Step 1:
Therefore:
Average Daily VMT:
219,021 Source: CalEEMod Output
Step 2: Given:
Fleet Mix (CalEEMod Output)
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH
56.01% 5.39% 17.34% 13.10% 2.13% 0.55% 1.26% 1.65% 0.04% 0.03% 2.12% 0.10% 0.27% And:
Gasoline MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class - Year 2030 (EMFAC2021 Output) LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV MCY MH OBUS
31.78 26.64 25.94 20.85 40.98 4.42 5.05
Diesel MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class - Year 2030 (EMFAC2021 Output) LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD UBUS SBUS
16.06816187 13.53509423 8.504393618 5.493562034 9.210939077 8.34950855 Therefore:
Weighted Average MPG Factors
Gasoline: 29.0 Diesel: 10.9
Step 3: Therefore:
7,119 daily gallons of gasoline 1,145 daily gallons of diesel or
2,598,340 annual gallons of gasoline 417,861 annual gallons of diesel EXHIBIT 1 1227
Off-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage
Note: For the sake of simplicity, and as a conservative estimation, it was assumed that all off-road vehicles use diesel fuel as an energy source.
Demolition (if applicable), Site preparation and grading off-road mobile vehicle on-site gallons of fuel are calculated below.
Given Factor: 986.6 metric tons CO2 (provided in CalEEMod Output File) Conversion Factor: 2204.6262 pounds per metric ton
Intermediate Result: 2,175,109 pounds CO2
Conversion Factor: 22.38 pounds CO2 per 1 gallon of diesel fuel Source: U.S. EIA, 2016 Final Result: 97,189.87 gallons diesel fuel http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11 Mitigated Onsite Scenario Total CO2 (MT/yr) (provided in CalEEMod Output File) Site Preparation - 2022 101.13
Grading - 2022 74.22
Grading - 2023 351.85
Building Construction - 2023 153.90
EXHIBIT 1 1228
On-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage - Site Preparation Step 1: Total Daily Worker Trips (CalEEMod Output)
18 Worker Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output)
10.8 Therefore:
Average Worker Daily VMT:
194
Step 2: Given:
Assumed Fleet Mix for Workers (Percentage mix is provided on Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMOD p. 15) LDA LDT1 LDT2
0.5 0.25 0.25
And:
Gasoline MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class (from EMFAC2021) - Year 2022 LDA LDT1 LDT2
28.11 23.45 22.48
Therefore:
Weighted Average Worker MPG Factor
25.5 Step 3: Therefore:
7.6 Worker daily gallons of gasoline
Step 4: 60 # of Days (CalEEMod Output)
Therefore:
Result: 457 Total gallons of gasoline
EXHIBIT 1 1229
On-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage - Grading
Step 1: Total Daily Worker Trips (CalEEMod Output)
20 Worker Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output)
10.8 Therefore:
Average Worker Daily VMT:
216
Step 2: Given:
Assumed Fleet Mix for Workers (Percentage mix is provided on Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMOD p. 15) LDA LDT1 LDT2
0.5 0.25 0.25
And:
Gasoline MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class (from EMFAC2021) - Year 2022 LDA LDT1 LDT2
28.11 23.45 22.48
Therefore:
Weighted Average Worker MPG Factor
25.5 Step 3: Therefore:
8.5 Worker daily gallons of gasoline
Step 4: 155 # of Days (CalEEMod Output)
Therefore:
Result: 1,311 Total gallons of gasoline
EXHIBIT 1 1230
On-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage - Building Construction Step 1: Total Daily Worker Trips (CalEEMod Output) Total Daily Vendor Trips (CalEEMod Output) 565 5% 28 219 5% 11
Note: Assumes 5% of Plan Area under construction at given point in time (on average) until buildout.
Worker Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output) Vendor Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output)
10.8 7.3
Therefore:
Average Worker Daily VMT: Average Vendor Daily VMT:
305 80
Step 2: Given:
Assumed Fleet Mix for Workers (Percentage mix is provided on Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMOD p. 15) LDA LDT1 LDT2 Fleet Mix for Workers (CalEEMod Output)
0.5 0.25 0.25 MHD HHD
Assumed Fleet Mix for Vendors 0% 100%
And:
MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class (from EMFAC2021) - Year 2022 Gasoline: Diesel:
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MHD HHD
28.11 23.45 22.48 8.50 5.49
Therefore:
Weighted Average Worker (Gasoline) MPG Factor Weighted Average Vendor (Diesel) MPG Factor
25.5 5.5
Step 3: Therefore: Therefore:
12 Worker daily gallons of gasoline 15 Vendor daily gallons of diesel Step 4: 1550 # of Days (CalEEMod Output)
Therefore: Therefore:
18,519 Total gallons of gasoline 22,554 Total gallons of diesel EXHIBIT 1 1231
On-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage - Paving
Step 1: Total Daily Worker Trips (CalEEMod Output)
15 Worker Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output)
10.8 Therefore:
Average Worker Daily VMT:
162
Step 2: Given:
Assumed Fleet Mix for Workers (Percentage mix is provided on Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMOD p. 15) LDA LDT1 LDT2
0.5 0.25 0.25
And:
Gasoline MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class (from EMFAC2021) - Year 2022 LDA LDT1 LDT2
28.11 23.45 22.48
Therefore:
Weighted Average Worker MPG Factor
25.5 Step 3: Therefore:
6.3 Worker daily gallons of gasoline
Step 4: 110 # of Days (CalEEMod Output)
Therefore:
Result: 698 Total gallons of gasoline
EXHIBIT 1 1232
On-road Mobile (Construction) Energy Usage - Architectural Coating Step 1: Total Daily Worker Trips (CalEEMod Output)
113 5% 6
Note: Assumes 5% of Plan Area under construction at given point in time (on average) until buildout.
Worker Trip Length (miles) (CalEEMod Output)
10.8 Therefore:
Average Worker Daily VMT:
61 Step 2: Given:
Assumed Fleet Mix for Workers (Percentage mix is provided on Appendix A: Calculation Details for CalEEMOD p. 15) LDA LDT1 LDT2
0.5 0.25 0.25
And:
Gasoline MPG Factors for each Vehicle Class (from EMFAC2021) - Year 2022 LDA LDT1 LDT2
28.11 23.45 22.48
Therefore:
Weighted Average Worker MPG Factor
25.5 Step 3: Therefore:
2.4 Worker daily gallons of gasoline
Step 4: 110 # of Days (CalEEMod Output)
Therefore:
Result: 263 Total gallons of gasoline
EXHIBIT 1 1233
EIR ADDENDUM – CANNERY PARK EIR
City of Stockton October 2023
140
Appendix B: Noise Report
EXHIBIT 1 1234
Environmental Noise Assessment
Cannery Park Project
City of Stockton, California
May 12, 2022
Project #220114
Prepared for:
De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
Prepared by:
Saxelby Acoustics LLC
Luke Saxelby, INCE Bd. Cert.
Principal Consultant
Board Certified, Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) EXHIBIT 1 1235
3.10 NOISE
3.10-2 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project Table of Contents
3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 3 KEY TERMS ..................................................................................................................................... 3 FUNDAMENTALS OF ACOUSTICS.......................................................................................................... 4 EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE............................................................................................................ 5 EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS............................................................... 6 EVALUATION OF FUTURE OPERATIONAL NOISE ON PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES.......... 7 EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION NOISE ON PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES ............... 8 CONSTRUCTION NOISE ENVIRONMENT.............................................................................................. 8 CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................................... 9
3.10.2 REGULATORY SETTING.............................................................................................. 10 FEDERAL.......................................................................................................................................10 STATE ..........................................................................................................................................10 CITY OF STOCKTON......................................................................................................................... 10 VIBRATION STANDARDS .................................................................................................................. 17
3.10.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES................................................................. 19 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ......................................................................................................... 19 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................................. 20 List of Figures
Figure 3.10‐1: Noise Measurement Locations...................................................................................25 Figure 3.10‐2: Commercial Operational Noise Contours Daytime (Leq) ...........................................27 Figure 3.10‐3: Commercial Operational Noise Contours Nightime (Leq)..........................................29 Figure 3.10‐4: Required Wall Locations for Proposed Single Family Residential Uses......................31 List of Tables
Table 3.10‐1: Typical Noise Levels.......................................................................................................5 Table 3.10‐2: Summary of Existing Background Noise Measurement Data........................................7 Table 3.10‐3: Construction Equipment Noise......................................................................................9 Table 3.10‐4: Vibration Levels for Various Construction Equipment ..................................................9 Table 3.10‐5: Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Exposure.............................................12 Table 3.10‐6: Part I: Transportation‐Related Noise Standards (Outdoor/Indoor).............................16 Table 3.10‐7: Part II: Land Use‐Related Noise Standards ................................................................16 Table 3.10‐8: Effects of Vibration on People and Buildings...............................................................18 Table 3.10‐9: Future (2043) Transportation Noise Levels at Proposed Residential Uses..................22 Appendices
Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Appendix B: Continuous Ambient Noise Measurement Results Appendix C: FHWA Barrier Calculations
Appendix D: Interior Noise Reduction Calculations
EXHIBIT 1 1236
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-3 This section provides a general description of the existing noise sources in the project vicinity, a discussion of the regulatory setting, and identifies potential noise impacts associated with the proposed project. Project impacts are evaluated relative to applicable noise level criteria and to the existing ambient noise environment. Mitigation measures have been identified forsignificant noise‐ related impacts.
3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
KEY TERMS
Acoustics The science of sound.
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given area consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre‐project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.
Attenuation The reduction of noise.
A‐Weighting A frequency‐response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response. A‐weighted dB values are expressed as dBA.
Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound, defined asten times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared.
CNEL Community noise equivalent level. Defined as the 24‐hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 ‐ 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.
Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic acoustic signal, expressed in cycles per second or Hertz.
Impulsive Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.
Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.
Leq Equivalent or energy‐averaged sound level.
Lmax The highest root‐mean‐square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.
L(n) The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period.
For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the one hour period.
Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.
Noise Unwanted sound.
SEL Sound exposure levels. A rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train passby, that compresses the total sound energy into a one‐second event.
EXHIBIT 1 1237
3.10 NOISE
3.10-4 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project
FUNDAMENTALS OF ACOUSTICS
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).
Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million‐fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.
The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A‐weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A‐weighted sound levels(expressed as dB) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A‐weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A‐weighted levels, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted.
The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A‐weighted, an increase of 10 dB is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70‐dB sound is half as loud as an 80‐dB sound, and twice as loud as a 60‐dB sound.
Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all‐encompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady‐state A weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.
The day/night average level (Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24‐hour day, with a +10 decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours.
The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24‐hour average, it tendsto disguise short‐term variationsin the noise environment. CNEL issimilarto Ldn, but includes EXHIBIT 1 1238
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-5 a +5‐dB penalty for evening noise. Table 3.10‐1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations.
TABLE 3.10‐1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
COMMON OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES NOISE LEVEL (DB) COMMON INDOOR ACTIVITIES --110-- Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft) --100--
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) --90--
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft),
at 80 km/hr (50 mph) --80-- Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft)
Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft) --70-- Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) --60-- Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft) Quiet Urban Daytime --50-- Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime --40-- Theater, Large Conference Room (Background)
Quiet Suburban Nighttime --30-- Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime --20-- Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background)
--10-- Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing --0-- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing SOURCE: CALTRANS, TECHNICAL NOISE SUPPLEMENT, TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS PROTOCOL. SEPTEMBER 2013.
EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction; Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning; and Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling.
Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.
Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so‐called ambient noise level.
In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it. With regard to increases in A‐weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a 1 dB change cannot be perceived; Outside of the laboratory, a 3‐dB change is considered a just‐perceivable difference; A change in level of at least 5‐dB is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
EXHIBIT 1 1239
3.10 NOISE
3.10-6 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project A 10‐dB change issubjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness, and can cause an adverse response.
Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6 dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises,such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres, or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.
EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS
Existing and Surrounding Land Uses
North: Eight Mile Road and existing single family residential uses border the northern boundary.
East: Highway 99 and the Highway 99 Frontage road border the eastern boundary.
South: Existing single‐family residences border the southern boundary of the overall project site.
West: Existing commercial uses and future single family residential uses border the western boundary of the overall project site.
Existing Ambient Noise Levels
To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the Project Vicinity, a continuous (24‐hour) noise level measurement was conducted on the project site on February 9th, 2022. The noise measurement location is shown on Figure 3.10‐1. The noise level measurement survey results are provided in Table 3.10‐2. Appendix B of Appendix F shows the complete results of the noise monitoring survey.
The sound level meters were programmed to collect hourly noise level intervals at each site during the survey. The maximum value (Lmax) represents the highest noise level measured during an interval. The average value (Leq) represents the energy average of all of the noise measured during an interval. The median value (L50) represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during an interval.
A Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 820 precision integrating sound level meter was used for the ambient noise level measurement survey. The meter was calibrated before and after use with an LDL Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).
EXHIBIT 1 1240
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-7 TABLE 3.10‐2: SUMMARY OF EXISTING BACKGROUND NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA
SITE LOCATION DATE/TIME LDN
AVERAGE MEASURED HOURLY NOISE LEVELS, DB
DAYTIME (7AM‐10PM) NIGHTTIME (10PM‐7AM)
LEQ L50 LMAX LEQ L50 LMAX
Continuous (24‐hour) Noise Level Measurements
LT‐1
Eastern side of
project site, 135
feet to Hwy 99
Centerline
2/9/2022 77 73 72 87 70 68 83
SOURCE: SAXELBY ACOUSTICS, 2022.
EVALUATION OF FUTURE OPERATIONAL NOISE ON PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES Operational Noise Levels
The proposed project includes the construction of high‐density residential housing on 12.34 acres surrounded by 19.76 acres of new commercial development. The commercial development will be distributed over 15 lots. The primary noise generating components of the new commercial development would be parking lot circulation, HVAC units, a gas station car wash, and drive‐thru speaker boxes. The following is a list of assumptions used for the noise modeling. The data used is based upon a combination of manufacturer’s provided data and Saxelby Acoustics data from similar operations.
On‐Site Circulation: The commercial component of the project is projected to generate 21,863 daily trips with 2,420 trips in the morning peak hour (KD Anderson & Associates). Saxelby Acoustics assumed that 2% of these trips could be trucks. Parking lot movements are predicted to generate a sound exposure level (SEL) of 71 dBA SEL at 50 feet for cars and 85 dBA SEL at 50 feet for trucks. Nighttime traffic outside of the AM or PM peak hour is estimated to be approximately 1/4 of daytime trips during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). Saxelby Acoustics data.
Rooftop HVAC Units: Each commercial building was assumed to have three ten‐ton packaged units operating continuously during the daytime, and 50% of the time at night. Manufacturer’s data.
Rooftop Condensing Unit: Each commercial building was assumed to have one ten‐ton air‐cooled chiller package operating continuously during the daytime, and 50% of the time at night. Manufacturer’s data.
Car Wash Blowers: 64‐65 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet during the peak hour. Typical manufacturer’s data.
EXHIBIT 1 1241
3.10 NOISE
3.10-8 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project Vacuum Station: One canister type vacuum station utilized at the gas station car wash at 64 dBA at 25 feet. Running continuously during the peak hour of usage.
Manufacturer’s data.
Drive‐Through Speakers: One speaker per drive‐through restaurant at 65 dBA each at 20 feet.
Running continuously during the peak hour of usage, day and night.
Saxelby Acoustics data.
Saxelby Acoustics used the SoundPLAN noise prediction model. Inputs to the model included sound powerlevelsforthe proposed amenities, existing and proposed buildings, terrain type, and locations of sensitive receptors. These predictions are made in accordance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard 9613‐2:1996 (Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors). ISO 9613 is the most commonly used method for calculating exterior noise propagation. Figure 3.10‐2 shows the noise level contours resulting from operation of the project.
EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION NOISE ON PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES Traffic Noise Levels
Highway 99
Future (2043) traffic noise levels are predicted to be 77 dB Ldn at a distance of 160 feet from the centerline of Highway 99, assuming no shielding from intervening buildings or sound walls. The proposed residential uses are located approximately 160 feet from the centerline Highway 99.
Therefore, maximum exterior noise levels of 77 dB Ldn are predicted for these uses.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE ENVIRONMENT
During the construction of the proposed project, including roads, water, and sewer lines and related infrastructure, noise from construction activities would add to the noise environment in the project vicinity. As indicated in Table 3.10‐3, activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 76 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet.
EXHIBIT 1 1242
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-9 TABLE 3.10‐3: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE
TYPE OF EQUIPMENT
MAXIMUM LEVEL, DB
25 FEET 50 FEET
Backhoe 84 78
Compactor 89 83
Compressor (air) 84 78
Concrete Saw 96 90
Dozer 88 82
Dump Truck 82 76
Excavator 87 81
Generator 87 81
Jackhammer 94 89
Pneumatic Tools 91 85
SOURCE: ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION NOISE MODEL USER’S GUIDE. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION. FHWA‐HEP‐05‐ 054. JANUARY 2006.
CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT
The primary vibration‐generating activities associated with the proposed project would happen during construction when activities such as grading, utilities placement, and road construction occur. Table 3.10‐4 shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction placement.
TABLE 3.10‐4: VIBRATION LEVELS FOR VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
TYPE OF EQUIPMENT
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY @ 25 FEET
(INCHES/SECOND)
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY @ 100 FEET
(INCHES/SECOND)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.011
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.010
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.000
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.011
Jackhammer 0.035 0.004
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.009
Vibratory Compactor/roller 0.210 0.026
SOURCE: FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, TRANSIT NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES, MAY 2006 EXHIBIT 1 1243
3.10 NOISE
3.10-10 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project
3.10.2 REGULATORY SETTING
FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations related to noise that apply to the proposed project.
STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, indicate that a significant noise impact may occur if a project exposes persons to noise or vibration levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels. CEQA standards are discussed more below under the Thresholds of Significance section.
California State Building Codes
The State Building Code, Title 24, Part 2 of the State of California Code of Regulations establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards to protect persons within new buildings which house people, including hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses and dwellings other than single‐family dwellings. Title 24 mandates that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn or CNEL in any habitable room.
Title 24 also mandates that for structures containing noise‐sensitive uses to be located where the Ldn or CNEL exceeds 60 dB, an acoustical analysis must be prepared to identify mechanisms for limiting exterior noise to the prescribed allowable interiorlevels. If the interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be kept closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment
CITY OF STOCKTON
City of Stockton General Plan
POLICY SAF-2.5
Protect the community from health hazards and annoyance associated with excessive noise levels.
A. Prohibit new commercial, industrial, or other noise‐generating land uses adjacent to existing sensitive noise receptors such as residential uses, schools, health care facilities, libraries, and churches if noise levels are expected to exceed 70 dBA Community Noise Equivalent (CNEL) (decibels on A‐weighted scale CNEL) when measured at the property line of the noise sensitive land use.
B. Require projects that would locate noise sensitive land uses where the projected ambient noise level is greater than the "normally acceptable" noise level indicated on Table 3.10‐5 to provide an acoustical analysis that shall:
EXHIBIT 1 1244
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-11 a. Be the responsibility of the applicant;
b. Be prepared by a qualified person experienced in the fields of environmental noise assessment and architectural acoustics;
c. Include representative noise level measurements with sufficient sampling periods and locations to adequately describe local conditions;
d. Estimate existing and projected (20‐year) noise levels in terms of Ldn/CNEL and compare the levels to the adopted noise policies and actions in this General Plan; e. Recommend appropriate mitigation to achieve compatibility with the adopted noise policies and standards;
f. Where the noise source in question consists of intermittent single events, address the effects of maximum noise levels in sleeping rooms in terms of possible sleep disturbance;
g. Estimate noise exposure after the prescribed mitigation measures have been implemented;
h. If the project does not comply with the adopted standards and policies of this General Plan, provide acoustical information for a statement of overriding considerations for the project; and
i. Describe a post‐project assessment program, which could be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures.
C. Require noise produced by commercial uses to not exceed 75 dB Ldn/CNEL at the nearest property line.
D. Grant exceptions to the noise standards for commercial and industrial uses only if a recorded noise easement is conveyed by the affected property owners.
E. Require all new habitable structures to be set back from railroad tracks to protect residents from noise, vibration, and safety impacts.
EXHIBIT 1 1245
3.10 NOISE
3.10-12 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project TABLE 3.10‐5: LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE City of Stockton Development Code
CHAPTER 16.60 - NOISE STANDARDS.
16.60.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to:
A. Establish standards to protect the health, safety, and welfare of those living and working in the City;
B. Implement goals and policies of the General Plan Noise Element; C. Facilitate compliance with the State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC); D. Provide community noise control regulations and standards which are consistent with, or exceed, the guidelines of the State Office of Noise Control and the standards adopted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), or other government or regulatory agencies; and EXHIBIT 1 1246
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-13 E. Consolidate and/or reference all applicable City noise regulations. (Prior code § 16‐340.010)
16.60.020 Activities exempt from noise regulations:
The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter.
A. Emergency Exemption. The emission of sound for the purpose of alerting persons to the existence of an emergency, or the emission of sound in the performance of emergency work. Does not include permanently installed emergency generators.
B. Warning Device. Warning devices necessary for the protection of public safety, (e.g., police, fire and ambulance sirens, properly operating home and car burglar alarms, and train horns).
C. Outdoor Play/School Ground Activities. Activities conducted on parks and playgrounds and school grounds, between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., except for additional hours that may be granted by the City Manager. Otherwise, outdoor activities shall meet standards in Table 3‐
7. D. Railroad Activities. The operation of locomotives, rail cars, and facilities by a railroad that is regulated by the State Public Utilities Commission.
E. State or Federal Pre‐Exempted Activities. Any activity, to the extent the regulation of it has been preempted by State or Federal law.
F. Public Health and Safety Activities. All transportation, flood control, and utility company maintenance and construction operations at any time on public rights‐of‐way, and those situations that may occur on private property deemed necessary to serve the best interest of the public and to protect the public’s health and well‐being, including, debris and limb removal, removal of damaged poles and vehicles, removal of downed wires, repairing traffic signals, repair of water hydrants and mains, gas lines, oil lines, and sewers, restoring electrical service, street sweeping, unplugging sewers, vacuuming catch basins, etc. The regular testing of motorized equipment and pumps shall not be exempt.
G. Maintenance of Residential Real Property. Noise sources associated with the minor maintenance of residential real property, provided the activities take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. (Prior code § 16‐340.020)
16.60.030 Activities deemed violations of this chapter:
The following acts are a violation of this chapter and are therefore prohibited.
A. Construction Noise: Operating or causing the operation of tools or equipment on private property used in alteration, construction, demolition, drilling, or repair work between the EXHIBIT 1 1247
3.10 NOISE
3.10-14 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., so that the sound creates a noise disturbance across a residential property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities.
B. Loading and Unloading Operations. Loading, unloading, opening, closing or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects on private property between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in a manner to cause a noise disturbance.
C. Public Nuisance Noise. Public nuisance noise is noise that is generally not associated with a particular land use but creates a nuisance situation by reason of its being disturbing, excessive, or offensive. Examples would include excessively loud noise from alarms, animals, horns, musical instruments, stereos, tape players, televisions, vehicle or motorboat repairs and testing, and similar noise as required by Chapter 8.20 and Sections 9.40.040 and
9.40.050 of the Municipal Code.
D. Stationary Nonemergency Signaling Devices. Sounding or allowing the sounding of an electronically amplified signal from a stationary bell, chime, siren, whistle, or similar device intended primarily for nonemergency purposes, from private property for more than 10 consecutive seconds in any hourly period as required by Section 8.20.030(B) of the Municipal Code.
E. Refuse Collection Vehicles.
F. Operating or allowing the operation of the compacting mechanism of any motor vehicle that compactsrefuse and that creates, during the compacting cycle, a sound level in excess of 85 dBA when measured at 50 feet from any point of the vehicle.
G. Collecting refuse or operating or allowing the operation of the compacting mechanism of any motor vehicle that compacts refuse in a residentialzoning district between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. the following day.
H. Sweepers and Associated Equipment. Operating or allowing the operation of sweepers or associated sweeping equipment (e.g., blowers) on private property between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day in, or adjacent to, a residential zoning district.
I. Vehicle or Motorboat Repairs and Testing. Modifying, rebuilding, repairing, or testing any motor vehicle, motorcycle, or motorboat in a manner as to cause a noise disturbance across the property line of a noise‐sensitive use greater than the noise level standards in Table 3‐ 7, below. (Prior code § 16‐340.030)
16.60.040 Standards.
EXHIBIT 1 1248
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-15 The following provisionsshall apply to all uses and properties, as described below, and shall establish the City’s standards concerning acceptable noise levels for both noise‐sensitive land uses and for noise‐generating land uses and transportation‐related sources:
A. Standards For Proposed Noise‐Sensitive Land Uses on Noise‐Impacted Sites (Except Infill Areas). Excluding proposed noise‐sensitive land uses on infill sites, which shall comply with subsection C of this section:
1. Existing Transportation‐Related Noise Sources. Proposed noise sensitive land uses that will be impacted by existing or projected transportation noise sources shall be required to mitigate the noise levels from these transportation noise sources so that the resulting noise levels on the proposed noise‐sensitive land use(s) do not exceed the standards in Table 3‐7, Part I.
2. Existing Land Use‐Related Noise Sources. Proposed noise sensitive land uses that will be impacted by existing land use‐related noise sourcesshall be required to mitigate the noise levels from those noise sources so that the resulting noise levels on the proposed noise‐ sensitive land use(s) do not exceed the standards in Table 3‐7, Part II.
B. Standards for Proposed Noise‐Generating Land Uses and Transportation‐Related Sources.
Excluding noise‐generating projects on infill sites, which shall comply with subsection C of this section, the following shall apply:
1. Transportation‐Related Noise Sources (Except Infill Sites). Transportation‐related projects that include the development of new transportation facilities or the expansion of existing transportation facilities shall be required to mitigate their noise levels so that the resulting noise:
a. Does not adversely impact noise‐sensitive land uses; and b. Does not exceed the standards in Table 3‐7, Part I.
Noise levels shall be measured at the property line of the nearest site, which is occupied by, and/or zoned or designated to allow the development of, noise‐sensitive land uses.
EXHIBIT 1 1249
3.10 NOISE
3.10-16 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project TABLE 3.10‐6: PART I: TRANSPORTATION‐RELATED NOISE STANDARDS (OUTDOOR/INDOOR)
NOISE LEVEL DESCRIPTOR, DB
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE (LDN DB)
OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS INDOOR SPACES
Residential (all types) 65 45
Child care ‐‐ 45
Educational Facilities ‐‐ 45
Libraries and museums ‐‐ 45
Live‐work facilities 65 45
Lodging 65 45
Medical services ‐‐ 45
Multi‐use (with residential) 65 45
TABLE 3.10‐7: PART II: LAND USE‐RELATED NOISE STANDARDS
NOISE LEVEL DESCRIPTOR, DB DAYTIME
(7 A.M. TO 10 P.M.)
NIGHTTIME
(10 P.M. TO 7 A.M.)
Hourly Leq 55 45
Maximum Sound Level Lmax 75 65
NOTES:
(1) THE NOISE STANDARD MUST BE APPLIED AT THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE RECEIVING LAND USE. WHEN DETERMINING THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES, THE STANDARDS MUST BE APPLIED ON THE RECEIVING SIDE OF NOISE BARRIERS OR OTHER PROPERTY LINE NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES.
(2) EACH OF THE NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS SPECIFIED MUST BE DECREASED BY 5 FOR IMPULSE NOISE, SIMPLE TONE NOISE, OR NOISE CONSISTING PRIMARILY OF SPEECH OR MUSIC.
SOURCE: CITY OF STOCKTON MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 16.60.040, STANDARDS.
2. Commercial, Industrial, and Other Land Use‐Related Noise Sources (Except Infill Sites). a. New and Expanded Noise Sources. Land use‐related projects that will create new noise sources or expand existing noise sources shall be required to mitigate their noise levels so that the resulting noise:
i. Does not adversely impact noise‐sensitive land uses; and EXHIBIT 1 1250
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-17 ii. Does not exceed the standards specified in Table 3‐7, Part II.
Noise levels shall be measured at the property line of the nearest site which is occupied by, zoned for, and/or designated on the City’s General Plan Diagram to allow the development of, noise‐sensitive land uses.
b. Maximum Sound Level.
i. Commercial.
a) The maximum sound level (Lmax) produced by commercial land uses or by other permitted noise‐generating activities on any retail commercial zoning district (i.e., CO, CN, CG, CD, CL, or CA districts) shall not exceed 75 dB; and b) The hourly equivalent sound level (Leq) from these land uses shall not exceed 65 dB during daytime or nighttime hours as measured at the property line of any other adjoining retail commercial zoning district (CO, CN, CG, CD, CL, or CA districts).
ii. Industrial.
a) The maximum sound level (Lmax) produced by industrial land uses or by other permitted noise‐generating activities on any industrial (IL, IG, or PT) or public facilities (PF) zoning district shall not exceed 80 dB; and b) The hourly equivalent sound level (Leq) from these land uses shall not exceed 70 dB during daytime or nighttime hours as measured at the property line of any other adjoining IL, IG, PT, or PF district.
c) Where industrial or public facilities uses abut a retail commercial use or zone, the maximum noise levels shall not exceed the above‐listed standards for commercial uses and zones (i.e., Lmax = 75 dB and Leq = 65 dB). c. Adjacent to Other Uses. If commercial, industrial, or public facilities land uses are adjacent to any noise‐sensitive land uses or vacant residential (RE, RL, RM, or RH) or open space (OS) zoning districts, these uses shall comply with the performance standards contained in Table 3‐7, Part II.
VIBRATION STANDARDS
Vibration islike noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure orsurface.
As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to the EXHIBIT 1 1251
3.10 NOISE
3.10-18 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system which is vibrating.
Vibration can be measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration measures in terms of peak particle velocities in inches per second. Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of peak particle velocities.
The City does not have specific policies pertaining to vibration levels. However, vibration levels associated with construction activities are addressed as potential noise impacts associated with project implementation.
Human and structuralresponse to different vibration levelsisinfluenced by several factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events. Table 3.10‐8 indicates that the threshold for damage to structures ranges from 0.2 to 0.6 peak particle velocity in inches per second (in/sec p.p.v). A threshold of 0.20 in/sec p.p.v. is considered to be a reasonable threshold for short‐term construction projects.
TABLE 3.10‐8: EFFECTS OF VIBRATION ON PEOPLE AND BUILDINGS
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY
HUMAN REACTION EFFECT ON BUILDINGS
MM/SEC. IN./SEC.
0.15‐0.30 0.006‐0.019 Threshold of perception; possibility of intrusion
Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of any
type
2.0 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible
Recommended upper level of the vibration to
which ruins and ancient monuments should
be subjected
2.5 0.10 Level at which continuous vibrations
begin to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural” damage to
normal buildings
5.0 0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in
buildings (this agrees with the levels
established for people standing on
bridges and subjected to relative
short periods of vibrations)
Threshold at which there is a risk of
“architectural” damage to normal dwelling ‐
houses with plastered walls and ceilings.
Special types of finish such as lining of walls,
flexible ceiling treatment, etc., would
minimize “architectural” damage
10‐15 0.4‐0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant by
people subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable to some
people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than normally
expected from traffic, but would cause
“architectural” damage and possibly minor
structural damage.
SOURCE: CALTRANS. TRANSPORTATION RELATED EARTHBORN VIBRATIONS. TAV‐02‐01‐R9601 FEBRUARY 20, 2002.
EXHIBIT 1 1252
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-19
3.10.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the project will have a significant impact related to noise if it will result in:
Would the project:
a. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Determination of a Significant Increase in Noise Levels Temporary Construction Noise Impacts
With temporary noise impacts(construction), identification of “substantial increases” depends upon the duration of the impact, the temporal daily nature of the impact, and the absolute change in decibel levels. Per the City of Stockton noise ordinance, construction activities operating between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. which create a noise disturbance at the property boundary of a residence are prohibited and would be considered a significant impact.
Operational Impacts
The noise standards applicable to the project include the relevant portions of the City of Stockton General Plan and Development Code described in the Regulatory Framework Section above (Section
3.10.2), and the following standards. Generally, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or expose people to severe noise levels. In practice, more specific professional standards have been developed. These standards state that a noise impact may be considered significant if it would generate noise that would conflict with local project criteria or ordinances, or substantially increase noise levels at noise sensitive land uses. The potential increase in traffic noise from the project is a factor in determining significance. Research into the human perception of changes in sound level indicates the following:
A 3‐dB change is barely perceptible,
A 5‐dB change is clearly perceptible, and
A 10‐dB change is perceived as being twice or half as loud.
Another means of determining a potential noise impact is Table 5‐1 of the Stockton General Plan 2040 Safety Element. Table 5‐1 provides specific guidance for assessing increases in ambient noise EXHIBIT 1 1253
3.10 NOISE
3.10-20 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project as follows: If existing noise standards are currently exceeded, a proposed project shall not incrementally increase noise levels by more than 3 dBA. It should be noted that Caltrans assumes a 12 dBA increase is significant. Therefore, use of the 3 dBA test is considered to be conservative relative to the expected reaction from persons affected by the noise increase.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 1: WOULD THE PROJECT GENERATE A SUBSTANTIAL TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT INCREASE IN
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT IN EXCESS OF STANDARDS ESTABLISHED
IN THE LOCAL GENERAL PLAN OR NOISE ORDINANCE, OR APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF OTHER AGENCIES?
TRAFFIC NOISE INCREASES AT EXISTING SENSITIVE RECEPTORS The proposed project is predicted to generate a total of 27,060 daily trips. This is less than the approved land uses which would generate 45,688 trips. Therefore, the proposed project traffic noise increases will be compatible with the surrounding land uses. This would be a less than significant impact.
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
During the construction phases of the project, noise from construction activities would add to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. As indicated in Table 3.10‐3, activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 76 to 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. Construction activities would also be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours.
Noise would also be generated during the construction phase by increased truck traffic on area roadways. A project‐generated noise source would be truck traffic associated with transport of heavy materials and equipment to and from the construction site. This noise increase would be of short duration, and would occur during daytime hours.
Noise from localized point sources (such as construction sites) typically decreases by approximately 6 dBA with each doubling of distance from source to receptor. Given this noise attenuation rate and assuming no noise shielding from either natural or human‐made features (e.g., trees, buildings, fences), outdoor receptors within approximately 1,600 feet of construction sites could experience maximum instantaneous noise levels of greaterthan 60 dBA when on‐site construction‐related noise levels exceed approximately 90 dBA at the boundary of the construction site. As previously discussed, nearby noise‐sensitive receptors consist predominantly of residential dwellings located near the western and northern boundaries of the project site.
The City of Stockton Noise Ordinance places limitations on the acceptable hours of construction.
During development of the proposed project, construction activities occurring during the more EXHIBIT 1 1254
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-21 noise‐sensitive late evening and nighttime hours (i.e., 10 PM to 7 AM) are prohibited. Additionally, there are several residential uses directly adjacent the project site which may be subject to construction noise. As a result, noise‐generating construction activities would be considered to have a potentially significant short‐term impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.10‐1 will ensure that these potential impacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
EXTERIOR NON-TRANSPORTATION NOISE AT PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES The proposed Project includes the development of 15 commercial lots on land with an existing commercial designation adjacent to a future high‐density residential use immediately to the south and east ofthe commercial use. The high density residentialsite has not been site planned, however, the intent is to incorporate the commercial and high density uses into an integrated and compatible plan with the commercial use, rather than building two isolated land uses.
As shown in Figures 3.10‐2 and 3.10‐3, the proposed commercial uses are predicted to generate noise levels of up to 57 dBA at the future residential property line during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours and up to 48 dBA during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. This exceedsthe City of Stockton daytime noise level standard of 55 dBA Leq and nighttime noise level standard of 45 dBA Leq.
While the high density residential site has not been site planned, the area where the noise threshold is exceeded at the parcel line is anticipated to be used for landscape buffers and parking space. The high density residential buildings are anticipated to be designed with a setback from the property line and commercial uses such that they would be built in an area that is within the City of Stockton noise levelstandards shown in Table NOISE‐1. In order to ensure compliance with the City’s daytime and nighttime noise standards, an evaluation of the high density residential site is necessary after it is designed for architectural design review. The City would need to review the site plan during that process to ensure that there are no buildings placed along the property line where the exceedance occurs. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.10‐2 will ensure that these potential impacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE AT PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES Table 3.10‐9 shows the predicted traffic noise levels at the proposed residential uses adjacent to Highway 99. Based upon Table 3.10‐9, exterior noise levels would exceed the City’s 60 dBA Ldn normally acceptable exterior noise standard, as well as the City 65 dBA Ldn maximum acceptable noise exposure. The 60 dBA Ldn noise contours for Highway 99 were found to extend to an approximate distance of 2,037 feet from the roadway centerline. This would encroach into the outdoor activity areas of proposed residences. Therefore, use of a physical barrier would be the only feasible method to reduce exterior noise levelsto within the City’s allowable exterior noise standard range.
EXHIBIT 1 1255
3.10 NOISE
3.10-22 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project TABLE 3.10‐9: FUTURE (2043) TRANSPORTATION NOISE LEVELS AT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL USES
SEGMENT
APPROXIMATE
RESIDENTIAL
SETBACK, FEET1
PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS, DB LDN2
NO
BARRIER
10’
BARRIER
11’
BARRIER
12’
BARRIER
13’
BARRIER
14’
BARRIER
Highway 99 135 78 67 66 65 64 63
NOTES: 1 SETBACK DISTANCES ARE MEASURED IN FEET FROM THE CENTERLINES OF THE ROADWAYS TO THE CENTER OF RESIDENTIAL BACKYARDS. 2 THE MODELED NOISE BARRIERS ASSUME FLAT SITE CONDITIONS WHERE ROADWAY ELEVATIONS, BASE OF WALL ELEVATIONS, AND BUILDING PAD ELEVATIONS ARE APPROXIMATELY EQUIVALENT. SOUND BARRIER HEIGHT MAY BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE USE A WALL AND EARTHEN BERM TO ACHIEVE THE TOTAL HEIGHT (E.G. A 6‐FOOT WALL ON 2‐FOOT BERM IS EQUIVALENT TO AN 8‐FOOT TALL BARRIER).
SOURCE: SAXELBY ACOUSTICS. 2022.
The modeled noise barriers assume flat site conditions where roadway elevations, base of wall elevations, and building pad elevations are approximately equivalent. Appendix C of Appendix F shows the full barrier height calculations.
Based upon the data in Table 3.10‐9, a 12‐foot‐tall barrier may be used to achieve compliance with the City’s exterior maximum noise level standard of 65 dBA Ldn for outdoor activity areas of residential uses. The proposed wall location isshown on Figure 3.10‐4. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.10‐3 will ensure that these potential impacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
INTERIOR NOISE IMPACTS AT PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USES Modern construction typically provides a 25‐dB exterior‐to‐interior noise level reduction with windows closed. Therefore, sensitive receptors exposed to exterior noise of 70 dB Ldn, or less, will typically comply with the City of Stockton 45 dB Ldn interior noise level standard. Additional noise reduction measures, such as acoustically‐rated windows, are generally required for exterior noise levels exceeding 70 dB Ldn.
It should be noted that noise barriers do not typically reduce exterior noise levels at second floor locations. The proposed residential uses are predicted to be exposed to unmitigated first‐floor exterior transportation noise levels up 77 dBA Ldn. Mitigated first‐floor noise levels of 63‐65 dBA Ldn are expected after construction of sound barriers. The second‐floor locations are not expected to receive adequate shielding from the proposed sound walls and may be exposed to noise levels 2‐3 dB higher than ground floor receivers. Therefore, noise levels of 80 dB Ldn are expected at the second‐floor facades of the proposed residences.
Based upon a 25‐dB exterior‐to‐interior noise level reduction, interior noise levels are predicted to be up to 55 dB Ldn at second floors and 40 dBA Ldn at first floors. Accordingly, predicted interior noise levels along the first row of residential uses along Highway 99 are predicted to exceed the City’s 45 dB Ldn interior noise level standard at second floor locations.
EXHIBIT 1 1256
NOISE 3.10
Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project 3.10-23 Appendix D (See Appendix F of this EIR) shows an estimate of the interior noise control measures required to meet the City’s interior noise level standards. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
3.10‐4 will ensure that these potential impacts are reduced to a less‐than‐significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.10‐1: The City shall establish the following as conditions of approval for any permit that results in the use of construction equipment:
Construction shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. All construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines shall be properly muffled and maintained.
Quiet construction equipment, particularly air compressors, are to be selected whenever possible.
All stationery noise‐generating construction equipment such as generators or air compressors are to be located as far as is practical from existing residences. In addition, the project contractor shall place such stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site. Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited. The construction contractorshall, to the maximum extent practical, locate on‐site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction‐related noise sources and noise‐sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.
Timing/Implementation: Implemented prior to approval of grading and/or building permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Stockton Community Development Services Department Mitigation Measure 3.10‐2: The high density residential development shall be designed with landscaping and parking space, or another non‐sensitive use, in the area along the property line closest to the commercial site. There shall be no noise sensitive outdoor activity areas, or residential buildings placed within the noise contour that exceedsthe City’s 55 dBA day and night noise standard for land uses. The intent is to ensure that outdoor areas in the high density residential uses are not adversely affected by noise in the commercial areas. Alternatively, once a specific site plan has been developed, the developer of the future high‐density parcel may submit a noise study prepared by a qualified acoustic engineer documenting a site plan design or required noise control measures to meet the noise standards of the City of Stockton.
Mitigation Measure 3.10‐3: A 12‐foot‐tall barrier shall be constructed along Highway 99 and the Highway 99 Frontage Road, adjacent to proposed residential uses, in order to achieve the City’s exterior noise standards. Noise barrier walls shall be constructed of concrete panels, concrete masonry units, earthen berms, or any combination of these materials that achieve the required total height. Wood is not recommended due to eventual warping and degradation of acoustical EXHIBIT 1 1257
3.10 NOISE
3.10-24 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project performance. These requirementsshall be included in the improvements plans prior to their approval by the City’s Public Works Department. Figure 3.10‐4 shows the recommended sound wall locations.
Mitigation Measure 3.10‐4: For the first rows of lots adjacent to the Highway 99 and Highway 99 Frontage Road right of way, second floor exterior facades with a view of Highway 99 would need the following noise control measures:
o Windows shall have a sound transmission class (STC) rating of 40. o Interior gypsum at exterior walls shall be 5/8” hung on resilient channels; o Ceiling gypsum shall be 5/8”;
o Exterior finish shall be stucco with sheathing, fiber cement lap siding with sheathing, or system with equivalent weight per square foot; o Mechanical ventilation shall be installed in all residential uses to allow residents to keep doors and windows closed, as desired for acoustical isolation. o As an alternative to the above‐listed interior noise control measures, the applicant may provide a detailed analysis of interior noise control measures once building plans become available. The analysis should be prepared by a qualified noise control engineer and shall outline the specific measures required to meet the City of Stockton 45 dB Ldn interior noise level standard.
IMPACT 2: WOULD THE PROJECT GENERATE EXCESSIVE GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION OR GROUNDBORNE NOISE LEVELS?
Construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building structural damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration risessignificantly above the threshold of perception.
Building damage can take the form of cosmetic or structural.
The Table 3.10‐8 data indicate that construction vibration levels anticipated for the project are less than the 0.2 in/sec threshold at distances of 26 feet. Sensitive receptors which could be impacted by construction related vibrations, especially vibratory compactors/rollers, are located approximately 26 feet, or further, from typical construction activities. At these distances construction vibrations are not predicted to exceed acceptable levels. Additionally, construction activities would be temporary in nature and would likely occur during normal daytime working hours. This is a less‐than‐significant impact and no mitigation is required.
IMPACT 3: FOR A PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN THE VICINITY OF A PRIVATE AIRSTRIP OR AN AIRPORT LAND USE
PLAN OR, WHERE SUCH A PLAN HAS NOT BEEN ADOPTED, WITHIN TWO MILES OF A PUBLIC AIRPORT
OR PUBLIC USE AIRPORT, WOULD THE PROJECT EXPOSE PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA TO EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS?
There are no airports within two miles of the project vicinity. Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the proposed project.
EXHIBIT 1 1258
Cannery Park
City of Stockton, California
Figure 3.10-1
Noise Measurement Sites
Eight Mile Rd.
PFC Jesse Mizener St.
EXHIBIT 1 1259
3.10 NOISE
3.10-26 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project This page left intentionally blank.
EXHIBIT 1 1260
Cannery Park
City of Stockton, California
Figure 3.10-2
Daytime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Project Noise Contours (dBA Leq)
52 dBA
57 dBA
53 dBA
EXHIBIT 1 1261
3.10 NOISE
3.10-28 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project This page left intentionally blank.
EXHIBIT 1 1262
45 dBA
Cannery Park
City of Stockton, California
Figure 3.10-3
Nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Project Noise Contours (dBA Leq)
47 dBA
50 dBA
44 dBA
48 dBA
43 dBA
EXHIBIT 1 1263
3.10 NOISE
3.10-30 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project This page left intentionally blank.
EXHIBIT 1 1264
Cannery Park
City of Stockton, California
Figure 3.10-4
Recommended Sound Wall Locations –
Single Family Residential Lots
Recommended 12-Foot Barrier
Legend
EXHIBIT 1 1265
3.10 NOISE
3.10-32 Environmental Impact Report – Cannery Park Project This page left intentionally blank.
EXHIBIT 1 1266
Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Acoustics The science of sound.
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre‐project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.
ASTC Apparent Sound Transmission Class. Similar to STC but includes sound from flanking paths and correct for room reverberation. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.
Attenuation The reduction of an acoustic signal.
A‐Weighting A frequency‐response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response.
Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound, A Bell is defined as the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared. A Decibel is one‐tenth of a Bell.
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as the 24‐hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 ‐ 10 p.m.) weighted by +5 dBA and nighttime hours weighted by +10 dBA.
DNL See definition of Ldn.
IIC Impact Insulation Class. An integer‐number rating of how well a building floor attenuates impact sounds, such as footsteps. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.
Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic signal, expressed in cycles per second or hertz (Hz).
Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.
Leq Equivalent or energy‐averaged sound level.
Lmax The highest root‐mean‐square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.
L(n) The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period. For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50% of the time during the one‐hour period.
Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.
NIC Noise Isolation Class. A rating of the noise reduction between two spaces. Similar to STC but includes sound from flanking paths and no correction for room reverberation.
NNIC Normalized Noise Isolation Class. Similar to NIC but includes a correction for room reverberation.
Noise Unwanted sound.
NRC Noise Reduction Coefficient. NRC is a single‐number rating of the sound‐absorption of a material equal to the arithmetic mean of the sound‐absorption coefficients in the 250, 500, 1000, and 2,000 Hz octave frequency bands rounded to the nearest multiple of 0.05. It is a representation of the amount of sound energy absorbed upon striking a particular surface. An NRC of 0 indicates perfect reflection; an NRC of 1 indicates perfect absorption.
RT60 The time it takes reverberant sound to decay by 60 dB once the source has been removed.
Sabin The unit of sound absorption. One square foot of material absorbing 100% of incident sound has an absorption of 1 Sabin.
SEL Sound Exposure Level. SEL is a rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train pass by, that compresses the total sound energy into a one‐second event.
SPC Speech Privacy Class. SPC is a method of rating speech privacy in buildings. It is designed to measure the degree of speech privacy provided by a closed room, indicating the degree to which conversations occurring within are kept private from listeners outside the room.
STC Sound Transmission Class. STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. It is widely used to rate interior partitions, ceilings/floors, doors, windows and exterior wall configurations. The STC rating is typically used to rate the sound transmission of a specific building element when tested in laboratory conditions where flanking paths around the assembly don’t exist. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.
Threshold The lowest sound that can be perceived by the human auditory system, generally considered of Hearing to be 0 dB for persons with perfect hearing.
Threshold Approximately 120 dB above the threshold of hearing. of Pain
Impulsive Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.
Simple Tone Any sound which can be judged as audible as a single pitch or set of single pitches.
EXHIBIT 1 1267
Appendix B: Continuous Ambient Noise
Measurement Results
EXHIBIT 1
1268
Site: LT-1
Project: Meter:
Leq Lmax L50 L90 Location: Calibrator:
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 0:00 67 78 65 59 Coordinates: 38.0533165°, Wednesday, February 9, 2022 1:00 66 79 63 58
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 2:00 68 93 64 58
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 3:00 68 83 67 61
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 4:00 71 83 69 65
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 5:00 73 81 72 68
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 6:00 74 88 74 71
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 75 83 75 73
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 8:00 75 90 74 71
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 9:00 73 84 72 69
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 10:00 73 90 72 69
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 11:00 73 83 72 68
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 12:00 73 88 72 69
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 13:00 73 82 72 68
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 14:00 73 85 72 68
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 15:00 73 87 73 70
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 16:00 74 89 73 70
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 17:00 73 89 73 70
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 18:00 73 95 72 69
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 19:00 72 85 71 67
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 20:00 71 89 70 66
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 21:00 70 85 69 65
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 22:00 69 85 68 64
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 23:00 68 79 67 62
Leq Lmax L50 L90
73 87 72 69
70 83 68 63
70 82 69 65
75 95 75 73
66 78 63 58
74 93 74 71
77 78
CNEL 77 Night % 22
Day Low
Day High
Night Low
Night High
Ldn Day %
Night Average
CAL200
-121.2597168°
Wednesday, February 9, 2022 Wednesday, February 9, 2022 Statistics
Day Average
Appendix B1: Continuous Noise Monitoring Results
Date Time
Measured Level, dBA Cannery Park
Eastern Project Boundary
LDL 820-8
78 79
93 83
83 81
88 83
90 84
90 83
88 82
85 87
89 89
95 85
89 85 85
79 59
58 58
61 65
68 71
73 71
69 69 68 69 68 68
70 70 70 69
67 66
65 64
62 67 66
68 68
71 73
74 75 75
73 73 73 73 73 73 73 74 73 73
72 71
70 69
68 50
55 60
65 70
75 80
85 90
95 100 Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
Time of Day
Measured Ambient Noise Levels vs. Time of Day
Lmax L90 Leq
Noise Measurement Site
LT-1
Eight Mile Rd
EXHIBIT 1 1269
Appendix C: Exterior to Interior Noise Level
Reduction Calculations
EXHIBIT 1
1270
Appendix C1: Interior Noise Calculation Sheet
Project: 220114 Cannery Park
Room Description:
Parallel Exterior level, dBA: 80.0 Ldn
Correction Factor, dBA: 5
Noise Source:
Room Perimeter, ft: 42
Room Area, ft: 120
Room Height, ft: 9
Transmitting Panel Length, ft: 12
Window Area, ft: 24
Ceiling Finish:
Ceiling, sf: 120
Wall Finish 1:
Wall Finish 1, sf: 354
Wall Finish 2:
Wall Finish 2, sf: 24
Floor:
Floor, sf: 120
Misc. Finish:
Misc. Finish, sf: 25
Transmitting Element 1:
Element 1, sf: 84
Transmitting Element 2:
Element 2, sf: 24
Transmitting Element 3:
Element 3, sf:
Transmitting Element 4:
Element 4, sf:
Predicted Interior Noise Level, dBA: 44
Noise Reduction, dBA: -36
Vinyl Plank
Soft Furnishings
Wall - 0.5" OSB, One Coat Stucco, RC
Window - Millgard 7520 Casement STC 40
Bedroom
Inputs
Freeway Traffic - SR99 Turlock
Gyp Board
Gyp Board
Glass
60 58
61 61
64 67
69 67
73 74
71 69
64 62
57 53
36 32 33
34 33
37 36
30 34 34
28 24
20 18
10 12
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1K 1.25K 1.6K 2K 2.5K 3.15K 4K dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Exterior Noise Level Predicted Interior Noise Level
EXHIBIT 1 1271
Appendix C2: Interior Noise Calculation Sheet
Project: 220114 Cannery Park
Room Description:
Parallel Exterior level, dBA: 80.0 Ldn
Correction Factor, dBA: 5
Noise Source:
Room Perimeter, ft: 64
Room Area, ft: 240
Room Height, ft: 9
Transmitting Panel Length, ft: 20
Window Area, ft: 24
Ceiling Finish:
Ceiling, sf: 240
Wall Finish 1:
Wall Finish 1, sf: 552
Wall Finish 2:
Wall Finish 2, sf: 24
Floor:
Floor, sf: 240
Misc. Finish:
Misc. Finish, sf: 25
Transmitting Element 1:
Element 1, sf: 156
Transmitting Element 2:
Element 2, sf: 24
Transmitting Element 3:
Element 3, sf:
Transmitting Element 4:
Element 4, sf:
Predicted Interior Noise Level, dBA: 43
Noise Reduction, dBA: -37
Vinyl Plank
Soft Furnishings
Wall - 0.5" OSB, One Coat Stucco, RC
Window - Millgard 7520 Casement STC 40
Living Room
Inputs
Freeway Traffic - SR99 Turlock
Gyp Board
Gyp Board
Glass
60 58
61 61
64 67
69 67
73 74
71 69
64 62
57 53
35 31 31 33 31
36 35
29 34 33
27 23
20 19
10 10
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1K 1.25K 1.6K 2K 2.5K 3.15K 4K dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Exterior Noise Level Predicted Interior Noise Level
EXHIBIT 1 1272
Appendix D: Traffic Noise Barrier Calculations
EXHIBIT 1
1273
74 68
74 140
10 0
2 8
0 5
0 6
Autos
Medium
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks Total Autos?
Medium
Trucks?
Heavy
Trucks?
6 68 62 69 72 Yes Yes Yes
7 67 61 68 71 Yes Yes Yes
8 65 59 66 69 Yes Yes Yes
9 64 58 65 68 Yes Yes Yes
10 63 57 64 67 Yes Yes Yes
11 62 56 63 66 Yes Yes Yes
12 61 55 62 65 Yes Yes Yes
13 60 54 61 64 Yes Yes Yes
14 60 53 60 63 Yes Yes Yes
Notes:
Project Information:
Noise Level Data:
Site Geometry:
Highway 99
Location(s): 1
Auto Ldn, dB:
2043
Job Number:
Description
Appendix D-1
FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108)
Noise Barrier Effectiveness Prediction Worksheet
Starting Barrier Height
-------------------- Ldn, dB --------------------
220114
Cannery Park
1 Standard receiver elevation is five feet above grade/pad elevations at the receiver location(s).
Barrier Effectiveness:
14 9
10 11
12 6
Top of Barrier
Elevation (ft)
Barrier Height2
(ft)
13 7
8 Roadway Name:
Year:
Receiver Description:
Medium Truck Elevation:
Heavy Truck Ldn, dB:
Medium Truck Ldn, dB:
Centerline to Barrier Distance (C1):
Barrier to Receiver Distance (C2):
Automobile Elevation:
Pad/Ground Elevation at Receiver:
Barrier Breaks Line of Sight to…
Heavy Truck Elevation:
Receiver Elevation1:
Cannery Park
Base of Barrier Elevation:
EXHIBIT 1 1274
EIR ADDENDUM – CANNERY PARK EIR
City of Stockton October 2023
141
Appendix C: Transportation Impact Analysis Report
EXHIBIT 1 1275
100 Pringle Avenue | Suite 600 | Walnut Creek, CA 94596 | (925) 930-7100 | Fax (925) 933-7090 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum
Date: March 31, 2022
To: Matt Arnaiz, Eight Mile Road Investors, LLC
Steve McMurtry, DeNovo Planning
From: Ellen Poling and Shangyou Zhou, Fehr & Peers
Subject: VMT Impact Assessment for the Cannery Park Revised Development Plan WC21-3863.00
I. Introduction
This memorandum presents the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment for the 2021 Cannery Park Project (2021 Project). The 2021 Project proposes a General Plan Amendment to change the planned land uses on four assessor’s parcels within the 2004 Cannery Park Project (2004 Project). The CEQA analysis for the 2004 Project is documented in Final Environmental Impact Report for Cannery Park Mixed Use Development (August 4. 2004). VMT was not a transportation impact criterion in 2004. Therefore, the CEQA analysis of the 2021 Project includes an analysis with respect to VMT impacts, consistent with the current CEQA Guidelines. As directed by the City of Stockton, this impact assessment compares the VMT impacts of the 2021 Project to those that would result from the 2004 Project.
The Project is located in the northeast corner of the City of Stockton southeast of the intersection of East Eight Mile Road and Holman Road. The Project site is generally bound by East Eight Mile Road to the north, the 99 Frontage Road/State Route 99 to the east, Holman Road to the west, and single-family residential uses to the south.
The project description section of the Initial Study provides a complete description of the 2021 Project. The land use changes proposed in the 2021 Project are described in Section III of this memorandum.
II. Regulatory Setting
This section provides the regulatory setting relevant to the VMT impact analysis. The remainder of the transportation impact analysis, including the physical setting, is being prepared by others.
EXHIBIT 1 1276
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to transportation and circulation are applicable to the project.
State
Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375 provides guidance regarding curbing emissions from cars and light trucks.
There are four major components to SB 375. First, SB 375 requires regional greenhouse gas emission targets. These targets must be updated every 8 years in conjunction with the revision schedule of the housing and transportation elements of local general plans. Second, Metropolitan Planning Organizations are required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting regional targets. Third, SB 375 requires housing elements and transportation plans to be synchronized on 8-year schedules. Finally, Metropolitan Planning Organizations must use transportation and air emissions modeling techniques that are consistent with the guidelines prepared by the California Transportation Commission.
Senate Bill 743
Passed in 2013, California Senate Bill (SB) 743 changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in CEQA from measuring impacts to drivers, to measuring the impact of driving. The change is being made by replacing Level of Service (LOS) as a performance metric with a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) approach. This shift in transportation impact focus is intended to better align transportation impact analysis and mitigation outcomes with the State’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, encourage infill development, and improve public health through development of multimodal transportation networks. LOS or other delay metrics may still be used to evaluate the effect of projects on drivers as part of land use entitlement review and impact fee programs.
In December 2018, the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines, including the incorporation of SB 743 modifications. The Guidelines’ changes were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and as of July 1, 2020 are now in effect statewide.
To help aid lead agencies with SB 743 implementation, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) produced the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA that provides guidance about the variety of implementation questions they face with respect to shifting to a VMT metric. Key guidance from this document includes:
• VMT is the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact. • OPR recommends tour- and trip-based travel models to estimate VMT, but ultimately defers to local agencies to determine the appropriate tools.
EXHIBIT 1 1277
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
• OPR recommends measuring VMT for residential and office projects on a “per rate” basis.
• OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is fifteen percent below that of existing development may be a reasonable threshold. In other words, an office project that generates VMT per employee that is more than 85 percent of the regional VMT per employee could result in a significant impact. OPR notes that this threshold is supported by evidence that connects this level of reduction to the State’s emissions goals. • OPR recommends that where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-thansignificant transportation impact. If the project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds described above should apply.
• Lead agencies have the discretion to set or apply their own significance thresholds.
Caltrans
Caltrans issued the VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) in May 2020, providing the process by which Caltrans will review and assess VMT impacts of land development projects. The TISG generally aligns with the guidance in the OPR Technical Advisory.
Caltrans also issued the Transportation Analysis Framework (TAF) in September 2020, which details methodology for calculating induced travel demand for capacity increasing transportation projects on the State Highway System. Caltrans also issued the Transportation Analysis Under CEQA (TAC) guidance in September 2020 which describes significance determinations for capacity increasing projects on the State Highway System. It is noted that the Housing Element Update does not propose any changes to the Caltrans owned and operated network.
Caltrans also issued Traffic Safety Bulletin 20-02-R1: Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioner Guidance in December 2020, describing the methods with which Caltrans will assess the safety impacts of projects on the Caltrans owned and operated network. This guidance states that Caltrans will provide its safety assessment to lead agencies for inclusion in environmental documents.
Finally, Caltrans has adopted procedures to oversee construction activities on and around its facilities. The Caltrans Construction Manual (Caltrans, 2020b) describes best practices for construction activities, including personnel and equipment safety requirements, temporary traffic control, signage, and other requirements aimed at reducing construction-related hazards and constructing projects safely and efficiently. Any work proposed on Caltrans facilities would be required to abide by these requirements.
EXHIBIT 1 1278
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Local
City of Stockton General Plan 2040
Stockton General Plan 2040, adopted in 2018, contains policies and actions related to analysis and mitigation of VMT impacts of new development. These are listed below.
Policy TR-4.2: Replace LOS with: (1) vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) per capita; and (2) impacts to non-automobile travel modes, as the metrics to analyze impacts related to land use proposals under the California Environmental Quality Act, in accordance with SB 743.
Action TR-4.2A: To evaluate the effects of new development and determine mitigation measures and impact fees, require projects to evaluate per capita VMT and impacts to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes.
Action TR-4.2B: Amend the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to include alternative travel metrics and screening criteria.
Policy TR-4.3: Use the threshold recommended by the California Office of Planning and Research for determining whether VMT impacts associated with land uses are considered significant under State environmental analysis requirements.
Action TR-4.3A: Amend the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines to:
• Establish a threshold of 15 percent below baseline VMT per capita to determine a significant transportation impact under the California Environmental Quality Act. • Identify screening criteria that will streamline certain types of development and/or development in certain areas by not requiring a VMT analysis.
City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Interim) The City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Interim) were completed in December 2021 and are effective for the calendar year January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2022. The guidelines were prepared as an update to the prior guidelines, in part to address the requirements of SB 743 and to implement the General Plan 2040 policies and actions listed above.
The guidelines lay out requirements for both CEQA and non-CEQA analysis. For the VMT portion of the CEQA analysis, the guidelines include sections related to initial screening, the types of VMT to be calculated, descriptions of the baseline and cumulative scenarios, and the VMT impact significance criteria. Table 1 shows the VMT impact criteria contained in the guidelines.
EXHIBIT 1 1279
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Table 1: VMT Impact Criteria for Land Use Projects under Baseline Conditions Project Type Significance Criteria Baseline Level1Impact Threshold Residential
A project exceeds existing
citywide home-based VMT
per resident minus 15%
17.46 Home-based VMT per
resident (citywide average)
15% below baseline
(14.84 Home-based VMT per
resident)
Office
A project exceeds citywide
home-based work VMT per
employee minus 15%
18.56 Home-based work VMT per
Employee (citywide average)
15% below baseline
(15.78 Home-based work
VMT per Employee)
Retail A net increase in total VMT
Can be measured for a
project’s influence area or
citywide
Can be measured for a
project’s influence area or
citywide
Mixed-Use For screening, evaluate each component of a mixed-use development independently, taking credit for internal capture, and apply the significance criteria for each project type.
Other Land
Use Types
The City’s TIA Guidelines explicitly addresses residential, office, and retail projects because those are very common land use types. In general, work-related land uses may be treated like the office land use subject to city approval. Likewise, land uses that generate a high proportion of their vehicle trips from visitors or customers may be treated like the retail land use subject to city approval. Applicants must coordinate with the City to affirm the appropriate, project-based VMT thresholds for other land uses.
1. Values subject to change based on changes to the baseline year or the City’s travel demand model.
Source: City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Interim), December 2021.
The guidelines also discuss the need for analysis of a project’s effect on total VMT within a region under cumulative conditions:
Some projects may also be required to evaluate the project effect on VMT under Year 2040 Cumulative Conditions. Cumulative without Project VMT estimates should be based on the horizon year of the Stockton model, ensuring the model does not already contain the land uses or transportation improvements associated with the Project. Any transportation network modifications for the cumulative year must be limited to those that are fully funded and will be open to traffic by 2040. The environmental analysis also must evaluate a project’s effect on VMT (CEQA Guidelines Section 21100(b)(5)). The project-generated VMT analysis considers all trips as new trips and does not consider how Cumulative Conditions considers the project’s influence on the VMT generation of surrounding land uses. The cumulative project effect on VMT shall be estimated using the City limit boundary and extracting the total link-level VMT for both the no project and with project conditions.
III. VMT Impact Assessment
Significance Thresholds
As directed by the City of Stockton, this impact assessment compares the impacts of the 2021 Project to those of the 2004 Project. Both projects include a mix of uses, including residential, EXHIBIT 1 1280
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
office/industrial/employment uses, and retail uses. Therefore, the following thresholds from the Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (Interim) are used in this assessment:
The project would have a significant impact if:
a. The Project’s residential uses exceed baseline citywide home-based VMT per resident minus 15% and the Project’s residential uses have a home-based VMT per resident that is higher than the 2004 Cannery Park Project; or
b. The Project’s office/employment uses exceed baseline citywide home-based work VMT per employee minus 15% and the Project’s office/employment uses have a home-based work VMT per employee that is higher than the 2004 Cannery Park Project; or c. The Project would increase total citywide VMT relative to the VMT generated by the 2004 Project
Project Land Uses
While the 2021 Project proposes changes only to Planning Areas D and E within the 2004 Cannery Park Project site, because VMT is affected by the totality of land uses within a project site and a region, this analysis provides a comparison of the complete 2004 Project and the complete 2021 Project (i.e., including the uses in Planning Areas A, B and C which are not changed with the Project). This approach captures the full effect of the change in uses with the 2021 Project.
However, Fehr & Peers also analyzed the VMT impacts when considering just the change in uses in Planning Areas D and E, to provide additional information on the VMT effects of the 2021 Project.
Table 2 shows the land uses in Planning Areas A, B and C, including the residential uses that have already been developed (for the No Project case). As noted above, the remaining development in these planning areas is the same under the 2004 Project and the 2021 Project.
Table 2: Land Use Summary: Plan Area A/B/C
Land Use
KSF or Dwelling Units Employees
No Project 2004 Project 2021 Project No Project 2004 Project 2021 Project Single Family
Housing 743 1,077 1,077 - - -
Industrial - 1452.508 KSF 1452.508 KSF - 1,060 1,060
1. Employees estimated Stockton Travel Demand Model employee/KSF conversion rates.
Source: DeNovo Planning, October 2021; Fehr & Peers, March 2022.
EXHIBIT 1 1281
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Table 3 shows the land uses in Planning Areas D and E under the 2004 Project and the 2021 Project.
Table 3: Land Use Summary: Plan Area D/E
Land Use
KSF or Dwelling Units Employees1
No Project 2004 Project 2021 Project No Project 2004 Project 2021 Project Area D - North of Bear Creek
Multi Family
Housing - - 296 - - 296
Restaurant - - 29.8 KSF - - 29
Medical Office - - 9.8 KSF - - 22
Office - 134.295 KSF 15.6 KSF - 305 35
Retail - -
24.6 KSF and
111 Hotel
Rooms
- - 123
Area E - South of Bear Creek
Single Family
Housing - - 321 - - 321
Multi Family
Housing - 210 - - 210 -
Retail - 944.468 KSF - - 851 -
1. Employees estimated using Stockton Travel Demand Model employee/KSF conversion rates.
Source: DeNovo Planning, October 2021; Fehr & Peers, March 2022.
VMT Analysis and Results
The Baseline Stockton Travel Demand Model was adjusted to reflect the No Project, With 2004 Project, and With 2021 Project land uses to allow an assessment of VMT impacts relative to significance criteria (a) and (b). In addition, the 2040 model was adjusted to reflect the 2004 Project and the 2021 Project to allow an assessment under significance criterion (c).
Table 4 presents the Baseline With Project VMT results comparing the 2021 Project as a whole (i.e. the full Cannery Park site) to the 2004 Project and the citywide average. While neither the 2004 Project nor the 2021 Project produces VMT per capita that is 15 percent below the citywide average, the home-based VMT per resident is lower with the 2021 Project than with the 2004 Project (21.59 versus 21.63). However, the home-based work VMT per worker is slightly higher with the 2021 Project than with the 2004 Project (21.86 versus 21.77).
EXHIBIT 1 1282
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Table 4: VMT Summary: Baseline with Project (Full Cannery Park Project) VMT Area
Home-Based VMT per Resident Home-Based Work VMT per Worker 2004 Project 2021 Project 2004 Project 2021 Project
Citywide Average 17.49 17.49 18.62 18.62
85 percent of City Average 14.87 14.87 15.83 15.83
Project Only 21.63 21.59 21.77 21.86
Project < 85 percent of
City Average? No No No No
2021 Project < 2004
Project? - Yes - No
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2022.
Table 5 presents the Baseline With Project VMT results comparing just the changed areas (Planning Areas D and E) between the 2021 Project and the 2004 Project, alongside the citywide average. Focusing just on the changed areas, neither the 2004 Project nor the 2021 Project produces VMT per capita that is 15 percent below the citywide average. However, both the homebased VMT per resident and the home-based work VMT per worker are lower with the 2021 Project than with the 2004 Project (21.91 versus 23.56 for the residential VMT, and 20.91 versus
21.84 for the worker VMT).
Table 5: VMT Summary: Baseline with Project (Planning Areas D and E Only) VMT Area
Home-Based VMT per Resident Home-Based Work VMT per Worker 2004 Project 2021 Project 2004 Project 2021 Project
Citywide Average 17.49 17.49 18.62 18.62
85 percent of City Average 14.87 14.87 15.83 15.83
Project Only (Planning
Areas D and E) 23.56 21.91 21.84 20.91
Project < 85 percent of
City Average? No No No No
2021 Project < 2004
Project? - Yes - Yes
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2022.
Table 6 shows the total citywide VMT under Baseline With Project and Cumulative (2040) With Project conditions, for the 2021 Project and the 2004 Project. The 2021 Project results in lower VMT than the 2004 Project in both scenarios.
EXHIBIT 1 1283
Matt Arnaiz and Steve McMurtry
March 31, 2022
Table 6: VMT Summary: Citywide Total VMT
Scenario With 2004 Project With 2021 Project 2021 Project < 2004 Project?
Baseline 5,009,069 4,977,057 Yes
Cumulative (2040) 6,277,222 6,253,041 Yes
Source: Fehr & Peers, March 2022.
Based on the above findings, and City direction to conduct this assessment as a comparison of the 2021 Project impacts to the 2004 Project’s impacts, the VMT impact can be considered less than significant. The only metric by which the 2021 Project results in higher VMT than the 2004 Project is the Baseline With Project home-based work VMT per worker. Since this metric is lower with the 2021 Project than the 2004 Project under Cumulative conditions, and the metric is lower with the 2021 Project than the 2004 Project when considering just the two Change Areas, and the 2021 Project results in lower citywide VMT than the 2004 Project under both Baseline and Cumulative conditions, the impact with respect to VMT can be considered less than significant.
Please call Ellen Poling at (925) 930-7100 if you have any questions about this memorandum.
EXHIBIT 1 1284
EIR ADDENDUM – CANNERY PARK EIR
City of Stockton October 2023
142
Appendix D: Water Supply Assessment
EXHIBIT 1 1285
Cannery Park Project
Water Supply Assessment
PREPARED FOR
City of Stockton
FINAL REPORT | DECEMBER 2022
EXHIBIT 1 1286
Cannery Park Project
Water Supply Assessment
Prepared for
City of Stockton
Project No. 129-60-22-53
December 29, 2022
Project Manager: Elizabeth T. Drayer, PE Date
December 29, 2022
QA/QC Review: Rhodora Biagtan, PE Date
EXHIBIT 1 1287
Executive Summary............................................................................................................................1 Purpose of Water Supply Assessment.................................................................................................... 1 Proposed Project Overview.................................................................................................................... 1 Potable and Recycled Water Demands and Supply Availability............................................................. 1 Determination of Water Supply Sufficiency........................................................................................... 2
1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................................3
1.1 Legal Requirement for Water Supply Assessment........................................................................... 3
1.2 Need for and Purpose of Water Supply Assessment ....................................................................... 3
1.3 Water Supply Assessment Preparation, Format and Organization.................................................. 4
2.0 Description of Proposed Project....................................................................................................5
2.1 Proposed Project Location ............................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Proposed Land Uses and Projected Water Demand ........................................................................ 5
2.3 Projected Water Supply.................................................................................................................... 5
3.0 Required Determinations .............................................................................................................8
3.1 Does SB 610 apply to the Proposed Project? ................................................................................... 8
3.2 Does SB 221 apply to the Proposed Project? ................................................................................... 8
3.3 Who is the Identified Public Water System?.................................................................................... 9
3.4 Does the City have an adopted Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and does the UWMP include the projected water demand for the Proposed Project?.................................. 9
4.0 City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Service Area............................................10
4.1 Water Service Area......................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Population ...................................................................................................................................... 11
4.3 Climate............................................................................................................................................ 12
5.0 City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Demands ................................................13
5.1 Historical and Existing Water Demand........................................................................................... 13
5.2 Future Water Demand.................................................................................................................... 13
5.3 Dry Year Water Demand................................................................................................................. 14
6.0 City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Supplies..................................................15
6.1 Existing Potable Water Supplies..................................................................................................... 16
6.1.1 Purchased Water .................................................................................................................. 16
6.1.1.1 Stockton East Water District ....................................................................................... 17
6.1.1.2 Woodbridge Irrigation District .................................................................................... 17
6.1.2 Surface Water....................................................................................................................... 17
6.1.2.1 Water Right Permit...................................................................................................... 17
6.1.2.2 Delta Water Treatment Plant...................................................................................... 18 EXHIBIT 1 1288
6.1.3 Groundwater......................................................................................................................... 19
6.1.3.1 Groundwater Overview............................................................................................... 19
6.1.3.2 Groundwater Basin Management............................................................................... 20
6.1.3.3 Groundwater Use ........................................................................................................ 20
6.1.3.4 Groundwater as a Future Water Supply...................................................................... 21
6.2 Additional Planned Future Potable Water Supplies....................................................................... 21
6.3 Summary of Existing and Additional Planned Future Water Supplies.............................................. 22
6.4 Water Supply Availability and Reliability........................................................................................ 22
6.4.1 Reliability by Water Source................................................................................................... 23
6.4.1.1 SEWD Supply ............................................................................................................... 23
6.4.1.2 San Joaquin River Supply............................................................................................. 23
6.4.1.3 WID Supply .................................................................................................................. 24
6.4.1.4 Groundwater Supply ................................................................................................... 24
6.4.2 Summary of Available Water Supplies Under Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years ................................................................................................................ 25
7.0 Determination of Water Supply Sufficiency Based on Requirements of SB 610 .............................27
8.0 Verification of Sufficient Water Supply Based on the Requirements of SB 221..............................29
8.1 Historical Water Deliveries............................................................................................................. 29
8.2 Projected Water Demand by Customer Sector.............................................................................. 29
8.3 Water Shortage Contingency Analysis ........................................................................................... 30
8.4 Future Water Supplies to Serve Water Demands Associated with Buildout of the Proposed Project .................................................................................................................................................. 31
8.5 Verification of Sufficient Water Supply .......................................................................................... 31
9.0 Water Supply Assessment Approval Process ...............................................................................32
10.0 References...............................................................................................................................33
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Total Projected Water Demand............................................................................................. 5 Table 4-1. Historical and Projected Population for the COSMUD Water Service Area........................ 11 Table 3-1. Monthly Average Climate Data Summary ........................................................................... 12 Table 5-1. Historical Potable Water Demand (includes Non-Revenue Water).................................... 13 Table 5-2. Summary of Future Water Demand (includes Non-Revenue Water) ................................. 13 Table 6-1. Existing (2020) Water Supplies............................................................................................ 16 Table 6-2. Historical Groundwater Volume Pumped by the COSMUD ................................................ 21 Table 6-3. Projected Water Supplies.................................................................................................... 22 Table 6-4. Anticipated San Joaquin River Water Supplies.................................................................... 24 EXHIBIT 1 1289
Table 6-5. Normal Year Water Supply .................................................................................................. 25 Table 6-6. Single Dry Year Water Supply.............................................................................................. 25 Table 6-7. Multiple Dry Years Water Supply ........................................................................................ 26 Table 7-1. Summary of Water Demand Versus Water Supply During Various Hydrologic Conditions 28 Table 8-1. Actual and Projected Water Demands by Customer Sector ............................................... 30
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Project Location.................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2-2. Project Site ........................................................................................................................... 7
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AF Acre-Feet 13
AFY Acre-Feet Per Year 1/5
Cal Water California Water Service 4
City City of Stockton 1
COSMUD City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department 1/4 County San Joaquin County 1
Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 1/4
DJWWTP Dr. Joe Waidhofer Water Treatment Plant 16
DU Dwelling Unit
DWR California Department of Water Resources 18
DWTP Delta Water Treatment Plant 2/9
EIR Environmental Impact Report 16
ETo Evapotranspiration 9
F Fahrenheit 12
Gpd Gallons Per Day
GPU General Plan Update
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan 20
GWA Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority
Mgd Million Gallons Per Day 21
Proposed Project Proposed Cannery Park Project
SB Senate Bill 4
SEWD Stockton East Water District 3
Sf Square Feet 16
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act 1/4
SOI Sphere of Influence 11
SOI/MSR City of Stockton Sphere of Influence Plan/Municipal Service Review State Water Board State Water Resources Control Board
EXHIBIT 1 1290
USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation
4 UWMP Urban Water Management Plan 18
Water Code California Water Code 2/10
WID Woodbridge Irrigation District1
WSA Water Supply Assessment 16
WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan
EXHIBIT 1 1291
Cannery Park Project
Water Supply Assessment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose of Water Supply Assessment
The purpose of this Water Supply Assessment (WSA) is to perform the evaluation required by California Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915, as established by Senate Bill (SB) 610, and verification of sufficient water supply, as established by SB 221, in connection with the proposed Cannery Park Project (Proposed Project) located in the northeast portion of the City of Stockton (City). The Proposed Project is anticipated to receive potable water supply from the City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department (COSMUD).
This WSA evaluates the adequacy and sufficiency of the COSMUD total projected water supplies, including existing water supplies and future planned water supplies, to meet the existing and projected future water demands, including those future water demands associated with the Proposed Project, under all hydrologic conditions (Normal Years, Single Dry Years, and Multiple Dry Years).
Proposed Project Overview
The Proposed Project is bounded by Eight Mile Road immediately to the north and is just west of Highway 99. The Proposed Project site contains approximately 100 gross acres1and is proposed to be developed primarily as a mix of 321 single family residential units and 296 high-density residential units, with approximately 20 acres of commercial uses. The Proposed Project would be in COSMUD’s North Stockton service area and would be served by COSMUD’s North Stockton water system.
The Proposed Project meets the definition of a “Project” per California Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915, as established by SB 610 in 2001, thus requiring the preparation of this WSA.
Potable and Recycled Water Demands and Supply Availability Projected potable demands for buildout of the Proposed Project total approximately 192 acre-feet per year (AFY). No recycled water demand is expected for the Proposed Project.
It is anticipated that potable water demands for the Proposed Project, if approved by the City, would be served by the COSMUD. The inclusion of existing and planned future water supplies is specifically allowed by the California Water Code:
California Water Code Section 10631(b): Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a).
Pursuant to California Water Code Section 10910(4) and based on the technical analyses described in this WSA, this WSA demonstrates that the COSMUD existing and additional planned future water supplies are sufficient to meet the COSMUD existing water demands, including those future water demands associated with the Proposed Project.
1 Project area based on San Joaquin County parcel data.
EXHIBIT 1 1292
Determination of Water Supply Sufficiency
As described in Section 7, this WSA demonstrates water supply sufficiency per the requirements of SB 610.
Water demand within the COSMUD water service area is not expected to exceed the COSMUD water supplies at buildout under any hydrologic condition through 2045. To remain conservative in planning, the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) assumes no reduction in water demand during dry years. However, water conservation and demand reduction methods detailed in the adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan, included in Appendix I of the City’s 2020 UWMP, are able to reduce demands by up to and greater than 50 percent under water supply shortage conditions and other emergencies.
Section 8 of this WSA also provides written verification of supply sufficiency per the requirements of SB 221 by demonstrating that water supplies available during Normal, Single Dry and Multiple Dry years within a 20-year projection will meet the projected demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including, but not limited to, agriculture and industrial uses.
EXHIBIT 1 1293
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Legal Requirement for Water Supply Assessment
California Senate Bill (SB) 610 amended state law, effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 sought to promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. It requires detailed information regarding water supply availability to be provided to the city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. The purpose of this coordination is to ensure that prudent water supply planning has been conducted, and that planned water supplies are adequate to meet existing demands, anticipated demands from approved projects and tentative maps, and the demands of proposed projects.
SB 610 amended California Water Code (Water Code) Sections 10910 through 10915 (inclusive) to require land use lead agencies to:
• Identify any public water purveyor that may supply water for a proposed development project
• Request a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) from the identified water purveyor The purpose of the WSA is to demonstrate the sufficiency of the purveyor’s water supplies to satisfy the water demands of the proposed project, while still meeting the water purveyor’s existing and planned future uses. Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915 delineate the specific information that must be included in the WSA.
1.2 Need for and Purpose of Water Supply Assessment
The purpose of this WSA is to perform the evaluation required by Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915 in connection with the Cannery Park Project (Proposed Project). It is not to reserve water, or to function as a “will serve” letter or any other form of commitment to supply water (see Water Code Section 10914). The provision of water service will continue to be undertaken in a manner consistent with applicable policies and procedures, consistent with existing law.
EXHIBIT 1 1294
1.3 Water Supply Assessment Preparation, Format and Organization The format of this WSA is intended to follow Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915 to clearly delineate compliance with the specific requirements for a WSA. The WSA includes the following sections:
• Section 1: Introduction
• Section 2: Description of Proposed Project
• Section 3: Required Determinations
• Section 4: City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Service Area • Section 5: City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Demands • Section 6: City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department Water Supplies • Section 7: Determination of Water Supply Sufficiency Based on the Requirements of SB 610 • Section 8: Verification of Sufficient Water Supply Based on the Requirements of SB 221 • Section 9: Water Supply Assessment Approval Process
• Section 10: References
Relevant citations of Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915 are included throughout this WSA in italics to demonstrate compliance with the specific requirements of SB 610.
EXHIBIT 1 1295
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
The Proposed Project location, description, and projected water demands are discussed below.
2.1 Proposed Project Location
The Proposed Project is located in the northeast area of the City, within existing City limits as shown on Figure 2-1, labelled as Cannery Park Large Lots 4, 5 & 6. A close-up view of the sites to be developed are shown on Figure 2-2. The Proposed Project would be served by the COSMUD.
The Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan land use designations for the Proposed Project are “Low Density Residential,” “High Density Residential,” and “Commercial.”2 The Proposed Project is located just south of Eight Mile Road and just west of Highway 99 and is currently surrounded by agricultural land uses to the north, and residential and rural residential land to the south, west, and east.
2.2 Proposed Land Uses and Projected Water Demand
The Proposed Project site contains approximately 100 gross acres of land3 and 617 total residential units.
In addition to the residential units, the Proposed Project would include approximately 19.8 acres of commercial development. Updated water use factors based on recent water consumption trends within the COSMUD service area, as presented in the City’s 2021 Water Master Plan Update, were used to determine the projected water demand for the Proposed Project. The total projected water demand is 192 acre-feet/year (AFY) as shown in Table 2-1. All of the water demands from the Proposed Project are anticipated to be served by the COSMUD North Stockton water system.
Table 2-1. Total Projected Water Demand
Land Use Type
Dwelling
Units, DU
Gross Area,
acres
Water Use
Factor(a)
Non-Revenue
Water(a), percent
Projected Water
Demand, AFY
Single Family Residential 321 -
242 gpd/DU
0.27 AFY/DU 8 95
High Density Residential 296 -
175 gpd/DU
0.20 AFY/DU 8 63
Commercial - 19.76 1.62 AFY/acre 8 35
Totals 617 192
(a) Based on the City of Stockton 2021 Water Master Plan Update.
2.3 Projected Water Supply
Water demands for the Proposed Project will be served using the COSMUD existing and future portfolio of water supplies discussed in Section 6. The inclusion of existing and planned future water supplies is specifically allowed by the Water Code:
Water Code Section 10631(b): Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a).
2 City of Stockton. December 2018. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan. 3 Project area based on San Joaquin County parcel data, July 2022.
EXHIBIT 1 1296
Figure 2-1. Project Location
EXHIBIT 1 1297
Figure 2-2. Project Site
EXHIBIT 1 1298
3.0 REQUIRED DETERMINATIONS
3.1 Does SB 610 apply to the Proposed Project?
Water Code Section 10910 (a) Any city or county that determines that a project, as defined in Section 10912, is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) under Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code shall comply with this part.
Water Code Section 10912 (a) “Project” means any of the following:
(1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. (2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space.
(3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space.
(4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms. (5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.
(6) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision. (7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project.
Based on the following facts, SB 610 does apply to the Proposed Project. • The City has determined that the Proposed Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required • The Proposed Project, with 617 dwelling units, meets the definition of a “project” as specified in Water Code Section 10912(a) paragraph (1) as defined for a residential development
The Proposed Project has not been the subject of a previously adopted WSA and has not been included in an adopted WSA for a larger project. Therefore, according to Water Code Section 10910(a), a WSA is required for the Proposed Project.
3.2 Does SB 221 apply to the Proposed Project?
In 2001, SB 221 amended State law to require that approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply. Per California Government Code Section 66473.7(a)(1), a subdivision means a proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. The Proposed Project, with its proposed 617 residential DUs, is therefore subject to the requirements of SB 221. Section 8 of this WSA provides the required written verification of sufficient water supply.
EXHIBIT 1 1299
3.3 Who is the Identified Public Water System?
Water Code Section 10910(b) The city or county, at the time that it determines whether an environmental impact report, a negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration is required for any project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 21080.1 of the Public Resources Code, shall identify any water system that is, or may become as a result of supplying water to the project identified pursuant to this subdivision, a public water system, as defined by Section 10912, that may supply water for the project.
Water Code Section 10912 (c) “Public water system” means a system for the provision of piped water to the public for human consumption that has 3,000 or more service connections… The Proposed Project is located within the City Limits and the Proposed Project will be served by the COSMUD. Therefore, the COSMUD is the identified public water system for the Proposed Project.
3.4 Does the City have an adopted Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and does the UWMP include the projected water
demand for the Proposed Project?
Water Code Section 10910(c)(1) The city or county, at the time it makes the determination required under Section 21080.1 of the Public Resources Code, shall request each public water system identified pursuant to subdivision (b) to determine whether the projected water demand associated with a proposed project was included as part of the most recently adopted urban water management plan adopted pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing with Section 10610).
The most recent COSMUD UWMP (2020 UWMP) was adopted by City Council in June 2021 and is incorporated by reference into this WSA.
4 The 2020 UWMP included water demand projections for
current water demands within the COSMUD water service area (baseline demand) and anticipated water demands associated with future development projects and planning areas within the COSMUD water service area through 2045, including projected water demand for the Proposed Project.
The ability of the COSMUD to meet the projected water demands for the Proposed Project is described in Section 7 of this WSA.
4 West Yost. June 2021. City of Stockton 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
EXHIBIT 1 1300
4.0 CITY OF STOCKTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER
SERVICE AREA
4.1 Water Service Area
The City is located in north-central California, approximately 70 miles east of the San Francisco Bay Area and 50 miles south of Sacramento. California State Highway 99 and Interstate 5 run north and south through the City on the east and west boundaries, respectively, and California State Highway 4 (the Crosstown Freeway) connects the two. The San Joaquin River flows from the south and terminates at the Delta area of Central Stockton.
The COSMUD provides water service to North and South Stockton while the central portion of the City is served by California Water Service (Cal Water). North Stockton is primarily residential, and South Stockton is largely comprised of residential (on the west side), industrial and agricultural land uses. The COSMUD water service area extends beyond the City Limits into unincorporated San Joaquin County, in conjunction with the City’s General Plan. The COSMUD provides water service as new developments are approved within its water service area and/or annexed into the City.
EXHIBIT 1 1301
4.2 Population
The existing (2020) population for the COSMUD water service area was estimated in the 2020 UWMP to be 184,402 people. Population projections for 2025 through 2040 presented in the 2020 UWMP were estimated in the City’s 2021 Water Master Plan Update5. These projections through 2040 were based on future land uses as defined in the City’s 2040 General Plan Update (GPU) and the April 2020 City of Stockton Sphere of Influence Plan/Municipal Service Review (SOI/MSR). Finally, as 2045 is outside of the SOI/MSR Report and 2021 Water Master Plan Update planning horizon, an annualized growth rate of
1.44 percent was used to estimate the 2045 projected population for the 2020 UWMP.
Table 4-1 shows the COSMUD historical and projected population in five-year increments from 1995 to 2045.
Table 4-1. Historical and Projected Population for the COSMUD Water Service Area Time Frame Year Population
Historical(a)
1995 117,303
2000 135,716
2005 177,127
2010 178,387
2015 170,417
Projected(b)
2020 184,402
2025 188,601
2030 192,800
2035 239,380
2040 285,960
2045 307,150
(a) City of Stockton 2015 UWMP, Table 2-2, July 2016.
(b) City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 3-2, June 2021.
5 West Yost. January 2021. City of Stockton 2021 Water Master Plan Update Chapter 3.
EXHIBIT 1 1302
4.3 Climate
The COSMUD water service area is located in the Central Valley of California and generally experiences hot, dry summers with daytime temperatures well over 100 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). Winter temperatures can drop to 30°F but are generally mild. A majority of the annual average 10.4 inches of rainfall generally falls from November through March. The average reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is 52.6 inches.
Table 4-2 summarizes the average temperature and rainfall data for the COSMUD water service area.
Table 3-1. Monthly Average Climate Data Summary
Month(a)
Standard Monthly
Average ET, inches
Average Total
Rainfall, inches
Average Temperature, degrees Fahrenheit
Maximum Minimum
Manteca (CIMIS Station No. 70, WRCC Station No. 045303) (a)
January 1.11 1.65 53.7 36.3
February 1.96 1.35 61.1 39.3
March 3.54 1.52 66.3 42.1
April 5.09 0.95 72.4 45.2
May 6.77 0.21 80.9 50.5
June 7.73 0.09 88.6 55.9
July 8.01 0.12 93.2 59.2
August 7.04 0.23 91.5 58.5
September 5.16 0.24 87.7 55.9
October 3.41 0.97 77.7 49.2
November 1.70 1.58 61.1 40.4
December 1.05 1.51 53.8 35.4
Totals 52.57 10.41 - -
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 3-1, June 2021. (a) Period of record is 1971 to 2000.
EXHIBIT 1 1303
5.0 CITY OF STOCKTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER
DEMANDS
Water Code Section 10910(c)(2) If the projected water demand associated with the proposed project was accounted for in the most recently adopted urban water management plan, the public water system may incorporate the requested information from the urban water management plan in preparing the elements of the assessment required to comply with subdivisions (d), (e), (f), and (g).
The descriptions provided below for the COSMUD water demands have been taken, for the most part, from the 2020 UWMP, which was adopted in June 2021.
5.1 Historical and Existing Water Demand
The COSMUD water demand decreased significantly from 2012 to 2015 due to drought conditions and associated conservation measures. However, water demands have rebounded somewhat in recent years with the end of drought conditions.
Table 5-1 shows the COSMUD historical water demand from 2012 to 2020.
Table 5-1. Historical Potable Water Demand (includes Non-Revenue Water), AFY Condition 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020(b) Total Water Demand 37,100 36,692 31,603 26,312 27,845 29,241 30,103 30,684 34,404 (a) 2012 through 2019 source: City of Stockton 2021 Water Master Plan Update, Table 3-1, January 2021. (b) 2020 source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 4-2, June 2021.
5.2 Future Water Demand
Projected future water demands presented in the City’s 2020 UWMP used land-use based water demand projections developed for the City’s 2021 Water Master Plan Update. Water demand projections were based on the anticipated growth within the COSMUD water service area as defined by City’s 2040 GPU and confirmed with the City’s Community Development Department; the Proposed Project is included in these projections. Projected water demands for 2045 are assumed to be the same as projected water demands in 2040 since the development of future planned developments beyond 2040 is not defined in the City’s 2040 GPU.
Projected water demands for the COSMUD water service area are summarized in Table 5-2 and indicate a 39 percent increase in water demand from 2020 to 2045.
Table 5-2. Summary of Future Water Demand (includes Non-Revenue Water), AFY Demand Projection Source 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
2020 UWMP 34,789 37,878 43,161 48,444 48,444
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 4-3, June 2021.
EXHIBIT 1 1304
5.3 Dry Year Water Demand
For planning purposes and to be conservative, the COSMUD assumes no reduction in water demand during dry years. The adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan, outlined in Appendix I of the 2020 UWMP, includes a six-stage plan describing specific actions to reduce water demand by up to and greater than 50 percent in the event of a water supply shortage or other emergency.
EXHIBIT 1 1305
6.0 CITY OF STOCKTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WATER
SUPPLIES
Water Code Section 10910(c)(2) If the projected water demand associated with the proposed project was accounted for in the most recently adopted urban water management plan, the public water system may incorporate the requested information from the urban water management plan in preparing the elements of the assessment required to comply with subdivisions (d), (e), (f) and (g).
Water Code Section 10910(d)(1) The assessment required by this section shall include an identification of any existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project, and a description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), under the existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts.
Water Code Section 10910(d)(2) An identification of existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts held by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), shall be demonstrated by providing information related to all of the following:
(A) Written contracts or other proof of entitlement to an identified water supply. (B) Copies of a capital outlay program for financing the delivery of a water supply that has been adopted by the public water system.
(C) Federal, state, and local permits for construction of necessary infrastructure associated with delivering the water supply.
(D) Any necessary regulatory approvals that are required in order to be able to convey or deliver the water supply.
Water Code Section 10910(e) If no water has been received in prior years by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), under the existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts, the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), shall also include in its water supply assessment pursuant to subdivision (c), an identification of the other public water systems or water service contract-holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts, to the same source of water as the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), has identified as a source of water supply within its water supply assessments.
The Proposed Project, if approved by the City, is anticipated to be served from the COSMUD existing and future portfolio of water supplies. The inclusion of existing and planned future water supplies is specifically allowed by the Water Code:
Water Code Section 10631(b): Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a).
The water supply for the Proposed Project will have the same water supply reliability and water quality as the water supply available to the other COSMUD existing and future water customers. Proponents of the Proposed Project will provide their proportionate share of required funding to the COSMUD for the acquisition and delivery of treated potable water supplies to the Proposed Project area.
The water supplies needed to serve the Proposed Project (together with existing water demands and planned future uses) are predominantly described in the City’s 2020 UWMP. When relevant, the descriptions provided below have been updated with information provided by COSMUD staff.
EXHIBIT 1 1306
6.1 Existing Potable Water Supplies
The COSMUD currently receives water supply from the following sources:
• Surface water from the San Joaquin River that is diverted at the Intake Pump Station on Empire Tract located in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and treated at the City’s Delta Water Treatment Plant (DWTP), supplemented by surface water from the Mokelumne River diverted and conveyed by Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID), and treated at the City’s DWTP, when the City’s San Joaquin River supplies are curtailed; • Surface water from the Mokelumne River diverted and conveyed by WID, and treated at the City’s DWTP;
• Potable water purchased from Stockton East Water District (SEWD); and • Groundwater pumped from City owned and operated wells from the underlying Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin.
Water from SEWD can be conveyed to both the North and South Stockton distribution systems. SEWD also supplies the COSMUD Walnut Plant service area that is surrounded by the Cal Water system through two interconnects. Cal Water conveys SEWD supply to the Walnut Plant service area via a wheeling agreement with COSMUD. Water supplies from local groundwater wells are used to supply both the COSMUD North and South Stockton water service areas. The Proposed Project will be served by the North Stockton water system.
To improve water supply resiliency and enhance water supply availability, the City plans to explore the potential of surface water/stormwater capture for the Groundwater Recharge Improvement Project. The COSMUD may pursue additional water resource exchanges or transfers. The COSMUD has no sources of ocean water, brackish water, or groundwater that provide a viable opportunity for development of desalinated water as a long-term supply.
Each of the COSMUD existing water supplies is described in more detail below. Table 6-1 shows the COSMUD source of its existing water supplies and actual volume used in 2020.
Table 6-1. Existing (2020) Water Supplies
Supply Source
Additional Detail on Water
Supply Actual Volume, AFY
Purchased Water (treated surface water) SEWD 6,939
Purchased Water (untreated surface water) WID 8,657
Surface Water (untreated) San Joaquin River 9,970
Groundwater Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin 8,662
Total 34,228
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 6-13, June 2021.
6.1.1 Purchased Water
The City purchases treated potable water from SEWD and untreated surface water from WID as described below.
EXHIBIT 1 1307
6.1.1.1 Stockton East Water District
SEWD is a wholesale water supplier that provides treated potable water to the urban water retailers within the Stockton Metropolitan Area, including COSMUD, Cal Water, and two small maintenance districts in the County (Urban Contractors). SEWD receives and treats surface water from New Melones Reservoir and New Hogan Reservoir through agreements with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). SEWD has filed several water right applications to divert excess wet weather flow from Calaveras River, Littlejohns Creek, and other tributaries. The applications are currently undergoing the permitting process with the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board).
To alleviate severe groundwater overdraft in the region, SEWD constructed the Dr. Joe Waidhofer Water Treatment Plant (DJWWTP) with a capacity of 30 million gallons per day (mgd) in the mid-1970s. Since then, the DJWWTP has been expanded to a current capacity of 62 mgd.
6.1.1.2 Woodbridge Irrigation District
WID provides agricultural water supply north of the City boundaries. When the DWTP is curtailed from diverting water from the San Joaquin River, the COSMUD obtains untreated surface water from WID to supplement its water supply. WID’s water supply is from the Mokelumne River.
In 2008, COSMUD executed a 40-year purchase agreement with WID for 6,500 AFY for municipal and industrial water use. This water augments supply to the DWTP when supply from the San Joaquin River is not available due to environmental restrictions. The water is conveyed to the DWTP through WID’s Wilkerson Canal system and Pixley lateral pipeline for treatment and conveyance to the COSMUD water service area.
The COSMUD 2008 contract with WID includes a provision for increase in water supply as WID-served agricultural lands in the northern part of the City are annexed to the City for municipal and industrial use.
Under this contract, an additional 6,500 AFY of WID supply will become available to the City at a rate of
3.0 AFY per acre annexed. WID supply may potentially increase from 6,500 AFY to 13,000 AFY by 2030.
6.1.2 Surface Water
Water supply from the San Joaquin River is a recent addition to the COSMUD water supply portfolio since the completion of the DWTP in 2012 and currently provides a significant portion of existing water supplies.
The City has a water right to Delta water because portions of the COSMUD water service area fall within the legally defined Delta and area of origin. Water supply from the San Joaquin River and substantially all of the groundwater that the COSMUD pumps are delivered primarily to the North Stockton water system.
6.1.2.1 Water Right Permit
The City’s 1996 water right application with the State Water Board requested an ultimate diversion of 125,900 AFY to address the projected long-term demands through 2050. The State Water Board bifurcated the water right application into two separate applications, Applications 30531A and 30531B.
Application 30531A proposed diversions of up to 33,600 AFY from the Delta and the Place of Use is confined to the City’s 1990 General Plan boundary. Through this application, the City was granted a water right permit under Water Code Section 1485. The City’s water right permit from the State Water Board was issued on March 8, 2006, under Water Right Permit 21176. Application 30531B, which proposed EXHIBIT 1 1308
diversions of up to 92,300 AFY, is currently unpermitted. The City plansto continue the application process for this application to help meet the City’s future water demands.
Under Water Code Section 1485, Water Right Permit 21176 allows the City to divert from the San Joaquin River as much water as the City’s wastewater treatment plant discharges into the San Joaquin River under an indirect potable reuse strategy. The quantity is permitted up to 33,600 AFY from the San Joaquin River under Water Right Permit 21176. However, Section 1485 water is subject to pumping restriction in some months due to environmental restrictions.
The City’s supply from the San Joaquin River is curtailed annually from February 15th to June 15th due to U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and National Marine Fisheries Service restrictions. When water diversion is curtailed, COSMUD obtains supplemental water supply from WID.
If the current pumping restrictions for Water Right Permit 21176 remain in place, the City may need the additional water supply it has applied for under Part B of the City’s Water Right (Application 30531B) between 2055 and 2060. The City estimates that planning and environmental analysis efforts related to Application 30531B would start between 2025 and 2035. The City will continue to evaluate these dates approximately every five years when it prepares future Urban Water Management Plan updates.
6.1.2.2 Delta Water Treatment Plant
Subsequent to the State Water Board water right permit issuance for Application 30531A, the COSMUD proceeded with Phase 1 of its Delta Water Supply Project with an initial treatment plant capacity of 30 mgd. The DWTP and associated water supply facilities were completed and commenced operation in 2012. Since completion of the DWTP, the City has exercised its water right to divert water through its intake facility on the San Joaquin River.
Surface water curtailments are possible in dry years and can be offset with additional groundwater use and/or demand reduction through implementation of the City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan.
EXHIBIT 1 1309
6.1.3 Groundwater
Water Code Section 10910(f) If a water supply for a proposed project includes groundwater, the following additional information shall be included in the water supply assessment.
Water Code Section 10910(f)(1) A review of any information contained in the urban water management plan relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed project.
Water Code Section 10910(f)(2) A description of any groundwater basin or basins from which the proposed project will be supplied. For those basins for which a court or the board has adjudicated the rights to pump groundwater, a copy of the order or decree adopted by the court or the board and a description of the amount of groundwater the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), has the legal right to pump under the order or decree. For basins that have not been adjudicated, information as to whether the department has identified the basin or basins as overdrafted or has projected that the basin will become overdrafted if present management conditions continue, in the most current bulletin of the department that characterizes the condition of the groundwater basin, and a detailed description by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), of the efforts being undertaken in the basin or basins to eliminate the long-term overdraft condition.
Water Code Section 10910(f)(3) A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater pumped by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), for the past five years from any groundwater basin from which the proposed project will be supplied. The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historical use records.
A detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater that is projected to be pumped by the public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), from any basin from which the proposed project will be supplied. The description and analysis shall be based on information that is reasonably available, including, but not limited to, historical use records.
Water Code Section 10910(f)(4) An analysis of the sufficiency of the groundwater from the basin or basins from which the proposed project will be supplied to meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project.
A water assessment shall not be required to include the information required by this paragraph if the public water system determines, as part of the review required by paragraph (1), that the sufficiency of groundwater necessary to meet the initial and projected water demand associated with the project was addressed in the description and analysis required by paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 10631.
6.1.3.1 Groundwater Overview
The COSMUD has groundwater wells located in the North Stockton and South Stockton water systems.
These wells are used conjunctively to meet peak summer demands or during dry years when available surface water supplies may be limited. The City has partnered with other users through the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (GWA) to manage the groundwater basin.
The City has determined that the sustainable groundwater yield is 0.75 AFY/acre, or approximately 50,000 AFY for the overall City area. To establish the projected groundwater supply that is reasonably available within the COSMUD service area, COSMUD assumes that the reasonably available groundwater supply for the current water service area (approximately 38,500 acres) is pumped at 0.6 AFY/acre, equivalent to an annual groundwater supply of 23,100 AFY.
EXHIBIT 1 1310
6.1.3.2 Groundwater Basin Management
The groundwater basin underlying the City is the San Joaquin Valley Basin, Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (5-22.01, Subbasin). The Subbasin is defined by the areal extent of unconsolidated to semi consolidated sedimentary deposits that are bounded by the Mokelumne River on the north and northwest; San Joaquin River on the west; Stanislaus River on the south; and consolidated bedrock on the east.
In 2014, the California legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) in response to continued overdraft of California’s groundwater resources. The Subbasin is one of 21 basins and subbasins identified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as being in a state of critical overdraft. SGMA requires preparation of a groundwater sustainability plan to address measures necessary to attain sustainable conditions in the Subbasin. Sustainability is generally defined as long-term reliability of the groundwater supply and the absence of undesirable results from over pumping.
The City, along with fifteen other groundwater users and groundwater sustainability agencies, formed a GWA in 2017 in response to SGMA. In 2019, the GWA completed the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to help achieve groundwater sustainability in the Subbasin by 2040. In general, the GSP shows that groundwater elevations have declined since the 1950s.
Water quality issues were detected on the west side of the Subbasin, some of which are from wells underlying the City. The GSP outlined the need to reduce overdraft conditions and identified 23 projects for potential development, along with management actions, that either replace groundwater use or supplement groundwater supplies to meet current and future water demands. The list of 23 potential projects included in the GSP represent a variety of project types including direct and in-lieu recharge, intra-basin water transfers, demand conservation, water recycling, and stormwater reuse to be undertaken by the member agencies. The GSP determined an estimated pumping offset and/or recharge need of 78,000 AFY Subbasin-wide to achieve sustainability. This amount may be reevaluated after additional data are collected and analyzed.6
From 2020 to 2045, members of the GWA, including the City, will be monitoring and reporting their progress on implementing projects and studies and the impacts of their outreach. Evaluation will be conducted every five years.
6.1.3.3 Groundwater Use
The COSMUD uses groundwater conjunctively with its surface water supply sources, with groundwater generally used to meet increased water demands primarily in the summer months or during dry years when available surface water supplies may be limited. Wells are also depended on for emergency supply in the event of surface water supply interruptions.
6 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan, November 2019, Section 6.
EXHIBIT 1 1311
Historically, the local groundwater basin provided 100 percent of the COSMUD water supply. However, with SEWD surface water deliveries beginning in the 1980s and the completion and dedication of the DWTP and associated water supply infrastructure in 2012, the reliance on groundwater has significantly reduced. The annual volume of groundwater pumped by the COSMUD is shown in Table 6-2. Groundwater supply provided an average of 4,320 AFY, approximately 14 percent of the total COSMUD water supply between 2016 and 2020.
Table 6-2. Historical Groundwater Volume Pumped by the COSMUD, AFY Supply Source 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Groundwater 3,394 4,085 7,228 6,619 3,748 2,965 3,236 3,778 8,662 Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 6-3, June 2021.
6.1.3.4 Groundwater as a Future Water Supply
In the future, the COSMUD plans to use less groundwater in wet and average years. It plans to continue groundwater use to meet peak demand and in dry years to make up for reductions in surface water deliveries.
6.2 Additional Planned Future Potable Water Supplies
In addition to the existing potable water supplies described above, the COSMUD has additional planned future potable water supplies to meet existing and projected future water demands, including those associated with the Proposed Project. The inclusion of planned future water supplies in this WSA is specifically allowed by the Water Code:
Water Code Section 10631(b): Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over the same five-year increments described in subdivision (a).
As discussed above, the City’s application for an additional water right from the San Joaquin River for up to 92,300 AFY, is currently unpermitted. The City plans to pursue this application in the future to meet the COSMUD ultimate water demand. Pursuant to the grant of this additional water right by the State Water Board, several expansion projects are planned for the DWTP, as needed, from the current capacity of 30 mgd, up to 160 mgd.
As discussed in Section 6.1.1.2, the City expects an additional 6,500 AFY of WID supply will become available to the City at a rate of 3.0 AFY per acre annexed, per the City’s 2008 contract with WID. This WID supply may potentially increase from 6,500 AFY to 13,000 AFY by 2030.
EXHIBIT 1 1312
6.3 Summary of Existing and Additional Planned Future Water Supplies Table 6-3 provides a summary of the COSMUD projected water supply entitlements. A discussion of the future anticipated availability of these existing and additional planned future water supplies during dry years is provided in the next section.
Table 6-3. Projected Water Supplies
Supply Source
Additional Detail on
Water Supply
Reasonably Available Volume, AFY
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Purchased Water
(treated surface water) SEWD 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300 Purchased Water
(untreated surface water) WID 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 Surface Water
(untreated) San Joaquin River 23,400 24,800 25,000 25,000 25,000 Groundwater Eastern
San Joaquin Subbasin 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 Total 77,300 85,200 85,400 85,400 85,400
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 6-14, June 2021.
Note: A normal year is assumed.
6.4 Water Supply Availability and Reliability
Water Code Section 10910 (c)(4) requires that a WSA include a discussion with regard to “whether total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection, will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.” Accordingly, this WSA addresses these three hydrologic conditions through the year 2045. The reliability discussion presented in this section reflects Chapter 7 of the City’s 2020 UWMP.
Factors contributing to potential reductions in the COSMUD water supplies include legal limitations due to water rights and contracts that may limit the quantity of water available, environmental constraints, and reductions in availability due to climatic factors. The surface water supplies delivered to the COSMUD is subject to reductions during single and multiple dry years (seasonal and climatic shortages) as discussed below.
Also, in response to drought conditions and the State of Emergency proclaimed by Governor Brown, first in January 2014 and again in April 2015, this WSA provides a discussion of the availability and reliability of the COSMUD available water supplies to meet water demands in the event that the COSMUD surface water supplies are limited under emergency water supply conditions.
EXHIBIT 1 1313
6.4.1 Reliability by Water Source
6.4.1.1 SEWD Supply
Review of SEWD’s water deliveries from Fiscal Years 2012 through 2018 show that COSMUD received approximately one-third of the total SEWD water supply to the Urban Contractors.7SEWD estimated that approximately 72,800 AF will be available to the Urban Contractors. Thus, the normal year volume entered for the COSMUD water service area is estimated to be 24,300 AF, approximately one-third of 72,800 AF.
Per the Second Amended Contract, SEWD is required to deliver a minimum of 20,000 AF to the Urban Contractors. Thus, the water supply availability for the City during the single dry year is assumed to be approximately one-third of the SEWD contractual minimum volume of 20,000 AF.
The water supply availability for the five-consecutive-dry years reflects the City’s deliveries from SEWD during the most recent Statewide drought. Available water supplies for the first and fifth years of the five-consecutive-year drought are estimated to be normal year supplies. Available SEWD supplies are reduced in the second year, and then further reduced to minimum deliveries (one-third on the contractual minimum volume) in the third and fourth years.
6.4.1.2 San Joaquin River Supply
Under Water Code Section 1485, Water Right Permit 21176 allows the City to divert from the San Joaquin River as much water as the City’s wastewater treatment plant discharges into the San Joaquin River. The quantity is permitted up to 33,600 AFY from the San Joaquin River under Water Right Permit 21176. However, Section 1485 water is subject to pumping restrictions in some months due to environmental restrictions.
The City’s Water Right Permit summarizes San Joaquin River water available for diversion based on the City’s wastewater treatment plant discharge and pumping restrictions due to the environmental restrictions for 2012 through 2040. If the current pumping restrictions for Permit 21176 remain in place, the City may need the additional water supply it has applied for under Part B of the City’s Water Right (Application 30531B) between 2055 and 2060. The City estimates that planning and environmental analysis efforts related to Application 30531B would start between 2040 and 2045. The City will continue to evaluate these dates approximately every five years when it prepares future Urban Water Management Plan updates.
7 Stockton East Water District. Fiscal Years 2012/2013 to 2018/2019. Schedule D.
EXHIBIT 1 1314
Since the Petition for Extension of Time was completed prior to 2020, the volumes for 2020 through 2040 are projections of the anticipated volume available for diversion from the San Joaquin River and are based on the historical volumes available under similar hydrologic years, as shown in Table 6-4.
Table 6-4. Anticipated San Joaquin River Water Supplies Year Type Base Year
Volume Available,
AFY
Percent of Average
Supply
Normal Year 2018 20,500 100
Single-Dry Year 2015 19,100 93
Consecutive Dry Year 1st Year 2013 18,300 89
Consecutive Dry Year 2nd Year 2014 19,000 93
Consecutive Dry Year 3rd Year 2015 19,100 93
Consecutive Dry Year 4th Year 2016 18,100 88
Consecutive Dry Year 5th Year 2017 21,400 104
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 7-3, June 2021.
6.4.1.3 WID Supply
Raw water from WID augments supply to the DWTP if the San Joaquin River water is not available due to environmental restrictions. Consistent with the 2020 UWMP, a slight supply reduction from 6,500 AF to 4,500 AF is assumed during a single dry year and the third and fourth years of the five-consecutiveyear drought.
6.4.1.4 Groundwater Supply
COSMUD plans to use its groundwater supply conjunctively with the available treated surface water supplies and purchased water supplies. Available groundwater supply is based on the projected groundwater supply that is reasonably available. COSMUD assumes that the reasonably available groundwater for the current water service area (approximately 38,500 acres) is pumped at 0.6 AFY/ac, equivalent to an annual groundwater supply of 23,100 AFY. This volume is assumed to be available under all year types.
EXHIBIT 1 1315
6.4.2 Summary of Available Water Supplies Under Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years The reliability of each of the COSMUD existing and additional planned water supplies and their projected availability during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years, as described in Chapter 7 of the 2020 UWMP, is summarized in Tables 6-5, 6-6, and 6-7, respectively.
Table 6-5. Normal Year Water Supply, AFY
Supply Source 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
SEWD 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300
WID 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
San Joaquin River 23,400 24,800 25,000 25,000 25,000
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Total 77,300 85,200 85,400 85,400 85,400
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 7-6, June 2021.
Table 6-6. Single Dry Year Water Supply, AFY
Supply Source 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
SEWD 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700
WID 4,500 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
San Joaquin River 21,800 23,100 23,300 23,300 23,300
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Total 56,100 61,900 62,100 62,100 62,100
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 7-7, June 2021.
EXHIBIT 1 1316
Table 6-7. Multiple Dry Years Water Supply, AFY
Supply 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
First Year
SEWD 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300
WID 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
San Joaquin River 20,900 22,100 22,300 22,300 22,300
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Supply Total 74,800 82,500 82,700 82,700 82,700
Second Year
SEWD 15,500 15,500 15,500 15,500 15,500
WID 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
San Joaquin River 21,700 23,000 23,200 23,200 23,200
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Supply Total 66,800 74,600 74,800 74,800 74,800
Third Year
SEWD 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700
WID 4,500 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
San Joaquin River 21,800 23,100 23,300 23,300 23,300
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Supply Total 56,100 61,900 62,100 62,100 62,100
Fourth Year
SEWD 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700
WID 4,500 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000
San Joaquin River 20,700 21,900 22,100 22,100 22,100
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Supply Total 55,000 60,700 60,900 60,900 60,900
Fifth Year
SEWD 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300 24,300
WID 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000
San Joaquin River 24,400 25,900 26,100 26,100 26,100
Groundwater 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100 23,100
Supply Total 78,300 86,300 86,500 86,500 86,500
Source: City of Stockton 2020 UWMP, Table 7-9, June 2021.
EXHIBIT 1 1317
7.0 DETERMINATION OF WATER SUPPLY SUFFICIENCY BASED ON
REQUIREMENTS OF SB 610
Water Code Section 10910 states:
10910(c)(4) If the city or county is required to comply with this part pursuant to subdivision (b), the water supply assessment for the project shall include a discussion with regard to whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20-year projection, will meet the projected water demand associated with the proposed project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.
Pursuant to Water Code Section 10910(c)(4), and based on the technical analyses described in this WSA, the total projected water supplies determined to be available for the Proposed Project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses.
Table 7-1 summarizes the projected availability of the COSMUD existing and planned future potable water supplies compared with projected water demands in normal, single dry and multiple dry years through buildout. As stated in Section 3.4, the Proposed Project’s water demands were included in future water demand projections presented in the 2020 UWMP and in this table.
EXHIBIT 1 1318
Table 7-1. Summary of Water Demand Versus Water Supply During Various Hydrologic Conditions 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Available Water Supply(a) 77,300 85,200 85,400 85,400 85,400 Total Water Demand(b) 34,789 37,878 43,161 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 42,511 47,322 42,239 36,956 36,956 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(c) 56,100 61,900 62,100 62,100 62,100 Total Water Demand(b) 34,789 37,878 43,161 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 21,311 24,022 18,939 13,656 13,656 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(d) 74,800 82,500 82,700 82,700 82,700 Total Water Demand(b) 34,789 37,878 43,161 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 40,011 44,622 39,539 34,256 34,256 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(d) 66,800 74,600 74,800 74,800 74,800 Total Water Demand(b) 35,407 38,935 44,218 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 31,393 35,665 30,582 26,356 26,356 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(d) 56,100 61,900 62,100 62,100 62,100 Total Water Demand(b) 36,025 39,991 45,274 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 20,075 21,909 16,826 13,656 13,656 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(d) 55,000 60,700 60,900 60,900 60,900 Total Water Demand(b) 36,642 41,048 46,331 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 18,358 19,652 14,569 12,456 12,456 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
Available Water Supply(d) 78,300 86,300 86,500 86,500 86,500 Total Water Demand(b) 37,260 42,104 47,387 48,444 48,444 Potential Surplus (Deficit) 41,040 44,196 39,113 38,056 38,056 Percent Shortfall of Demand -- -- -- -- --
(a) Refer to Table 6-5.
(b) Refer to Table 5-2.
(c) Refer to Table 6-6.
(d) Refer to Table 6-7.
Multiple Dry
Year 3
Multiple Dry
Year 4
Multiple Dry
Year 5
Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years, AFY
Hydrologic Condition
Multiple Dry
Year 1
Multiple Dry
Year 2
Normal Year
Single Dry Year
Multiple Dry Years
N-129-60-22-53\R-WSA
City of Stockton
Cannery Park Project WSA
Last Revised: 11-15-22
EXHIBIT 1 1319
8.0 VERIFICATION OF SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLY BASED ON THE REQUIREMENTS OF SB 221
The Proposed Project, with up to 617 residential dwelling units, is also subject to the requirements of SB 221 (Government Code section 66473.7). SB 221 applies to projects with residential subdivisions with more than 500 dwelling units (such as the Proposed Project) and requires that the water supplier (COSMUD) provide a written verification that the water supply for the Proposed Project is sufficient.
Verification must demonstrate supply sufficiency by showing that water supplies available during Normal, Single Dry and Multiple Dry years within a 20-year projection will meet the projected demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including, but not limited to, agriculture and industrial uses.
Per the requirements of SB 221, the following must be considered:
• Historical Water Deliveries
• Urban Water Shortage Contingency Analysis Prepared for the UWMP • Supply Reduction for Specific Water Use Sectors
• Amount of Water Expected from Specified Supply Projects The 2020 UWMP and this WSA for the Proposed Project provide the documentation required to comply with SB 221 and demonstrate that COSMUD’s supplies are sufficient to meet the projected demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. The specific considerations to be evaluated for the SB 221 verification are described below and reference applicable sections of the 2020 UWMP and this WSA.
8.1 Historical Water Deliveries
COSMUD’s historical and current water supplies are summarized in Section 6 of this WSA and described in detail in Chapter 6 of the 2020 UWMP. The use of these supplies will continue into the future as described in Section 6 of this WSA and as shown in Table 6-3 of this WSA.
Water supply availability and reliability during Normal, Single Dry and Multiple Dry years is summarized in Section 6 of this WSA and described in detail in Chapter 7 of the 2020 UWMP.
8.2 Projected Water Demand by Customer Sector
Projected potable water demands in COSMUD’s water service area are described in Section 5 of this WSA based on information provided in Chapter 4 of the 2020 UWMP. Projected water demand by customer sector within COSMUD’s water service area is documented in the 2020 UWMP and is summarized in Table 8-1.
EXHIBIT 1 1320
Table 8-1. Actual and Projected Water Demands by Customer Sector Water Source
2020
(actual)(a) 2025(b) 2030(b) 2035(b) 2040(b) 2045(b)
Potable Water, af/yr
Single Family Residential 15,758 15,782 16,066 19,259 22,451 22,451 Multi-Family Residential 3,030 2,927 2,976 3,494 4,012 4,012 Commercial 4,700 4,793 4,856 5,149 5,442 5,442
Industrial 709 3,397 5,797 6,076 6,355 6,355
Landscape 3,255 3,162 3,208 3,786 4,363 4,363
Sales to Other Agencies 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 1,830 Other 132 0 0 0 0 0
Losses 4,991 2,898 3,145 3,568 3,991 3,991
Potable Water Demand Total 34,404 34,789 37,878 43,161 48,444 48,444 (a) From Table 4-2 in the City of Stockton 2020 UWMP.
(b) From Table 4-3 in the City of Stockton 2020 UWMP.
8.3 Water Shortage Contingency Analysis
The City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP), included as an appendix to the City’s 2020 UWMP, describes the City’s strategic plan in preparation for and responses to water shortages. It includes water shortage stages and associated actions that will be implemented in the event of a water supply shortage, including situations when catastrophic water supply interruptions occur due to regional power outage, earthquake, or other disasters; and when drought occurs. As part of the WSCP, the City’s legal authorities, communication protocols, compliance and enforcement, and monitoring and reporting are included.
Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) Chapter 13.28 Water Conservation and SMC Chapter 13.32 Water Shortage Emergencies supports the City’s WSCP actions.
The six Stages of Action outlined in the City’s WSCP are intended to promote the proper management and distribution of water supplies during a drought or emergency situation. Each of the six stages describes specific actions to be taken by individual water customer sectors to achieve the water conservation requirement of that particular stage. All of the stages allow for adequate water supply to protect public health and safety and satisfy the fire protection needs of the City. Each of the six stages corresponds to a specific water demand reduction goal. These potable water demand reduction goals are based on the potential supply cutbacks during times of drought, with up to and greater than a 50 percent supply reduction as mandated by the UWMP Act.
If an emergency were to occur, or if drought conditions occurred, requiring the City to implement its WSCP, all of COSMUD’s water customers, including those within the Proposed Project, would be subject to the same water conservation measures and water use restrictions as included in City’s WSCP.
EXHIBIT 1 1321
8.4 Future Water Supplies to Serve Water Demands Associated with Buildout of the Proposed Project
As described in this WSA, the following water supplies will be used to serve the projected COSMUD water demands, including the projected water demands associated with buildout of the Proposed Project:
• Surface water from the San Joaquin River that is diverted at the Intake Pump Station on Empire Tract located in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and treated at the City’s Delta Water Treatment Plant (DWTP), supplemented by surface water from the Mokelumne River diverted and conveyed by Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID), and treated at the City’s DWTP, when the City’s San Joaquin River supplies are curtailed; • Surface water from the Mokelumne River diverted and conveyed by WID, and treated at the City’s DWTP;
• Potable water purchased from Stockton East Water District (SEWD); and • Groundwater pumped from City owned and operated wells from the underlying Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin.
The availability and reliability of these supplies are described in Section 6 of this WSA.
8.5 Verification of Sufficient Water Supply
As described in Section 7 of this WSA, the total projected water supplies determined to be available for the Proposed Project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years during a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including, but not limited to, agriculture and industrial uses.
EXHIBIT 1 1322
9.0 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT APPROVAL PROCESS
Water Code Section 10910 (g)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the governing body of each public water system shall submit the assessment to the city or county not later than 90 days from the date on which the request was received. The governing body of each public water system, or the city or county if either is required to comply with this act pursuant to subdivision (b), shall approve the assessment prepared pursuant to this section at a regular or special meeting.
Water Code Section 10911 (b) The city or county shall include the water supply assessment provided pursuant to Section 10910, and any information provided pursuant to subdivision (a), in any environmental document prepared for the project pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.
As the approving agency for the Proposed Project, the City must adopt this WSA at a regular or special meeting. Furthermore, the City must include this WSA in the EIR that is being prepared for the Proposed Project.
EXHIBIT 1 1323
10.0 REFERENCES
City of Stockton. December 2018. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan.
Stockton East Water District. Fiscal Years 2012/2013 to 2018/2019. Schedule D.
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin Authority. November 2019. Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
West Yost. January 2021. City of Stockton Water Master Plan Update.
West Yost. June 2021. City of Stockton 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
EXHIBIT 1 1324
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FOR MULTIPLE PARCELS (APNs 122-020-32, -33, -38 and -60) TO MODIFY THE
BOUNDARY OF THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL, HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND LOW DENSITY LAND USES, LOCATED AT 3827 PFC JESSE MIZENER STREET (P21- 0435)
The applicant Holman Investors, LLC (hereafter “Applicant”), is proposing the subdivision of a 99.87-acre site into 350 total parcels including: 16 commercial lots, 331 single family residential lots, one high-density residential lot, and two common area lots at 3827 PFC Jesse Mizener Street (APNs 122-020-32, -33, -38, and -60); and The Project includes a Tentative Map, a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Development Agreement Amendment, and adoption of an Addendum to the previously certified Cannery Park Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2003042022) [EIR Addendum]; and
On January 29, 2024, The City of Stockton provided public notice for the subject application was published in the local newspaper in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) section 16.88.030; and
On February 8, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to SMC section 16.116.040(D), to consider the proposed Amendments and addendum, at which all times all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. After discussion, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council certify the EIR Addendum and approve the General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Development Agreement amendment; and
On April 2, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, pursuant to SMC section 16.116.040(D), to consider the proposed Amendments and certify the Addendum to the Cannery Park EIR, at which all times all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON AS FOLLOWS:
1. Pursuant to SMC Section 16.116.050(B), Based on its review of the entire record herein, the City Council makes the following Mandatory Findings of Fact for General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Map, and Development Code Amendments:
a) The proposed amendment ensures and maintains internal consistency with general land uses, objectives, policies, programs, and actions of all elements of the General 1325
Plan on balance and would not create any inconsistencies with this Development Code.
The project site is currently designated by the Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan as Commercial for 88.61 acres and High Density Residential for 11.26 acres. The proposed General Plan Land Use Map Amendment requests to redesignate the land uses of the subject parcels to Commercial for 19.76 acres, Low Density Residential for 67.78 acres and High Density Residential for 12.34 acres. The proposed commercial parcels north of Bear Creek are consistent with the Commercial designation on the General Plan Land Use Map and will continue to provide future retail and office options for the city and surrounding area. The proposed High-Density parcel maintains a similar size as the currently zoned parcel and will result in a similar unit yield for a future high density residential development. The new low density residential land use area will provide opportunity for more housing and fill in vacant project land area that have remained vacant for almost 20 years. Per City standards (SMC Section 16.72.060) a new ±4-acre neighborhood park is required and is included within the tentative map to serve the surrounding development area.
Although two of the original parks planned for the Cannery Park Project are part of the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) project list, due to funding shortages they remain undeveloped. To avoid adding a third undeveloped park, the Applicant has agreed to construct the neighborhood park as part of the proposed DA amendment and Tentative Map conditions of approval.
As the proposed project would still provide options for commercial and residential uses and propose to construct a new park for the area, the proposed Project is consistent with General Plan policies.
New housing and the development of vacant properties complies with complies with the following General Plan policies:
-LU-6.2: Prioritize development and redevelopment of vacant, underutilized, and blighted infill areas.
-HE-2: Provide a range of housing types, densities, designs, and meet existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of Stockton. b) The proposed amendment will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the City.
The design of the proposed development will not cause serious public health or safety problems. The proposed commercial and high density residential was previously approved on the subject property. The layout is being requested to be revised. The proposed low density residential uses are compatible with the adjacent residential uses to the south and west surrounding the subject site and will not cause serious public health or safety problems. All on-site and off-site improvements to 1326
serve the development will be constructed as part of the Project, which provides a public benefit. Any potential health risks have been evaluated in the Addendum to the Cannery Park EIR and are as necessary, addressed.
c) The proposed amendment complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines.
The proposed project site was previously certified for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIR) by the Cannery Park EIR [SCH # 2003042022]. The EIR Addendum was prepared for the proposed project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15164, since the project is requesting a change of a previously certified EIR, and the proposal does not result in substantial changes or create new significant environmental effects beyond what was anticipated in the original EIR.
2. Pursuant to Government Code section 65863, the City may not reduce the residential density for any parcel to a lower residential density unless it makes written findings supported by substantial evidence of both of the following:
a) The reduction is consistent with the adopted General Plan, including the housing element.
The City of Stockton 2015-2023 Housing Element includes a list of vacant or underutilized property sites that provide opportunities for meeting the City's fair share of RHNA. The identified RHNA sites were based on Zoning. The proposed amendments would align GPLU Map Designations with the densities and intensities identified in the State-certified Housing Element. The densities of the housing capacity sites will either be maintained or slightly increased due to the alignment. An example of the increase would be land zoned for medium-density residential being upzoned to a commercial or high-density residential to align with the General Plan vision for the area. In addition, many of the housing sites included are currently developed with residential, civic, or nonresidential uses. b) The remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to meet the requirements of section 65583.2 and to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to section 65584. The finding shall include a quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the housing element to accommodate that need by income level.
In addition, the “no net loss” provision of Government Code section 65863requires that specific findings be made if the City reduces residential density on any property to a lower residential density. The Series changes align zones with their civic use (right-of-way, parks, schools, etc.), transitioned noxious services away from sensitive receptors (industrial uses adjacent to residential), and intensified areas of the City intended to support high-density housing. The intensification occurred mainly in the 1327
Greater Downtown Area and Downtown Core as identified in the City’s General Plan, where densities can reach 108 units/gross acre. This intensification leads to an overall increase in housing units by almost 1,000 units compared to the General Plan EIR and Housing Element projections.
The proposed amendments will not decrease the number of properties available to provide new housing and result in a slight increase in housing capacity due to the intensification in urban areas. While some public uses (e.g., parks, schools, rightsof-way) are being corrected to match their intended function, these areas were never meant to provide housing. The proposed map amendments do not reduce the intensities or preclude residential development on the housing capacity sites (i.e., RHNA). They will result in a slight increase of housing unit capacity beyond the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the map changes will not impact the City’s Housing Element or overall housing capacity.
The City Council hereby adopts a Resolution approving amendments to the Stockton General Plan Land Use Map, attached as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2, incorporated by reference.
3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED April 2, 2024 .
KEVIN J. LINCOLN II
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
ELIZA R. GARZA, CMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
1328
0 ´
0.05 Miles 0.1
EXHIBIT 1
Eight Mile Road
PFC Jesse Mizener Street
Holman Road
Bear Creek
Legend
City of Stockton, CA makes no claims and no warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the validity or accuracy of the GIS data presented on this map.
Map created by: AL
Map created on: October 27, 2023
Aerial Photo: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A
LEGAL DOCUMENT
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN MAP
Quashnick Road
Commercial General Plan
High Density Residential
General Plan
City Limits
Subject Parcels
Low Density
Residential
General Plan
Industrial General Plan
1329
EXHIBIT 1
1330
GENERAL PLAN CHANGE FOR
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
AND CANNERY PARK NO. 12, REMAINDER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Being a portion of Lot 4, and Lot 5, as shown on that certain map entitled “Tract No. 3465, Cannery Park Unit No. 1” filed for record in Book 40 of Maps and Plats, Page 51, Amended per Certificate of Correction recorded as Document No. 2006-081669, and on the map entitled “Tract No. 4076, Cannery Park No. 12-Village C”, San Joaquin County Records, City of Stockton, County of San Joaquin, State of California, more particularly described as follows:
PARCEL 1
COMMERCIAL PROPOSED CHANGE IN SIZE:
APN: 122-020-32 & 33
Being a portion of said Lot 4, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence, along the Easterly and Southeaster lines of said Lot 4 the following five (5) courses: (L12) South 08°37'05" West
74.09 feet; thence, (L13) South 32°05'10" West 155.94 feet; thence, (L14) South 31°56'19" West 279.44 feet; thence, (L15) South 37°30'51" West 40.68 feet; thence, (L16) South 39°35'53" West 74.78 feet; thence, (L17) North 58°03'48" West 166.20 feet; thence, (L18) North 00°29'52" East 82.94 feet; thence, (L19) North 44°30'08" West 57.26 feet; thence, (L20) North 89°30'08" West 160.61 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the North having a radius of 63.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L67) South 66°07'20" East; thence, along said curve (C1) through a central angle of 133°14'25" an arc distance of 146.51 feet, and a chord course of North 89°30'08" West 115.65 feet; thence, (L21) North 89°30’08” West 636.15 feet; thence, (L22) South 00°29'52" West 307.70 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 62.50 feet, to which a radial line bears South 24°04'33" West thence, along said curve (C2) through a central angle of 132°50'37" an arc distance of 144.91 feet, and a chord course of South 0°29’52” West 114.56 feet; thence, (L23) South 0°29’52” West 159.64 feet; thence, (L24) North 87°51'54" East 157.64 feet to a tangent curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 70.00; thence, along said curve (C3) through a central angle of 65°49'23" an arc distance of 80.42 feet, and a chord course of South 59°13’24” East 76.07 feet; thence; thence, (L25) South 26°18'43" East 37.14 feet; thence, (L26) South 88°51'17" West 78.07 feet; thence, (L27) South 89°34'20" West 130.36 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 725.76 feet, to which a radial line bears (L69) North 4°48’44” West; thence, along said curve (C4) through a central angle 29°30’30” an arc distance of 373.78 feet, and a chord course of South 70°26’01” West 369.66 feet; thence, (L28) South 61°07'39" West 42.51 feet; thence, (L29) North 78.92 feet; thence, (L30) North 41°27'48" West 30.21 feet; thence, (L31) North 274.78 feet; thence, (L32) North 45°00'00" East 21.21 feet; thence, (L33) North 78.00 feet; thence, (L34) North 45°00'00" West 21.21 feet; thence, (L35) North 269.29 feet to a beginning of curve concave to the East having a radius of 250.00 feet; thence, along said curve EXHIBIT 2 1331
(C5) through a central angle of 05°42'38" an arc distance of 24.92 feet, and a chord course of North 2°51’19” East 24.91 feet; thence, (L36) North 05°42'38" East 63.09 feet to a tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 500.00 feet; thence, along said curve (C6) through a central angle of 05°42'38" an arc distance of 49.83 feet, and a chord course of North 2°51’19” East 49.81 feet; thence, (L37) North 195.15 feet; thence, (L1) North 45°14'56" East 21.31 feet; thence, (L2) South 79°50'37" East 59.60 feet; thence, (L3) South 89°30'08" East 101.98 feet; thence, (L4) North 84°52'07" East 141.07 feet; thence, (L5) North 87°29'58" East 136.92 feet; thence, (L6) South 89°30'08" East 514.31 feet; thence, (L7) South 44°30'08" East 49.50 feet; thence, (L8) South 89°30'08" East 96.00 feet; thence, (L9) North 00°29'52" East 11.00 feet; thence, (L10) North 45°29'52" East 49.50 feet; thence, (L11) South 89°30'08" East 643.27 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 19.77 acres, more or less.
PARCEL 2
PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, CHANGE FROM COMMERCIAL APN: 122-020-32 & 33
Being a portion of said Lot 4, more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence, along Easterly and Southeasterly of said Lot 4 the following five (5) courses: (L12) South 8°37’05” West
74.09 feet; (L13) South 32°05’10” West 155.94 feet; (L14) South 31°56’19” West 279.44 feet ; (L15) South 37°30’51” West 40.68 feet; (L16) South 39°55’53” West 74.78 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, continue on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 4 (L60) South 39°35'53" West 17.04 feet; thence, (L38) South 53°01'55" West 331.26 feet; thence, (L39) South 53°36'09" West 268.60 feet; thence, (L40) South 63°23'39" West
92.55 feet; thence, (L41) South 80°36'49" West 68.05 feet; thence, (L42) South 88°51'17" West 216.98 feet; thence, leaving last said line (L25) North 26°18'43" West 37.14 feet to a tangent curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 70.00 feet; thence along said curve (C3) through a central angle of 65°49'23" an arc distance of 80.42 feet, and a chord course of North 59°13’24” West 76.07 feet; thence, (L24) South 87°51’54” West 157.64 feet; thence, (L23) North 0°29’52” East 159.64 feet to beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 62.50 feet, to which a radial line bears (L61) South 23°04’49” East; thence, (L22) North 0°29’52” East 307.70 feet; thence, (L21) South 89°30’08” East 636.15 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the North having a radius of 63.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L62) South 67°07’04” West; thence, along said curve (C1) through a central angle of 133°14’25” an arc distance of 146.51 feet, and a chord course of South 89°30’08” East 115.65 feet; thence, (L20) South 89°30’08” East 160.61 feet; thence, (L19) South 44°30’08” East
57.26 feet; thence, (L18) South 0°29’52” West 82.94 feet ; thence, (L17) South 58°03’48” East 166.20 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 12.34 acres, more or less.
EXHIBIT 2 1332
PARCEL 3
PROPOSED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, CHANGE FROM COMMERCIAL & HIGH DENSIRTY RESIDENTIAL:
APN: 122-020-38
Being a portion of said Lot 5, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Lot 5; thence, (L43) North 89°22'15" East 150.78 feet to beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 623.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L63) South 3°06’54” West; thence, along said curve (C7) through a central angle of 40°11'56" an arc distance of 437.10 feet, and a chord course of North 73°00’56” East 428.19 feet; thence, (L44) North 53°35'08" East, a distance of 513.88 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 843.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L65) South 37°57’44” East; thence, along said curve (C8) through a central angle of 21°16'16" an arc distance of 312.96 feet, and a chord course of North 41°24’08” East 311.17 feet; thence, (L45) North 31°57'15" East 248.32 feet; thence, (L46) North 30°48'26" East 278.36 feet; thence, (L47) North 32°06'05" East 10.36 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 5; thence, (L48) South 62°54'17" East 28.98 feet; thence, (L49) South 12°39'10" East
82.92 feet; thence, (L50) South 29°35'46" East 256.86 feet; thence, (L51) South 28°16'08" East 505.61 feet; thence, (L52) South 22°04'50" East 187.54 feet; thence, (L53) South 09°20'57" East 198.35 feet; thence, (L54) South 02°48'08" East 788.53 feet; thence, (L55) South 87°11'52" West 46.62 feet; thence, (L56) South 43°35'56" West 19.33 feet; thence, West 1,950.75 feet; thence, North 812.38 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 55.876 acres, more or less.
PARCEL 4
CHANGE FROM COMMERCIAL TO PROPOSED LOW DENSIRTY RESIDENTIAL:
APN: 122-020-43
Being said Remainder, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Remainder; thence, along the Northerly line of said Remainder East 1100.56 feet; thence, (L57) South 46°24’04” East 13.79 feet; thence, (L58) South 2°48’08” East 453.16 feet; thence, North 89°53’30” West 1132.71 feet; thence, (L59) North 459.98 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 11.90 acres, more or less.
All Parcels are subject to covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, rights, rights-of-way, and easements of record, if any.
See Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof.
__________________________ ______________
Kaiser I. Shahbaz, L. S. 8599 Date
2/08/2024
EXHIBIT 2 1333
EXHIBIT
1 AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 2/08/2024
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
N
PROJECT
SITES
2/08/2024
EXHIBIT 2 1334
PFC JESSE MIZENER ST PFC JESSE MIZENER STREET
STATE ROUTE 99 WEST FRONTAGE ROAD HOLMAN ROAD
0 400 800
SCALE: 1" = 400'
N
EIGHT MILE ROAD
EXHIBIT
2 AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 2/07/2024
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
BEAR CREEK LOT B
POB-1, POC-2
POB-2
POB-3
POB-4
EXHIBIT 2 1335
EXHIBIT
3 AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 2/07/2024
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
EXHIBIT 2 1336
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE STOCKTON CITYWIDE ZONING
MAP FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CANNERY PARK SUBDIVISION PROJECT LOCATED ON MULTIPLE PARCELS AT 3827 PFC JESSE MIZENER STREET (APNs 122-020-32, -33, -38 and -60)(P21-0435)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. FINDINGS AND INTENT
Amendments to Zoning Map
A. Pursuant to SMC section 16.116.050(B) “Mandatory Findings of Fact,” an amendment to the Stockton Zoning Map may be approved only if all of the findings of fact listed below, can be made.
I. The project site is currently zoned CG (Commercial, General) for 88.61 acres and RH (Residential, High Density) for 11.27 acres. The proposed rezoning would reclassify to 19.76 acres of CG, 12.34 acres of RH and
67.78 acres of RL (Residential, Low Density). As the Project areas are surrounded by development, it would be physically suitable to accommodate the change, is needed to comply with the General Plan amendment request, the rezone complies with City standards.
II. The design of the proposed development will not cause serious public health or safety problems. The proposed commercial and high density residential was previously approved on the subject property. The layout is being requested to be revised. The proposed low density residential uses are compatible with the adjacent residential uses to the south and west surrounding the subject site and will not cause serious public health or safety problems. All on-site and off-site improvements to serve the development will be constructed as part of the Project, which provides a public benefit. Any potential health risks have been evaluated in the Addendum to the Cannery Park EIR and are as necessary, addressed.
III. The proposed project site was previously certified for an EIR by the Cannery Park EIR [SCH # 2003042022]. The EIR Addendum was prepared for the proposed project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15164, since the project is requesting a change of a previously certified EIR, and the proposal does not result in substantial changes or create new significant environmental effects beyond what was anticipated in the original EIR. 1337
IV. (Additional Finding for Zoning Map Amendments). The Project will install on-site and off-site improvements, including public streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, sidewalk, landscaping, and street lighting. All proposed utilities (e.g., water, sewer, storm drainage) will be extended to the subject site from the existing subdivision to the southwest and comply with the City’s Standard Plans and Specifications.
Residential Density
B. Pursuant to Government Code section 65863, the City may not reduce the residential density for any parcel to a lower residential density unless it makes written findings supported by substantial evidence of both of the following:
I. The reduction is consistent with the adopted General Plan, including the housing element.
Evidence: The City of Stockton 2015-2023 Housing Element included the Cannery Park project high- and low-density units but did not anticipate residential uses in the commercial zoned designations. Since the proposed amendment will maintain the high-density housing units and add 331 new low-density units, the map amendments will add residential capacity beyond what was anticipated in the Housing Element.
II. The remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to meet the requirements of section 65583.2 and to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to section 65584. The finding shall include a quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the housing element to accommodate that need by income level.
Evidence: In addition, the “no net loss” provision of Government Code section 65863requires that specific findings be made if the City reduces residential density on any property to a lower residential density. As indicated above, the proposed amendment to convert the regional commercial zones to new housing will add housing to the project and city in addition to maintaining neighborhood services retail uses along Eight Mile Road and a new 4-acre neighborhood park.
SECTION II. AMENDMENT CITYWIDE ZONING MAP
The Stockton Citywide Zoning Map pursuant to SMC section 16.16.030 (Zoning Map Adopted) is hereby amended as described in Section I (Finding and Intent) and illustrated in (Exhibit 1) and (Exhibit 2), based on the above findings. 1338
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY
If any part of this Ordinance is held invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance if such invalid portionthereof had been deleted.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after its passage.
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
KEVIN J. LINCOLN II
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
ELIZA R. GARZA, CMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
1339
0 ´
0.05 Miles 0.1
EXHIBIT 1
Eight Mile Road
PFC Jesse Mizener Street
Holman Road
Bear Creek
Legend
City of Stockton, CA makes no claims and no warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the validity or accuracy of the GIS data presented on this map.
Map created by: AL
Map created on: October 27, 2023
Aerial Photo: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community
MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A
LEGAL DOCUMENT
CURRENT ZONING MAP
Quashnick Road
OS
PF
RL
General Commercial
Zoning
High Density
Residential Zoning
City Limits
Subject Parcels
Low Density
Residential Zoning
IL
CG
Open Space Zoning
RH
CG
1340
EXHIBIT 1
1341
EXHIBIT A
ZONE CHANGE FOR
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
AND CANNERY PARK NO. 12, REMAINDER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Being a portion of Lot 4, and Lot 5, as shown on that certain map entitled “Tract No. 3465, Cannery Park Unit No. 1” filed for record in Book 40 of Maps and Plats, Page 51, Amended per Certificate of Correction recorded as Document No. 2006-081669, and on the map entitled “Tract No. 4076, Cannery Park No. 12-Village C”, San Joaquin County Records, City of Stockton, County of San Joaquin, State of California, more particularly described as follows:
PARCEL 1
PROPOSED CG ZONE, CHANGE IN SIZE:
APN: 122-020-32 & 33
Being a portion of said Lot 4, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence, along the Easterly and Southeaster lines of said Lot 4 the following five (5) courses: (L12) South 08°37'05" West
74.09 feet; thence, (L13) South 32°05'10" West 155.94 feet; thence, (L14) South 31°56'19" West 279.44 feet; thence, (L15) South 37°30'51" West 40.68 feet; thence, (L16) South 39°35'53" West 74.78 feet; thence, (L17) North 58°03'48" West 166.20 feet; thence, (L18) North 00°29'52" East 82.94 feet; thence, (L19) North 44°30'08" West 57.26 feet; thence, (L20) North 89°30'08" West 160.61 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the North having a radius of 63.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L67) South 66°07'20" East; thence, along said curve (C1) through a central angle of 133°14'25" an arc distance of 146.51 feet, and a chord course of North 89°30'08" West 115.65 feet; thence, (L21) North 89°30’08” West 636.15 feet; thence, (L22) South 00°29'52" West 307.70 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 62.50 feet, to which a radial line bears South 24°04'33" West thence, along said curve (C2) through a central angle of 132°50'37" an arc distance of 144.91 feet, and a chord course of South 0°29’52” West 114.56 feet; thence, (L23) South 0°29’52” West 159.64 feet; thence, (L24) North 87°51'54" East 157.64 feet to a tangent curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 70.00; thence, along said curve (C3) through a central angle of 65°49'23" an arc distance of 80.42 feet, and a chord course of South 59°13’24” East 76.07 feet; thence; thence, (L25) South 26°18'43" East 37.14 feet; thence, (L26) South 88°51'17" West 78.07 feet; thence, (L27) South 89°34'20" West 130.36 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the Southeast having a radius of 725.76 feet, to which a radial line bears (L69) North 4°48’44” West; thence, along said curve (C4) through a central angle 29°30’30” an arc distance of 373.78 feet, and a chord course of South 70°26’01” West 369.66 feet; thence, (L28) South 61°07'39" West 42.51 feet; thence, (L29) North 78.92 feet; thence, (L30) North 41°27'48" West 30.21 feet; thence, (L31) North 274.78 feet; thence, (L32) North 45°00'00" East 21.21 feet; thence, (L33) North 78.00 feet; thence, (L34) North 45°00'00" West 21.21 feet; thence, (L35) North 269.29 feet to a beginning of curve concave to the East having a radius of 250.00 feet; thence, along said curve EXHIBIT 2 1342
(C5) through a central angle of 05°42'38" an arc distance of 24.92 feet, and a chord course of North 2°51’19” East 24.91 feet; thence, (L36) North 05°42'38" East 63.09 feet to a tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 500.00 feet; thence, along said curve (C6) through a central angle of 05°42'38" an arc distance of 49.83 feet, and a chord course of North 2°51’19” East 49.81 feet; thence, (L37) North 195.15 feet; thence, (L1) North 45°14'56" East 21.31 feet; thence, (L2) South 79°50'37" East 59.60 feet; thence, (L3) South 89°30'08" East 101.98 feet; thence, (L4) North 84°52'07" East 141.07 feet; thence, (L5) North 87°29'58" East 136.92 feet; thence, (L6) South 89°30'08" East 514.31 feet; thence, (L7) South 44°30'08" East 49.50 feet; thence, (L8) South 89°30'08" East 96.00 feet; thence, (L9) North 00°29'52" East 11.00 feet; thence, (L10) North 45°29'52" East 49.50 feet; thence, (L11) South 89°30'08" East 643.27 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 19.77 acres, more or less.
PARCEL 2
PROPOSED RH ZONE, CHANGE FROM CG ZONE:
APN: 122-020-32 & 33
Being a portion of said Lot 4, more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at a the Northeast corner of said Lot 4; thence, along Easterly and Southeasterly of said Lot 4 the following five (5) courses: (L12) South 8°37’05” West
74.09 feet; (L13) South 32°05’10” West 155.94 feet; (L14) South 31°56’19” West 279.44 feet ; (L15) South 37°30’51” West 40.68 feet; (L16) South 39°55’53” West 74.78 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence, continue on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 4 (L60) South 39°35'53" West 17.04 feet; thence, (L38) South 53°01'55" West 331.26 feet; thence, (L39) South 53°36'09" West 268.60 feet; thence, (L40) South 63°23'39" West
92.55 feet; thence, (L41) South 80°36'49" West 68.05 feet; thence, (L42) South 88°51'17" West 216.98 feet; thence, leaving last said line (L25) North 26°18'43" West 37.14 feet to a tangent curve concave to the Southwest having a radius of 70.00 feet; thence along said curve (C3) through a central angle of 65°49'23" an arc distance of 80.42 feet, and a chord course of North 59°13’24” West 76.07 feet; thence, (L24) South 87°51’54” West 157.64 feet; thence, (L23) North 0°29’52” East 159.64 feet to beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the West having a radius of 62.50 feet, to which a radial line bears (L61) South 23°04’49” East; thence, (L22) North 0°29’52” East 307.70 feet; thence, (L21) South 89°30’08” East 636.15 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the North having a radius of 63.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L62) South 67°07’04” West; thence, along said curve (C1) through a central angle of 133°14’25” an arc distance of 146.51 feet, and a chord course of South 89°30’08” East 115.65 feet; thence, (L20) South 89°30’08” East 160.61 feet; thence, (L19) South 44°30’08” East
57.26 feet; thence, (L18) South 0°29’52” West 82.94 feet ; thence, (L17) South 58°03’48” East 166.20 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 12.34 acres, more or less.
EXHIBIT 2 1343
PARCEL 3
PROPOSED RL ZONE, CHANGE FROM CG ZONE & RH ZONE:
APN: 122-020-38
Being a portion of said Lot 5, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Lot 5; thence, (L43) North 89°22'15" East 150.78 feet to beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 623.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L63) South 3°06’54” West; thence, along said curve (C7) through a central angle of 40°11'56" an arc distance of 437.10 feet, and a chord course of North 73°00’56” East 428.19 feet; thence, (L44) North 53°35'08" East, a distance of 513.88 feet to a non-tangent curve concave to the Northwest having a radius of 843.00 feet, to which a radial line bears (L65) South 37°57’44” East; thence, along said curve (C8) through a central angle of 21°16'16" an arc distance of 312.96 feet, and a chord course of North 41°24’08” East 311.17 feet; thence, (L45) North 31°57'15" East 248.32 feet; thence, (L46) North 30°48'26" East 278.36 feet; thence, (L47) North 32°06'05" East 10.36 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot 5; thence, (L48) South 62°54'17" East 28.98 feet; thence, (L49) South 12°39'10" East
82.92 feet; thence, (L50) South 29°35'46" East 256.86 feet; thence, (L51) South 28°16'08" East 505.61 feet; thence, (L52) South 22°04'50" East 187.54 feet; thence, (L53) South 09°20'57" East 198.35 feet; thence, (L54) South 02°48'08" East 788.53 feet; thence, (L55) South 87°11'52" West 46.62 feet; thence, (L56) South 43°35'56" West 19.33 feet; thence, West 1,950.75 feet; thence, North 812.38 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 55.876 acres, more or less.
PARCEL 4
PROPOSED RL ZONE, CHANGE FROM CG ZONE:
APN: 122-020-43
Being said Remainder, more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northwest corner of said Remainder; thence, along the Northerly line of said Remainder East 1100.56 feet; thence, (L57) South 46°24’04” East 13.79 feet; thence, (L58) South 2°48’08” East 453.16 feet; thence, North 89°53’30” West 1132.71 feet; thence, (L59) North 459.98 feet to THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 11.90 acres, more or less.
All Parcels are subject to covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, rights, rights-of-way, and easements of record, if any.
See Exhibit B consisting of three sheets attached hereto and made a part hereof. __________________________ ______________
Kaiser I. Shahbaz, L. S. 8599 Date
3/06/2024
EXHIBIT 2 1344
EXHIBIT
B
AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 3/06/2024
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
N
PROJECT
SITES
SHEET 1 OF 3
3/06/2024
EXHIBIT 2 1345
PFC JESSE MIZENER ST
STATE ROUTE 99 WEST FRONTAGE ROAD HOLMAN ROAD
0 400 800
SCALE: 1" = 400'
N
EIGHT MILE ROAD
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
BEAR CREEK LOT B
POB-1, POC-2
POB-2
POB-3
POB-4
EXHIBIT
B
AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 3/06/2024
SHEET 2 OF 3
EXHIBIT 2 1346
APN 122-020-32, 22, 38 & 43
EXHIBIT
B
AND UNIT NO. 12, REMAIDER
CANNERY PARK UNIT NO. 1, LOTS 4 & 5
PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE
STOCKTON, CA 95212
4114 E RIGHT MILE ROAD HOLAM INVESTORS LLC
KS 3/06/2024
SHEET 3 OF 3
EXHIBIT 2 1347
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT FOR
THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CANNERY PARK MIXED USE PROJECT LOCATED ON MULTIPLE PARCELS AT 3827 PFC JESSE MIZENER STREET
(APNs 122-020-32, -33, -38 and -60)(P21-0435)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. FINDINGS
Pursuant to SMC section 16.128.080 “Findings and decision,” an amendment to the Development Agreement may be approved only if all of the findings of fact listed below, can be made.
A. The Development Agreement is in the best interest of the City, as it would promote commercial and residential development and employment opportunities associated with those uses.
B. The Development Agreement complies with the City Development Code and other applicable ordinances and regulations, particularly the regulations of Chapter
16.128 pertaining to development agreements.
C. The Development Agreement is consistent with the general land uses, objectives, policies, and programs of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan or master development plan. The Development Agreement provides commercial and housing development opportunities in Stockton, consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, including the creation of new housing and jobs.
D. The Development Agreement will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare in that projects constructed pursuant to it are required to comply with all health and safety regulations, zoning requirements, infrastructure provision, and General Plan policies.
E. The Development Agreement complies with the conditions, requirements, restrictions, and terms of section 16.128.060(B) (Preparation and Content - Proposed Development Agreement).
F. The Development Agreement complies with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA Guidelines in that evaluation of potential impacts have been completed and mitigation measures have been maintained to mitigate all identified impacts to a less-than-significant level.
1348
SECTION II. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Pursuant to SMC section 16.128.070, the Stockton City Council has conducted a public hearing, and hereby approves the Development Agreement for the Delta Cove Project, attached as (Exhibit 1), to be executed, based on the above findings.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY
If any part of this Ordinance is held invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance, and the City Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted.
SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after its passage.
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
ATTEST: KEVIN J. LINCOLN II
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ELIZA R. GARZA, CMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
1349
This document is recorded for the
benefit of the City of Stockton and is
entitled to be recorded free of charge
in accordance with Sections 6103
and 27383 of the Government Code.
When recorded, mail to:
City Attorney’s Office
City of Stockton
425 North El Dorado St., 2nd Floor
Stockton, CA 95202-1997 THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER’S USE ONLY
SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF STOCKTON
AND
HOLMAN INVESTORS, LLC
WHEREAS, the Development Agreement (“DA 2-03”), dated September 14, 2004, was authorized by City of Stockton Ordinance No. 022-02, adopted September 14, 2004, effective October 14, 2004, and recorded on October 29, 2004 as Document No. 2004-246441; and WHEREAS, the First Amended and Restated Agreement to DA 2-03 (“First Amended Agreement”), dated April 19, 2006 was authorized by City of Stockton Resolution No. 06-0164, adopted on March 28, 2006, and recorded on June 29, 2006 as Document No. 2006-141380; and
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to modify the Project such that approximately eighty (80) acres of commercial and high density residential land uses will be subject to a General Plan amendment, a Zoning Map amendment, and a Tentative Subdivision Map (collectively the “Modified Project Property”) resulting in three hundred thirty one (331) units of single family detached housing (“New Lots”), and 12.34-acres of multi-family housing, 3.98-acres of parkland, and 1.00-acre of open space; and
WHEREAS, approximately nineteen (19) acres of existing commercial land use will be included with the Modified Project Property in a new Tentative Subdivision Map; and WHEREAS, Tentative Subdivision Map Cannery Park Large Lots 4, 5 & 6 (“TM 2021“) contains Large Lot 4, Large Lot 5, and Large Lot 6 created by the Cannery Park Unit No. 1 Final Map filed on December 12, 2005, in Book 40 of Maps and Plats, at Page 51; and WHEREAS, the Developer’s Modified Project necessitates increased parkland and open space to be provided. City desires the Developer to prepare improvement plans and construct the
3.98-acres of parkland and 1.00-acre of open space (collectively “New Park”) in conjunction with development of the New Lots located within Large Lot 5; and WHEREAS, the economic crisis that started in 2008 and ended in 2017 significantly delayed the progress of the Developer to facilitate the implementation of the General Plan through the development of the Project, thereby realizing the public benefits to City and private benefits to EXHIBIT 1 1350
Developer described in DA 2-03 as amended by the First Amended Agreement and the parties desire to extend the term of DA 2-03, as amended by the First Amended Agreement; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed that this SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA 2-03) properly reflects their original intent and desire of that said DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, DA 2-03, as set forth herein, and shall be duly approved and recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Joaquin County.
NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1.The Subject Property as described in Exhibit “A” and depicted on Exhibit “B” to DA 2-03 is hereby amended such that Exhibit “B” shall be replaced in its entirety by Exhibit “B-1” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
2. Section 1.3.a of DA 2-03 is revised such that the Term of the Agreement shall extend for a period of thirty (30) years from the Effective Date of DA 2-03 thus extending the Term of DA 2-03 and any amendments thereto by an additional ten (10) years.
3. Section 3.2.c of DA 2-03 is revised such that the Developer shall limit development of the site to a total of not more than one thousand three hundred fifty (1,350) units of single family detached housing, the maximum density allowance for 12.34 acres of high density residential housing, and one hundred sixty thousand (160,000) square feet of commercial building area.
4. The Developer shall prepare improvements plans to construct the New Park in substantial conformance to the Cannery Park Site Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “C” (“Park Plans”). Upon approval of the Park Plans, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld and shall be required to comply with adopted City standards and specifications, Developer shall, prior to or in conjunction with submittal of the first final subdivision map within Large Lot 5, commence construction of the New Park as per the Park Plans. The Developer(s) of Large Lot 4, Large Lot 5, and Large Lot 6 shall mutually participate in the full cost of the design and construction of the New Park as a public benefit to the City in consideration for the City approving the Modified Project. The Developer(s) shall be entitled to receive, for costs incurred by the Developer(s), credit against any parkland fees imposed by the City at building permit within the Cannery Park Large Lot 4, Large Lot 5, and Large Lot 6 map areas (“Park Fee Credit”) up to the final documented cost to design and construct the New Park (“Park Cost”).
5. Upon submittal of a Parcel Map by the Developer, the City shall process the Parcel Map creating bulk sale only parcels for the Village I Parcel, the Village J Parcel, and the Village K Parcel, and dedication parcels for the Lot A Park/Open Space Parcel and the Lot B Basin Parcel as shown on TM 2021.
6. Pursuant to Government Code section 66452.6(a), any Tentative Subdivision Map approved within the Subject Property shall be valid until the expiration of the Term of the Agreement as amended herein.
7. All other provisions of DA 2-03 as amended by the First Amended Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
EXHIBIT 1 1351
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Developer have executed this SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT as of the date set forth below.
CITY OF STOCKTON,
a political subdivision of the State of California
____________________________________ Date: ______________ City Manager
Attest:
____________________________________ Date: ______________ City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
_____________________________________ Date: ______________ City Attorney
HOLMAN INVESTORS, LLC,
a California limited liability company
By: H. D. Arnaiz Corporation,
a California Corporation, its Manager
By: _____________________________ Date: ______________
Matthew Arnaiz, Secretary
EXHIBIT 1 1352
EXHIBIT 1 1353
EXHIBIT 1 1354
EXHIBIT 1 1355
EXHIBIT 1 1356
Exhibit 1a
EXHIBIT 1 1357
CANNERY PARK PROJECT AMENDMENTS (P21-0435)
3827 PFC JESSE MIZENER STREET
Agenda Item 16.1
City Council Meeting
April 2, 2024
1358
Project Location N
1359
• The Cannery Park Mixed Use Project was approved in
2004.
• Most single-family homes have been constructed.
• The applicant has indicated the market for commercial development is not as strong as the need for additional housing. This resulted in the current request to provide 331 new single-family homes while reducing the size of
commercially zoned property and relocating the highdensity site closer to Eight Mile Road. • The applicant is requesting a General Plan
Amendment, Rezone, Development Agreement (DA)
Amendment, a new Tentative Map and an Addendum to
the previous Certified EIR.
Background + Request
1360
Existing General Plan
1361
Proposed General Plan
1362
• Current Land Use Designations: – Commercial (88.61 acres) – High Density Residential (11.27 acres) • Requested Land Use Designations: – Commercial (19.76 acres) – High Density Residential (12.34 acres) – Low Density Residential (67.78 acres) Proposed General Plan Amendment
1363
Existing Zoning
1364
• Current Zoning Designations: – Commercial, General (88.61 acres) – Residential, High Density (11.27 acres) • Requested Zoning Designations: – Commercial, General (19.76 acres) – Residential, High Density (12.34 acres) – Residential, Low Density (67.78 acres) Proposed Rezone Amendment
1365
Proposed Zoning
1366
Proposed Tentative Map
Future Park
Location
N
1367
• The original approvals included a DA to vest the
tentative map and development rights.
• The 1st Amendment, approved in 2019, aligned
with the approved phasing plan.
• The 2ndAmendment proposes:
―A 10-year extension (10/14/2034).
―Developer obligation to construct the new 4-
acre neighborhood park.
Proposed DA Amendment
1368
Staff Analysis
• The project area is surrounded by similar development and would allow the area to develop fully. • All comments from departments and agencies have been incorporated into the design and conditions. • Aside from the new homes, the project must construct
the new 4-acre park and detention basin.
• A proposed Addendum to previously certified EIR
concludes that no new significant environmental effects or mitigation measures were needed beyond the existing EIR for the Project.
• Conditions of the original Cannery Park project have been updated and will still require Design Review, Final Map, and Construction Permit approvals.
• On 2/8/24, the Planning Commission approved the Tentative Map and recommended Council approval of the proposed Cannery Park amendments.
1369
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt :
1) A Resolution certifying an Addendum to the Cannery
Park EIR;
2) A Resolution approving a General Plan Land Use Map
Amendment;
3) An Ordinance approving a Rezone Amendment; and
4) Adopt an Ordinance approving a Development
Agreement Amendment for the Cannery Park Project.
1370