January 2022 | General Plan EIR Addendum
ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN EIR
SCH No. 2017052062
FOR THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AND
ZONING UPDATE
City of Stockton
Prepared for:
City of Stockton
Community Development Director
425 N. El Dorado Street Stockton,
California 95202
Prepared by:
Pla
ceWorks
101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 112
Folsom, California 95630
916.276.0616
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
Section Page
1. ADDENDUM TO THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN EIR ............................................................... 1
1.1 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 PURPOSE OF AN EIR ADDENDUM ........................................................................................................... 2
1.3 GENERAL PLAN EIR ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................................. 5
2. CEQA ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 10
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 11
2.2 FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................................... 11 Table Page
TABLE 1: TYPES OF INCONSISTENCIES ................................................................................................. 7 TABLE 2: EXISTING 2040 GENERAL PLAN AND PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE............... 9 TABLE 3: EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING ..................................................................................... 10 EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
This page intentionally left blank.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
1. Addendum to the Adopted General Plan EIR
1.1 BACKGROUND
The Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan includes some key changes from the prior 2007 G eneral Plan for Stockton, including:
• Increasing allowable residential densities and intensity of development downtown and in the surrounding greater downtown area;
• Allowing mixed-use infill development along major travel corridors, particularly downtown and in South Stockton; and
• Reducing the amount of agricultural land that could be developed with urban land uses by almost 8,000 acres.
On December 4, 2018, the City Council approved the Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan that included a map designating land uses for all properties within the city limits and future growth areas that may someday be incorporated into Stockton. State law requires a city’s General Plan to be consistent with its zoning regulations, which includes map designation and text standards for use and design.
As part of the work to implement the Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan, PlaceWorks conducted a geographic information system (GIS ) data analysis of inconsistencies between the City of Stockton’s (City’s) current zoning map and the new General Plan land use map. This analysis helped determine necessary changes to zoning to achieve consistency with the General Plan , to resolve discrepancies between zoning and current land uses that pre-date the General Plan update, and, in some instances, to amend the General Plan land use diagram to align with current zoning and/or land uses.
Approximately 7 percent (or 6,000) of the parcels in Stockton have zoning that does not align with the General Plan or the current land use. Some properties simply have never been assigned a zoning category, and a number of street, rail, water, park, and open space areas were mistakenly assigned the zoning of a nearby land use , independent of the adoption of the General Plan. Other lots have single -family homes but a re zoned multifamily or commercial. These cases are easily remedied by correcting the zoning, while others also require a change to the General Plan Land Use Map to achieve consistency in compliance with state law.
This document serves as the environmental documentation for the City’s updates to the General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map. This addendum to the City of Stockton 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), certified on December 4, 2018 (State Clearinghouse Number 2017052062), demonstrates that the analysis in the General Plan EIR adequately addresses the potential physical impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project and that none of the conditions described in the California EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15162, exist and preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration is not necessary.
1.2 PURPOSE OF AN EIR ADDENDUM
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a), an addendum shall be prepared if some changes or additions to a previously adopted EIR are necessary, but none of the conditions enumerated in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1) to (3) calling for the preparation of subsequent EIR have occurred . As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations):
When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
The proposed project would not trigger any of the conditions outlined in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1) to (3) because these changes would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects requiring major revisions to the EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
General Plan EIR. The following analysis provides the substantial evidence required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(e) to support the finding that a subsequent EIR is not required and an addendum to the General Plan EIR is the appropriate environmental document to address changes to the project.
As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR):
(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Secti on 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
A copy of this addendum, and all supporting documentation, may be reviewed or obtained at the City of Stockton Community Development Department, 425 N. El Dorado Street, Stockton, California 95202.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
1.3 GENERAL PLAN EIR
The General Plan EIR found that, with the implementation of policies and actions from the General Plan and mitigation measures identified in the EIR, there would be less-than-significant impacts related to aesthetics; biological resources; cultural and tribal cultural resources; geology, soils, seismicity, an d mineral resources; hazards and hazardous materials; hydrology and water quality; land use; public services and recreation; and utilities and service systems.
The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would result in the foll owing significant and unavoidable impacts.
Impact AG -1: Although the proposed General Plan includes policies and actions that would reduce and partially offset the conversion of farmland, it designates approximately 16,160 acres of farmlands of concern under CEQA for non-agricultural uses.
Impact AG-2: The proposed General Plan designates 2,464 acres of lands with active Williamson Act contracts for non-agricultural uses.
Impact AQ-1: Implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in the generation of substantial long-term criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) regional significance thresholds and would therefore not be considered consistent with the existing Air Quality Management Plans.
Impact AQ -2: Construction activitie s associated with implementation of the proposed General Plan and UMPS could exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds.
Impact AQ-3: Operation of development projects allowed under the proposed General Plan would generate emissions that would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC, NO X, CO, PM10, and
PM2.5.
Impact AQ-4: Development allowed under the proposed General Plan and UMPS could result in short - and long-term emissions that could cause or contribute to a violation of the ambient air quality standards.
Impact GHG -1: Implementation of the proposed General Plan would result in a substantial increase in greenhouse emissions.
Impact NOISE-3: Increased traffic from projected development allowed by the proposed General Plan would result in a significant increase in traffic noise levels compared to existing conditions along the following roadway segments:
1. State Route (SR-) 99 between Farmington Road and Mariposa Road
2. SR -4 west of Interstate (I-) 5
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
3. Eight Mile Road between Mokelumne Drive and Trinity Parkway.
4. Eight Mile Road between West Lane and SP Railroad
5. Eight Mile Road between SR-99 and west of Bear Creek
6. March Lane between West Land and Bianchi
7. French Camp Road between McDougald and Ews Woods
8. California Street between Park and Weber
9. California Street between Weber and Crosstown Freeway
10. Airport Way between Main and Market
11. Airport Way between Ninth and Tenth
12. Airport Way between Sperry and CE Dixon St
13. Mariposa Road between Stagecoach and SR-99
14. B Street between Ralph Avenue and Arch Airport
Impact POP-1: The proposed General Plan and UMPS would induce substantial employment growth within the EIR Study Area.
Impact TRAF-1: Implementation of the proposed General Plan, in combination with regional growth, would result in increased vehicle traffic, which would affect the operation of local roadways and freeway segments.
The proposed General Plan would result in significant level of service impacts to roadway and freeway segments.
Impact TRAF-2: Implementation of the proposed General Plan, in combination with regional growth, would result in increased vehicle traffic, which would affect the operation of regional roadways and freeway segments.
The proposed General Plan would result in significant level of service impacts to roadway and freeway segments.
1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CEQA requires the City to evaluate the environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the proposed project. The goals, policies, and actions from the previous 2040 General Plan would not be changed as part of this proposed project.
The proposed project would amend the General Plan Land Use Map and Title 16 of the City’s Municipal Code to align the zoning map and the revised General Plan Land Use Map.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
Amendments to Title 16 (Development Code) of the Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) inc lude Sections
16.08.020 (Rules of interpretation), 16.12.020 (Requirements for development and new land uses), 16.16.020 (Zoning districts established), 16.16.030 (Zoning Map adopted), 16.20.020 (Allowable land uses and permit requirements), 16.24.040 (RL (residential, low density) zoning district standards), 16.24.110 (CL (commercial- large-scale) zoning district standards), 16.24.200 (Table 2-3 Zoning District Development Standards), 16.28.040 (Channel area ( -CHA) overlay district), 16.28.060 (Magnolia historic ( -MHD) overlay district), 16.28.070 (Commercial-Industrial (-CI) overlay district),16.36.080 (Hazardous materials), 16.36.110 (Setback regulations and exceptions), 16.40.030 (Definitions), 16.40.040 (Types of density bonuses), 16.40.050 ( Concessions or incentives, waivers or reductions, and eligibility points), 16.52 ( Infill Development Standards ), 16.64.040 (Number of parking spaces required), 16.76.030 (Prohibited signs), 16.76.040 (Sign permits), 16.76.090 (Illegal signs), 16.80.020 (Acc essory uses and structures), 16.80.165 (Funeral facilities and services), 16.80.210 (Mobilehome parks and subdivisions), 16.80.215 ( Multi-unit Residential), 16.80.250 (Outdoor dining and seating areas), 16.80.310 (Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs)),
16.84.020 (Review Authority for land use and zoning decisions), 16.92.170 (Runs with the land), 16.120.040 (Applicable Review Authority), 16.162.030 (Applicability), 16.228.040 (Provisions for nonconforming uses, structures, and parcels), and 16.240.020 (Definitions of specialized terms and phrases).
Many of the code changes are proposed in tandem with the General Plan Land Use and Citywide zoning map to better implement the proposed map changes to resolve inconsistencies. The code amendments needed for the map changes are intended to ensure existing property rights and incentivize land-use transitions by allowing more land uses that are more compatible with the communities and comply with the adopted General Plan policies. Other code changes are needed to comply with s tate law, provide clarity, and accommodate current best practices.
Key proposed changes include the following topics:
• Expand housing typologies to integrate “Missing Middle” (or low-rise, small-scale) housing types, including definitions and standards for Cottage Courts, Stacked Duplexes, Stacked Triplexes, Stacked Fourplexes, and Townhouses. Encourages use of small, underutilized, infill lots. • Further parking reductions for residential housing types. • Clean-ups to the Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Density Bonus sections to align with state law.
• Expansion of allowable land uses in Table 2-2, Allowable Land Uses, in line with Series 3 map changes.
• Creation of a new hybrid Industrial-Commercial Overlay District to ease transition from heavier industrial uses to commercial/higher-tech (indoor) industrial, and to buffer residential from industrial uses.
• Allow upper-floor multifamily residential development in the Commercial, Large (CL) zone, i.e., the malls and large shopping centers zoned CL.
• Updates to the Channel Area Overlay District to carve out a Marine Commercial Subarea, intended to retain and continue certain marine uses in a small defined area on the north shore of the waterfront.
• Updates to the Magnolia Historic Overlay District to allow flexibility (relaxation of permit requirements for residential and some commercial uses, including reduction from CUP to AUP).
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
• Define Adaptive Reuse to encourage infill development, along with relaxed standards to encourage reuse of existing buildings, including parking reductions/exemptions, particularly targeting the downtown.
• Updates to signage requirements.
• Creation of minor design review process for streamlined approvals. • Creation of definition for parklets.
• Updates for motorized food wagons.
• Various clean-ups and revised definitions.
The majority of the proposed map changes are needed to resolve decades-long inconsistencies between zoning and built development and predate the current and previous General Plans . As shown in Table 1, t hese map amendments include unzoned properties ; r ight-of-way; c ivic uses; and parks, split-zones, open space; and owner-requested properties, for which a General Plan Land Use Map Amendment (GPLUMA) may resolve the inconsistency.
Table 1: Types of Inconsistencies
Parcel Type Current Inconsistency Possible Resolution
Unzoned Properties that do not have a General
Plan land use designation or zoning
but are currently used for a specific
purpose (such as waterway, bike path,
open space).
GPLUMA and rezoning to retain
current use and match surrounding
uses/development patterns.
General Plan Land Use -
Zoning Mismatch
Properties that have zoning that is
incongruent/inconsistent with the
property’s General Plan Land Use.
Modify General Plan Land Use
Designation or zoning to align zoning
with General Plan Land Use and
General Plan Policy.
Split Properties with multiple land use
designations or zoning.
GPLUMA and rezoning to retain
current use and match surrounding
uses/development patterns. While
each designation allows development,
smaller sites may see a reduction in
buildable area should the designation
have conflicting standards (such as
setbacks, heights, allowable uses).
Rights-of-Way (ROW) Streets, waterways, and railroad
alignments used for circulation that
cannot be developed for other uses.
GPLUMA and rezoning to classify as
ROW consistent with the General
Plan circulation map. Should a ROW
cease to operate, an amendment may
be processed concurrent with a
proposed land use review.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
Civic Uses (Schools) City-owned schools, libraries, and community facilities.
GPLUMA and rezoning to classify
public schools and other institutional
uses. This will not apply to private
schools and other public uses (e.g.,
churches) that require City review.
Recreation and Open
Space
Includes parks and some properties
with inaccurate adjacent residential or
commercial designation.
GPLUMA and rezoning to classify
Park and Recreational uses (active
and passive areas) and Open Space
(preservation, conservation).
Residential Uses Residential parcels where the General
Plan, zoning, and/or current use do
not align.
GPLUMA and rezoning to retain
current use and match surrounding
uses/development patterns. The City
may also investigate standards to
allow more flexibility (without
impacting Regional Housing Needs
Allocation capacity or obligations).
Property Owner Request
(if consistent with
General Plan)
While some properties may not have
inconsistencies with the General Plan
or zoning, owners have expressed
interest in modifying the zoning to
increase development potential.
Staff may support requests that
continue to align with the General
Plan and not negatively impact the
surrounding community. Staff will
not support requests that will create
an inconsistency, undue precedent, or
have a substantial negative effect on a
surrounding property.
The propose
d project includes zoning and General Plan designation updates for parcels throughout the extents of the c ity boundaries. Most changes occur in developed infill areas to align zoning and General Plan designations with one another. These changes are needed to transition noxious industrial uses away from residential uses by converting them to commercial and in other areas increase development intensity for properties in urban downtown areas to align with General Plan development intensities. Designation changes to commercial zones allow the option of commercial development, residential units, or a combination of both.
Many industrial sites in the core of the c ity are proposed to change to commercial zones, increasing the allowable uses for these sites, while the Industrial-Commercial Overlay recognizes the industrial past of these areas, allowing some light industrial uses to initiate in these same areas. Generally, these changes provide the same level of, if not slightly more, development flexibility for property owners. Other changes include changes to accurately categorize some rights -of-way and open space areas that, to date, have been mapped as within adjacent zoning districts with standards that are not applicable for rights-of-way or open space.
The proposed amendments ensure consistency with the policies of the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and ensure that sites designated for meeting the City’s fair-share housing requirements are maintained.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
The proposed project would not affect housing unit capacity included in the 2015-2023 Housing Element that count toward meeting the City ’s fair share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). While the residentially designated land would be reduced by the proposed c hanges, the overall building capacity would not be reduced, as the residential densities on some parcels would be increased where infrastructure capacity exists to serve increased densities. This increase typically occurs when a property is proposed to convert from industrial to commercial or for single -family residential uses in the downtown area upzoned to align with the development intensities identified in the General Plan.
Many of the parcels in question have long been zoned RH (Residential, High Density), but developed in the RM (Residential, Medium Density), range of 6.2 to 13.1 gross units per acre or 8.8 to 17.4 net units per acre.
Some of these areas are designated as RL (Low-Density Residential) in the adopted General Plan and, therefore, would also be adjusted to the Medium -Density Residential General Plan Land Use Designation to reflect the reality of built development. These properties currently are developed with single- family homes and are not designated RHNA sites, and the proposed changes for these parcels support the continuation of legally established existing uses. The other most significant change is the addition of an overlay to allow current industrial uses to transition to a combination of commercial and residential uses over time.
As shown in Table 2, the proposed General Plan land use changes would reduce residentially designated land by approximately 115 acres and reduce non-residential land (excluding parks, open space, and right-of-way) by approximately 106 acres. The redesignations would increase land designated for parks and open space by approximately 9 acres, and land designated for right-of-way would also increase by approximately 16 acres. The change would reduce land with no land use designations by approximately 30 acres. During the General Plan update, it was envisioned that the North Wilson Way corridor could transition toward neighborhood -serving land uses over time. However, the corresponding application of the Commercial land use designation west of Wilson Way into the El Pinal Business Park area covered parcels that remain appropriate for industrial uses.
During the General Plan update, it was envisioned that the North Wilson Way corridor could transition toward neighborhood-serving land uses over time. However, the corresponding application of the Commercial land use designation west of Wilson Way into the El Pinal Business Park area covered parcels that remain appropriate for industrial uses.
Table 2: Existing 2040 General Plan and Proposed General Plan Land Use General Plan Land Use
EXISTING (2040) PROPOSED DIFFERENCE
Acres Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Parcels
Admin Professional 121 25 37 230 -84 205
Commercial 696 610 615 763 -82 153
Industrial 11 23 84 23 73 0
Institutional 52 10 38 18 -14 8
Low Density Residential 246 1,080 39 20 -207 -1060
Medium Density Residential 50 23 159 887 109 864
High Density Residential 92 351 75 81 -17 -270
Mixed Use 0 0 0 0 0 0
Open Space/Agriculture 0 0 3.5 4 3.5 4
Parks and Recreation 25 12 34 12 9 0
Right-of-Way 0 0 16 8 16 8
Not labeled or labeled "None" 30 11 0 0 -30 -11
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
TOTAL 1,294 2,144 1,294 2,143 0 0
Note: Totals may be off due to rounding
Existing and proposed zoning is shown in Table 3. Approximately 89.5 acres did not have a zoning district assigned. The rezoning would increase non-residentially zoned land citywide by approximately 58.1 acres and increase residentially zoned land by appro ximately 15.6 acres. Right-of-way zoning would also increase by approximately 15.6 acres.
Table 3: Existing and Proposed Zoning
Zoning
EXISTING PROPOSED DIFFERENCE
Acres Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Parcels
Commercial - Downtown (CD) 5.5 11 80.8 234 75.34 223
Commercial - General (CG) 61.9 215 253.2 185 210.79 -28 Commercial - Neighborhood (CN) 1.7 5 270.9 3.5 270.64 303 Commercial - Office (CO) 308.3 374 36.8 229 -271.32 -144 Industrial - General (IG) 320.5 216 177.7 78 -154.89 -143 Industrial - Limited (IL) 255.4 339 67.5 31 -197.81 -311 Port 0 0 11.7 4 0 0
Public Facilities (PF) 7.9 3 120.7 40 112.87 37
Mixed Use (MX) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential - Low Density (RL) 98.6 66 37.9 18 -59.29 -45 Residential - Low Density Planned (RLP) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential - Medium Density (RM) 13.9 16 165 891 144.87 872 Residential - Medium Density Planned (RMP) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Residential - High Density (RH) 130.7 871 55.9 120 -74.81 -751 Residential - High Density Planned (RHP) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Right-of-Way 0 0 15.6 8 15.57 8
Unzoned 89.5 27 0 0 -71.96 -21
TOTAL 1,294 2,144 1,294 2,143 0 0
As a c hart
er city, Stockton is not required to maintain consistency as the majority of change needed to the zoning map results from decades -long inconsistencies between zoning and built development that predate Envision Stockton 2040. Since the adoption of the Envision Stockton 2040 Ge neral Plan on December 4, 2018, California law now requires charter cities to demonstrate compliance with its development standards and General Plan.
In addition, many of the changes are needed to further implement General Plan policies for effective growth and public health and safety. These changes include reducing potential incompatibilities between adjacent uses, such as industrial and residential uses, protecting civic uses, and preserving open space.
2. CEQA Analysis
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The General Plan contains policies related to land use, circulation, housing, noise, safety, conservation, open space, urban design, economic development, air quality, historic and cultural resources, infrastructure, services, and finance. As previously described in Section 1. 3, the General Plan EIR address es potentially significant impacts related to aesthetics, land use, agriculture, population/housing/employment, hazards and human health, air quality, noise, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, biological resources, cultural and paleontological resources, and public services and utilities. The policies of the General Plan and the existing development standards apply to all development in the General Plan Planning Area and would continue to apply to the land that this mapping correction found.
As discussed in Section 1. 4, the land use designation changes are intended to align the zoning map with the General Plan Land Use Map, as well as to update the zoning and General Plan designations to reflect the existing land development pattern in Stockton, and to ensure consistency with General Plan and Housing Element policies and actions and the community’s vision expressed during the General Plan update process regarding preferred land uses for specific neighborhoods, nodes, and corridors. The code changes are proposed in tandem with the General Plan Land Use and Citywide zoning map to better implement the proposed map changes to resolve inconsistencies.
As shown in Table 2, the proposed General Plan land use changes would reduce residentially designated land by approximately 115 acres and decrease non-residential land (excluding parks, open space, and right-of-way) by approximately 106 acres. The redesignations would increase land designated for parks and open space by approximately 9 acres, and land designated for right -of-way would increase by approximately 16 acres. The change would reduce land with no designations by approximately 30 acres.
This change would not be considered a substantial change to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. While the residential and non-residential designated land would be reduced by the proposed changes, the overall building capacity would not be reduced, as the residential densities on some parcels would be increased where infrastructure capacity exists to serve increased densities .
In addition, there would be no reductions in capacity that would occur on sites identified for housing in the Housing Element.
2.2 FINDINGS
The discussion in this addendum confirms that the proposed project has been evaluated for significant impacts pursuant to CEQA.
There are no substantial changes in the circumstances or new information that was not known and could not have been known at the time of the adoption of the General Plan EIR. As a result, and for the reasons explained in this a ddendum, the proje ct would not cause any new significant environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity of significant environmental impacts disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Thus, the proposed project does not trigger any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
preparation of a subsequent EIR, and the appropriate environmental document as authorized by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(b) is an addendum. Accordingly, this EIR addendum has been prepared.
The following identifies the standards in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 as they relate to the project.
1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
As discussed previously, the changes included in the proposed project are intended to align the zoning map with the General Plan Land Use Map and update the zoning and General Plan designations to reflect the existing land development pattern in Stockton. As discussed, the proposed General Plan land use changes would decrease non-residential land (excluding parks, open space, and right-of-way) by approximately 106 acres and reduce residential land by approximately 115 acres . The redesignations would increase land designated for parks and open space by approximately 9 acres, and land designated for right-of-way would increase by approximately 12.5 acres. The change would reduce land with no designations by approximately 30 acres. The changes would not increase development potential in the city and would not be considered a substantial change to the General Plan that would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
Further, as noted previously, the majority of change needed to the zoning map results from decades-long inconsistencies between zoning and built development that predate Envision Stockton 2040. The land use and zoning alignments also provide a variety of environmental benefits, including promoting infill development, discouraging single-occupant vehicle trips and reducing vehicle miles traveled ( VMT), and preserving parks and open space for active and passive recreation and active transportation purposes.
Therefore, the changes would not require revisions to the General Plan EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
2. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete demonstrating that the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.
The policies and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR would continue to apply to all development in Stockton and would have the same mitigating effect as disclosed in the General Plan EIR.
There is no new information that was not known and could not have been known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified demonstrating that the project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR. Therefore, no new impacts would occur as a result of future development.
Because a development project must be consistent with the General Plan, zoning, and development standards of the City, the resulting impacts would be the same as those disclosed in the certified General Plan EIR.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
3. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete demonstrating that significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.
The proposed project would have the same significant impacts as those disclosed in the certified General Plan EIR. The General Plan policies and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce physical environmental effects would apply to all new development, including parcels redesignated as part of this project. These policies and mitigation measures would have the same mitigating effect as disclosed in the General Plan EIR . There is no new information that would demonstrate that significant effects examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the certified General Plan EIR.
4. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete demonstrating that mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Although the proposed changes would result in different types of development occurring in different portions of the city, the changes would not occur in areas that were not already assumed for development in the General Plan EIR. In addition, the overall development intensity in the city would not be substantially changed compared to that analyzed in the General Plan EIR. As noted previously, in most instances, the changes reflect existing development and amendments are consistent with the policies of the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and would not substantially affect the City’s ability to meet its fair-share housing requirements. Further, as noted previously, the policies and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR would continue to apply to all development in the city and would have the same mitigating effect as disclosed in the General Plan EIR. The changes in land use designations compared to that assumed in the General Plan EIR would not substantially change the conclusions of the EIR or require new mitigation measures.
5. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete demonstrating that m itigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
As noted previously , the overall development intensity in the city would not be substantially changed compared to that analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, no new mitigation measures or alternatives to the proposed project would be required . Further, the General Plan policies and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce physical environmental effects would have the same mitigating effect as disclosed in the General Plan EIR. There is no new information of substantial importance that EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum
would indicate that these land use changes would result in new impacts that would not be reduced by these policies and mitigation measures. No new mitigation measures or alternatives are required.
EXHIBIT 1 - GPEIR Addendum