy
CONS-1.3
The City will promote and encourage adaptive reuse of historic buildings. Consistent with health, safety, and other basic considerations, the City will be flexible in applying building and zoning standards to encourage continued use and adaptive reuse of historic buildings.

Policy
CONS-1.4
The City shall coordinate with local, State, and federal agencies to ensure that historic preservation regulations are implemented.

Goal CONS-2 Minimize negative impacts to archaeological resources.

Policy
CONS-2.1
Approved projects, plans, and subdivision requests shall incorporate all available measures, with a preference for avoidance, to reduce or eliminate impacts to known and unknown archaeological and paleontological resources.

Policy
CONS-2.2
All Native American cultural and archaeological sites shall be protected permanently from urban development, wherever possible.

Policy
CONS-2.3
The City shall restrict the circulation of cultural resource locational information to prevent potential site vandalism.

Policy
CONS-2.4
The City shall not knowingly approve any public or private project that may adversely affect an archaeological site without first consulting with the Central California Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and, if necessary, consulting with a qualified professional archaeologist regarding the significance of the site. Implementation of this policy shall be guided by Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA guidelines.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES
TABLE 4.5-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

CULTURAL RESOURCES (CONTINUED)

4.5-6
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Policy
CONS-2.5
As guided by State law, in the event of the inadvertent discovery of previously unknown archaeological sites during excavation or construction, all construction affecting the site shall cease and the contractor shall contact the appropriate City agency. If Native American human remains are discovered, the City shall work with local Native American representatives to ensure that the remains and associated artifacts are treated in a respectful and dignified manner.

Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025.

B. Existing Conditions
This section described the existing conditions pertaining to cultural resources in the RAAP Plan Area and its surroundings.

1. Historic Context
a. From Pre-historic Times to the 20th Century
When the first Spanish missionaries came east to the lower San Joaquin River in 1776, the valley floor was inhabited by groups who called themselves “Yokuts” and groups living along the Stanislaus River were known as Lakisamne Yokuts.6
Estimates of the number of valley Yokuts at this time
range from 11,000 to 31,000, and more than 50 burial sites, some as large as 45 acres, have been found, indicating a substantial population. The Spanish reached the Stanislaus River in 1806, establishing missions. From 1828 to 1829, Estanislao, Chief of the Laquisismas Yokuts, lead a rebellion against the missions. Ultimately, the rebellion was suppressed, but Stanislaus County derives its name from the vanquished Chief.

6 City of Riverbank, 2005. City of Riverbank General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report, page 4.6-1.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-7
Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1821 and controlled the area around what is now Riverbank until 1846, when the US took control of what is now the State of California at the end of the Mexican War. The Mexicans referred to an area of some 35,000 acres of land between present-day Riverbank and Oakdale as the San Joaquin District. Early settlements in the central valley were established along the rivers, the primary transportation routes available at the time. With California’s gold rush in 1849, a stampede of people flooded the state, seeking their fortunes. Following the gold rush many stayed to establish towns and cities in northern California.

Stanislaus County was established in 1854, and transportation into the area became easier with the advent of river steamers and better roads. Population grew rapidly after that, tripling between 1860 and 1870. Cattle and wheat became important exports for the County in the 1800s, driving the construction of railways. In 1896, the community of Riverbank was established, becoming the location of the railroad division terminal for the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad companies in 1910. Riverbank incorporated as a California municipality in 1922.
b. Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant
With World War II came an increased need for aluminum, a necessity in the production of aircraft and a commodity the United States had limited ability to produce. Faced with aluminum shortages, construction of the Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant (RAAP) was authorized in August 1941.7 The RAAP was one of nine new aluminum production facilities on the West Coast funded by the Defense Plant Corporation, (DPC) under the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC). Since aluminum production requires large amounts of energy, most of these plants were located near hydro-electric power sources. The RAAP drew power from the Hetch Hetchy transmission line, which passes through the Plan Area. The location was also selected for its proximity to the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway, which allowed

7 Knapp Architects, 2009. Historical Resources Assessment Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Riverbank, California, page 7.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-8
for the transport of aluminum ore into, and aluminum ingots out of, the facility. The concentration of shipyards and aircraft production facilities in operation during World War II in the San Francisco Bay Area made Riverbank a convenient location for the aluminum plant.

Operated by the Aluminum Company of America, (later ALCOA) the RAAP originally consisted of 27 buildings. Configured with six single-story, steel-frame “Pot Rooms” (Buildings 1-6) laid out in parallel rows, annual output capacity of the RAAP was 96,000,000 pounds.8 Each Pot Room was 46 by 743 feet, and contained 64 smelting pots in which alumina was electrolytically reduced. Each building was fed by large silo-like structures which moved along an overhead rail system depositing ore in the pots. Perpendicular to these buildings was the two-story brick Rectifier Building (Building 13) which supplied power to the Pot Rooms. In case of burned-out transformers, a frequent occurrence, a set of railroad tracks led north from the Rectifier Building toward the Transformer Repair Building (Building 15). These tracks could be used to carry the massive transformers back and forth to the highbay repair building where huge cranes lifted them to repair stations.

Flanking the Pot Rooms was the Carbon Rodding Building (Building 7), and opposite the Rectifier Building, on the east end of the Pot Rooms, was the Metal Service Building (Building 8). The Metal Shop (Building 9) and Carbon Unloading and Shipping Building (Building 10), Ore Unloading Building (Building 11), and Boiler House (Building 12) lay north of the cluster of smelting buildings. The Dispensary/Washroom (Building 14) greeted workers as they left building 7, and just further south lay a cluster of administrative brick buildings (Buildings 16-18). These structures, unlike the industrial buildings dominating the site, incorporated more architectural detail, with keystoned, splayed lintels at doors and windows, gabled roofs, and regular fenestration in a domestic-institutional pattern.

8 Knapp Architects, 2009. Historical Resources Assessment Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Riverbank, California, page 7.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-9
With the close of World War II, the need for aluminum dropped substantially, and the RAAP was declared surplus and closed in August of 1944 after only one year in production. The Kaiser Corporation purchased the aluminum production equipment, and the facility was used to store surplus grain while the local government struggled to come up with a more productive use for the plant.

The Korean War provided the next opportunity for the facility’s reuse, and in 1951 the plant was converted to manufacture steel cartridge casings, operating under Norris Industries. Contracting with Bechtel Corporation, Norris Industries ordered the installation of six production lines in Buildings 1-6, which allowed for the production of 90-millimeter (mm) and 105-mm cartridge cases and US Navy 3"/50 and 5"/38 caliber cases. Building 3 was enlarged to accommodate presses, and Building 120 was erected to house heattreating facilities. The production lines were supported by a rash of new buildings, and by the end of the Korean War, there were over one hundred buildings on the site. The plant operated from 1952 to 1958, when it was again declared surplus and deactivated. The facility was unsuccessfully put up for sale in 1963.

In 1966 the plant was again reactivated to produce cartridge casings and mortar projectiles for use in the Vietnam War. Bechtel Corporation helped retrofit the facilities, and Buildings 2, 3, and 4 were outfitted to produce 105-mm cartridge casings, while Building 1 produced mortar projectiles in addition to cartridge casings. Building 7 was also outfitted to produce 81-mm mortar projectiles. The plant stayed in full operation until 1975.

Although lines 2 through 7 were temporarily decommissioned, line 1 was retrofitted in 1975 to produce 81-mm projectiles, and in 1976, Building 6 was outfitted to produce grenade body assemblies. As production waned, Norris Industries was permitted to lease excess space on the site to private tenants involved in light and heavy industry through the US Army’s Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support (ARMS) program. In 2005, the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC), convened by the US Congress,

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-10
recommended that the RAAP be closed and manufacturing operations overseen by Norris Industries be relocated to the Rock Island Arsenal in Illinois.

Production of ammunition at the RAAP ceased in 2010 although some private tenants continue to use space in the facility today.

2. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources
California’s prehistoric population of Native Americans tribes was large and diverse. Tens of thousands of archaeological sites representing villages, hunting, gathering and fishing areas, religious and ceremonial locations, trails, and rock art sites, have been recovered throughout the state. Archaeologists identify such sites by the presence of groundstone; stone artifacts, such as arrow or spear points; circular depressions representing the remains of pit houses or ceremonial structures; and “midden,” which is darker soil resulting from human occupation. These remains mark areas which have been, and often continue to be, of economic, social, and/or religious significance to peoples today.

In the Riverbank area in general, including the Plan Area, there is a lack of information pertaining to actual or potential paleontological and prehistorical resources. Consequently, it is difficult to predict how life may have been during prehistoric times. Heavy use has impacted the land so that actual and potential pre-historical resources have been made indistinguishable.

However, the available information about the prehistory of the Plan Area has high significance. The Plan Area is in an area of non-riverine grassland and is likely to have smaller and less dense remains than the floodplain, and would represent short-term occupation only, because of limited food, shelter, fuel, and water in the area.

A records search of the files at the Central California Information Center (CCIC), located at the California State University, Stanislaus, indicated that no prehistoric cultural resources are recorded within the City of Riverbank General Plan Planning Area, which includes Plan Area. However, this does

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-11
not preclude the possibility that archaeological or paleontological resources may be present in surface and subsurface contexts.9
Although there are no paleontological or pre-historical resources recorded in the Plan Area, there are two resource sites in the vicinity. SJO-191, a large artifact scatter on a low terrace of the Stanislaus River, is the nearest recorded archeological site to the RAAP. SJO-191 is located 5.5 miles northwest of the RAAP, 1.5 miles downstream from SJO-191 is SJO-10. SJO-10 is a burial and habitation site on a mound in the Stanislaus floodplain. There are no other recorded sites within 10 miles of the RAAP.10

3. Historical Resources
There are four sites within the RAAP site that are potentially identifiable but not presently recorded with the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). These sites have been distinguished through archival research and a brief tour of the RAAP installation.11,12
¨ RAAP-1 and RAAP-2 are two unidentified historic structures that likely functioned as part of the domestic or agricultural history of the site. The proximity of the structures suggest they may have been associated, perhaps a house and barn. ¨ RAAP-3 is the homestead and ranch of George Squire, who owned and resided on property in the area. This resource includes a wood-frame farmhouse, a barn, and associated outbuildings.

9 City of Riverbank, 2008. 2005-2020 General Plan Update DEIR. 10 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1988. An Archeological Overview and Management Plan for the Riverbank Army and Ammunition Plant, Riverbank, California, pages 2-3 and 2-9.
11 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1988. An Archeological Overview and Management Plan for the Riverbank Army and Ammunition Plant, Riverbank, California, page 4-1.
12 Please note that RAAP-4, as identified by the 1988 National Park Service Overview and Management Plan, is not located within the Specific Plan Area, and is not included in this list.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-12
¨ RAAP-5 is a trash dump near the Stanislaus River with early twentieth century artifacts.

Additionally, there are properties and structures that have been recorded, and are eligible or ineligible for listing in the NRHP. The Historic Property Data File Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), which is maintained by the State Office of Historic Preservation, identifies such properties. The listing for Stanislaus County, including the City of Riverbank, includes 39 buildings or structures in or adjacent to the City of Riverbank. Of the 39 listed properties, 22 are located on the RAAP Site at 5300 Claus Road. The building names and year of construction are listed in Table 4.5-2. a. California Register of Historic Resources
This report surveyed documents and incorporated additional research and site observations in order to assess whether the RAAP is eligible to the CRHR.

The following analysis provides a summary of eligibility for the RAAP site under each required CRHR criterion.
i. Criterion 1 (History)
The RAAP began its life as an aluminum plant in 1943. The initial purpose of the plant was to supply the United States with desperately needed aluminum for the production of airplanes. This came at a time when California and the Pacific coast were just beginning to obtain the manufacturing capabilities which had previously resided exclusively in the East. The RAAP site is thus associated, not only with World War II, but also with the rapid industrialization of California, a process responsible for the 130 percent increase in California’s population that occurred between 1940 and 1946.

The RAAP, however, was only a small part of this industrial boom. While only one other aluminum plant, Vernon Works in southern California, was in operation at the time, there were many other military and industrial production facilities throughout the State which remain, in some form, today.

Having been the largest shell casings plant at the time, the RAAP is also linked to the Korean War; however, as the site was not developed specifically

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-13
TABLE 4.5-2 RAAP SITE PROPERTIES ELIGIBLE FOR NRHP LISTING Structure Year Built
Blanking Plant 7 Furnace Building 1953
Boiler House 1942
Building 120 1951
Building 120 A 1953
Carbon Rodding Building 1942
Communications Building 1971
Firehouse 1942
Garage 1954
Gate House 7 Cafeteria 1942
Machine Shop 9 1942
Materials Service Building, Press Room 1942
Ore Unloading Building 1948
Paint Spray Building 1978
Pot Room For Aluminum Production 1942
Rectifier Station, Production Line 1942
Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant 1942
Terminal House 1942
Transformer Service Building 1942
Unloading 7 Shipping Building 1942
Washroom 7 1942
Water Well 1942
Source: Knapp Architects, 2009.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-14
for use in the Korean War, the connection is not as strong as it would otherwise be. Although it is possible that the site is significant for this association, previous reports did not mention a strong connection.

The Vietnam War, while it occurred less than 50 years ago is arguably already a significant historic event worthy of recognition. However, while the RAAP supplied ammunition for the Vietnam War, it is in no other way linked to the war. In summary, the property may be eligible to the CRHR for its association with munitions manufacturing, but its association with three wars, change of use, and growth by accretion significantly complicate any such determination. California housed extensive arms manufacturing plants over the same period, making it likely that this plant would be significant only at the local level, if at all.

The eligibility criteria state that a site must be considered significant under Criterion 1 (history), Criterion 2 (persons), Criterion 3 (design), or Criterion 4 (potential to yield information); possess integrity; and be classified as a building, structure, object, site, or district.
ii. Criterion 2 (Persons)
Research into the site’s history has uncovered no significant persons associated with the RAAP, and thus the property does not appear eligible under this criterion.
iii. Criterion 3 (Design)
The RAAP is significant in that it is an example of industrial architecture in an area where agriculture and residence dominate. Features such as high, open interior spaces, steel-frame and corrugated steel construction, and gravity vents in roofs set it apart from its surroundings. The density, extent, and visual prominence of utilities, systems, and service structures outside the buildings themselves bolster this characteristic. No single building or object on the site appears to be individually significant; Buildings 1-6 are striking in plan, but were not unusual enough even at their completion to be significant on their own.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-15
The property qualifies as a district, significant as an industrial design for a large manufacturing facility, and notable for its setting in a primarily agricultural and residential area. The size, form, scale, materials, and design of the individual buildings illustrate important trends in 20th century heavy manufacturing, and the layout of the site, along with its highly visible utilities, exposed systems, and machinery convey important design and technological trends from the period of significance.

While the RAAP originally had a much larger site, the district’s potential boundaries would be formed by the buildings and the roads, rail lines, and parking which served them. Some features associated with the plant from the period of significance, such as the non-contiguous site next to the Stanislaus River where the leaching ponds, and outlying portions of the Claus Road site, do not contribute to the significance of the district because they are not identifiable features of manufacturing plant design. While the Hetch Hetchy power lines in the northern, undeveloped portion of the RAAP Site are strongly associated with the RAAP manufacturing buildings, they are far enough away from the manufacturing buildings so that they do not contribute to its significance as an example of design of heavy manufacturing plants.

The boundaries of the district would be as follows:
¨ West. Claus Road;
¨ South. Parallel to Claribel Road, but about 300 feet north of it, enclosing the south perimeter roadway and the grouping of Buildings 137 and 139;
¨ East. The east property line of the site; and
¨ North. A line enclosing Buildings 76 and stepping north to take in 182 and 192, then running diagonally along the northwest side of the rail line to a point roughly aligned with the north end of Building 122, then east to Claus Road.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-16
iv. Criterion 4 (Potential to Yield Information)
Although the RAAP has always been unique in its locality, it fits well into the historic context of the time period in which it was originally constructed.

World War II brought a sudden demand for the products of large-scale industry, and, accordingly, factories began being built across the west coast to meet these new demands. RAAP was one of nine aluminum plants to be federally funded in 1942, and helped fuel the industrial revolution that took place as the United States struggled to keep up the war effort.

Thus, while the RAAP is part of a large-scale change in California that has numerous other notable remnants, it remains significant at a local level, where fewer examples of such industry exist.
v. Historical Integrity
As the RAAP has not moved, it retains integrity of location. Although Riverbank has grown over the years, it has remained a relatively small town still surrounded by agricultural land despite its recent trend toward suburban transformation.

Furthermore, the RAAP, being on the edge of town, has seen little of this change and retains integrity of setting. The facilities at RAAP are in good working order and most of the buildings’ the materials appear original and intact, meaning that the site retains integrity of materials. It should be noted, however, that a property can retain integrity of materials and workmanship even if costly repairs are needed for a new use.

As new facilities were added to the site, the layout of the plant changed from its original design. Buildings were reused for purposes different than their original intent, and open spaces were gradually filled in to create walkways connecting Buildings 1-6.

Despite these changes, the buildings remain decidedly industrial, and the site is still easily recognizable as an industrial facility. Thus, RAAP retains integrity of design with respect to its period of significance. Although the facility

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-17
has been retrofitted several times and facilities have been added, the original construction, consisting of brick and steel-frame buildings with high open roofs still remains. Changes that have been made over the years somewhat diminish the integrity of workmanship, but overall, it remains intact.

The fact that some of the original buildings and equipment are gone means that the site has difficulty communicating its original use (aluminum production), but it is still capable of communicating a sense of large-scale industry associated with its later use of munitions manufacturing. Thus, RAAP retains integrity of feeling.

The fact that much of the original machinery is missing somewhat diminishes the site’s integrity of association, as it is much more difficult to perceive the facility’s original use. The presence, however, of most of the original buildings in the original layout, as well as features such as the tracks used for transporting transformer to and from the transformer repair building, aid the integrity of association. Although it is diminished, the integrity of association is still intact.

Overall, this report concludes that the RAAP is eligible to the CRHR as a district, significant locally as an example of the design of heavy manufacturing plants. The size, form, materials, and design of the buildings exemplify design of manufacturing plants from the period of significance. The many pipes, service buildings, free-standing machines, roads, and rail lines which form a highly visible network of infrastructure for the buildings are also highly characteristics of a heavy production facility. The period of significance is from 1942 to 1958, encompassing the World War II and Korean War eras. The district encompasses the buildings, roads, and rail lines developed during the period of significance, but does not include the entire Claus Road site. The non-contiguous site adjacent to the Stanislaus River is not included in the district.

The RAAP appears eligible to the CRHR as a historic district; it is significant at the local level under Criterion 3 for its significance in design of manufacturing facilities within the context of industrial architecture. Although the

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-18
site has changed since the period of significance, it retains historical integrity.

Figure 4.5-1 is a diagram of the buildings and areas that belong to the historic district.
b. Other Historic Resources
The Riverbank Branch Library is the only structure in Riverbank listed under the National Register of Historic Places as a Multiple Property Submission (MPS) under the California Carnegie Libraries. The Riverbank Branch Library, listed in 1996, is one of 142 Carnie Libraries built in California.

The E Clampus Vitas (Chapter No. 58), a fraternal organization dedicated to the study and preservation of Western Heritage, has erected three monuments in the City of Riverbank marking historic places, people, or structures:
¨ Site No. 3. Burnville, 1867 settlement by Major James Burney, corner of Highand First Streets.
¨ Site No. 13. Statue of Justice, Justice Court, courthouse east wall. ¨ Site No. 27. Riverbank Historical Museum, Santa Fe Avenue.

C. Standards of Significance
The draft RAAP Site Specific Plan would have a significant cultural resource impact if it would:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource.
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

FIGURE 4.5-1

E L I G I B L E C R H P H I S T O R I C D I S T R I C T

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Source: KNAPP Architects.
0 180 360 Feet NORTH
Historic District
Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant Building Groups
Knapp Architects 14/8/2009
Contributing Buildings/Structures
Historic District
Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant
Knapp Architects
Contributing Buildings/Structures
Eligible CRHP District
Contributing Buildings/Structures
Claribel Road

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-20
D. Impact Discussion
The following discussion provides an analysis of potential project and cumulative cultural resource impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the draft RAAP Site Specific Plan.

1. Project Impacts
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
As described above, a series of evaluations commissioned by the US Army determined that the RAAP property is not eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic places. However, the Historic Resources Assessment conducted for the Plan determined that a portion of the Plan Area is eligible for inclusion on the CRHR as a district, as it is significant locally as an example of the design of heavy manufacturing plants. This eligible district, shown in Figure 4.5-1, encompasses the buildings, roads, and rail lines developed between 1942 and 1958.

The eligible district currently retains a high degree of historic integrity and the Plan recommends that the associated buildings and other elements be retained as they are now. The draft Specific Plan does allow additional buildings and modifications to existing buildings in this area, with restrictions in place to protect historical resources and preserve the viability of this area for future heavy industrial uses. Additional landscaping is also recommended for this area in the draft Specific Plan, both for improved aesthetics and to implement principles of low-impact development (LID). It is anticipated that new development in this area would be of a similar character to existing development and range from one to two stories. Additionally, the Riverbank General Plan includes the goals and policies listed in Table 4.5-1 which would protect buildings within the eligible the district from substantial adverse changes in historical significance. These policies include General Plan Policies CONS-1.1, which prohibits the modification of historically significant buildings in a way that affects their historic value, and CONS-1.3, which promotes and encourages reuse of historic buildings consistent with other basic considerations.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-21
The draft Specific Plan includes policies to protect the historic character of the RAAP site, but the draft Specific Plan does not propose to designate a historic district within the RAAP site, nor does the City of Riverbank intend to pursue such a designation. As the draft Specific Plan is implemented, existing structures may be demolished or altered to allow for future uses within the RAAP site. Although the draft Specific Plan policies will seek to protect the historic character of the site, because the draft Specific Plan will allow for the demolition or alteration of buildings within an area that is eligible to be listed on the CRHR, a significant impact would occur.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? There are no known archaeological resources in the RAAP Plan Area and a records search of files at the CCIC indicated there are no recorded prehistoric cultural resources in Riverbank. However, previous archeological investigations have been limited in scope and, given that prehistoric and historic settlements in the central valley were generally established along rivers, the banks of the Stanislaus River are considered archeologically sensitive. Therefore, it is possible that as yet undiscovered archeological resources are present in the RAAP Plan Area.

Because the Plan Area is already largely developed, it is unlikely that as yet undiscovered archaeological resources. If present in the Plan Area, undiscovered archaeological resources would be disturbed as a result of Plan implementation. Additionally, the Riverbank General Plan includes goals and policies listed in Table 4.5-1 above, which would serve to reduce any potential impacts to archaeological resources. These policies include Policies CONS-2.1, CONS-2.2, CONS-2.4, and CONS-2.5. Consequently, impacts to archaeological resources resulting from implementation of the Plan would be less than significant.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-22
c. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
There are no known paleontological resources in the RAAP Plan Area and a records search of files at the CCIC indicated there are no recorded prehistoric cultural resources in Riverbank. Because the Plan Area already largely developed, it is unlikely that as yet undiscovered paleontological resources, if present in the Plan Area, would be disturbed as a result of Plan implementation.

Additionally, Policy CONS-2.1 from the Riverbank General Plan requires that approved plans incorporate measures to reduce or eliminate impacts to known or unknown paleontological resources. Therefore, compliance with General Plan policies would ensure that impacts to paleontological resources and unique geologic features associated with Plan implementation would be less than significant.
d. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Human remains dating to the prehistoric period of California have been located at numerous locations along rivers and streams within the San Joaquin Valley, although there are no known prehistoric human remains in the vicinity of Riverbank. Nevertheless, given that prehistoric and historic settlement has generally occurred along rivers, the possibility that as yet undiscovered human remains are present in the RAAP Plan Area remains.

California Law and the Riverbank General Plan recognize the need to protect interred human remains, particularly Native American burials and related items of patrimony, and have established procedures for the treatment of discovered remains. The California Health and Safety Code and Riverbank General Plan Policy CONS-2.5 require that if human remains are inadvertently discovered during excavation or construction activities, all construction affecting the discovery site halt, the contractor contact the appropriate City agency, and the county coroner examine the remains within 48 hours of discovery. Additionally, if the remains are determined to be those of a Native American, the City agency will work with local Native American representatives to insure that the remains and associated artifacts are treated in a respect-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-23
ful and dignified manner. Therefore, compliance with State law and local policy would ensure that impacts associated with disturbance of human remains from implementation of the Plan would be less than significant.

E. Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts to cultural resources would occur when a series of actions leads to the loss of a substantial type of site, building, or resource. For example, while the loss of a single historic building may not be significant to the character of a neighborhood or streetscape, continued loss of such resources on a project-by-project basis could constitute a significant cumulative effect. This is most obvious in historic districts, where destruction or alteration of a percentage of the contributing elements may lead to a loss of integrity for the district overall. Changes to the setting or atmosphere of an area, for example, by adding modern structures on all sides of a historically significant building, thus altering the aesthetics of the streetscape, would create a significant impact. Destruction or relocation of historic buildings would also significantly impact the setting. The geographic scope of this analysis is the RAAP Plan Area and immediate surrounding area.

The Plan Area is separated from surrounding properties by a fence, such that it is self-contained. Alteration of structures or features would therefore not affect adjacent neighborhoods or the atmosphere and setting of the surrounding area. The district within the RAAP Plan Area identified as eligible for inclusion on the CRHP is not proposed to be altered by the Plan. Instead, the draft Specific Plan does allow additional buildings and modifications to existing buildings in this area, with restrictions in place to protect historical resources and preserve the viability of this area for future heavy industrial uses. Additionally, compliance with Riverbank General Plan Policies CONS-1.1 and CONS-1.3, described above, would protect the district.

Therefore, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects in surrounding area, implementation of the proposed Plan would not result in a cumulative impact to cultural resources. Impacts would be less than significant.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.5-24
F. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact CUL-1. Implementation of the RAAP Specific Plan would alter the significance of an historic resource. By removing individual structures that contribute to the eligibility of an historic district, the RAAP’s ability to convey its importance to local and national history is significantly altered, the resource may not be eligible for inclusion on the CRHR.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to the demolition of buildings and structures comprising the eligible district, an Historic American Building Survey/Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER) recordation shall be conducted for the affected structures. HABS/HAER recordation could include archiving of original plans, undertaking archival research for preparation of a report, making measured drawings, and completing a photographic study of the structures.

Significance after Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. HABS documentation and interpretive display would lessen the impact to the eligible district by preserving construction information, providing a photographic record of the district and its contributors, and providing archival access to the public. However, demolition of a historical resource cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-1
This chapter discusses existing geology, soils, and seismic conditions in the Plan Area and evaluates the potential impacts associated with buildout of the Plan.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes applicable State and local policies and regulations regarding geology, soils, and seismicity.

1. State Laws and Regulations
a. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act1 was passed by the California Legislature in 1972 to mitigate the hazards of surface faulting to structures. The main purpose of the Act is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act addresses only the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards, such as ground shaking or landslides. 2 The law requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones (known as Earthquake Fault Zones or Alquist-Priolo Zones) around the surface traces of active faults and to issue maps to all affected cities, counties, and State agencies for use in planning and controlling development. Local agencies must regulate most development projects within the zones. Construction is generally prohibited within 50 feet of an active fault zone.3 Currently, the
California Department of Conservation’s Geological Survey (CGS) does not include Riverbank on its list of cities affected by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake

1 Called the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act until renamed in 1993. 2 California Geological Survey, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap/, accessed on December 23, 2009. 3 California Geological Survey, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/rghm/ap/pages, accessed on December 23, 2009.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-2
Fault Zones4 and the City is not located within an earthquake fault zone as designated by the Alquist-Priolo Act.
5 b. Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (California Public Resources Code Sections 2690-2699.6) addresses seismic hazards other than surface fault rupture, including liquefaction and seismically induced landslides. Implementation of this Act by the Department of Conservation requires Seismic Hazard Zones be mapped by the State Geologist to assist local governments in land use planning. The Department of Conservation has determined that the City of Riverbank is not affected by a Seismic Hazard Zone.
6 c. International Building Code, 2006 Edition
The International Building Code was developed by the International Conference of Building Officials to provide a set of consistent standards for building structures. The Code requires strict building standards for essential facilities and for sites on soft soil where shaking intensity from a potential earthquake is increased.

The Uniform Building Code (UBC), the predecessor of the International Building Code, was last adopted as Title XV of Chapter 150 of the Code of the City of Riverbank in 1992. The UBC, now known as the International Building Code (IBC), is the Building Code for Riverbank and regulates all building and construction projects within the city. All developments in Riverbank applying for a permit are subject to the IBC.

4 California Geological Survey, Cities and Counties Affected by Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/ap/Pages/ affected.aspx, accessed January 25, 2010.
5 City of Riverbank, 2005. General Plan DEIR 2005-2025, page 4.8-7. 6 California Geological Survey, Northern California cities and counties affected by SHMP Zones, http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/shzp/Pages/affected.as- px, accessed January 25, 2010.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-3
d. California Building Code
Statewide, California has adopted mandatory codes based on the International Code Council's Uniform Codes. These are compiled the 2010 California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, also known as the California Building Standards Code or California Building Code (CBC). The CBC is based on the 2006 International Building Code and combines three types of building standards from three different origins:
¨ Building standards that have been adopted by State agencies without change from building standards contained in the International Building Code.
¨ Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the national model code standards to meet California conditions.
¨ Building standards, authorized by the California legislature, that constitute extensive additions not covered by the model codes that have been adopted to address particular California concerns.

When no other standards apply, the CBC provides Riverbank with a minimum standard for building design and construction. The 2007 update to the CBC reflects significant changes in design and construction requirements relating to structural safety. The CBC contains specific requirements for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls, and site demolition.

It also regulates grading, drainage and erosion control activities.7 Through the CBC, the State provides a minimum standard for building design and construction. Seismic zone designations range from zone 0 to zone 4. The ascending numbers indicate the respective increase in the required factor of safety applied to structural design equations for resisting earthquake-induced ground accelerations. The City of Riverbank is in CBC Seismic Zone 3, and consequently, construction within the city is required to meet all applicable building code standards for CBC Zone 3.

7 California Building Standards Commission, 2002. 2001 California Building Standards Administrative Code California Code of regulations, Title 24, Part 1.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-4
The earthquake protection law, established in California Health and Safety Code Section 19100 et seq., requires that structures be designed to resist stresses produced by lateral forces caused by wind and earthquakes. Specific minimum standards for seismic safety and structural design to meet earthquake protection requirements are set forth in Chapter 16 of the CBC.

2. Local Policies
a. City of Riverbank General Plan
Table 4.6-1 lists the goals and policies from the City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025 that relate to geology and soils.
b. Riverbank Municipal Code
Title XV, Chapter 155, of the City of Riverbank Municipal Code establishes procedures, permits, and other requirements for grading, excavation, and filling activities within the city. An important goal of these procedures and requirements is to protect public health and safety and aesthetics through regulating the development of potentially hazardous terrain; minimizing water quality, air quality, and stormwater impacts; reducing propagation of noxious weeds; and conserving the aesthetic value of the grading site and surrounding properties.

Sections 152.140 to 152.143 of the City of Riverbank Municipal Code require that subdividers submit a preliminary soil report, prepared by a stateregistered civil engineer or soil engineer, prior to the submission of the final subdivision map. If the preliminary soil report indicates the presence of critically expansive soils or other soil problems on the site, a soil investigation must be prepared by a state-registered civil engineer. The soil investigation must include a recommendation of corrective action to prevent structural damage in the subdivision. The City Council may approve the subdivision and its building permit conditioned upon the incorporation of the approved recommended corrective action.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-5
TABLE 4.6-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN GOAL AND POLICY RELATED

TO GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal SAFE-1 Minimize the loss of life and damage to property natural and human-caused hazards.

Policy SAFE-1.2
The City will continue to enforce State of California Building Standards Commission uniform codes, such as the Uniform Building Code and Fire Code.

Policy SAFE-1.11
Proposed developments located within river bluff areas and other areas prone to geologic and soil limitations require a detailed geotechnical study prepared by an independent qualified geologist approved by the City. Approved plans, projects, and subdivision requests shall incorporate measures to reduce risks identified in the geotechnical study, to the City’s satisfaction.

Policy SAFE-1.12
The City will not allow the location of water wells in areas where subsidence could occur as a result or where existing potential for subsidence could be increase as a result of operation of a domestic water well.

Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025.

B. Existing Conditions
This section discusses the existing conditions pertaining to geology and soils in the Plan Area.

1. Geologic Setting
The City of Riverbank and the Plan Area are located in northern San Joaquin Valley, the southern of the two valleys that comprise California’s Great Central Valley. The Great Central Valley is an alluvial plain, approximately 50 miles wide and 400 miles long, located in central California.8 For the past
two million years in the Great Central Valley, eroded sediments from the Coast Range of mountains to the west, and the Sierra Nevada mountain range

8 United States Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-38.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-6
to the east, have deposited in the Valley floor. The oldest and deepest sediments found in the Great Central Valley are of volcanic origin, and other sediments have been found to originate from granite rock, pale quartz, and feldspar sand.
9 At the Plan Area, the subsurface geology is locally known as the Riverbank Formation and consists of unconsolidated Pleistocene non-marine sedimentary deposits. Also found in the subsurface are Aromas Red Sands, which are cross-bedded colored sands, ranging from gray to brown and yellow to red.

These sands are locally pebbly with minor percentages of clay and silt. There are subsurface strata at the RAAP site comprised of hundreds of feet of interlayered fluvial deposits, including sand, clays, and gravels. There are clay layers in the subsurface, and clay strata at the following intervals: 100 to 110, 70 to 80, and 10 to 40 feet below the surface.10

2. Geologic Hazards
a. Surface Fault Rupture
California is a seismically active region; seismic activity is concentrated in tectonically active regions, such as the Pacific Coast, the Sierra Nevada Range, and the Cascade Range. The active tectonism in these regions is due to plate tectonics and movements of the earth’s tectonic plates, and resulting active volcanism.

In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 (A-P EFZ), only faults with evidence of historic or Holocene surface fault rupture are considered “active” earthquake faults and zoned on the A-P EFZ maps. Faults with evidence of surface fault rupture within the past 1.6 million years are considered potentially or conditionally active.

The A-P EFZ maps show faults considered active by the California Geological Survey (CGS). The City of Riverbank and the Plan Area are not located

9 City of Riverbank. General Plan 2005-2025 DEIR, page 4.8-1.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-7
within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and is not included on an AP EFZ map (California Geological Survey 2005). Therefore, the Riverbank area is not susceptible to seismic hazards related to fault rupture.11 However, a 7-mile portion of Ortigalita fault, which is located in the southwestern portion of Stanislaus County, has been identified as an A-P EFZ. It has been approximately five million years since the most recent rupture of the Ortigalita fault, and earthquake activity without surface fracturing or faulting is a common occurrence.12
It is possible that seismic activity in other parts of the state can affect the Riverbank area depending on strength and intensity of the seismic event. The strength of an earthquake may be expressed as its magnitude, commonly measured on the Richter scale, and its intensity, as ranked on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. The Richter scale magnitude is a measure of the energy released at the focus of the earthquake and the Modified Mercalli Scale measures the intensity on a scale of I to XII of ground shaking as determined from observations of an earthquake’s effect on people, structures and the earth’s surface.

The discussion below presents prominent faults that could produce seismic activity in the Riverbank area.
¨ San Andreas Fault. The San Andreas Fault is the dominant influence on local geology and seismic potential. At its closest point, the fault lies about 70 miles west of the Plan Area. The San Andreas is a slip-strike fault, meaning that the Earth’s crust on either side of the fault is slipping past the other in a horizontal motion. Historic earthquakes confirm that the San Andreas Fault, as well as well its eastern branches, the Calaveras and Hayward Faults, remains highly active today. The CGS and United

10 US Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-38. 11 City of Riverbank. General Plan 2005-2025 EIR, page 4.8-7. 12 City of Riverbank. General Plan Background Report, Safety, page SAFETY-2.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-8
States Geological Survey (USGS) have defined segments of the San Andreas Fault based on the size and recurrence interval of earthquakes associated with each. At its closest point, the San Andreas Fault lies approximately 85 miles west of the Plan Area. ¨ Hayward Fault. The 53-mile Hayward Fault runs parallel to the eastern side of the San Francisco Bay, roughly from the San Pablo Bay in the north to the City of San Jose in the south. The Hayward Fault has generated one large historical earthquake, an event in 1868 of approximately

8.6 magnitude. The Fault is considered likely to produce a 6.9 to 7.1 magnitude earthquake in the future, with a recurrence interval of 210 years.

As shown in Figure 4.6-1, less prominent fault systems in proximity to the City of Riverbank and the Plan Area include the Ortigalita Fault, San Joaquin Fault, Rescue Lineament – Bear Mountains Fault, Clayton – Marsh Creek – Greenville Fault, and the Calaveras Fault.
b. Seismically Induced Ground Shaking
Fault activity has the potential to result in ground shaking. Any slip along all or part of a fault surface releases accumulated energy that radiates in all directions away from the source, in the form of earthquake waves. Associated ground shaking varies in intensity depending on the severity of earthquake activity, proximity to that activity and local soil and geological conditions.

The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, passed in 1990, addresses non-surface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including seismically induced ground shaking and other seismic hazards. Areas within Stanislaus County, including the City of Riverbank and the Plan Area, have not been mapped as part of the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. However, prominent faults such as the San Andreas Fault and the Hayward Fault will likely produce earthquakes sometime in the future which may result in ground shaking in the Riverbank area.

According to the US Geological Survey (USGS) Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment Program, the Plan Area is considered to be within an area EDAW City of Riverbank General Plan DEIR
Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 4.8-8 City of Riverbank Fault Lines in the Project Area Source: U.S. Geological Survey, Earthquake Hazards Program – Northern California 2007 Exhibit 4.8-3
FIGURE 4.6-1

FAULT LINES IN THE PROJECT AREA

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Source: City of Riverbank General Plan EIR. 0 10 20 Feet NORTH

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-10
that is predicted to have a 90 percent probability of an earthquake of magnitude greater than 5.0 in the next 100 years and a 70 percent probability of an earthquake of a magnitude greater than 5.0 in the next 50 years.13 The USGS has also furnished information to Stanislaus County that the eastern half of the County, including Riverbank and the Plan Area, is expected to experience seismically induced ground shaking at an intensity of VI or VII on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale.14 The USGS Earthquake Database lists earthquakes occurring within 30 miles of the Plan Area from the following years: 1866, 1932, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1952, 1954, 1955, 1957, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1963, 1966, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1976, 1977, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1994, 1996, and 2002.

The greatest magnitude earthquake occurring within 30 miles of the Plan Area occurred in 1866 and had an epicenter approximately 25 miles from RAAP and a magnitude of 5.80. The greatest-magnitude earthquake occurring within 30 miles of RAAP since 1866 occurred in 1994 and had a magnitude of 4.1.

This earthquake was also epicentered approximately 25 miles from RAAP. 15 c. Soil Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a process in which uniform, clean, loose, fine sandy, and silty sediments below the water table temporarily lose strength during an earthquake and behave as a viscous liquid rather than a solid. Liquefaction is restricted to certain geologic and hydrologic environments, primarily recently deposited sand and silt in areas with high groundwater levels.

Liquefaction can cause the soil beneath a structure to lose strength, which may result in the loss of foundation-bearing capacity. This loss of strength commonly causes the structure to settle or tip. Loss of bearing strength can

13 US Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-40. 14 City of Riverbank. General Plan Background Report, Safety, page SAFETY-2. 15 US Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-40.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-11
also cause light buildings with basements, buried tanks, and foundation piles to rise buoyantly through the liquefied soil.

Impacts from liquefaction have the potential to occur in and around Riverbank, including in the Plan Area. The alluvial soils in the Riverbank area, which are discussed in detail below, have the potential to become watersaturated when the groundwater table is high. Consequently, interstitial spaces between individual grains of sediment become logged with water, and potentially lose contact with each other. Without contact or friction, grains of sediment can lose strength and behave like a liquid, particularly in a seismic event.16
d. Landslides and Slope Instability
Landslides and slope instability are characterized by the movement of soils and surficial deposits, known as colluvium, and bedrock down steep slopes.

This movement results from wet weather, adverse structures, seismic shaking, and/or improper grading and drainage. The Riverbank area, including the Plan Area, is generally level. Elevation in the Riverbank area ranges from 75 feet above mean sea level at the southern bank of the Stanislaus River to 150 feet above mean sea level at the eastern city limit. The average elevation in the Plan Area is 135 feet above mean sea level. Terrain at the RAAP site is basically level but slopes southwestward at a rate of 25 feet per mile.17 There is one significant ridge in Riverbank. Varying from 10 to 30 feet high, this ridge is located along the southern edge of the Stanislaus River and north of the existing developed portion of the City of Riverbank. Aside from this ridge, landslides and slope instability are not environmental concerns for the City of Riverbank or the Plan Area.

16 US Geological Survey (USGS), About Liquefaction, http://geomaps.wr.usgs. gov/sfgeo/liquefaction/ aboutliq.html, accessed January 28, 2010. 17 US Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-38.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-12

3. Soils and Soil Hazards
The soils in Riverbank have been significantly influenced by the Stanislaus River. Most soils in the Riverbank area are found in alluvial fans and within the floodplain of the Stanislaus River. The Soil Survey for Eastern Stanislaus County was published by the National Resource Conservation District (NRCS) in 1964.18 Within the Riverbank area, the Soil Survey reports 23 distinct soil series, or soils with similar characteristics such as color, texture, structure, reaction, consistency, mineral, chemical composition, and arrangement in the profile. Table 4.6-2 lists the soil series found in Riverbank, the general characteristics of each series, and the slope percentage at which a series is likely to occur.

There are two soil series found on the RAAP site, the San Joaquin Series (SaA) and the Madera Series (MdA). The San Joaquin Series is characterized by moderately coarse, reddish-brown to brown, well-draining, slightly to moderately acidic soils. This series is composed of silica and iron that forms hardpans. Between 41 and 76 cm deep, a red to reddish-brown clayey subsoil rests on the hardpan. The Madera series is characterized by medium to moderately coarse sediments that are well-draining. On the surface, soils in the Madera series are commonly neutral to brown colored loams, or sandy loams.

The subsoil is reddish-brown to brown sand clay that rests on an iron and silica hardpan with seams of lime. Below the hardpan is a compact, stratified sandy loam that can be weakly cemented in certain areas.19 The potential for soil hazards, specifically erosion, subsidence, and expansive soils in Riverbank is discussed below.

18 Arkley, Rodney J., United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1964. Soil Survey, Eastern Stanislaus Area, California. 19 US Army, 2009. Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 05 Disposal and Reuse of Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant, California, page 4-39.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-13
TABLE 4.6-2 SOIL SERIES FOUND IN RIVERBANK
Soil Series Description Slope Percentage
CaA Chualar sandy loam 0 to 3
DeA Dehli loamy sand 0 to 3
DeB Delhi loamy sand 3 to 8
DhA Delhi sand 0 to 3
DhB Delhi sand 3 to 8
GfA Grangeville fine sandy loam 0 to 1
GmA Grangeville very fine sandy loam 0 to 1
GsA Greenfield sandy loam 0 to 3
GvA Greenfield sandy loam, deep over 0 to 3
HbA Hanford fine sandy loam 0 to 3
had Hanford sandy loam, moderately deep over silt 0 to 1 HdsA Hanford sandy loam, deep over silt 0 to 1
HfA Hilmar loamy sand 0 to 1
MdA Madera sandy loam 0 to 2
MmA Modesto clay loam 0 to 1
OaA Oakdale sandy loam 0 to 3
SaA San Joaquin sandy loams 0 to 3
SnA Snelling sandy loam 0 to 3
TuA Tujunga loamy sandy 0 to 3
Tx Terrace escarpments -
WmC Whitney sandy loams 8 to 15
WrA Whitney and Rocklin sandy loams 0 to 3
Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025 DEIR, pages 4.8-1 to 4.8-2.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-14
a. Erosion Potential
Erosion generally happens when natural forces, such as water and/or wind, loosen, dissolve, and wear away at the surface of the earth. Erosion may contribute to a significant loss of soil, or produce sedimentation that degrades water quality. In and around Riverbank, including within the Plan Area, water erosion is of moderate to low concern because the topography of the area is largely flat and the soils are mostly well-draining. The potential for wind erosion in Riverbank is moderate to high in the summer, fall, and springtime, when prevailing winds push marine air through the Carquinez Straight, a sea-level gap in the Coastal Range mountains located 70 miles west to northwest of the City of Riverbank. In wintertime, winds generated in the Carquinez Straight area are decreased and the potential for wind erosion in Riverbank is low.
b. Subsidence Potential
Subsidence occurs after a drainage event, when soil organic matter shrinks as a result of drying out or oxidation. The NRCS Soil Survey reports that subsidence is uncharacteristic of the soil series found in Riverbank, and therefore is not of concern. At this time, there is no evidence of subsidence within Riverbank or the Plan Area. Subsidence is discussed further in Chapter 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR.
c. Expansive Soils
Expansive soils have a “shrink-swell potential,” meaning they are known to shrink when dry and swell when wet. If the expansiveness of a soil is rated by the NRCS as moderate to high, then buildings, roads, and other structures may incur significant damage as a result of a shrinking or swelling event.

Specific building techniques have been developed, and are often required, for construction in areas with expansive soils.

Expansive soils are a significant concern for the City of Riverbank and in the Plan Area. The NRCS identifies the majority of the Riverbank area soils, and the Plan Area soils altogether, as expansive. Of the 23 soil series known to occur within the Riverbank city limit, four are identified as expansive. Table

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-15

4.6-3 lists the expansive soils within the city, the potential for their expansion, and the soil depth at which that expansion potential is known to occur. Two of the four expansive soils series found in the Riverbank area occur on the RAAP site, the Madera (MdA) and the San Joaquin (SaA) series. The soils on the northern portion of the RAAP Site belong to the SaA series, which is considered to have a high expansion potential at 13 to 24 inches below the surface. The soils on the southern portion of the RAAP Site belong to the MdA series, which is considered to have high expansion potential at a depth of 19 to 30 inches.

C. Standards of Significance
The proposed project would have a potentially significant geology and soils impact if it would:
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
¨ Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault.
¨ Strong seismic ground shaking.
¨ Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. ¨ Landslides, mudslides or other similar hazards.
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. d. Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or property. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-16
TABLE 4.6-3 EXPANSIVE SOILS FOUND IN RIVERBANK
Soil Series Shrink-Swell Potential
Snelling (SnA) Moderate potential at depth of 19-56 inches San Joaquin (SaA) High potential at depth of 13-24 inches Modesto (MmA)
Moderate potential at depths of 0-12 and 35-55 inches
High potential at depths of 12-35 inches and 55-62 inches Madera (MdA) High potential at depth of 19-30 inches
Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025 EIR, page 4.8-5.

D. Impact Discussion

1. Plan Impacts
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault.

As described above, the Plan Area is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and is not located on an active fault as designated by the California Geological Survey (CGS). The Plan Area is located more than 70 miles to the east of both the San Andreas and Hayward Faults, the two most prominent fault lines in the region, and approximately 37 miles northeast of the Ortigalita Fault, which is identified as active by the CGS. Therefore, the Plan Area is not considered susceptible to the risk of loss, damage, or death involving fault rupture. Associated impacts would be less than significant. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking.

Given the likelihood of earthquakes along the prominent faults in the region and the proximity of those faults to the Plan Area, seismic ground shaking is possible within the Plan Area in the event of a major earthquake. However,

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-17
pursuant to General Plan Policy SAFE-1.2 and Riverbank Municipal Code, the standards for seismic safety and structural design established in the California Building Code would apply to construction in the Plan Area, thereby ensuring adequate earthquake protection. Therefore, with continued implementation of General Plan policies, including Policy SAFE-1.2, buildout of the Plan would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the risk of loss, damage, or death involving seismic ground shaking. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction.

Alluvial soils in the Plan Area can potentially become saturated when the groundwater table is high, which increases their susceptibility to liquefaction during a seismic event. However, the California Building Code, applicable in Riverbank pursuant to General Plan Policy SAFE-1.2, establishes standards for seismic design, foundations, and drainage. Continued implementation of this policy and compliance with State of California uniform codes would ensure that the risk of loss, damage, or death from seismic related ground failure is less than significant.
iv. Landslides, mudslides, or other similar hazards.

The terrain of the Plan Area slopes to the southwest at a rate of 25 feet per mile, and given this relatively flat topography, there would be no impact associated with landslides and slope instability. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

The Plan would have a significant environmental impact if it would cause substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil, consequently generating dust, resulting in the loss of arable soils, or hindering proper drainage and stormwater management. Erosion can result from either water or wind.

Buildout of the Plan would place additional structures on the RAAP site; however, construction activities in the Plan Area would be subject to the erosion control provisions in Chapter 155 of the Riverbank Municipal Code, which establish grading/clearing performance standards and permit thresholds. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1a, which calls

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-18
for SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Control Measures, would reduce dust emissions from the construction activities. Compliance with these provisions and implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1a would limit and control wind erosion to the maximum extent practicable.

The construction of new buildings and structures on the RAAP site would also result in the creation of new areas of impervious surfaces such as rooftops and driveways, thereby increasing the amount and rate of urban storm runoff, which can increase erosion. However, the Plan includes Policy PUB-23 which requires developers to implement “green” infrastructure, where practical, such as on-site stormwater management, water reclamation, and permeable surfaces. Consequently, impacts associated with substantial soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant.
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

As described above, land subsidence is not characteristic of soils in Riverbank and the Plan Area. The potential for seismic-related ground failure and landslides are discussed above, and risks associated with expansive soils are discussed below. Overall, buildout of the Plan would have a less-than-significant impact related to geologically unstable soils.
d. Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or property.

The Plan would have a significant environmental impact if it would locate people or structures on expansive soils. Expansive soils undergo a significant volume change as a result of wetting or drying and this volume change can cause damage to improperly designed foundations and pavements. The San Joaquin soils found on the majority of the RAAP site have a high potential for expansion at 13 to 24 inches below surface, and the Madera soils found on the southern portion of the RAAP site have high expansion potential at 19 to 30 inches below surface. However, these risks can be ameliorated with proper analysis, design, and construction. Pursuant to Riverbank General Plan Policy SAFE-1.11, a geotechnical study would be required prior to construc-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORIT Y

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-19
tion on the expansive soils of the RAAP site, and the City would require that measures to reduce risks identified in the study be incorporated into project design prior to approval. In addition, as part of the routine implementation of the subdivision ordinance, Sections 152.140 to 152.143 of the Riverbank Municipal Code requires preliminary soil reports, soil investigation, and mitigation measures if the preliminary soil report found any critically expansive soils or other soil problems. Compliance with Policy SAFE-1.11 and continued implementation of the applicable provisions of the Riverbank Municipal Code and California Building Code would ensure that impacts related to expansive soils from buildout of the Plan would be less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water.

The Plan Area is served by the City of Riverbank Public Works Department Sewer Division and its wastewater facilities. Chapter 4.14-17 of this EIR contains a discussion of wastewater infrastructure and capacity. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be required to serve new development. Therefore, there would be no impact.

2. Cumulative Impacts
This section analyzes potential impacts related to geology and soils that could occur from a combination of the Plan with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the surrounding area. Cumulative impacts would occur if development associated with the Plan together with other projects would expose people or structures to substantial risk of injury, damage, or death related to seismic activity, soil erosion, or unstable soils. The geographic scope of this analysis is taken as the City of Riverbank sphere of influence, as defined in the General Plan.

As described above, the Plan Area is not located within a known, active earthquake fault zone, and as such, buildout of the Plan would not, either by itself or in combination with other projects in the City of Riverbank sphere of influence, place people or structures at risk in the event of fault rupture.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

PLAN AREA SPECIFIC P LAN EIR

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6-20
The same CBC standards for seismic safety and structural design applicable in the Plan Area would also apply throughout Riverbank, thereby reducing potential impacts from strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure to a less-than-significant level.

Implementation of the Plan would not affect the characteristics of soils in the Plan Area of the City of Riverbank sphere of influence. Accordingly, Plan implementation would not contribute to a substantial increase in the risk of loss, damage, or death associated with expansive or unstable soils in the sphere of influence. Overall, cumulative impacts to geology, soils, and seismicity from buildout of the Plan in combination with other projects in the sphere of influence would be less than significant.

E. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Since there are no significant impacts related to land use as a result of the Plan, no mitigation measures are required.

4.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

4.7-1
This section assesses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan. Included in this section is background information on GHGs and global climate change, a summary of the regulatory framework that pertains to the Specific Plan, and a summary of existing air quality conditions.

A. Background Information
Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, GHGs, regulate the earth’s temperature. This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. The most common GHGs are carbon dioxide and water vapor but there are also several others, most importantly: methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). These are released into the earth’s atmosphere through a variety of natural processes and human activities. ¨ Carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. ¨ Nitrous oxide is associated with agricultural operations such as fertilization of crops. ¨ Methane is commonly created by off-gassing from agricultural practices (e.g. keeping livestock) and landfill operation.
¨ Chlorofluorocarbons were widely used as refrigerants, propellants, and cleaning solvents but their production has been stopped by international treaty.
¨ Hydrofluorocarbons are now used as a substitute for chlorofluorocarbons in refrigeration and cooling. ¨ Perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride emissions are commonly created by industries such as aluminum production and semi-conductor manufacturing.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-2
Each GHG has its own potency and effect upon the earth’s energy balance.

This is expressed in terms of a global warming potential (GWP), with carbon dioxide being assigned a value of 1 and sulfur hexafluoride being several orders of magnitude stronger with a GWP of 23,900. In GHG emission inventories, the weight of each gas is multiplied by its GWP and is measured in units of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e).

An expanding body of scientific research supports the theory that global warming is currently affecting changes in weather patterns, average sea level, ocean acidification, chemical reaction rates, and precipitation rates, and that it will increasingly do so in the future. The climate and several naturallyoccurring resources within California could be adversely affected by the global warming trend. Increased precipitation and sea level rise could increase coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion (a particular concern in the low-lying Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, where potable water delivery pumps could be threatened), and degradation of wetlands. Mass migration and/or loss of plant and animal species could also occur. Potential effects of global climate change that could adversely affect human health include more extreme heat waves and heat-related stress; an increase in climate-sensitive diseases; more frequent and intense natural disasters such as flooding, hurricanes and drought; and increased levels of air pollution.

B. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes key federal, State and City statutes, regulations and policies that would apply to the Plan. Global climate change resulting from GHG emissions is an emerging environmental concern being raised and discussed at the international, national, and statewide level. At each level, agencies are considering strategies to control emissions of gases that contribute to global climate change.

1. Federal Regulations
The United States participates in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). While the United States signed the Kyoto

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-3
Protocol, which would have required reductions in GHGs, Congress never ratified the protocol. The federal government chose voluntary and incentivebased programs to reduce emissions and has established programs to promote climate technology and science. In 2002, the United States announced a strategy to reduce the GHG intensity of the American economy by 18 percent over a 10-year period from 2002 to 2012. At this time, there are no federal regulations or policies pertaining to GHG emissions.

2. State Regulations
The State of California is concerned about GHG emissions and their effect on global climate change. The State recognizes that “there appears to be a close relationship between the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere and global temperatures” and that “the “evidence for climate change is overwhelming.” The effects of climate change on California, in terms of how it would affect the ecosystem and economy, remain uncertain. The State has many areas of concern regarding climate change with respect to global warming. According to the 2006 Climate Action Team Report, the following climate change effects and conditions can be expected in California over the course of the next century:
¨ A diminishing Sierra snowpack declining by 70 percent to 90 percent, effecting the state’s water supply; ¨ Increasing temperatures from 8 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) under the higher emission scenarios, leading to a 25 to 35 percent increase in the number of days ozone pollution standards are exceeded in most urban areas; ¨ Coastal erosion along the length of California and seawater intrusion into the Sacramento River Delta from a 4- to 33-inch rise in sea level. This would exacerbate flooding in already vulnerable regions; ¨ Increased vulnerability of forests due to pest infestation and increased temperatures;

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-4
¨ Increased challenges for the state’s important agricultural industry from water shortages, increasing temperatures, and saltwater intrusion into the Delta; and
¨ Increased electricity demand, particularly in the hot summer months. a. Assembly Bill 1575 (1975)
In 1975, the Legislature created the California Energy Commission (CEC).

The CEC regulates electricity production that is one of the major sources of GHGs.
b. Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations (1978) The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2005 Standards went into effect October 1, 2005. Projects that apply for a building permit on or after this date have had to comply with the 2005 Standards. The 2008 Standards are currently being developed and were anticipated to become effective in late 2009.
c. Assembly Bill 1493 (2002)
Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 required California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHG emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. d. State of California Executive Order S-3-05 (2005)
The Governor’s Executive Order established aggressive emissions reductions goals: by 2010, GHG emissions must be reduced to 2000 levels; by 2020, GHG emissions must be reduced to 1990 levels; and by 2050, GHG emissions must be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

In June 2005, the Governor of California signed Executive Order S-3-05, which identified Cal/EPA as the lead coordinating State agency for establishing climate change emission reduction targets in California. A “Climate Ac-

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-5
tion Team,” a multi-agency group of State agencies, was set up to implement Executive Order S-3-05. Under this order, the State plans to reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. GHG emission reduction strategies and measures to reduce global warming were identified by the California Climate Action Team in 2006. e. Assembly Bill 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006) AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, codifies the State’s GHG emissions target by directing CARB to reduce the State’s global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. CARB regulations are required to begin phasing in by 2012. AB 32 was signed and passed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger on September 27, 2006. Since that time, the CARB, CEC, CPUC, and Building Standards Commission have all been developing regulations that will help meet the goals of AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05.

A Scoping Plan for AB 32 was adopted by CARB in December 2008. It contains the State’s main strategies to reduce GHGs from business-as-usual emissions projected in 2020 back down to 1990 levels. Business-as-usual (BAU) is the projected emissions in 2020, including increases in emissions caused by growth, without any GHG reduction measures. The Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions, including direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade system. It requires CARB and other State agencies to develop and adopt regulations and other initiatives reducing GHGs by 2012.

As directed by AB 32, CARB has also approved a statewide GHG emissions limit. On December 6, 2007, CARB staff resolved an amount of 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) as the total statewide GHG 1990 emissions level and 2020 emissions limit. The limit is a cumulative statewide limit, not a sector- or facility-specific limit.

CARB is also conducting rulemaking, culminating in rule adoption by January 1, 2011 for reducing GHG emissions to achieve the emissions cap by

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-6
2020. The rules must take effect no later than 2012. In designing emission reduction measures, CARB must aim to minimize costs, maximize benefits, improve and modernize California’s energy infrastructure, maintain electric system reliability, maximize additional environmental and economic cobenefits for California, and complement the State’s efforts to improve air quality.

In addition, landfill gas capture and control was identified as an early adoption measure for AB 32, and CARB has proposed a rule requiring gas capture and collection for landfills having at least 450,000 tons of waste in place and establishing performance standards for systems already installed. f. Senate Bill 97, Modification to the Public Resources Code (2007) Pursuant to Senate Bill 97 (SB 97), the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) is in the process of developing CEQA Guidelines addressing GHGs. OPR is required to “prepare, develop, and transmit” the guidelines to the Resources Agency on or before July 1, 2009. In June 2008, OPR issued interim guidance for addressing climate change through CEQA.

At the direction of the OPR, CARB is currently developing statewide interim thresholds of significance for GHG emissions. CARB is focusing on common project types that, collectively, are responsible for substantial GHG emissions – specifically industrial, residential, and commercial projects. The ongoing workshops have been planned to discuss further development of concepts introduced in its Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal on Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). g. Senate Bill 375, California's Regional Transportation and Land Use Planning Efforts (2008) Recently, California enacted legislation (SB 375) to expand the efforts of AB 32 by controlling indirect GHG emissions caused by urban sprawl.

SB 375 would develop emissions-reduction goals in which regions can apply in planning activities. SB 375 provides incentives for local governments and

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-7
developers to implement new conscientiously planned growth patterns. This includes incentives for creating attractive, walkable, and sustainable communities and revitalizing existing communities. The legislation also allows developers to bypass certain environmental reviews under CEQA if they build projects consistent with the new sustainable community strategies. Development of more alternative transportation options that would reduce vehicle trips and miles traveled, along with traffic congestion, would be encouraged.

SB 375 enhances CARB’s ability to reach the AB 32 goals by directing the agency in developing regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from the transportation sector for 2020 and 2035. CARB would work with the metropolitan planning organizations (e.g. ABAG and MTC) to align their regional transportation, housing, and land use plans to reduce vehicle miles traveled and demonstrate the region's ability to attain its GHG reduction targets. A similar process is used to reduce transportation emissions of ozone precursor pollutants in the Bay Area.
h. Executive Order S-13-08 (2008)
This Executive Order directed California agencies to assess and reduce the vulnerability of future construction projects to impacts associated with sealevel rise. i. California’s Heavy Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Measure
On December 12, 2008 (one day after adopting the AB 32 Climate Action Plan), CARB adopted the Heavy Duty Vehicle GHG Emission Reduction measure that requires long-haul truckers to install fuel-efficient tires and aerodynamic devices on their trailers. This measure will reduce GHG emissions through improved fuel economy.

3. Regional and Local Regulations
a. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) In August 2008, SJVAPCD’s Governing Board adopted the Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP). The CCAP directed the District Air Pollution Control Officer to develop guidance to assist Lead Agencies and project proponents in

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-8
assessing and reducing the impacts of project-specific GHG emissions on global climate change. On December 17, 2009, SJVAPCD adopted its Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA.1
The guidance and policy rely on the use of performance based standards, or Best Performance Standards (BPS), to mitigate and assess the significance of project-specific GHG emissions on global climate change. b. City of Riverbank
To date, the City has not developed a climate action plan. The Riverbank General Plan2 contains the following goals and policies that relate, either directly or indirectly, to GHG emissions and the Specific Plan (see Table 4.7-1):

C. Existing Conditions

1. Greenhouse Gas Inventories
a. U.S. Inventory
The United States participates in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The U.S. EPA is developing rulemaking to regulate GHGs under the Clean Air Plan (note that a 2007 Supreme Court ruling held that the U.S. EPA can regulate GHG emissions). 3 1 SJVAPCD, 2009. Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA.
2 City of Riverbank, 2009. City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025. Adopted April 22, 2009. 3 On April 2, 2007, the United States Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, which holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has authority, under the Clean Air Act, to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles. The U.S. EPA had previously argued it lacked legal authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court decision noted that greenhouse gases meet the Clean Air Act’s definition of an “air pollutant,” and the EPA has the statutory authority to regulate the emission of such gases from new motor vehicles.

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-9
TABLE 4.7-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal AIR-1
Create and enhance development patterns that encourage
people to walk, bicycle, or use public transit for a significant number of their daily trips.

Policy
AIR-1.2
Approved plans, subdivisions, and projects shall provide highlyconnected circulation networks that accommodate safe, direct, and convenient alternatives to vehicular travel.

Policy
AIR-1.7
New major activity centers, office, and commercial development shall accommodate alternatives to automobile access, including provision of secure bicycle storage and parking facilities.

Policy
AIR-1.10
Projects or portions of projects that implement a fine-grained mixinga of housing types and land uses, and that include other pedestrian, bicycle, and transit oriented design elements, which generate fewer vehicle trips, will have a correspondingly lower contribution towards any roadway or intersection improvement mitigation measures required in City environmental documents and conditions or approval.

Goal AIR-2 Construction practices and materials used in Riverbank minimize direct and indirect air pollutant emissions.

Policy
AIR-2.5
The City of Riverbank will require new residential, commercial, and industrial development to reduce air quality impacts from area sources and from energy consumption. a The term “grain” can be used to describe the degree to which land uses are mixed and the size of development blocks. “Fine grain” development involves land uses located in proximity with one another on relatively smaller parcel or development blocks, allowing residents and employees to walk or bicycle among different destinations to meet their daily or occasional needs without use of a private automobile. By contrast, “coarse grain” development involves land uses that isolated from one another, with non-residential land uses typically occurring on larger parcels. This presents a situation in which residents and employees have a more difficult time traveling among destinations except by automobile. Public transit service is less feasible because transit routes would be located at a significant distance form potential transit users.

As part of the commitments to UNFCCC, the U.S. EPA has developed an inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all GHGs. This inventory is periodically updated with the latest update being

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-10
2009.
4 EPA reports that total U.S. emissions have risen by 7.3 percent from 1990 to 2009 to 6,633 million metric tons of equivalent CO2 per year, while emissions decreased by 6.1 percent from 2008 to 2009. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease in economic output (resulting in lower energy consumption) and a decrease in the carbon density of fuels used to generate electricity. The inventory notes that the electric power industry is the highest emitter by economic sector at 33 percent. The transportation sector emits about 27 percent of CO2 equivalent emissions, with 60 percent of those emissions coming from personal automobile use. Residential uses, primarily from energy use, accounted for 20 percent of CO2 emissions.

As a part of U.S. EPA’s responsibility to develop and update an inventory of U.S. GHG emissions and sinks, EPA compared trends of other various U.S. data. Over the period between 1990 and 2009, GHG emissions grew at a rate of about 0.4 percent per year. Population growth was higher at 1.1 percent, while electricity consumption was at 1.5 percent and fossil fuel use grew at 0.5 percent. Gross domestic product grew at a much higher rate of 2.5 percent. b. State of California Inventory
California emissions of GHGs or CO2 equivalent emissions was estimated at 484 million metric tons of equivalent CO2 emissions (MMTCO2e), which is about 7 percent of the emissions from the entire United States. It is estimated that the United States contributes up to 35 percent of the world’s CO2 equivalent emissions. Transportation is the largest source of GHG emissions in California, contributing about 40 percent of the emissions. Electricity generation is second at over 20 percent, but California imports electricity during the summer bringing energy sources up to about 25 percent. Industrial activities account for about 20 percent of the State’s emissions. Transportation is the largest source of GHG emissions in California, followed by industrial sources and electric power generation. On a per-person basis, GHG emissions are lower in California than most other states; however, California is a

4 U.S. EPA, 2011. 2011 U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report Inventory of U.S.

Greenhouse Gas E3missions and Sinks: 1990-2009. USEPA #430-R-11-005.

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-11
populous state and the second largest emitter of GHGs in the United States and one of the largest emitters in the world.

Under a “business as usual” scenario, emissions of GHG in California are estimated to increase to approximately 600 MMTCO2e by 2020. CARB staff has estimated the 1990 statewide emissions level to be 427 MMTCO2e, therefore, requiring a reduction of almost 30 percent in emissions by 2020 to meet the AB 32 goal.

CARB updated the future 2020 forecast in light of the economic downturn and updated the 2020 projected annual emissions to 545 million metric tons of CO2e. Two GHG emissions reduction measures currently enacted that were not previously included in the 2008 Scoping Plan baseline inventory were included, further reducing the baseline inventory to 507 million metric tons of CO2e. Thus, an estimated reduction of 80 million metric tons of CO2e is necessary to reduce statewide emissions to meet the AB 32 target by 2020. c. Riverbank Greenhouse Gas Emissions
To date, no formal emissions inventory has been conducted for the City of Riverbank.

D. Standards of Significance

1. CEQA Appendix G Standards
The Natural Resources Agency conducted formal rulemaking in 2009, as required by SB 97 for issuing criteria to determine the significance of projects or plans. The Plan would have a significant impact related to GHGs if it would:
a. Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-12
The Office of Planning and Research (OPR) recommends that each agency develop an approach to addressing GHG emissions that is based on best available information. The approach includes three basic steps: (1) identify and quantify emissions; (2) assess the significance of the emissions; and (3) if emissions are significant, identify mitigation measures or alternatives that will reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

2. Thresholds of Significance
The SJVAPCD has published recommended methodology for determining the significance of a project’s contribution to global climate change. According to the Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA,5 projects requiring preparation of an EIR would require quantification of project-specific GHG emissions.

Projects implementing Best Performance Standards (BPS) or achieving at least a 29 percent GHG emission reduction compared to Business As Usual (BAU) would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impacts for GHG. There are no thresholds applicable to GHG emissions associated with of Specific Plans. However, potential GHG emissions associated with build-out of the Draft Specific Plan were modeled and presented in this analysis.

E. Impacts Discussion
The following provides a discussion of the potential GHG impacts that could occur as a result of implementation of the Plan and cumulatively.

1. Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Operation-related GHG emissions derive primarily from five sources:
¨ Mobile source emissions due to additional trips generated by the Plan.

5 SJVAPCD, 2009. Guidance for Valley Land-Use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. December 17.

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-13
¨ Emissions from electricity generated by fossil-fuel power plants to the Plan Area.
¨ Emissions caused by consumption of natural gas for heating, cooking, and water heating within the Plan.
¨ Municipal emissions created by transport and treatment of water supply to the Plan and by electricity used to light streets.
¨ Municipal emissions created by the disposal and decomposition in landfills of solid waste generated from the Plan Area.

GHG emissions were modeled for existing or baseline conditions assumed to be 2010 and year 2020 to be consistent with AB 32 targets used by SJVAPCD to develop GHG significance thresholds. In addition, emissions were also modeled for 2030, which is the assumed build-out year of the Draft Specific Plan. The predicted 2020 emissions modeling assumes full build-out of the Draft Specific Plan, which is unlikely in that short timeframe. Therefore, this analysis likely overestimates the emissions. Area and mobile source emissions were computed using the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2011.1.1 (CalEEMod), as recommended by SJVAPCD.

CalEEMod is a computer model developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to estimate air pollutant and GHG emissions from land use development projects. The model uses the latest statewide emission inventory models for mobiles sources (i.e. EMFAC2007).

The model is periodically updated to reflect most recent emissions estimates for source types and incorporate accuracies in estimating emission from land use activities. The latest version of this model (i.e. Version 2011.1.1) was used in this analysis.

CalEEMod used the Draft Specific Plan land use types and sizes to predict area source and operational (traffic-related) emissions. The total square footages for the various land uses (e.g. office, industrial, retail, etc.) were input to the model. Trip generation rates produced by Fehr & Peers were input to CalEEMod. Where appropriate, the trip generation estimates include reduc-

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-14
tions for pass-by trips, which are trips made by traffic already using the adjacent roadway that enter the site as an intermediate stop on the way from another destination. They do not involve an extra vehicle trip. The methodology for developing the trip estimates is described in the Fehr & Peers report.6

Trip generation represents the daily number of trips generated when the land uses are fully operational. Pass-by trips are subtracted only from the proposed retail land uses. The adjusted trip rates were entered into CalEEMod, such that CalEEMod computed the same total number of daily trips generated as the Fehr & Peers study. The default trip lengths in CalEEMod were assumed in the analysis.

Emissions rates associated with electricity consumption were adjusted to account for Pacific Gas & Electric utility’s (PG&E) existing 2010 and future projected rate for 2020 and 2030 CO2 intensity rate. These rates are based, in part, on the requirement of a renewable energy portfolio standard of 33 percent by the year 2020. CalEEMod uses a default rate of 641.3 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity produced. The derived 2020 and 2030 rate for PG&E was estimated at 286.6 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity delivered and is based on the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) GHG Calculator.7
2020 is the last year for which CO2 intensity rate data is available from the CPUC. The 2010 rate for PG&E was estimated at 529.1 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity delivered. Default model assumptions for GHG emissions associated with area sources, solid waste generation, and water/wastewater use were applied to the project. CalEEMod output worksheets are included in Appendix B.

The results shown in Table 4.7-2 reflect the primary features of the Specific Plan that produce emissions. As these results do not include the effects of the

6 Fehr & Peers, 2011. Administrative Draft Transportation Impact Analysis Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant.
7 California Public Utilities Commissions GHG Calculator Version 3c, October 7, 2010. Available on-line at: http://ethree.com/public_projects/cpuc2.php. Accessed: March, 14, 2012.

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-15
TABLE 4.7-2 ANNUAL OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS (CO2E)
Category
2010
(Baseline)
(Metric
Tons/Year)
2020
Specific Plan
(Metric
Tons/Year)
2030
Specific Plan
(Metric
Tons/Year)
Mobile (Vehicular Traffic) 1,479 12,742 12,190
Energy 2,146 3,485 3,485
Water and Wastewater 7,275 11,165 11,165
Solid Waste 3,774 8,012 8,012
Total 14,674 35,404 34,852
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin, 2012.

Draft Specific Plan policies that would reduce GHG emissions, emissions are overestimated.

The Specific Plan includes numerous goals and policies to reduce the rate of vehicle trips or VMT associated with implementation of the Plan land uses, and in turn GHG emissions (see Table 4.7-3).

A 2020 BAU model was also run using the average of the 2003 and 2004 rates for PG&E, estimated at 593 pounds of CO2 per megawatt of electricity delivered8 . The same proposed land uses and sizes, and vehicle trip rates were used as in the 2020 and 2030 model runs. Annual operational GHG emissions under BAU are estimated to be 45,990 metric tons of CO2e per year. As shown in Table 4.7-2, the 2020 Specific Plan would emit approximately 35,404 metric tons of CO2e per year. Therefore, the Specific Plan in 2020 would provide

8 PG&E. 2011. Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors Info Sheet

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-16
TABLE 4.7-3 RIVERBANK SPECIFIC PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal LUD-1 A land use mix that contributes to job creation for Riverbank residents.

Policy LUD-1
Encourage a mix of new employment-intensive development types on undeveloped portions of the RAAP, including
traditional industrial uses, R&D space, flex space, office uses, and supporting retail space.

Goal TRAN-1 A new industrial park and retail area that facilitates the safe circulation of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians.

Policy TRAN-1 Provide pedestrian crossings as appropriate to ensure that employees can safely walk between buildings and to areas off-site.

Policy TRAN-2 On new public streets built in the Specific Plan Area, use a landscaped planting strip to buffer sidewalks from roadways.

Policy TRAN-3 Ensure bicycles are accommodated through the provision of onsite bicycle parking.

Policy TRAN-4 Design roadways to accommodate all modes of travel safely.

Goal TRAN-3 An industrial park that provides for safe queuing of delivery vehicles.

Policy TRAN-8 Ensure that truck deliveries and movement do not inhibit pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation.
approximately a 23 percent GHG emission reduction compared to BAU.

Additional reductions in GHG emissions would be required through the implementation of BPS for both land uses and possibly stationary source reductions. At this time, however, there is not enough information regarding specific planned uses and proposed stationary sources (e.g., industrial equipment) to implement SJVAPCD BPS or demonstrate at least a 29 percent GHG emission reduction compared to BAU. Therefore, this impact is considered significant.

RIVERBANK LOCAL RED EVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-17

2. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

All future projects in the Plan Area would be subject to any new requirements under rule making developed at the State and local level regarding GHG emissions and would be subject to local policies that may affect emissions of GHGs. Future projects in the Plan Area would be analyzed for consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations on a project-byproject basis as they are proposed.

F. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact GHG-1: Development and operation of the Specific Plan could generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Each individual project component of the Specific Plan shall be analyzed for significant GHG impacts. For each project-level analysis, appropriate BPS will be implemented or a 29 percent GHG emission reduction compared to BAU will be demonstrated.

Means of mitigating GHG impacts to a less-than-significant level include, but are not limited to, technological controls for stationary sources (such as for boilers, generators, and process heaters) and the GHG emission reduction measures (such as energy efficiency, transportation, and site design measures) for development projects listed in the SJVAPCD CCAP.9 Significance After Mitigation. Less than significant.

9 SJVAPCD, 2009. Final Staff Report – Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Under the California Environmental Quality Act. December 17.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISS IONS

4.7-18

4.8 MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-1
This chapter summarizes information on mineral resources in and around the City of Riverbank, including the Plan Area. This chapter provides an overview of the current regulatory framework, a description of existing conditions, and an analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed Plan.

A. Regulatory Framework
This section summarizes the key State and local regulations, policies, and programs applicable to mineral resources in and around the Plan Area.

1. State Regulations
The 1975 California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) requires that local governments address mineral recovery on two levels: through direct regulation of mining operations, and through planning policies that harmonize the mineral resource needs of the State and region with environmental quality.1 SMARA also contains policies for the conservation of known mineral deposits, access to which might be affected by proposed land uses, so that these deposits will be available for extraction and use.

The State Board of Mining and Geology conducts a two-step mineral resource inventory process mandated by SMARA and intended to ensure that important mineral deposits are identified and protected for continued and further extraction. The first step is classification of important mineral commodities by the State Geologist, based solely on geological factors. SMARA establishes the following four Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) Classifications:
¨ MRZ-1. Areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.

1 City of Riverbank, 2005. Mineral Resources Background Report for the General Plan, page MR-1.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-2
¨ MRZ-2. Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence exists.
¨ MRZ-3. Areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
¨ MRZ-4. Areas where available information is inadequate for assignment into any other MRZ.

Additionally, SMARA establishes a Scientific Zone (SZ) classification for areas containing unique or rare occurrences of rocks, minerals, or fossils that are of outstanding scientific significance.

The second step in the inventory process is designation, whereby deposits of prime importance to the future needs of the region are identified and their availability is assessed from an existing land use perspective. Following a public hearing and consultation with the affected cities and counties, the State Board designates all or part of areas classified as MRZ-2 or SZ as areas containing mineral resources of Statewide or regional significance. The State Board then transmits a report of its action to the affected city or county and within 12 months the jurisdiction must:
¨ Recognize and include in its General Plan the designated area of Statewide and regional significance transmitted by the State Board; ¨ Develop and adopt policies for the management of land use of areas classified MRZ-2 or SZ and designated by the State Board as areas of statewide and regional significance to protect those areas from premature development incompatible with mining;
¨ Emphasize the conservation and development of mineral deposits designated by the State Board to be of Statewide or regional significance.

2. Local Regulations
The Riverbank General Plan recognizes the Stanislaus River Corridor as an area associated with important mineral resources and includes the goals and

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-3
policies shown on Table 4.8-1 which seek to protect mineral resources and balance extraction with environmental, social, and economic considerations.

B. Existing Conditions

1. Mineral Resources
Mineral commodities in Stanislaus County are valued at several hundred million dollars, with gold and construction aggregate deposits representing the greatest value. Today, the most important area of the County for mining is the upstream portion of the Tuolumne River between Waterford and La Grange, which has substantial concrete-grade aggregate resources that could be used for future land development in the region. Several alluvial fans along the west side of the San Joaquin Valley are potential sources of concrete-grade aggregate, however, these deposits are of lesser quality than those found along the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers.

The majority of the City of Riverbank, including the Plan Area, is in an area classified as MRZ-3a, indicating that there are known mineral occurrences of undetermined significance present. The area contains concrete aggregate (sand and gravel) and is a potential future source of construction aggregate, although much of the Riverbank area is developed or currently in agricultural use.

2. Mining Activities
The first full scale mining activities in Stanislaus County began during the Gold Rush in the mid-19th Century. Gold was initially the most sought-after commodity and the main extraction activity was concentrated in the eastern portion of the county; however, other metallic commodities including chromite, manganese, and mercury were also mined.2 In the 20th Century, mining of industrial minerals including clay, diatomite, manganesite, mineral

2 Higgins, Chris T., 1993. Mineral Land Classification of Stanislaus County, California. Special Report 173. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California, pages 27-28.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-4
TABLE 4.8-1 RIVERBANK GENERAL PLAN GOAL AND POLICY RELATED TO

MINERAL RESOURCES
Goal/Policy
Number Goal/Policy Content
Goal CONS-9
Protect mineral resources in the Riverbank Planning Area consistent with other environmental, social, and economic goals.

Policy
CONS-9.1
The City will coordinate with the California Geologic Survey to incorporate, as necessary, on policies for conservation and possible future extraction of mineral resources of regional or statewide significance.

Source: City of Riverbank General Plan 2005-2025.
pigment (yellow ochre), quartz (silica), and dimension stone began, with production in the more mountainous regions of the county.

Today, the only mineral commodity mined in Stanislaus County is construction aggregate in the form of sand and gravel. This material has been mined extensively in Stanislaus County since the 1860s, and while commonplace, is important for the construction of sidewalks, roads, and buildings required for development. In 1991, Stanislaus County produced 75 percent of the aggregate required for construction within the county; however, the California Division of Mines and Geology identified a potential shortfall in supply of construction aggregate from sources within Stanislaus County if the pace of development continued at the rate seen in the 1990s.3
There are no active mines inside the Riverbank city limits or in the Plan Area; however, there are five mines in the 12.49-square mile MRZ-2 zone along

3 Higgins, Chris T., 1993. Mineral Land Classification of Stanislaus County, California. Special Report 173. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California, page 152.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-5
the Stanislaus River.4
The Munn and Perkins Pit, where aggregate (sand and
gravel) is mined, is the closest active mine to the Plan Area, located approximately 4 miles to the northeast of the Plan Area in Escalon, California.

There are also major sources of construction aggregate located in areas adjacent to Stanislaus County, as well as from the Table Mountain Quarry east of Knights Ferry.

C. Standards of Significance
The draft RAAP Site Specific Plan would have a significant impact on mineral resources if it would:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the state;
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a mineral resource plan, local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan.

D. Impacts Discussion

1. Project Level Impacts
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the state.

Mineral resources are known to be present in the Plan Area. The Plan Area is classified as MRZ-3 and concrete aggregate (sand and gravel) are potentially present in this portion of the Plan Area, although it has not been determined whether significant quantities of this commodity are in fact present at this location. The site, however, is already largely developed and surrounded by land uses incompatible with mining activities, including residences and agri-

4 Higgins, Chris T., 1993. Mineral Land Classification of Stanislaus County, California. Special Report 173. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California, pages xiv.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-6
cultural land. As such, future use of this site for mineral extraction is unlikely and therefore implementation of the Plan would not result in a significant loss of available minerals at this location. Overall, impacts related to loss of mineral resource availability from implementation of the Plan would be less than significant.
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site.

There are no mines located in the Plan Area. The closest active mine is the Munn and Perkins Pit, located approximately 3.8 miles to the northwest of the RAAP Site in Escalon, San Joaquin County. While the RAAP Site could potentially contain significant quantities of construction aggregate, it has not been determined that significant quantities of the commodity do in fact exist on the site. Additionally, the site is already largely developed and surrounding land uses would be incompatible with mining activities so that future use of the site for mineral extraction is unlikely. Therefore, overall, impacts related to loss of mineral resource recovery sites from implementation of the Plan would be less than significant.

2. Cumulative impacts
This section analyzes potential impacts to mineral resources that could occur from a combination of the proposed Plan with other reasonably foreseeable projects in the surrounding area. Cumulative impacts would occur if development associated with the Plan together with other projects in the City of Riverbank or adjacent portion of San Joaquin County along the Stanislaus River would result in the substantial loss of mineral resource sites or availability.

As described above, concrete-grade aggregate in the form of sand and gravel is potentially present in significant quantities in the Plan Area. This commodity is used to build sidewalks, roads, and buildings as the county grows; however, the California Division of Mines and Geology identified a potential shortfall in supply from sources within Stanislaus County if the pace of development continued at the rate seen in the 1990s. Implementation and

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-7
buildout of the Plan would result in the loss of a potential source of construction aggregate. This loss, however, would not be cumulatively considerable.

Even without implementation of the Plan, mining activities at this location would be unlikely given that the site is already largely developed and that surrounding land uses are incompatible with mineral extraction activities.

Further, substantial sources of construction aggregate located in areas adjacent to Stanislaus County as well as from the Table Mountain Quarry east of Knights Ferry. Therefore, implementation of the Plan would result in a lessthan-significant impact related to loss of mineral resource sites or availability.

E. Impacts and Mitigation Measures
There are no significant impacts related to agricultural resources as a result of the proposed Plan. Therefore no mitigation measures are required.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

MINERAL RESOURCES

4.8-8

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

4.9-1
This section provides an overview of the regulatory framework, describes existing conditions, analyzes the potential impacts and includes recommended mitigation measures, if necessary, to address the impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials.

A. Regulatory Framework
Various federal, State, regional, and local agencies oversee hazards and hazardous materials issues in Riverbank, and have established regulations designed to protect human health and the environment from the effects of hazardous materials.

1. Federal
Following are the federal agencies that oversee hazards and hazardous materials concerns. a. US Environmental Protection Agency
The US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) is the federal agency responsible for enforcement and implementation of federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. The legislation includes the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (commonly referred to as “Superfund”), the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Acts of 1986, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1986 (RCRA). The US EPA provides oversight and supervision for site investigations and remediation projects, and has developed land disposal restrictions and treatment standards for the disposal of certain hazardous wastes. b. United States Department of Transportation
Transportation of chemicals and hazardous materials are governed by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), which stipulates the types of containers and labeling and other restrictions to be used in the movement of such material on interstate highways.

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOU S MATERIALS

4.9-2

2. State
Following are the State agencies and regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials.
a. California Environmental Protection Agency
Within the State of California, California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) serves as the umbrella agency for six boards/departments: the California Air Resources Board (CARB) AND San Joaquin Valley Air District (SJVAD), the Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR), the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), the California Integrated Waste Management Board, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its associated regional Water Boards.
¨ California Air Resources Board and San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Valley Air District). CARB and the Valley Air District have responsibility for developing and enforcing regulations to achieve and maintain ambient air quality standards in the district. CARB is responsible for enforcing the Clean Air Act and California's State Ambient Air Quality Standards. The Valley Air District is responsible for regulating air emissions from stationary sources.
¨ Department of Pesticide Regulation. The DPR has the primary responsibility for regulating all aspects of pesticide sales and use to protect public health and the environment. The DPR’s mission is to evaluate and mitigate impacts of pesticide use, maintain the safety of the pesticide workplace, ensure product effectiveness and encourage the development and use of reduced-risk pest control practices while recognizing the need for pest management in a healthy economy.
¨ Department of Toxic Substance Control. The DTSC works in conjunction with the US EPA to enforce and implement specific laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous wastes. California legislation, for which the DTSC has primary enforcement authority, includes the Hazardous Waste Control Act and the Hazardous Substance Account Act.

Most State hazardous waste regulations are contained in the CCR, Title

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP S PECIFIC PLAN EIR

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOU S MATERIALS

4.9-3

27. The DTSC generally acts as the lead agency for soil and groundwater cleanup projects, and establishes cleanup and action levels for subsurface contamination that are equal to, or more restrictive than, federal levels. ¨ Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. The mission of the OEHHA is to protect and enhance public health and the environment by objective scientific evaluation of risks posed by hazardous substances. ¨ State Water Resource Control Board. The SWRCB, through its regional boards, regulates discharge of potentially hazardous materials to waterways and aquifers and administers basin plans for groundwater resources in various regions of the State. The California Regional Quality Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region is the regional board that has jurisdiction over the Plan Area. The SWRCB provides oversight for sites at which the quality of groundwater or surface waters is threatened, and has the authority to require investigations and remedial actions.
b. California Department of Transportation
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages more than 50,000 miles of California's highway and freeway lanes, provides inter-city rail services, permits more than 400 public-use airports and special-use hospital heliports and works with local agencies. This agency is also the firstresponder for hazardous material spills and releases that occur on those highway and freeway lanes and inter-city rail services.

3. Local and County Agencies
Following are the local and County agencies that oversee hazards and hazardous materials in Stanislaus County. a. Stanislaus County Environmental Resources Department The Environmental Resources Department of Stanislaus County oversees hazardous materials programs throughout the county. It maintains hazardous materials response teams and implements the county’s plan for emergencies resulting from chemical spills. Additionally, the Department prepares and

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP SPECIFIC PLAN E IR

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOU S MATERIALS

4.9-4
implements the County’s Hazardous Waste Management Plan, as well as inspects the facilities impacted by the Aboveground Storage and Underground Storage Tank Programs. Finally, the Department maintains hazardous materials response teams to assist public and fire agencies during chemical spills. b. Stanislaus County Office of Emergency Services (OES) The Stanislaus County OES is a division of the General Services Department and its mission is to minimize or reduce injury, loss of life, environmental and property damage from emergencies within Stanislaus County. The OES provides the following services:
¨ Prepare disaster response plans and procedures, and improve response capabilities ¨ Coordinate public safety agency response to large scale emergencies in Stanislaus County
¨ Respond to hazardous materials incidents in the unincorporated areas of ¨ Provide instructions and information to the public during disasters ¨ Assist businesses to comply with Chapter 6.95 of the Health and Safety Code, hazardous materials management plans and inventories ¨ Assist businesses to comply with the Federal Risk Management Plan Program ¨ Make hazardous materials "Community-Right-To-Know" Information available to the public
¨ Provide disaster preparedness presentations to community groups c. Stanislaus County Consolidated Fire Prevention District In cooperation with Stanislaus County the Stanislaus County Consolidated Fire Prevention District (SCFPD) has implemented a Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP), which identifies ways to minimize damage from those disasters. The plan is a comprehensive resource document that serves many purposes, including: enhancing public awareness and understanding, creating a decision tool for management, promoting compliance

RIVERBANK LOCAL REDE VELOPMENT AUTHORITY

RAAP S PECIFIC PLAN EIR

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOU S MATERIALS

4.9-5
with State and federal program requirements, enhancing local policies for hazard mitigation capability, and providing inter-jurisdictional coordination. Additionally, the MJHMP has identified and profiled the following hazards: Earthquake, Landslide, Dam Failure, Flood, and Wildfire. The MJHMP must be updated every five year, in accordance with FEMA guidelines. d. City of Riverbank General Plan
The Riverbank General Plan includes several goals and policies that address hazards and hazardous materials. Table 4.9-1 lists these goals and policies.