Attachment G
Attachment G
Attachment G
SECOND ADDENDUM
TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK
State Clearinghouse No.: 2020120283
Certified by the City of Stockton, California
December 2022
SMALL PARCEL ANNEXATION, PREZONING AND REZONING
IDENTIFY PG&E SUBSTATION AS PROPOSED USE
August 14, 2024
Prepared for:
City of Stockton
Community Development Department
345 N. El Dorado Street
Stockton, CA 95202
Prepared by:
BaseCa
mp Environmental, Inc.
802 W. Lodi Avenue
Lodi, CA 95240
Attachment G
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 CEQA Provisions Related to the Addendum 9
3.0 Mariposa Industrial Park Project 10
4.0 Proposed Project 12
5.0 Potential Environmental Effects of the Project 13
6.0 Conclusions Regarding Addendum Usage 16
APPENDICES
A. Proposed Development Agreement Amendment
B. Initial Study
C. Mariposa Industrial Park EIR Summary Table
D. Adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Regional Location Map 3
2. Street Map 4
3. Aerial Photo 5
4. Assessor Parcel Map 6
5. Conceptual Site Plan 7
6. Proposed Annexation and Pre-Zoning 8
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 1 August 2024
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The subject of this document is the proposed annexation of two 2.5-acre residential parcels and one driveway parcel to the Mariposa Industrial Park (MIP) project site; the project also includes the rezoning of one 0.89-acre parcel that was inadvertently already annexed to the City in conjunction with the approximately 200-acre MIP project site, without being pre-zoned. In total, the project site amounts to 7.60 acres:
Residential Parcel 14 2.48 ac.
Residential Parcel 15 2.48 ac.
Driveway Parcel 26 1.75 ac.
Rezoning-only 25 0.89 ac.
TOTAL 7.60 ac
In addition, this document also recognizes that Pacific Gas and Electric, the local natural gas and electricity provider in the City of Stockton, seeks to locate an approximately three-acre substation within the MIP area. Future industrial uses will likely require additional electrical equipment, including individual substations. Substations and related utility facilities are listed as Permitted Uses within the IL Limited Industrial zoning of the approved MIP site and therefore do not require discretionary approvals from the City. The potential for substation development is, however, identified in this document, and the attached Initial Study, so that its potential environmental impacts, if any, can be distinguished from the potential environmental effects of warehousing industrial development planned by the project owners and appropriately addressed in the overall MIP project context.
The potential environmental impacts of the MIP project, as a whole, were addressed in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by the City of Stockton and certified in December 2022, prior to the City’s approval of the project and its decision to annex and prezone the project site. This document is an addendum to the certified MIP EIR. It is the second addendum to the MIP EIR; the first addendum was adopted by the City in June 2023.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires State and local agencies to consider and document the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects as well as mitigation measures needed to reduce those impacts to a less than significant level. This is accomplished in Initial Studies, EIRs, and Negative Declarations. CEQA also encourages the use of previously prepared environmental documents in evaluating subsequent projects when these documents effectively address the environmental issues associated with the subsequent project.
The proposed, including the small parcels annexation, prezoning and rezoning sites as well as the planned substation site, are adjacent to and within the MIP site (Figures 1 to Figure 6). The project involves the annexation and pre-zoning of three parcels to the City of Stockton: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 179-220-14, APN 179-220-15 and APN 179-220-26. In addition, the project proposes the rezoning of a third parcel, APN 179-220-25, which was annexed to the City along with the MIP site but inadvertently not prezoned at the time of annexation. The proposed project is described in more detail in Section 3.0.
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 2 August 2024
Based on the analysis provided in Section 5.0 of this document and the attached Initial Study, the City has determined that the potentially significant environmental effects of the proposed project have been adequately addressed in the certified MIP EIR. Based on requirements specified in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162-15164, only an addendum to the MIP EIR is needed to satisfy CEQA requirements for the proposed project. The EIR was certified by the Stockton City Council in December 2022 and is incorporated by reference into this document. A copy of the certified EIR may be reviewed at the Stockton Community Development Department at 345 N El Dorado Street, Stockton, or online at the Community Development Department website at:
http:// www.stocktonca.gov/government.departments/communityDevelop/cdPlanGenDocs.html The remainder of this document, along with its attachments, contains an analysis of the potential environmental effects of the project and provides substantial evidence supporting the City’s determination regarding adoption of an addendum. Specifically, the document considers the potential effects of the project in comparison to the analysis contained in the MIP EIR. It then determines whether the potential environmental effects of the proposed project are adequately addressed by the MIP EIR, and whether any revisions to the EIR are needed to provide an adequate environmental review of the project, consistent with the requirements of CEQA.
Section 2.0 of this document describes the criteria for determining if an addendum would be an adequate CEQA document for a project. Section 3.0 describes the MIP project and the EIR, while Section 4.0 describes the proposed project and compares it to the MIP project as discussed in the certified EIR. Section 5.0 analyzes the degree to which the proposed project would result in changes to the environmental effects described in the EIR, if any, and Section 6.0 presents the overall conclusions of this analysis.
Attachment G
ampB Case
Figure1
REGIONAL LOCATION MAPBaseCamp Environmental
Humboldt
San Diego Imperial
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Los AngelesVentura
Santa Barbara
KernSan Luis
Obispo
Inyo
Tulare
KingsMonterey
FresnoSan
Benito
Mono
Madera
Mariposa
Tuolumne
Calaveras
Amador
El Dorado
Sacra-
mento
Alpine
Santa
Clara
San
Joaquin
Contra
Costa
Merced
Marin
Napa
Yolo
Solano
Sutter
Placer
Nevada
Sierra
Plumas
ButteGlenn
Lake
Mendocino
LassenShasta
Tehama
Trinity
Colusa Yuba
Sonoma
StanislausAlameda
Santa Cruz
San Mateo
San Francisco
w w w .c s a c .c ounti e s .o r g
PROJECT LOCATION
Attachment G
ampB Case
Figure 2
STREET MAPBaseCamp Environmental
SOURCE: Google Maps
MARIPOSA 1 PROJECT SITEAPPROVED
PROPOSED
PROJECT
SITE
PROPOSED PG&E SUBSTATION
Attachment G
ampB Case
Figure 3
AERIAL PHOTOBaseCamp Environmental
SOURCE: Google Maps
MARIPOSA 1 PROJECT SITE
PROJECT SITE
Attachment G
Figure 4
ASSESSOR PARCEL MAPBaseCamp Environmental
PARCEL 25 PROPOSED
REZONING TO IL,
INDUSTRIAL, LIMITED
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
AND PRE-ZONING AREA
Attachment G
D A O R A O G R A F R A M
BLDG 3
FOOTPRINT: 1,021,440 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 4
FOOTPRINT:1,021,440 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 1
FOOTPRINT: 670,320 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 2
FOOTPRINT: 637,450 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 6
100,980 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
DETENTION
570' 570'
570' 570'
170'
1792' 1792'
594'
1176' 1176'
D A O R K R A L C
BLDG 7
100,980 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
170'
594'
BLDG 5
64,260 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
378'
MARIPOSA ROAD
scheme: 1
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
AND PRE-ZONING AREA
PROPOSED REZONING TO
IL, INDUSTRIAL LIMITED
EXISTING PG 115 kVTRANSMISSION LINE
PROPOSED SUBSTATION
ampB Case
Figure 5
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLANBaseCamp Environmental
SOURCE: Ware Malcomb
Attachment G
Figure 6
PROPOSED ANNEXATION AND PREZONINGBaseCamp Environmental PARCEL 25 PROPOSED
FOR REZAINING TO IL,
INDUSTRIAL, LIMITEDPROPOSED ANNEXATION
AND PRE-ZONING AREA
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 9 August 2024
2.0 CEQA PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE ADDENDUM
Ordinarily, the certification of an EIR and the filing of a Notice of Determination closes the CEQA review process for a project. These steps for the MIP project occurred in December 2022.
However, changes may occur to a project after EIR certification, and these changes could have significant environmental impacts that may or may not have been analyzed in the certified EIR.
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15164 describe options for completing CEQA documentation for changes to a project addressed by a previously certified EIR. These options may include preparation of a subsequent EIR, a supplemental EIR, or an addendum. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 describes the conditions under which preparation of a subsequent EIR may be warranted, while CEQA Guidelines Section 15163 describes the same for a supplemental EIR. If none of those conditions apply, then an addendum to the certified EIR can be prepared as provided in Section 15164.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) states that once an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent CEQA documentation shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency makes one or more of the following determinations:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found to be not feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 10 August 2024
effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15163(a) states that the lead agency may choose to prepare a supplemental EIR if (1) any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and (2) only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project in the changed situation.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 provides that an addendum may be used to make "minor technical changes or additions" that are necessary to assure that the previous EIR is "adequate under CEQA," provided that no new important "issues about the significant effects on the environment" are raised. The provisions of Section 15164 are outlined below. (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b) [Refers only to Negative Declarations.]
(c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration. (d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
As noted above, on the basis information in this document and attachments, the City has determined that will not have any new or more significant effects other than those discussed in the MIP EIR, and as a result an addendum to the MIP EIR will be adequate to describe the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. A description of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project, and the conclusions regarding the use of an addendum, are provided in Section 5.0 below.
3.0 MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT
The MIP project involves industrial development of approximately 200 acres of land located immediately north of North Littlejohns Creek and south of Mariposa Road in the southeastern portion of the City of Stockton. The MIP project was approved by the City and annexed after LAFCo approval; the industrial prezoning took effect upon annexation in 2023. As approved, the MIP site could be developed with several industrial buildings totaling up to approximately 3.6 million square feet of floor area; these buildings would be used for light industrial activities consisting primarily of warehousing and distribution facilities. This limitation on the potential development of the MIP project was clearly described in the EIR Project Description and referenced in the adopted Development Agreement for the project (Recital D). Based on Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 11 August 2024
conceptual development plans, site development would include an estimated total of 2,938 parking stalls, of which 1,831 stalls would be for automobiles and 1,107 stalls would be for trucks and trailers. Development of cold storage uses within MIP is prohibited by the approved Development Agreement for the project.
The main access to the MIP project site is from two driveways off Mariposa Road, which is being improved along the project frontage to incorporate road widening, acceleration/ deceleration lanes and other improvements. Utility services are being extended to the project site from existing City sewer and water trunk lines. As described in the certified EIR, regulated electrical, gas, and communication utilities would be extended onto the project site from existing facilities in the area.
However, post-approval discussions with PG&E have indicated a mutual desire to improve service to MIP and other industrial development in the vicinity by installing a new substation. The proposed substation is described in more detail in Section 4.0 below and the Initial Study, Appendix B.
The MIP project will include on-site storm drainage collection lines, a detention basin, pump station, and outfall to North Littlejohns Creek; these latter facilities were only conceptually designed at the time the EIR was certified but were addressed in a subsequent First Addendum, as discussed below.
The certified MIP EIR describes the potential environmental effects of the project and the adopted mitigation requirements will address these effects as development of the project proceeds. A table summarizing the environmental impacts and lists all of the mitigation requirements of the MIP EIR is provided in Appendix B of this document. The adopted mitigation measures are also described in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project, which is shown in Appendix C of this document. Additional details regarding the MIP project can be reviewed in the certified EIR, access to which is described in Section 1.0.
First Addendum
As part of the MIP engineering process, additional land adjacent to North Littlejohns Creek and already annexed and entitled for industrial development was acquired by the developer; in combination with the MIP site, more suitable locations for the planned detention basin, pump station and outfall were defined. The detention basin was relocated further south and located partially on the adjacent property. The planned pump station and outfall were relocated to more suitable and less impacting locations. The MIP EIR had analyzed the impacts of these storm drainage facilities, but in a different location.
In addition, in reviewing MIP improvement plans, the City requested installation of a connection between its potable water system facilities north and south of North Littlejohns Creek. The purpose of this connection was to improve the reliability of the City’s water system in the area. This improvement was not discussed in the MIP EIR.
The City considered the adequacy of the MIP EIR in addressing the environmental impacts of the proposed changes in the water and storm drainage infrastructure in an Initial Study. The City concluded that the potential environmental effects of these changes to the project were adequately addressed in the certified MIP EIR and that only an addendum to the EIR was necessary to satisfy Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 12 August 2024
CEQA requirements for these changes. The City processed this first addendum to the MIP EIR in accordance with CEQA procedures, and the addendum was adopted by the City in June 2023.
4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT
The project proposes the annexation of two rural residential parcels that are adjacent to the MIP project to the City of Stockton: APN 179-220-14 and APN 179-220-15; a third parcel, 179-220- 26, which encompasses a 20-foot wide driveway providing vehicular access to the parcels and the south portion of the MIP site would also be annexed and prezoned. The purpose of the project is to eliminate irregularities in the eastern boundary of the MIP site, which are impeding industrial site design; industrial site design would be facilitated by providing an even eastern site boundary, which would also provide for more efficient use of land area.
The project applicant proposes to acquire the two adjacent residential parcels and demolish the existing residences and other buildings on these properties. The two rural residential parcels are approximately 2.48 acres in size. Combined with the access road of 1.75 acres, the total annexation area would amount to 6.71 acres. The three parcels are adjacent to each other and adjacent to the eastern boundary of the MIP, which was annexed to the City in 2023.
LAFCo requires the prezoning of lands included in a city’s annexation application The three parcels to be annexed would be prezoned IL, Light Industrial, consistent with the entire MIP project site. The prezoning would take effect upon annexation of the three sites.
The 2023 annexation of the MIP site included APN 179-220-25, an approximately 0.89-acre parcel adjacent to Mariposa Road. While this parcel should have been prezoned consistent with LAFCo requirements, the subject parcel was inadvertently not included in the prezoning action and has no official City zoning. The project will correct this oversight by applying IL, Light Industrial zoning to this parcel, consistent with the remainder of the MIP site. The locations of each of the project parcels are shown on Figure 4.
All three annexation parcels will become part of the MIP site with the project, adding approximately 6.71 acres to the approved project site. The proposed annexation project does not include any change to the amount of development that could occur on the MIP site. These amounts are defined in the MIP applications, the certified MIP EIR, the MIP Development Agreement and other approval documents. Despite the fact that the proposed project would involve a small change in the acreage of the MIP project site, the project includes no change to any of these provisions.
The proposed project will include a minor amendment to the MIP Development Agreement for the Mariposa Industrial Park, which would incorporate the three proposed annexation and prezoning parcels into the project. This action would subject any future development on these parcels to all of the requirements and mitigation measures described in the MIP Development Agreement, EIR and MMRP.
APN 179-220-14 and APN 179-220-15 each currently have an existing single-family residence.
Both these structures would be demolished by the project applicant. It is expected that these two parcels, together with the rezoning parcel (179-220-25) and the driveway parcel (179-220-26) , would be utilized in some way by the MIP project. However, the allowable amount of proposed Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 13 August 2024
building development on the MIP site, including building square footage, land disturbance, traffic generation and other environmental impacts would not change as a result of the proposed project.
No new buildings or extensions of approved buildings are proposed on any of the three annexation parcels.
The proposed substation is a Permitted Use in the IL Limited Industrial zoning that applies to the entire MIP site. As a result, it does not require any discretionary approvals at the local level. The substation does, however, require review by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
In order to facilitate CPUC permitting, the City of Stockton is including a description of the substation in the MIP EIR as a part of this addendum.
Mariposa Road Substation. Preliminary plans for the new substation, which would be adjacent to the Mariposa Industrial Park Project and north of Mariposa Road, include up to six 115 kV circuit breakers, three 60 megavolt-ampere (MVA) 115/12 kV substation transformers, and related substation equipment. Two new approximately 500-foot long, 115 kV transmission lines would loop into and out of the substation from existing nearby 115 kV regional transmission facilities, and up to fifteen 12 kV distribution feeders would extend out from the substation to tie into the local distribution network. Approximately four to six tubular steel poles would typically support the 115 kV conductors that would provide a connection to the existing 115 kV Stockton A- Lockeford-Bellota transmission line to the north. The tubular steel poles would be approximately 100-120 feet in height. This substation is needed to serve approved and planned industrial load in the Mariposa Road area.
The proposed substation site would be approximately 3 to 6 acres in size. The substation would include one or two single-story control and battery enclosures, typically totaling approximately 1,000 square feet in floor area. The substation site would be surfaced with aggregate and surrounded by a chain link/slat fence; one or two sides could be enclosed by a pre-fabricated wall, depending on surrounding aesthetic requirements. Access roads within the substation would be paved. The substation would also include a storm water detention basin and a Spill Prevention Control Countermeasure (SPCC) concrete basin. Control enclosure design features, fencing, perimeter landscaping, and other aesthetic considerations will be consistent with adopted local design specifications to the extent feasible. A steel monopole communication tower, typically 60- 120 feet in height, may be located on or adjacent to the control enclosure.
The substation will be an unmanned, automated, low-profile electrical substation that will require only periodic maintenance.
5.0 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT
The City has considered the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project as compared to the predicted environmental effects of the MIP project, as discussed in the certified MIP EIR.
These effects, including any potential effects associated with the planned substation, were evaluated in detail in a CEQA Initial Study shown in Appendix A of this document. The Initial Study identifies no new or more severe environmental effects of the proposed annexation and pre- zoning and the planned substation. The Initial Study considers whether the environmental effects of the project are adequately addressed in the MIP EIR and whether the project would involve any Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 14 August 2024
new or substantially more severe environmental effects that were not already addressed in the certified EIR. A summary of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project is presented below.
Aesthetics
The proposed project would involve no substantial changes to the visual character of the project area, other than the removal of existing residences that are not a prominent feature of the landscape.
The proposed project would not result in new or more severe aesthetic impacts, other than lighting that may be installed by future development, if any. A mitigation measure in the MIP EIR would reduce potential lighting impacts to a level that would be less than significant.
Agricultural Resources
The proposed project would not convert any Farmland as defined in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The proposed project would not involve any new agricultural impacts nor increase the severity of impacts described in the EIR.
Air Quality
Future development on the proposed project site would not generate any substantial air pollutant or toxic air contaminant emissions beyond those analyzed in the MIP EIR. Air quality impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures specified in the EIR and agreed to by the project applicant. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the proposed project. The proposed project would have no new or more severe air quality impacts.
Biological Resources
The MIP EIR analyzed impacts on potential biological resources, migratory bird and special-status species, wetlands and Waters of the U.S., and oak trees potentially subject to the City’s Heritage Oak Ordinance. The EIR concluded that compliance with the SJMSCP and the Heritage Oak Ordinance, if applicable, would reduce impacts to a level that would be less than significant. The proposed project site has no jurisdictional wetlands or Heritage Oaks. Some trees that could be used by migratory birds are on the proposed project site. However, the proposed project would be subject to the same mitigation measures as in the MIP EIR, including compliance with the SJMSCP. The proposed project would have no new or more severe biological resource impacts.
Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
A cultural resource survey of the Mariposa Industrial Park area, including the proposed project site, did not indicate the presence of any historic or prehistoric resources eligible for listing on either the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places.
No human burials were found. The EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures covering inadvertently discovered resources. These mitigation measures would also be applicable to the proposed annexation sites. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to cultural resources or tribal cultural resources.
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 15 August 2024
Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources
The MIP EIR addressed soil erosion impacts and concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the proposed project should any development occur on the proposed project site in the future. No other impacts were identified in the MIP EIR. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to geology, soils, or mineral resources.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Future development on the proposed project site would not generate any substantial GHG emissions beyond those analyzed in the MIP EIR. GHG impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures specified in the EIR. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the proposed annexation sites. The proposed project would have no new or more severe GHG impacts.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed project is not expected to use any substantial amounts of hazardous materials not already discussed in the EIR. The EIR addressed hazardous material use associated with the MIP project and concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the annexation parcels.
The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to hazardous materials or hazards such as wildfires.
Hydrology and Water Quality
The EIR addressed impacts related to hydrology and water quality, including runoff and its potential impacts on surface water quality and flooding. It concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the annexation parcels. The proposed project is not expected to contribute substantially to any additional runoff that would not be captured in the proposed MIP storm drainage system. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to hydrology and water quality.
Land Use, Population, and Housing
The proposed project would be consistent with the approved MIP project, which the EIR determined to have no significant land use impacts. The proposed project would involve the demolition of existing housing; however, the MIP EIR addressed this issue and determined that this impact was less than significant. The proposed project is not located any other existing housing areas and would have no new or more severe impacts related to land use, population, and housing.
Noise
The EIR addressed construction noise and concluded that impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures, particularly addressing construction noise. These mitigation measures would be applicable to the construction on the annexation parcels, assuming any construction work occurs. The proposed project is not expected to generate any substantial Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 16 August 2024
traffic noise nor any noise from operations beyond that of MIP operations. The proposed project would have no new or more severe noise impacts.
Public Services and Recreation
The proposed project would not increase demands or have any other known effects on public services beyond that generated by MIP development as a whole. The proposed project would have no new or more severe public service impacts.
Transportation
The proposed project is not expected to generate any additional traffic or demand for transportation services beyond that identified with the approved MIP development. It also would not affect any existing public transportation facilities, nor any emergency access to the MIP site or the surrounding area. The proposed project would have no new or more severe transportation impacts.
Utilities and Energy
The proposed project would not increase demands or have any other known effects on utility or energy services beyond that generated by the MIP project as a whole. The proposed project would have no new or more severe utility and energy impacts than would the larger MIP project.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed project would have no impact on environmental issues beyond those described in the MIP EIR. As a result, the proposed project would not generate any potentially significant cumulative effects.
Other CEQA Issues
The proposed project would have no new significant and unavoidable impacts, and it would not involve an irreversible commitment of resources, including fuels, beyond that described in the MIP EIR. The proposed project would be integrated with the MIP project, which was found to not have growth-inducing impacts. The proposed project is not located within or near a disadvantaged community and would have no environmental impacts related to environmental justice issues.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS REGARDING ADDENDUM USAGE
Based on the analysis and conclusions in the attached Initial Study, which are summarized in Section 5.0 of this addendum, the potential environmental effects of the proposed project, including the planned substation, are considered to have been adequately addressed in the MIP EIR. The project would not require any substantial change of the environmental impact analysis in the certified EIR to allow its use to address the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. The EIR considered a wide range of potential environmental effects associated with planned industrial land uses on the MIP project site, which included facilities similar to those that could be constructed on the which were located in much the same location as described in the MIP EIR. The revisions to the EIR needed to describe the proposed project and its environmental impacts documented in this addendum consist entirely of minor changes and updates to the project description and the environmental impact analysis.
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park Addendum #2 17 August 2024
Compared to the EIR environmental impact conclusions, separately or in aggregate, the proposed project, including the planned substation, would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of significant effects associated with the MIP project. The City has not identified any new information related to the project, nor any changes in the circumstances of the project, that would involve the potential for new or more severe environmental effects that were not described in the certified EIR. The analysis and conclusions in the certified EIR adequately describe the potentially significant environmental effects of the proposed project and the mitigation measures necessary to reduce the project’s effects to a level that is less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required to address the potential environmental effects of the proposed project.
The proposed project conforms to the criteria for adopting an addendum, as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. Therefore, it is appropriate for the City to adopt this addendum to the certified EIR for the MIP project.
As noted, the City adopted an MMRP prior to certifying the EIR for the MIP project. Appendix C contains the MMRP, which describes the mitigation measures that are to be implemented as part of the MIP project and which would also apply to the proposed annexation area. Since new or substantially more severe environmental effects were not identified in this addendum, and no need for additional mitigation measures was identified, the adopted MMRP is applicable to the proposed project.
Attachment G
APPENDIX A
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT
Attachment G
Draft 02-09-2024
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN
TO:
City of Stockton
425 N. El Dorado St, 1st Floor
Stockton, CA 95202
Attention: City Clerk
Record for the Benefit of
The City of Stockton
Pursuant to Government Code
Section 27383
Space Above Reserved for Recorder’s Use Only
FIRST AMENDMENT
TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
CITY OF STOCKTON, a
California municipal corporation
AND
GREENLAW DEVELOPMENT, LLC
a California limited liability company
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT
Effective Date: _____________, 2024
Attachment G
1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“First
Amendment”), dated for reference purposes as of ____________, 2024 (“Amendment Date”), is entered into by and between the CITY OF STOCKTON, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and GREENLAW DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Developer”). Developer and City may each be referred to individually herein as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
R E C I T A L S
This First Amendment is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the Parties.
A. City and Developer are parties to that certain Development Agreement by and between City of Stockton, a California municipal corporation, and Greenlaw Development, LLC, a California limited liability company, for the Mariposa Industrial Park Project, recorded in the Official Records of San Joaquin County on May 16, 2023, as Document Number 2023-038261 (hereafter, the “Agreement”). All capitalized terms in this First Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement unless specifically defined otherwise herein.
B. Since the Parties executed the Agreement, Developer has acquired a legal or equitable interest, as used by Government Code subsections 65865(a) and (b), in four (4) parcels of real property that are adjacent to the Property that is the subject of the Agreement. One of the parcels is located within the City of Stockton, and the other three parcels are located outside the City of Stockton in the unincorporated area of the County of San Joaquin (the “County”).
C. In conjunction with its development of other property adjacent to the Property that is the subject of the Agreement, Developer has applied to City to annex to City the other three parcels that are not currently within the City of Stockton, and City intends to petition the County Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) for approval of such annexation so that all four of the parcels described in Recital B above will be within the City of Stockton. These four parcels bear Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 179-220-14, 179-220-15, 179-220-25 and 179-220-26 (together, the “Additional Property”), and are more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein.
D. City and Developer have determined and agree that development of the Additional Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement would be in the best interests of the Parties and, therefore, consistent with Section 65865(b) of the Development Agreement Statute, the Parties have agreed to amend the Agreement to bring the Additional Property within the coverage of the Agreement.
E. The potential environmental impacts from development of the Additional Property consistent with the terms and conditions of the Agreement were evaluated by the City, in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), in that certain Environmental Impact Report for the Mariposa Industrial Park (State Clearinghouse No. 2020120283) certified by the City on December 6, 2022 (the “MIP EIR”).
Attachment G
2 F. On _______ ___, 2024, City’s Planning Commission recommended, by adoption of Resolution No. _______, that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Determine that the potential environmental effects from development of the Additional Property consistent with the Agreement were adequately analyzed in the MIP EIR and no further environmental review for the First Amendment is required under CEQA.
2. Adopt an ordinance authorizing City to execute this First Amendment to bring the Additional Property within the coverage of the Agreement.
G. On _______ ___, 2024, the City Council took the following actions:
1. Determined that the potential environmental effects from development of the Additional Property consistent with the Agreement were adequately analyzed in the MIP EIR and no further environmental review for the First Amendment is required under CEQA.
2. Adopted Ordinance No. ______, authorizing the City to execute the First Amendment to bring the Additional Property within the coverage of the Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and provisions set forth herein, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
A G R E E M E N T
1. Incorporation of Preamble, Recitals, and Exhibits. The Preamble, Recitals, Exhibits and all defined terms set forth therein are hereby incorporated into this First Amendment as if set forth herein in full.
2. Amendment to Definition of “Property” in Agreement. The definition of “Property” in Article 1 on page 7 of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the existing definition in its entirety, and replacing it with the text set forth below:
“Property” is defined in Recital C, and also includes the Additional Property, as defined in Recital C of that certain First Amendment to Development Agreement by and between City and Developer approved by Ordinance No. ______.
3. Continued Effectiveness of Agreement. Except as expressly modified herein, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. The provisions of this First Amendment are several and separate and should a legal challenge be brought challenging this First Amendment, such challenge shall in no way affect or impact the continuing validity and vitality of the Agreement.
4. Effective Date; Recording. This First Amendment shall become effective on the Effective Date identified on the signature page. Not later than ten (10) days following Attachment G
3 the Effective Date, a duly executed and notarized copy of this First Amendment shall be recorded in the Official Records of the County of San Joaquin.
5. Signature Pages. For convenience, the signatures of the parties to this First Amendment may be executed and acknowledged on separate pages in counterparts which, when attached to this First Amendment, shall constitute one complete agreement.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Attachment G
4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Developer have executed this First Amendment as of the Effective Date shown below.
CITY:
CITY OF STOCKTON,
a California municipal corporation
By:
Harry Black, City Manager
[Signature must be notarized]
ATTEST:
By:
Eliza R. Garza, City Clerk
“Effective Date”: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Lori M. Asuncion, City Attorney
DEVELOPER:
By:
Name:
Its:
By:
Name:
Its:
[Signatures must be notarized]
Attachment G
Exhibit A
EXHIBIT A
[Property Description – To be Inserted]
Attachment G
APPENDIX B
INITIAL STUDY
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 1 August 2024 INITIAL STUDY
MIP SMALL PARCELS ANNEXATION AND PREZONING PROJECT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental effects of the proposed MIP Small Parcels Annexation and Prezoning Project (project) and the degree to which those effects are adequately addressed by the Mariposa Industrial Park Environmental Impact Report (MIP EIR). The MIP EIR was certified by the Stockton City Council in December 2022.
The MIP Small Parcels Annexation and Prezoning Project involves the proposed annexation of two 2.5-acre residential parcels and one driveway parcel to the Mariposa Industrial Park (MIP) project site; the project also includes the rezoning of one 0.89-acre parcel that was inadvertently already annexed to the City in conjunction with the approximately 200-acre MIP project site, without being pre-zoned. In total, the project site amounts to 7.60 acres:
Residential Parcel 14 2.48 ac.
Residential Parcel 15 2.48 ac.
Driveway Parcel 26 1.75 ac.
Rezoning-only 25 0.89 ac.
TOTAL 7.60 ac
The potential environmental impacts of the MIP project, without the proposed Small Parcels Annexation and Prezoning Project, were addressed in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by the City of Stockton and certified in December 2022, prior to the City’s approval of the MIP project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) encourages the use of previously prepared environmental documents in evaluating subsequent projects when the prior documents effectively address the environmental issues associated with the subsequent project.
Plans to locate a PG&E substation within the MIP project were not specifically addressed in the EIR, but they are explicitly considered in this Initial Study and the associated addendum. The planned substation is a Permitted Use in the IL Limited Industrial zone and would be permitted by the City subject only to a non-discretionary Site Plan Review.The Initial Study analysis employs a template checklist of the environmental issues analyzed in the EIR to evaluate the proposed project. The purpose of the checklist is to consider each of the environmental issues addressed in the EIR and determine whether the potential environmental effects of the project were already adequately addressed by the certified EIR. More specifically, the checklist considers whether the proposed project, changed circumstances, or new information of substantial importance could result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified environmental effect. If any of these conditions are found to exist, additional CEQA review of the proposed project could be required; this, however, as documented below, is not the case.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 2 August 2024 A “No” answer to a checklist question does not necessarily mean that there are no potential impacts related to the environmental subject. Rather, it indicates that the project will not result in a new impact or in a more severe impact than that discussed in the certified MIP EIR, and as addressed with mitigation measures, if necessary. Under these circumstances, a “No” answer indicates the proposed project does not involve any need to modify the conclusions of the EIR.
2.0 EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST EVALUATION CATEGORIES
The Initial Study checklist documents the analysis of the CEQA environmental concerns analyzed in the MIP EIR, whether the potential environmental effects of the project are adequately addressed by the MIP EIR and whether the project would involve environmental effects that were not adequately addresses in the MIP EIR. The meanings of the individual checklist columns are explained below.
Conclusion in MIP EIR – This column acknowledges that the listed potential environmental effect was addressed in the MIP EIR and identifies the conclusion of the MIP EIR relative to each environmental effect listed.
Does the project involve new impacts? – This column indicates whether the proposed project will result in new significant environmental effects not identified MIP EIR or adequately mitigated by the EIR, or whether changes associated with the project will result in a substantial increase in the severity of a significant impact identified in the MIP EIR, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(1).
New circumstances involving new impacts? - This column indicates whether there have been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed project is undertaken that would require major revisions to the EIR, due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(2).
New information requiring new analysis or verification? - Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), this column indicates whether new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified shows any of the following:
● The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIR, ● Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR,
● Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or ● Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 3 August 2024 Where this analysis finds that the proposed project would not result in any substantial changes to the conclusions of the MIP EIR – that is, no new significant impacts are identified, previously identified impacts are not found to be substantially more severe, and additional mitigation is not necessary - and if all of the checklist questions are answered “No”, no additional CEQA analysis for the proposed project is required, and the City may determine that the certified MIP EIR, with the incorporation of the information in this checklist and the accompanying addendum, adequately addresses the potential environmental effect of the project.
Mitigation required? - This column indicates whether mitigation measures are required to address project impacts. These include any mitigation measures identified in the MIP EIR and any developed specifically for the proposed project. If “None required” is indicated, the EIR and/or this Addendum conclude that no impact occurs with the proposed project, or the project impact is not significant; in either case, no additional mitigation is required.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICS
3.1 AESTHETICS
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Scenic vistas Less than
significant
No No No None required
b) Scenic resources Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Visual character and
quality
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
d) Light and glare Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
a) Scenic Vistas.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have 32- to 36-foot industrial structures that would limit distance views across the site but finds that their impacts on scenic vistas would be less than significant. The planned substation would not result in any increase in impacts on scenic vistas. The project does not propose the introduction of any new aboveground structures that would obstruct any scenic vistas. Therefore, the proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on scenic vistas.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 4 August 2024 b) Scenic Resources.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, a drainage detention pond, pump station and outfall facilities associated with the MIP project would affect riparian vegetation along North Littlejohns Creek and a tributary ditch, but that these aesthetic impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project, including the planned substation, would not affect either of these features or the riparian vegetation along them. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on scenic resources.
c) Visual Character and Quality.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have visual character impacts that are less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures, which apply to building, landscaping, and other site improvements. The planned substation would be consistent with the surrounding industrial development proposed by the MIP project and would be subject to City design controls. The proposed project would lead to the removal of two existing single-family residences; otherwise, it would not affect the overall visual character of the MIP site, either before or after development. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on visual character and quality.
d) Light and Glare.
The MIP EIR indicates that the MIP project would have light and glare impacts that are less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures, which include compliance with City lighting requirements and building codes. The proposed project would not install any lighting fixtures, and any future development that involves lighting would be subject to the same City requirements as the MIP project. The proposed project would have no new or more severe light or glare impacts.
3.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Conversion of
Farmland
Significant and
unavoidable even
with mitigation
No No No None required
b) Agricultural zoning
and Williamson Act
contracts
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Indirect conversion
of Farmland
Less than
significant
No No No None required
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 5 August 2024 a) Conversion of Farmland.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would involve conversion of 106 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance and 60 acres of Farmland of Local Importance. The proposed project would involve land designated Farmland of Local Importance, which is not Farmland as defined in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The planned substation would involve no change to the agricultural effects of the project. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to conversion of Farmland.
b) Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act Contracts.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site has no agricultural zoning, and no portion of the site is under a Williamson Act contract. These same conditions apply to the proposed project site.
Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact and no new or more severe impacts related to agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts.
c) Indirect Conversion of Farmland.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site is in an area that is already substantially developed with commercial and rural residential land use. As a result, the MIP would have no impact regarding indirect conversion of Farmland. As noted, the proposed project would not convert any Farmland.
Any future development of the proposed project site would serve only approved industrial development on the MIP site. The planned substation may improve PG&E’s ability to provide electrical service to planned industrial development in the general project area. However, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on indirect conversion of Farmland.
3.3 AIR QUALITY
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Air quality plans
and standards -
Construction
emissions
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures AIR-1
through AIR-7
b) Air quality plans
and standards -
Operational
emissions
Significant and
unavoidable even
with mitigation
No No No None required
c) Exposure of
sensitive receptors to
criteria pollutants
Significant and
unavoidable even
with mitigation
No No No None required
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 6 August 2024 d) Exposure of
sensitive receptors to
toxic air
contaminants
Less than
significant
No No No None required
e) Odors and other
emissions
Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Air Quality Plans and Standards - Construction Emissions.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project construction emissions would be below SJVAPCD significance thresholds, and adopted mitigation measures would further reduce the project’s dust and other air pollutant emissions. The proposed project would not involve construction at this time.
Any future development on the proposed project site, including the planned substation, would generate similar construction emissions as those analyzed in the MIP EIR, but these emissions would be substantially less given the size of the proposed project site. Mitigation measures described in the MIP EIR would apply to the proposed project. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to air pollutant emissions from construction activities. b) Air Quality Plans and Standards - Operational Emissions.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP operational emissions would be below SJVAPCD significance thresholds except for NO x, and mitigation measures could not be demonstrably quantified to reduce NOx emissions below the threshold of significance. The proposed project does not propose any additional development than the approved MIP; as such, the proposed project would not contribute any new operational air pollutant emissions to the potentially significant operational emissions discussed in the MIP EIR. The planned substation would not contribute to the operational emissions of the project. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on air pollutant emissions from operations.
c) Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project NOx emissions could have a significant and unavoidable impact on a nearby disadvantaged community. However, as noted in b) above, the proposed project would not involve any additional development and no additional development in the vicinity of the disadvantaged community. In addition, the proposed project would remove two single-family residences that would otherwise be considered sensitive receptors. Therefore, the proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on exposure of sensitive receptors to criteria pollutants. d) Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP construction emissions would include diesel PM, classified as a TAC, but these emissions would have no significant impact on sensitive receptors as they are not long-term emissions. As noted in c) above, the proposed project would not generate any new diesel particulate matter emissions or emissions of other TACs, and potential sensitive receptors would be removed. Therefore, the proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on exposure of sensitive receptors to TACs.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 7 August 2024 As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not generate any new or additional odor emissions. The proposed project likewise would not generate any odors. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on odors.
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Special-status
species and habitats
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure BIO-1
b) Riparian and other
sensitive habitats
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Waters of the U.S.
and wetlands
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures BIO-2
through BIO-4
d) Fish and wildlife
migration
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure BIO-1
e) Local biological
requirements
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure BIO-5
f) Conflict with
habitat conservation
plans
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure BIO-1
a) Special-Status Species and Habitats.
Preparation of the original MIP EIR included a detailed biological resource assessment. An updated assessment was prepared in conjunction with the first addendum to the MIP EIR.
As discussed in the MIP EIR and the first addendum, MIP development would involve potentially significant effects on four special-status species: Swainson’s hawk, white-tailed kite, burrowing owl, and vernal pool fairy shrimp. The MIP project, including the planned substation site, is required by adopted mitigation to participate in the SJMSCP, the habitat conservation plan applicable to San Joaquin County and its incorporated cities. Participation in the SJMSCP will reduce MIP impacts on covered species to a less-than-significant level.
The proposed project site also contains potential habitat for the four special-status species named above, although this habitat is more limited in area and has been disturbed by residential development. All four species are covered by the SJMSCP, compliance with which would be required by MIP EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which is also applicable to the proposed annexation area. Required compliance with the SJMSCP, including implementation of Incidental Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 8 August 2024 Take Minimization Measures identified by SJCOG, would reduce proposed project impacts on these species to a level that would be less than significant, consistent with the MIP EIR conclusions in this issue area.
b) Riparian and Other Sensitive Habitats.
A riparian vegetation corridor exists along North Littlejohns Creek and the constructed tributary ditch that would be affected by the project including effects on riparian vegetation. Similar facilities and their impacts on riparian vegetation were analyzed in the MIP EIR and the first addendum; the impacts were determined to be less than significant.
The proposed project site is not located along either of these water features and therefore would not affect riparian vegetation. No other sensitive habitats were identified in the previous biological assessments, and there are no such resources within the proposed annexation parcels or the planned substation site. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to riparian and other sensitive habitats.
c) Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands.
The MIP EIR documented the presence of potential Waters of the U.S. and wetlands, including features that would be potentially affected by the proposed project. These include North Littlejohns Creek and nearby seasonal wetlands. The MIP EIR concluded that the MIP project would not have a significant impact on these features with implementation of EIR Mitigation Measures BIO-2 through BIO-4. The updated biological assessment indicated that the total acreage of potential jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. affected by the project would be slightly reduced as a result of the addition of acreage south of the MIP site and the relocation of the drainage basin.
The proposed annexation site does not include wetlands or jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. per the previous biological assessments; there are no wetlands on the planned substation site.
Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on Waters of the U.S. and wetlands.
d) Fish and Wildlife Migration.
As discussed in the MIP EIR and the first addendum, several trees in the project vicinity are suitable for nesting raptors and other protected bird species. The proposed project site likewise contains trees that could potentially be used by migratory birds for nesting. The proposed project would not involve any development at this time that could affect these trees. Any future development would be subject to MIP EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which requires participation in the SJMSCP. The SJMSCP contains measures that would protect migratory bird species. Required compliance with the SJMSCP, including implementation of Incidental Take Minimization Measures identified by SJCOG, would reduce proposed project impacts on migratory bird species to a level that would be less than significant, consistent with th e MIP EIR findings in this issue area.
e) Local Biological Requirements.
The City has a Heritage Tree Ordinance (Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.72.245) that protects valley oak trees of a specific size by requiring permits for their removal and replacement Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 9 August 2024 of removed trees. The MIP EIR concluded that the Mariposa Industrial Park project would not have a significant impact on oak trees with implementation of EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-5, which requires compliance with the Heritage Tree Ordinance. The proposed project, including the substation site, would not involve the removal of any oak trees, either now or in the future.
Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to local biological requirements.
f) Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans.
As required by MIP EIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1, the proposed project is required to participate in the SJMSCP as part of the Mariposa Industrial Park project. No other habitat conservation plans apply to the project site or to the Stockton area. Proposed project impacts related to habitat conservation plans would be less than significant, consistent with the MIP EIR findings in this issue area.
3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Historical
resources
No impact No No No None required
b) Archaeological and
tribal cultural
resources
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures CULT-1
through CULT-3
c) Human burials Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure CULT-4
a) Historical Resources.
Preparation of the original MIP EIR included a detailed cultural resources study. An updated study was prepared in conjunction with the first addendum to the MIP EIR. As discussed in the MIP EIR, field surveys conducted on the MIP site led to the recording of two potential historical resources, but neither was determined to meet the criteria for listing on either the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places.
No historical resources were identified in the area of the proposed project by either the original or the updated cultural study. The proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts on historical resources. Neither of the houses proposed for removal are of historical age. b) Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, no archaeological or tribal cultural resources were found on the MIP site, except for isolated prehistoric greenstone flakes. No archaeological resources were identified Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 10 August 2024 in the area of the proposed project by either the original or the updated cultural study. The MIP EIR noted that currently unknown cultural resources could be encountered during MIP project construction, which would include development of the substation site; therefore, MIP EIR Mitigation Measures CULT-1 through CULT-3 were added to address this issue. The proposed project would be subject to the same mitigation measures. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the EIR. c) Human Burials.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, no human burials have been recorded on the MIP project site, including the proposed annexation site and the substation site. The updated cultural resources study reached the same conclusion. The certified EIR noted that currently unknown burials could be encountered during MIP project construction; therefore, MIP EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-4 was added to address this issue; planned industrial development and development of the substation site would be subject to the same mitigation measure. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts than those analyzed in the EIR.
3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Faulting and
seismicity
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures GEO-1
and GEO-2
b) Other geologic
hazards
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Soil erosion Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures GEO-3
and GEO-4
d) Expansive soils Less than
significant
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures GEO-3
and GEO-4
e) Paleontological
resources and unique
geological features
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure GEO-5
f) Access to mineral
resources
No impact No No No None required
a) Faulting and Seismicity.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, while there are no active or potentially active faults within or near the MIP project site, the site is subject to seismic shaking from active faults outside San Joaquin Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 11 August 2024 County. MIP EIR Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2, requiring compliance with the State Construction General Permit, and with City ordinances, would reduce impacts to a level that would be less than significant. Conditions for the proposed project related to faulting and seismicity are the same as those described in the MIP EIR, and development of the proposed annexation areas and the substation site would be subject to the same EIR mitigation measures. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to faulting and seismicity. b) Other Geologic Hazards.
As discussed in the EIR, MIP project impacts related to other geologic hazards, such as liquefaction, would be less than significant. Conditions for the proposed project related to other geologic hazards are the same as those described in the MIP EIR. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to other geologic hazards. c) Soil Erosion.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have soil erosion impacts associated with project construction. These impacts would be less than significant with implementation of MIP EIR Mitigation Measures GEO-3 and GEO-4, which require a soils report and compliance with building codes. The proposed annexation and prezoning would not involve any soil disturbance at this time, and any future development of the proposed project site and the substation would be subject to the same EIR mitigation measures as the MIP project. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to soil erosion. d) Expansive Soils.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project could have potential expansive soil impacts. These impacts would be less than significant with implementation of EIR Mitigation Measures GEO-3 and GEO-4. The proposed project, including the planned substation, would be subject to the same expansive soil impacts but would be subject to the same EIR mitigation measures as the MIP project. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to expansive soils.
e) Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, no paleontological resources were found on the MIP site. However, it noted that currently unknown paleontological resources could be encountered during MIP project construction, including required utility improvements. MIP EIR Mitigation Measure GEO- 5 was identified to address this issue. The proposed project, including the planned substation, would be subject to the same mitigation measure; therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on paleontological resources. f) Access to Mineral Resources.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site contains no known mineral resources. The proposed project site likewise contains no known mineral resources. Because of this, neither the approved MIP project nor the proposed project would have any new or more severe impacts on access to mineral resources.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 12 August 2024
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Project GHG
construction
emissions and
consistency with
applicable plans and
policies
Significant and
unavoidable even
with mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures GHG-1,
GHG-2, AIR-1
through AIR-7.
b) Project GHG
operational emissions
and consistency with
applicable plans and
policies
Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Project GHG Construction Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, GHG emissions from MIP construction activities would be reduced through mitigation measures but impacts would nonetheless be significant and unavoidable.
Development of the proposed annexation sites and the planned substation would not generate new or additional GHG emissions. Mitigation measures described in the MIP EIR would apply to the proposed project. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to GHG emissions from construction activities.
b) Project GHG Operational Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, GHG emissions from MIP operations would be reduced to a level that is less than significant through implementation of mitigation measures. Development within the proposed annexation area and the planned substation would not generate any new or more GHG emissions than those that would result from the approved MIP project. As such, the proposed project would not affect the attainment of the GHG reduction objectives of the Stockton CAP (now outdated) or of State GHG reduction plans. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to GHG operational emissions and their impacts on GHG reduction plans.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 13 August 2024
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Hazardous
material
transportation and
storage
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
b) Hazardous
material releases
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures GEO-1
and GEO-2
c) Hazardous material
sites
Less than
significant
No No No None required
d) Airport hazards Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
e) Interference with
emergency vehicle
access and
evacuations
Less than
significant
No No No None required
f) Wildfire hazards Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Hazardous Material Transportation and Storage.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project impacts on hazardous material transportation and storage would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures requiring a Hazardous Material Business Plan and compliance with City code requirements. The proposed project and the planned substation would not result in any additional use of hazardous materials.
Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to hazardous material transportation and storage.
b) Hazardous Material Releases.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project impacts on hazardous material transportation and storage would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures requiring compliance with City and County code requirements, and with conditions of the Construction General Permit. Like construction on the MIP site, any construction on the proposed project site may involve the use of hazardous materials and potential spills. Potential hazardous materials spills during construction are addressed in the SWPPP, as required by MIP EIR Mitigation Measures GEO-1 and GEO-2. The proposed project and the planned substation would be subject to the same mitigation measures. Other substances used in the construction process would ordinarily be stored in approved containers and used in relatively small quantities, in accordance with the Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 14 August 2024 manufacturers’ recommendations and/or applicable regulations. As noted in a) above, development within the proposed annexation area is not expected to use any substantial quantities of hazardous materials. Therefore, project impacts related to hazardous material releases would be less than significant, consistent with the EIR findings in this issue area. c) Hazardous Materials Sites.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, a search of hazardous material databases did not find records of active hazardous material sites on or adjacent to the MIP site, which included the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project and the planned substation would not expose persons to known materials or conditions that would be a significant health risk. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to hazardous material sites. The substation project would result in electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions; potential health risks associated with EMF have not been reliably quantified and are considered too speculative for CEQA analysis. d) Airport Hazards.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site is within Compatibility Zone 7b of the Stockton Metropolitan Airport, requiring Airport Land Use Commission review, but impacts related to airport operations are anticipated to be less than significant, because no industrial structures tall enough to interfere with airport operations would be built. The proposed substation may involve construction of electrical poles and radio control tower that exceed 100 feet in height. Development within the proposed annexation area, along with the MIP project site as a whole and planned substation, would also be subject to Airport Land Use Commission review. There are no plans for any aboveground structures on the proposed project site; therefore, the proposed project would not involve any known effect on airport operations. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to airport hazards.
e) Interference with Emergency Vehicle Access and Evacuations.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP construction would not require closure or major restriction on public roads, and no obstruction of any roads would occur when construction work is completed.
These conditions also apply to the proposed annexation area and to any future development that may occur there. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on emergency vehicle access and evacuations.
f) Wildfire Hazards.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site is not within a designated Fire Hazard Safety Zone, as defined by Cal Fire, and wildfires are unlikely to occur. These conditions also apply to the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to wildfire hazards.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 15 August 2024
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Surface water
resources and
quality
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measure GEO-1
b) Groundwater
resources and
quality
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Drainage patterns
and runoff
Less than
significant
No No No None required
d) Release of
pollutants in flood,
tsunami, and seiche
zones
Less than
significant
No No No None required
e) Consistency with
water quality and
groundwater
management plans
Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Surface Water Resources and Quality Standards.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have impacts that are less than significant with implementation of a mitigation measure requiring an Industrial General Permit. Any future development within the proposed annexation area and the planned substation would be subject to this same requirement. Any future construction would also be required to obtain a Construction General Permit, as required by MIP EIR Mitigation Measure GEO-1 and as noted in Section 3.6, Geology and Soils. As a result, the proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on surface water resources and quality.
b) Groundwater Resources and Quality.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have impacts that are less than significant on groundwater resources or quality. The proposed annexation project and the planned substation would not place any new or additional demand on groundwater supplies, nor would they directly affect existing groundwater resources in the area. The project would not have any new or more severe impacts on groundwater resources and quality.
c) Drainage Patterns and Runoff.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not have a significant impact related to drainage patterns and runoff. These conditions also apply to the proposed annexation area and the Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 16 August 2024 planned substation. Future development would likely be integrated with planned development on the MIP site. It is expected that the MIP drainage system can accommodate any runoff generated by the annexed parcels. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to drainage patterns and runoff.
d) Release of Pollutants in Flood, Tsunami, and Seiche Zones.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the southern portion of the MIP site from failure of Camanche Dam and New Hogan Dam, but it is not in a seiche or tsunami zone. The proposed project site is not within the 100-year floodplain. As noted in Section 3.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the proposed project is not expected to use any substantial amounts of hazardous materials. Therefore, any flooding that occurs on the proposed project site would not lead to the release of pollutants.
The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts regarding release of pollutants.
e) Consistency with Water Quality and Groundwater Management Plans.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would be required to comply with water quality provisions in the City’s Storm Water Management Program and Storm Water Quality Control Criteria Plan. Any future development of the proposed annexation area would also be required to comply with these City requirements. As noted, the proposed project would not affect groundwater; therefore, it would not affect implementation of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts regarding consistency with water quality and groundwater management plans.
3.10 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Division of
communities
No impact No No No None required
b) Conflict with plans,
policies, and
regulations adopted
to avoid or mitigate
environmental effect
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Population growth
inducement
Less than
significant
No No No None required
d) Displacement of
housing and people
Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Division of Communities.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 17 August 2024 As discussed in the MIP EIR, the area immediately surrounding the MIP site is predominantly a combination of industrial development, vacant parcels, agricultural lands, and commercial and rural residential development, the latter located to the north and west. Therefore, the MIP project would not divide an established community. These same conditions also apply to the proposed project site, which is surrounded by existing approved or proposed industrial development.
Therefore, the proposed project would have no new or more severe impacts related to division of communities.
b) Conflict with Plans, Policies, and Regulations Adopted to Avoid or Mitigate Environmental Effect.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project is consistent with the Stockton General Plan policies that affect the environment, and the project would not conflict with these policies. Proposed prezoning and rezoning actions are consistent with the Stockton General Plan. All four parcels that are a part of the project would have zoning that is consistent with General Plan designations and the planned Light Industrial development of the MIP site. The proposed substation is consistent with the existing zoning of the MIP site.
As noted elsewhere in this Initial Study, the proposed project is not expected to conflict with any City policies or ordinances designed to avoid or mitigate environmental effects. Any future development on the proposed project site, including the planned substation, would be required to implement mitigation measures described in the MIP Development Agreement and EIR, which were identified in part to ensure the MIP project complies with City policies and ordinances regarding environmental impacts. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to plans, policies, and regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effects.
c) Population Growth Inducement.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project, including the planned substation, would not induce any population growth that is not planned for in the Stockton General Plan. The proposed project would not create new housing, nor would it support housing development. As such, it would not induce any unplanned population growth. The project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to population growth.
d) Displacement of Housing and People.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP would involve the probable demolition of two single-family residences on the MIP site, but the displacement impacts would be less than significant. The MIP EIR addressed the situation on the proposed project site, which proposes the removal of two existing single-family residences. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on displacement.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 18 August 2024
3.11 NOISE
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Increase in noise
levels in excess of
standards - Traffic
Significant and
unavoidable
No No No None required
b) Increase in noise
levels in excess of
standards - Other
project noise
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
c) Increase in noise
levels in excess of
standards -
Construction
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No EIR Mitigation
Measures NOISE -
4 and NOISE-5
d) Groundborne
vibrations
Less than
significant
No No No None required
e) Airport and
airstrip noise
No impact No No No None required
a) Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards - Traffic.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would result in traffic noise level increases on two Mariposa Road segments; these 4 dB noise level increases would exceed the 3-dB impact threshold set in the City of Stockton Noise Element. Mitigation measures to reduce noise impacts on these segments are not considered feasible; therefore, this noise impact was considered significant and unavoidable. The proposed project, including the planned substation, would not, however, generate any additional traffic or associated noise impacts. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect traffic noise levels on any road segment. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on traffic noise levels.
b) Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards - Other Project Noise As discussed in the MIP EIR, operation of proposed warehousing uses would generate new noise, but this impact would be reduced to a level that would be less than significant with implementation of required mitigation. The proposed project, including the planned substation, would not contribute to noise levels generated by MIP operations at this time. It is expected that any future development of the proposed project site would not contribute substantially to noise generated by MIP operations. The project would not have any new or more severe impacts on noise from project operations.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 19 August 2024 c) Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards - Construction As discussed in the MIP EIR, noise from MIP project construction activities would involve temporary increases in ambient noise levels, but this impact would be reduced to a level that would be less than significant with implementation of MIP EIR Mitigation Measures NOISE-4 and NOISE-5, which restrict construction hours and require compliance with City code noise measures. There are no land uses sensitive to noise in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project site, and MIP EIR Mitigation Measures NOISE-4 and NOISE-5 would apply to any construction that may occur, which would reduce potential construction noise to a level that is less than significant. The proposed project would not have new or more severe impacts related to construction noise.
b) Groundborne Vibrations.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not involve potential groundborne vibration sources other than construction equipment, and these vibrations would cease once work is completed. Should future development occur, the proposed project would not involve any more construction noise or vibration than the approved MIP project. As noted, there are no land uses sensitive to noise in the proposed project vicinity; likewise, there are no land uses sensitive to vibrations. The proposed project would not have new or more severe impacts related to groundborne vibrations.
e) Airport and Airstrip Noise.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the outermost noise contour (60 dB) of the Stockton Metropolitan Airport does not extend to the MIP site, including the proposed project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not have new or more severe impacts related to airport and airstrip noise.
3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Fire protection
facilities
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
b) Police protection
facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Schools Less than
significant
No No No None required
d) Parks and
recreational services
Less than
significant
No No No None required
e) Other public
facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 20 August 2024 a) Fire Protection Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would generate new demand for fire protection services from the Stockton Fire Department, which would require support for development of new fire protection facilities. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional demand for Stockton Fire Department services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to the demand for new fire protection facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on fire protection services or facilities.
b) Police Protection Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would generate new demand for police protection services from the Stockton Police Department, but no new facilities would be required. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional demand for Stockton Police Department services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to the demand for new police protection facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on police protection facilities. c) Schools.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project could indirectly generate new demand for educational services of the Stockton Unified School District, but payment of development impact fees required by ordinance would satisfy CEQA mitigation requirements. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional demand for Stockton Unified School District services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to the demand for new school facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on school facilities.
d) Parks and Recreational Services.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not generate any significant demand for park or recreational facilities. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional demand for park and recreational services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to the demand for new facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on park and recreational facilities. e) Other Public Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not generate significant demand for other public facilities such as libraries. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional demand for other public services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to the demand for new facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on park and recreational facilities.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 21 August 2024
3.13 TRANSPORTATION
Envi
ronmental
Issue Area
Con
clusion in
MIP EIR
Do
es the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mi
tigation
required?
a) Motor vehicle
transportation plans
- Intersections
Not applicable
under LOS
analysis
No No No None required
b) Motor vehicle
tr
ansportation plans
- Roadway segments
Not applicable
under LOS
analysis
No No No None required
c) Motor vehicle
tr
ansportation plans
- Ramp junctions
Not applicable
under LOS
analysis
No No No None required
d) Motor vehicle
transportation plans
- Truck routes
Less than
significant
No No No None required
e) Conflicts with non-
motor vehicle
transportation plans
Less than
significant
No No No None required
f) Consistency with
CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3(b)
Significant and
unavoidable even
with mitigation
No No No None required
g) Safety hazards Less than
significant
No No No None required
h) Emergency access Less than
significant
No No No None required
a) Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans - Intersections.
As
discussed in the MIP EIR, under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions, four intersections, two roadway segments, and three ramp junctions were determined to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) that is inconsistent with City standards. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional traffic beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to these effects. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on motor vehicle transportation plans relative to intersections.
b) Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans - Roadway Segments.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions, two roadway segments were determined to operate at a LOS that is inconsistent with City standards.
The proposed project is not expected to generate additional traffic beyond that generated by the Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 22 August 2024 MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to these effects. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on motor vehicle transportation plans relative to roadway segments.
c) Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans - Ramp Junctions.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions, three ramp junctions were determined to operate at a LOS that is inconsistent with City standards. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional traffic beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to these effects. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on motor vehicle transportation plans relative to ramp junctions. d) Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans - Truck Routes.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have no significant impacts on transportation facilities analyzed in the traffic study with recommended improvements, including designated truck routes. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional traffic beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to these effects. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on motor vehicle transportation plans relative to truck routes.
e) Conflict with Non-Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have no significant impacts on non-motor vehicle transportation facilities or services, including public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional transportation demand beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to these effects. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on non-motor vehicle transportation plans.
f) Consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) addresses vehicle miles traveled (VMT). As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would have impacts on VMT that would be significant and unavoidable even with mitigation. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional traffic beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not contribute to VMT impacts. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).
g) Safety Hazards.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not present a significant safety hazard to traffic, even with planned road improvements along Mariposa Road. The proposed project is not located on nor would affect any public roads. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to transportation safety hazards. h) Emergency Access.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP site would have several access points for emergency vehicles. The proposed project is not located near and would not affect proposed emergency access Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 23 August 2024 to the MIP site. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to emergency access.
3.14 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Environmental
Issue Area
Conclusion in
MIP EIR
Does the
project
involve new
impacts?
New
circumstances
involving new
impacts?
New
information
requiring new
analysis or
verification?
Mitigation
required?
a) Wastewater
services and facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
b) Water services and
facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
c) Stormwater
services and facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
d) Solid waste Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
e) Energy and
telecommunications
facilities
Less than
significant
No No No None required
f) Project energy
consumption
Less than
significant with
mitigation
No No No None required
a) Wastewater Services and Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would be connected to the City’s existing adjacent wastewater system, which has adequate capacity to serve the MIP; the MIP project would have no significant impacts. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate any additional demand for wastewater services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not place any substantial additional demands on the City’s wastewater facilities.
The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on wastewater services and facilities.
b) Water Services and Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would be connected to the City potable water system, which would involve no significant impacts. The proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to generate additional demand for water services beyond that generated by the MIP project; therefore, it would not place any substantial additional demands on the City’s water facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on water services and facilities.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 24 August 2024 c) Storm Water Services and Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, drainage from the MIP site would be collected by the proposed on- site storm drainage collection system and sent to a detention basin which would ultimately discharge to North Littlejohns Creek via a new pump station and outfall facility. As noted in Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project, including the planned substation, is not expected to make a substantial contribution to storm drainage; therefore, it is not expected to require changes to the MIP storm drainage system. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on storm water services and facilities. d) Solid Waste.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project impacts on solid waste would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation requiring compliance with City construction and demolition waste requirements. The proposed project is not expected to generate any substantial solid waste long-term and therefore would place no substantial demands on solid waste collection and disposal facilities. Any future development on the proposed project site would comply with applicable regulations concerning construction and demolition waste. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on solid waste services and facilities. e) Energy and Telecommunications Facilities.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, the MIP project would not have significant impacts on energy and telecommunications facilities in the area. The proposed project is not expected to generate additional demand, if any, for energy or telecommunication services beyond that generated by the MIP project. Therefore, it would not place any substantial additional demands on energy and telecommunication facilities. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts on energy and telecommunications facilities.
f) Project Energy Consumption.
As discussed in the MIP EIR, MIP project construction and operations would not consume energy in a manner that is wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. As noted in e) above, the proposed project is not expected to consume substantial amounts of energy beyond that consumed by the MIP project. The proposed project would not have any new or more severe impacts related to energy consumption.
3.15 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
A cumulative impact is an environmental impact that may result from the combination of two or more environmental impacts associated with the proposed project with each other, or the combination of one or more project impacts with related environmental impacts caused by other projects. Cumulative impacts can be analyzed using a “project list” method, which accounts for the contribution of other development activities to possible cumulative impacts, or the “general plan” method, which relies on an analysis of the impacts of community or regional development activities as described in a general, specific plan or regional plan.
Attachment G
MIP Small Parcels Annexation/Prezoning Initial Study 25 August 2024 The potential cumulative environmental effects of the MIP project, including the project’s proposed potable water and storm drainage improvements, were analyzed in the MIP EIR. The MIP EIR considered the potential cumulative environmental impacts of the MIP in the context of the long-range urban development in the City of Stockton through the year 2040, as set forth in the City’s General Plan. The analysis indicated that the MIP would have cumulative environmental impacts that are less than considerable.
The proposed project by itself, including the planned substation, would not contribute substantially to any environmental impacts. Any future development that may occur on the proposed project site would have impacts that at most would be no different than those identified in the MIP EIR.
On some issues, the proposed project would have no impact whatsoever. Any project-specific effects that could be significant would be reduced to a level that would be less than significant through the mitigation measures identified in the MIP EIR and adopted Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (see Appendix C). Based on the analysis in this chapter, none of the potential environmental effects of the proposed project, as addressed individually in this chapter, would combine with other effects to result in a cumulatively considerable effect.
3.16 OTHER CEQA ISSUES
The proposed project would have no new significant and unavoidable impacts, nor would the proposed project contribute substantially to any significant and unavoidable impacts described in the MIP EIR. Future development on the proposed project site would involve the same irreversible commitment of resources, including fuels, as described in the MIP EIR.
The proposed project would be integrated with development of the MIP project. The MIP EIR analyzed growth-inducing impacts of the MIP project and concluded that such impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project would not introduce new or more severe growth- inducing impacts.
Environmental justice has become an issue of concern in the State of California. Although environmental justice is not by itself an environmental issue, projects could have impacts on disadvantaged communities that can be linked to the physical environment. As noted above, the proposed project would have no environmental impacts not otherwise discussed in the MIP EIR.
The proposed project is not located within a disadvantaged community as it was known prior to annexation of the project site. As with the MIP project, future development on the proposed project site would not conflict with General Plan policies that address environmental justice concerns, as the proposed project would not affect any disadvantaged communities. Therefore, the proposed project would have no significant impact on environmental issues related to environmental justice.
Attachment G
APPENDIX C
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK EIR SUMMARY TABLE
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-6 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
4.0 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impact AES-1: Scenic Vistas. Views of scenic vistas already limited; project would not substantially interfere with views.
LS None required. -
Impact AES-2: Scenic Resources. There are no significant scenic resources on the project site. Potential riparian area along North Littlejohns Creek would only be minimally
affected. No other scenic resources or scenic highways are in the area.
LS None required. -
Impact AES-3: Visual Character and Quality. Urban
development would replace existing open space areas. New structures, site improvements, and landscaping would be designed and constructed to meet the aesthetic standards of the City of Stockton. Compliance with these standards would minimize project impacts on public views.
PS AES-1: New structures, landscaping, and site improvements shall conform with Section 5.02 of the City of Stockton Design Guidelines.
LS
Impact AES-4: Light and Glare. Lighting would be installed on properties that currently have none located near existing residences. Compliance with Stockton Municipal Code
Sections 16.36.060(B) and 16.32.070 would minimize light and glare impacts.
PS AES-2: The approved site plan shall conform with the most recent version of the California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11) adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of site plan approval, including compliance with Section 5.106.8, which establishes mandatory requirements for outdoor lighting systems of nonresidential development that are designed to minimize the effects of light pollution.
AES-3: The approved site plan shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Stockton Municipal Code pertaining to lighting, including Sections 16.36.060(B) and 16.32.070, which require exterior lighting to be shielded and directed away from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way. Compliance shall be documented in a photometric (lighting) plan or other documentation acceptable to the City.
AES-4: Prior to final approval, the project shall be submitted to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), acting in its LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-7 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. capacity as the Airport Land Use Commission, for review of the compatibility of the project with Stockton Metropolitan Airport operations and conformance to the guidelines stipulated in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Stockton Metropolitan Airport.
5.0 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland. The southern portion of the project site is classified as Farmland of Local
Importance, which is not Farmland as defined by the CEQA Guidelines. However, the northern portion is classified as Farmland of Statewide Importance, which is Farmland. The City’s Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program and
participation in SJMSCP would compensate for impacts on Farmland but not avoid conversion. [This issue was analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR and was determined to be significant and unavoidable even with mitigating General Plan policies.]
S AG-1: The project shall participate in and comply with the City’s Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program, under which developers of the property shall contribute agricultural mitigation land or shall pay the Agricultural Land Mitigation Fee to the City.
SU
Impact AG-2: Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act. The project site is zoned AG-40 (General Agriculture), which holds land for future urban development. None of the parcels within the project site are under a Williamson Act contract.
LS None required. -
Impact AG-3: Indirect Conversion of Agricultural Lands. The project is in an area designated for urban development, and such development has occurred nearby. The project would not involve any activity that would indirectly convert other agricultural land to non-agricultural uses beyond land
designated Industrial by the Stockton General Plan.
LS None required. -
6.0 AIR QUALITY
Impact AIR-1: Air Quality Plans and Standards –
Construction Emissions. Project construction emissions would not exceed SJVAPCD significance thresholds, thereby being consistent with adopted air quality plans. Dust emissions would be reduced through the required implementation of PS AIR-1: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant/developer shall demonstrate compliance with the SJVAPCD Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) to reduce growth in both NOx and PM10 emissions, as required by SJVAPCD and City requirements.
LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-8 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
SJVAPCD Regulation VIII and the Indirect Source Rule. AIR-2: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII for the control of dust emissions during project construction. A project Dust Control Plan shall be submitted to the SJVAPCD as required by Regulation VIII. Enforcement of Regulation VIII is the direct responsibility of the SJVAPCD. City Building inspectors shall monitor conformance with approved plans and specifications.
AIR-3: Architectural Coatings: Construction plans shall require that architectural and industrial maintenance coatings (e.g., paints) applied on the project site shall be consistent with a VOC content of <10 g/L. Developer or tenant is not expected to exercise control over materials painted offsite.
AIR-4: SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Compliance: Construction plans and specifications shall include a Dust Control Plan incorporating the applicable requirements of Regulation VIII, which shall be submitted to the SJVAPCD for review and approval prior to beginning construction in accordance with the requirements of Regulation VIII.
AIR-5: Construction Worker Trip Reduction: Project construction plans and specifications will require contractor to provide transit and ridesharing information for construction workers.
AIR-6: Construction Meal Destinations: Project construction plans and specifications will require the contractor to establish one or more locations for food or catering truck service to construction workers and to cooperate with food service providers to provide consistent food service.
AIR-7: To reduce impacts from construction -related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available o ff-road construction equipment, including the latest tier equipme nt (recommended by SJVAPCD).
Impact AIR-2: Air Quality Plans and Standards – Operational Emissions. Project operational emissions would not exceed S AIR-8: The project shall comply with the emission reduction SU Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-9 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
SJVAPCD significance thresholds, except for NOx.
Compliance with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 and Additional Air
Quality Improvement Measures (Appendix B) would reduce
NOx emission impacts. However, it cannot be determined if reduction through these measures would make project impacts less than significant. [This issue was analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR and was determined to be significant and unavoidable even with mitigating General Plan policies and EIR measures.]
requirements of SJVAPCD Rule 9510 for project operations.
AIR-9: Prior to building occupancy, employers with 100 or more eligible employees shall submit an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval, as required by SJVAPCD Rule 9410. A copy of the ETRIP shall be provided to the SJVAPCD. Employers shall facilitate participation in the implementation of the ETRIP by providing information to its employees explaining methods for participation in the Plan and the purpose, requirements, and applicability of Rule 9410.
AIR-10: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4101, which prohibits emissions of visible air contaminants to the atmosphere and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants.
AIR-11: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4601,which limits emissions of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings by specifying storage, clean up and labeling requirements. (The project has agreed to abide by more stringent VOC emissions requirements.
AIR-12: Solar Power: Owners, operators or tenants shall include with the building permit application, sufficient solar panels to provide power for the operation’s base power use at the start of operations and as base power use demand increases. Project sponsor shall include analysis of (a) projected power requirements at the start of operations and as base power demand increases
corresponding to the implementation of the “clean fleet” requirements, and (b) generating capacity of the solar installation.
AIR -12 (continued): CDD shall verify the size and scope of the solar project based upon the analysis of the projected power requirements and generating capacity as well as the available solar panel installation space. The photovoltaic system shall include a battery storage system to serve the facility in the event of a power outage to the extent required by the 2022 or later California Building Standards Code.
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-10 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
AIR -12 (continued): In the event sufficient space is not available on the subject lot to accommodate the needed number of solar panels to produce the operation’s base or anticipated power use, the applicant shall demonstrate how all available space has been maximized (e.g., roof, parking areas, etc.). Areas which provide truck movement may be excluded from these calculations unless otherwise deemed acceptable by the supplied reports.
AIR -12 (continued): The developer or tenant, or qualified solar provider engaged by the developer or tenant shall timely order all equipment and shall install the system when the City has approved building permits and the necessary equipment has arrived. The developer or tenant shall commence operation of the system when it has received permission to operate from the utility. The photovoltaic system owner shall be responsible for maintaining the system(s) at not less than 80% of the rated power for 20 years. At the end of the 20-year period, the building owner shall install a new photovoltaic system meeting the capacity and operational requirements of this measure, or continue to maintain the existing system, for the life of the project.
AIR -13: Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Trucks: The following mitigation measu res shall be implemented during all on-going business operations and shall be included as part of contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all on-going operational responsibilities.
The property owner /tenant/les see shall ensure that all heavy -duty trucks (Class 7 and 8) domic iled on the project si te are model year 2014 or later from start of operations and shall expedite a transition to zero-emission vehicles, with the fleet fully zero - emission by December 31, 2025 or when commercially available for the intended application, whichever date is later.
A zero-emission vehicle shall ordinarily be considered
commercially available if the vehicle is capable of serving the intended purpose and is included in California’s Hybrid and Zero- Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project,
https://californiahvip.org/ or listed as available in the US on the Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-11 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Global Commercial Vehicle Drive to Zero inventory,
https://globaldrivetozero.org/. The City shall be responsible for the final determination of commercial availability and may (but is not required to) consult with the California Air Resources Board before making such final determination. In order for the City to make a determination that such vehicles are commercially unavailable, the operator must submit documentation from a minimum of three (3) EV dealers identified on the
californiahvip.org website demonstrating the inability to obtain the required EVs or equipment needed within 6 months.
"Domiciled at the pr oject site shall mean the vehicle is eith er (i) parked or kept overnight at the project site more than 70% of the calendar year or (ii) dedicated to the project site (defined as more than 70% of the truck routes (during the calendar year) that start at the project site even if parked or kept elsewhere)
Zero-emission heav y-duty trucks which require service can be temporarily replaced with m odel year 2 014 or later trucks.
Replacement trucks shall be used for only the minimum time required for servicing fleet trucks.
AIR-14: Zero Emission Vehi cles: The property
owner/tenant/ lessee shall utilize a "clean fleet" of
vehicles/delivery vans/tr ucks (Class 2 through 6) as part of business operations as follows: For any vehi cle (Class 2 through 6) domiciled at the project site, the following "clean fle et" requirements apply: (i) 33% of the fleet will be zero emission vehicles at start of operations, (ii) 65% of the fleet will be zero emission vehicles by December 31, 2023, (iii) 80% of the fleet will be zero emissi on vehicles by December 31, 2025, and ( iv) 100% of the fleet will be zero emission vehicles by December 31, 2027.
"Domiciled at the project site" shall mean the vehicle is either (i) parked or kept overnight at the project site more than 70% of the calendar year or (ii) dedicated to the project site (defined as more than 70% of the truck routes (during the calendar year) that start at Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-12 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. the project site even if parked or kept elsewhere).
Zero-emission vehicles which req uire service can be temporarily replaced with alter nate vehicles. Replacement v ehicles shall be used for only t he minimum time required for servicing fleet vehicles.
The proper ty owner/tenant/lessee shall not be responsi ble to meet "clean fleet" requirem ents for vehicles used by common c arriers operating under their own authority that provide delivery services to or fr om the project site.
AIR-15: Demonstrat e Compliance with Cl ean Fleet
Requirements: The applicant, property owner, tenant, lessee, or other party operating the facility (the "Operator") shall utilize the zero emission vehi cles/trucks required to meet t he "clean fleet" requirements in AIR-13 (for Class 7 and 8 vehicles) and AIR-14 (for Class 2 through 6 vehicles) above. Within 30-days of occupancy, the Operator shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD staff, that the applicabl e clean fleet requiremen ts are being met.
AIR-15 (continued): In the event that vehicles/trucks are not commercially available for the intended application, the " clean fleet requirement s" may be adjusted as minimally as possible by the CDD to accommodate unavailab ility of commerc ially available vehicles/trucks.
AIR-15(continued): The City shall quantify the air pollution and GHG emissions resulting from any modification of this condition. Within 12 months of failing to meet a “clean fleet” requirement the property owner/tenant/lessee shall implement a Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement (VERA)
providing pound for pound mitigation of the criteria
pollutant, toxic air contaminants, and GHG emissions
quantified by the City through a process that develops, funds, and implements emission reduction projects, with the Air District serving a role of administrator of the emission reduction projects and verifier of the successful mitigation Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-13 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. effort. The VERA shall prioritize projects in the South Stockton and surrounding area. Property owner/tenant/lessee shall continue to fund the VERA each year in an amount
necessary to achieve pound for pound mitigation of emissions resulting from not meeting the clean fleet requirements until the owner/tenant/lessee fully complies.
AIR-15 (continued): The Operator shall implement the proposed measures after CDD review and approval. Any extension of time granted to implement this condition shall be limited to the shortest period of time necessary to allow for 100% electrification under the clean fleet requirements. The CDD staff may seek the recommendation of the California Air Resources Board in determining whether there has been a manufacturing disruption or insufficient vehicles/trucks commercially available for the intended application.
AIR-16: C ondition of Approved C ompliance Repor t: The Operator sha ll submit a condition of approval compl iance report within 30 days of, but not later than, the following dates:
December 31, 2023, December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2027.
The report shall outline clean fleet requirements applicable at each report interval and include documentation demonstrating compliance with each requirement. The City shall consid er each report at a noticed public hearing and determine whether the Operator has complied with the applicable clean fleet
requirements. If the Operator has not met each 100% clean fleet requirement by December 3 1, 2027, then the Operator shal l submit subsequent reports every year until the 100% clean fleet requirement is implemente d. The City shall consider each subsequent report at a noticed public hearing and determine whether the Operator has complie d with the clean fleet requirements, including any minimal adjustments to the requirements by the CDD to accommodate the manufacturi ng disruption or unavailability of commercially available vehicles/trucks, as described in the previous paragraph. Notice of the above hearings shall be provided to all properties located within 1,000 feet of the project site and through the ASK Stockton Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-14 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. list serve.
AIR-16 (continued): After the 100% clean fleet requirement has been implemented and confirmed by the CDD, t he Operator s hall submit to the CDD an on -going compliance report every three years containing all necessary documentation to verify that the Operator is meeting the clean fleet requirements. At the time it confirms that the 100% clean fleet requirement has been implemented, the CDD will establish the due date for the first on- going compli ance report . Each subseque nt on-going compliance report shall be due within 30 days of, but not later than, the three- year anniversary of the preceding due date. The on-going compliance reports and accompanying documentation shall be made available to the public upon request.
AIR-17: Zero Emission Forklifts, Yard trucks and Yard
Equipment: Owners, operators or tenants shall require all forklifts, yard trucks, and other equipment used for on-site movement of trucks, trailers and warehoused goods, as well as landscaping maintenance equipment used on the site, to be electrically powered or zero-emission. The owner, operator or tenant shall provide on-site electrical charging facilities to adequately service electric vehicles and equipment.
AIR-18: Truck Idling Restrictions: Owners, operators or tenants shall be required to make their best effort to restrict truck idling onsite to a maximum of three minutes, subject to exceptions defined by CARB in the document:
commercial_vehicle_idling_requirements_July 2016. Idling restrictions shall be enforced by highly-visible posting at the site entry, posting at other on-site locations frequented by truck drivers, conspicuous inclusion in employee training and guidance material and owner, operator or tenant direct action as required.
AIR-19: Electric Truck Charging: At all times during project operation, owners, operators or tenants shall be required to provide electric charging facilities on the project site sufficient to charge all electric trucks domiciled on the site and such facilities shall be made available for all electric trucks that use the project site.
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-15 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
AIR-20: Project Operations, Food Service: Owners, operators or tenants shall establish locations for food or catering truck service and cooperate with food service providers to provide consistent food service to operations employees.
AIR-21: Project Operations, Employee Trip Reduction: Owners, operators or tenants shall provide employees transit route and schedu
le information on systems serving the project area and
coordi
nate ridesharing amongst employees.
AIR-22: Yard Sweeping: Owners, operators or tenants shall provide periodic yard and parking area sweeping to minimize dust generation.
AIR-23: Diesel Generators: Owners, operators or tenants shall prohibit the use of diesel generators, except in emergency situations, in which case such generators shall have Best Available Control Technology (BACT) that meets CARB’s Tier 4 emission standards.
AIR-24: Truck Emission Control: Owners, operators or tenants shall ensure that trucks or truck fleets domiciled at the project site be model year 2014 or later, and maintained consistent with current CARB emission control regulations
AIR-25: SmartWay: Owners, operators or tenants shall enroll and participate the in SmartWay program for eligible businesses AIR-26: Designated Smoking Areas: Owners, operators or tenants shall ensure that any outdoor areas allowing smoking are at least 25 feet from the nearest property line.
AIR-27: Project construction shall be subject to all adopted City building codes, including the adopted Green Building Standards Code, version July 2022 or later. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall demonstrate (e.g., provide building plans) that the proposed buildings are designed and will be built to, at a minimum, meet the Nonresidential Voluntary Measures of the California Green Building Standards code, Divisions A5.1, 5.2 and 5.5, including but not limited to the Tier 2 Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-16 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Impact AIR-3: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants. Rural residences are unlikely to be exposed to high pollutant concentrations. CO concentrations at one street intersection can be reduced through mitigation. NOx
emissions within the DUC area an area designated a
disadvantaged community would be substantially reduced by general plan mitigation measures, conformance with
SJVAPCD rules and regulations and additional mitigation prescribed for Impact AIR-2 above. SJVAPCD rules and
Additional Air Quality Improvement Measures (Appendix B).
However, it cannot be determined if this reduction would have an impact on the disadvantaged community that is less than significant. [This issue was analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR and was determined to be significant and unavoidable even with mitigating General Plan policies and EIR measures.]
S SU
Impact AIR-4: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants. Diesel PM generated by project operations.
Health Risk Assessment conducted for project indicates diesel PM emissions would not adversely affect nearby residences.
LS -
Impact AIR-5: Odors and Other Emissions. Main odor source would be vehicle emissions, which would be localized and would dissipate rapidly.
LS
standards in those Divisions, where applicable, such as the Tier 2 advanced energy efficiency requirements as
outlined under Section
A5.203.1.2.
AIR-28: All tenant lease agreements for the project site shall include a provision requiring the
tenant/lessee to comply with all
applicabl
e requirements of
the MMRP, a copy of which shall b e
attached to each tenant/lease agreement.
AIR-29: The project applicant, to reduce carbon monoxide concentrations to an acceptable level, shall contribute fair- share costs to
an improvement on the Mariposa Road and Carpenter
Road intersection that would
widen the northeast-bound Carpenter
Road approach to include
an exclusive northeast-bound-to
northwest-bound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right -turn lane. (See also Trans
portation Improvement Measure TRANS-2
in Chapt
er 16.0, Transportation.)
Implement all mitigation measures fo
r Impact: AIR-2,
Mitigation Measures #s AIR-8 through AIR-28.
None required.
None required.
-
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-17 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
7.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Special-Status Species and Habitats. Project development would involve the potential for impacts on
foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl and some potential for nesting impacts. Seasonal wetlands may support vernal pool fairy shrimp.
PS BIO-1: The developer shall apply to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) for coverage under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Open Space and Habitat Conservation Plan
(SJMSCP). The project site shall be inspected by the SJMSCP biologist, who will recommend which Incidental Take Minimization Measures (ITMMs) set forth in the SJMSCP should be
implemented. The project applicant shall pay the required SJMSCP fee, if any, and be responsible for the implementation of the specified ITMMs. Setbacks along North Littlejohns Creek shall be as specified in the SJMSCP- approved buffer reduction.
LS
Impact BIO-2: Riparian and Other Sensitive Habitats.
Riparian corridor along North Littlejohns Creek would be minimally affected by installation of an outfall. No other sensitive habitats would be affected.
LS None required -
Impact BIO-3: Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands. North
Littlejohns Creek, a ditch, and five seasonal wetlands have been identified as potential Waters of the U.S or State wetlands.
PS BIO-2: Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall conduct a wetland delineation identifying jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and wetlands. The delineation shall be verified by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The delineation shall be used to determine if any project work will encroach upon any jurisdictional water, thereby necessitating an appropriate permit. For any development work that may affect a delineated jurisdictional Water, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to the start of development work within these locations. Depending on the Corps permit issued, the project applicant shall also apply for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, , or if phased development occurs in areas where no wetlands have been identified, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
BIO-3: Prior to the start of construction work in North Littlejohns Creek, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board. The project developer shall comply LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-18 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. with all conditions attached to any required permit.
BIO-4: Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall obtain any necessary Waste Discharge Requirements from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pursuant to the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, the filling of seasonal wetlands containing vernal pool invertebrates shall be delayed until the wetlands are dry and SJCOG biologists can collect the surface soils from the wetlands, to store them for future use on off-site seasonal wetland creation on SJOCG preserve lands. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
Impact BIO-4: Fish and Wildlife Migration. Several trees in the project vicinity that are suitable for nesting raptors and other protected bird species, including migratory species.
PS Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. LS
Impact BIO-5: Local Biological Requirements. Valley oak, a species protected by City’s Heritage Tree Ordinance, was identified along North Littlejohns Creek.
PS BIO-5: If removal of any oak tree on the project site is required, a certified arborist shall survey the oak trees proposed for removal to determine if they are Heritage Trees as defined in Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The arborist report with its findings shall be submitted to the City’s Community Development Department. If Heritage Trees are determined to exist on the property, removal of any such tree shall require a permit to be issued by the City in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The permittee shall comply with all permit conditions, including tree replacement at specified ratios.
LS
Impact BIO-6: Habitat Conservation Plans. Project would participate in the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Open Space and Habitat Conservation Plan
PS Implement Mitigation Measure DEIRBIO-1. LS
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CULT-1: Historical Resources. No historical
resources have been recorded on the project site.
NI None required. -
Impact CULT-2: Archaeological and Tribal Cultural
Resources. No archaeological or tribal cultural resources were PS CULT-1: If any subsurface archaeological resources, including human burials and associated funerary objects, are encountered LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-19 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. identified on the project site. However, a Sacred Land has been recorded nearby, and it is possible that unknown cultural resources may be uncovered during project construction. during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified archaeologist can examine these materials and evaluate their significance. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. If burial resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered, the City shall notify the appropriate tribal representative, who may examine the materials with the
archaeologist and advise the City as to their significance.
The archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal representative if contacted, shall recommend mitigation measures needed to reduce potential cultural resource effects to a level that is less than significant in a written report to the City, with a copy to the tribal representative. The City shall be responsible for implementing the report recommendations. Avoidance is the preferred means of disposition of tribal cultural resources. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
CULT-2: The project shall comply with the provisions of the City of Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.36.050. If a historical or archaeological resource or human remains may be impacted by the project, the Secretary of the Cultural Heritage Board shall be notified, any survey needed to determine the significance of the resource shall be conducted, and the proper environmental documents shall be prepared.
CULT-3: In the event that archaeological resources are discovered during any construction, construction activities shall cease, and the Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may occur in compliance with State and federal law.
Impact CULT-3: Human Burials. The Yokuts representative indicated that Native American burials have occurred in the project vicinity. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) and the Stockton Municipal Code describe procedures to be followed PS CULT-4: If project construction encounters evidence of human burial or scattered human remains, the contractor shall immediately notify the County Coroner and the City, which shall in turn notify the appropriate tribal representative. The City shall notify other LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-20 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. when human remains are uncovered in a location outside a dedicated cemetery. Additional mitigation is prescribed for treatment of Native American remains.
federal and State agencies as required. The City will be responsible for compliance with the requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and with any direction provided by the County Coroner.
If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will notify and appoint a Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant will work with the archaeologist to decide the proper treatment of the human remains and any associated funerary objects in accordance with California Public Resources Code Sections 5097.98 and 5097.991. Avoidance is the preferred means of disposition of the burial resources.
CULT-5: In the event human remains are discovered during any construction, construction activities shall cease, and the County Coroner and Community Development Director shall be notified immediately in compliance with CEQA Guidelines 15064.5 (d). A qualified archaeologist shall be contacted to evaluate the situation. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner shall notify the NAHC within 24 hours of this identification. The NAHC will identify the most likely descendent of the Native American to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. [Note: this is similar to EIR Mitigation Measure CULT-2.]
9.0 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact GEO-1: Faulting and Seismicity. There are no active or potentially active faults within or near the project site. The project site would be exposed to seismic shaking, but
compliance with the adopted California Building Code would minimize seismic hazards.
PS GEO-1: The project shall obtain a Notice of Intent issued by the SWRCB for compliance with the Construction General Permit. The project shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including a site map, description of construction activities and identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction-related pollutants.
GEO-2: The project applicant shall comply with Stockton Municipal LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-21 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Code Section 15.48.050, which requires construction activities to be designed and conducted to minimize discharge of sediment and all other pollutants and Section 15.48.070, which contains standards for implementation of Best Management Practices.
Impact GEO-2: Other Geologic Hazards. The project site is not prone to landslide hazards or subsidence. Liquefaction and other soil instability on the project site are considered unlikely, but no information specific to the site is available.
LS None required. -
Impact GEO-3: Soil Erosion. Project construction activities would loosen the soil, leaving it exposed to potential water and wind erosion. Project would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit, which has conditions that would reduce soil erosion impact, as would the City’s Storm Water Management Program, the Stockton Municipal Code, and
SJVAPCD Regulation VIII.
PS GEO-3: The project applicant shall submit a geologic soils report, prepared by a registered civil engineer, in compliance with Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.192.020. The report’s recommendations shall be incorporated into the final design and construction plans.
GEO-4: Project plans and specifications shall comply with the most recent version of the California Building Code adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of project approval.
LS
Impact GEO-4: Expansive Soils. Project site soils have high shrink-swell potential.
LS None required. -
Impact GEO-5: Paleontological Resources and Unique
Geological Features. The project site does not contain unique geological features or any known paleontological resources; however, project construction could unearth previously
unknown paleontological materials of significance.
PS GEO-5: If any subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified paleontologist can examine these materials, initially evaluate their significance and, if potentially significant, recommend measures on the disposition of the resource. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
LS
Impact GEO-6: Access to Mineral Resources. There are no identified mineral resource areas on the project site.
NI None required. -
10.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impact GHG-1: Project GHG Construction Emissions and
Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies. Unmitigated PS GHG-1: The project shall implement the Off-Road Vehicles Best Management Practices specified in the Stockton Climate Action SU
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-22 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. construction GHG emissions would be reduced by Additional Air Quality Improvement Measures (Appendix B),
compliance with applicable State and SJVAPCD rules and
regulations, and additional mitigation. However, since these measures cannot be precisely quantified, and no quantified thresholds applicable to GHG construction emissions are available, it cannot be stated with certainty that GHG
emissions would be reduced to a level that is considered less than significant. [GHG construction emissions were not
specifically analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR.] Plan. At least three (3) percent of the construction vehicle and equipment fleet shall be powered by electricity. Construction equipment and vehicles shall not idle their engines for longer than three (3) minutes.
GHG-2: The project applicant shall comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the California Air Resources Board’s Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleets, which applies to all self- propelled off-road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater used in California and most two-engine vehicles (except on-road two-engine sweepers). These provisions include imposing limits on idling and requiring a written idling policy. It also requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or by installing Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (i.e., exhaust retrofits).
AIR-1: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 for project
construction.
AIR-2: Comply with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII for the control of dust emissions, submit a project Dust Control Plan.
AIR-3: Architectural Coatings: VOC content of <10 g/L.
AIR-4: Comply with SJVAPCD: Repeats EMM-2.
AIR-5: Provide transit and ridesharing information for construction workers.
AIR-6: Contractor to locations for food or catering truck service to construction workers.
AIR-7: Use cleanest available off-road construction equipment (recommended by SJVAPCD).
Impact GHG-2: Project GHG Operational Emissions and
Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies. Unmitigated operational GHG emissions would be reduced by project
features, compliance with regulations consistent with
Stockton Climate Action Plan and with State and SJVAPCD LS AIR-8: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 requirements for project operations.
AIR-9: Employers with 100 employees shall submit an Employer -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-23 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. plans, and Additional Air Quality Improvement Measures
(Appendix B).
Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval.
AIR-10: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4101prohibiting emissions of visible air contaminants.
AIR-11: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule4601 limiting VOC emissions from architectural coatings.
AIR-12:Buildings to be solar ready and install solar panels to provide power for operational base power use.
AIR-13: Emission standards for heavy-duty trucks (Class 7 and 8) domiciled on the project site, clean vehicle requirements.
AIR-14: Zero Emission Vehicles: Emission standards for
vehicles/delivery vans/trucks (Class 2 through 6), clean vehicle requirements.
AIR-15:Demonstrate compliance with “clean fleet” requirements in AIR-13 and AIR-14 within 30-days of occupancy. Operator shall submit Clean Fleet condition of approval compliance report at December 31, 2023, 2025 and 2027, tri-annually afterward. In the event of a disruption in clean fleet supply, the applicant will implement a Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement (VERA).
AIR-16:Submittal of Clean Fleet condition of approval compliance report within 30 days of, but not later than, the following dates:
December 31, 2023, December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2027.
AIR-17: Requirement for forklifts, yard trucks and yard equipment, all zero emission.
AIR-18: Limit truck idling to a maximum of three minutes.
AIR-19: Operators to provide electric truck charging facility.
AIR-20: Operators to provide location for food or catering truck Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-24 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. service.
AIR-21: Operators to provide employees with alternative commute information.
AIR-22: Yard Sweeping: Operators to provide periodic yard and parking area sweeping to minimize dust generation.
AIR-23: Diesel Generators: Operators shall prohibit the use of diesel generators.
AIR-24: Emission controls for trucks or truck fleets domiciled at the project site.
AIR-25: Operators participate in EPA SmartWay.
AIR-26: Operators shall designate smoking areas at least 25 feet from the nearest property line.
AIR-27:Project construction is subject to adopted City building codes, including adopted Green Building Standards Code, Tier 2 advanced energy efficiency requirements for specified divisions.
AIR-28:Tenant lease agreements to include required compliance with all applicable requirements of the MMRP.
11.0 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-1: Hazardous Material Transportation and
Storage. Proposed warehouses may store finished goods or raw materials considered hazardous. Compliance with
applicable local, state, and federal regulations would
minimize impacts.
PS HAZ-1: New business on the project site that may handle quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 55 gallons of a liquid, 500 pounds of a solid, or 200 cubic feet of a compressed gas at any given time shall submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan to the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) of San Joaquin County. The Hazardous Materials Business Plan shall include an inventory of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes and an emergency response plan for incidents involving hazardous LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-25 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. materials and wastes.
HAZ-2: Proposed business uses that involve the manufacture, storage, handling, or processing of hazardous materials in sufficient quantities that would require s Hazardous Materials Business Plan and the use is within 1,000 feet of a residential zoning district, the project shall comply with Stockton Municipal Code Section
16.36.080, which governs use, handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials.
Impact HAZ-2: Hazardous Material Releases. Project
construction and operations create a potential for hazardous material releases. The required SWPPP and other typical contractor practices shall minimize construction impacts.
Compliance with applicable local, state, and federal
regulations would minimize operational impacts. No schools are located within one-quarter mile of the project site.
PS GEO-1: The project shall obtain a Notice of Intent issued by the SWRCB for compliance with the Construction General Permit. The project shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including a site map, description of construction activities and identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction-related pollutants.
GEO-2: The project applicant shall comply with Stockton Municipal Code Section 15.48.050, which requires construction activities to be designed and conducted to minimize discharge of sediment and all other pollutants and Section 15.48.070, which contains standards for implementation of Best Management Practices.
LS
Impact HAZ-3: Hazardous Material Sites. No active
hazardous material sites were identified on or adjacent to project site. Soil sampling as part of a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment did not indicate soil contamination on the project site.
LS None required. -
Impact HAZ-4: Airport Hazards. The project site is within Compatibility Zone 7b as established by the Stockton
Metropolitan Airport ALUCP. Proposed development would
be consistent with allowable land uses in this zone.
PS MM HAZ-3: The project shall be submitted to the San Joaquin County Airport Land Use Commission for review of project- associated objects that exceed 100 feet in height.
LS
Impact HAZ-5: Interference with Emergency Vehicle Access and Evacuations. Neither project construction nor operations would require closure or any major restriction on use of adjacent roads. Once construction work is completed, project LS None required. -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-26 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. development would not obstruct any roads.
Impact HAZ-6: Wildfire Hazards. Project is in an urbanizing area and has not been designated a fire hazard area by Cal Fire.
LS None required. -
12.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HYDRO-1: Surface Water Resources and Quality.
Construction activities could loosen soils that could
eventually enter nearby surface waters, as well as debris and deposits from project operations. Compliance with applicable water quality plans, permits, and regulations would minimize impacts. Project development will be required to submit storm water management plans for the project that shall include construction erosion and sedimentation controls as well as post-construction Best Management Practices.
PS Implement storm water quality protections described in GEO-1 HYDRO-1: Industrial uses on the project shall obtain coverage under the Central Valley RWQCB Industrial General Permit program and implement pollution control measures using the best available technology economically achievable and best conventional pollutant control technology. All facility operators shall prepare, retain on site, and implement a SWPPP implementing applicable Industrial General Permit requirements, including a monitoring program.
Impact HYDRO-2: Groundwater Resources and Quality.
Project would be served by the City’s water system, which relies in part on groundwater. Project can be accommodated from City’s existing supplies without requiring additional groundwater. Project would be subject to Groundwater
Sustainability Plan for basin, which include direct and in-lieu recharge projects.
LS None required. -
Impact HYDRO-3: Drainage Patterns and Runoff. Project
would alter existing drainage patterns and runoff volumes, but project features would reduce impacts. Issues associated with water quality of runoff would be mitigated.
LS None required. -
Impact HYDRO-4: Release of Pollutants in Flood, Tsunami, and Seiche Zones. Only a small portion of the project site is within a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain, and no
buildings using or storing hazardous materials would be located there. The project site would not be subject to flooding from dam or levee failure or from seiches or
tsunamis.
LS None required. -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-27 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Impact HYDRO-5: Consistency with Water Quality and
Groundwater Management Plans. The project would comply
with applicable water quality plans and be consistent with the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
LS None required. -
13.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
Impact LUP-1: Division of Communities. The area
surrounding the project site is a combination of vacant parcels, agricultural uses, and rural residential and
commercial development. This does not constitute a
community that could be divided by the project.
NI None required. -
Impact LUP-2: Conflict with Applicable Plans, Policies, and Regulations. The project would be consistent with the policies of the Stockton General Plan. Project may conflict with LAFCo policies preserving agricultural land, but project would be subject to the City’s Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program. Project site is consistent with development
standards for Compatibility Zone 7b of the Stockton
Metropolitan Airport ALUCP.
LS None required. -
Impact LUP-3: Inducement of Population Growth. While the warehouse development would provide employment
opportunities, these opportunities are expected to be filled mainly by existing residents. The project would not induce population growth beyond that anticipated in the Stockton General Plan.
LS None required. -
Impact LUP-4: Displacement of Housing and People. The
project site has single-family residences that would be demolished. However, there is available housing in the
Stockton area to accommodate any displaced persons.
LS None required. -
14.0 NOISE
Impact NOISE-1: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of
Standards-Traffic. Traffic generated under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions would increase S NOISE-1: The applicant, the City of Stockton and other project developers impacting Mariposa Road traffic shall consider the use of noise-reducing pavement and utilize it where feasible in planned SU
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-28 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. traffic noise levels along segments of Mariposa Road that would exceed City Noise Element standards. [This issue was analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR and was
determined to be significant and unavoidable.]
widening projects for Mariposa Road.
Impact NOISE-2: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of
Standards-Other Project Noise. Noise from trailer parking and truck loading/unloading could affect nearby sensitive land uses, mainly residences.
PS NOISE-2: Sound walls and/or berms 10 feet in height shall be required where existing residential uses or residentially zoned areas are located adjacent to the project site. Figure 3 of the project noise study (Figure 14-2 of this EIR) shows the locations of the recommended sound walls based on the proposed conceptual plan.
Site plan modifications, and/or additional noise analysis by a qualified acoustical consultant may warrant changes to these requirements, assuming that compliance with City noise standards is maintained.
NOISE-3: Project operation shall at all times comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.60, including Section 16.60.040, which states that new or expanded commercial, industrial, and other land use-related noise sources shall mitigate their noise levels such that they do not adversely impact noise- sensitive land uses (e.g., residences) and do not exceed City noise standards.
LS
Impact NOISE-3: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of
Standards-Construction. Construction activities may
potentially increase ambient noise above City standards at nearby residences.
PS NOISE-4: Construction activities associated with the project shall adhere to the requirements of the City of Stockton Municipal Code with respect to hours of operation. The applicant shall ordinarily limit construction activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sundays or national holidays without a written permit from the City. All construction equipment shall be in good working order and shall be fitted with factory-equipped mufflers.
NOISE-5: Project construction comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.60, including Section
16.60.030, which contains restrictions on construction noise, including operating or causing the operation of tools or equipment LS
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-29 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. on private property used in alteration, construction, demolition, drilling, or repair work between the 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. [Proposed EIR mitigation measure NOISE-2 more restrictive on construction days and hours.]
Impact NOISE-4: Groundborne Vibrations. Earth-moving
equipment may generate some groundborne vibrations, but not at levels distinctly perceptible by sensitive receptors or threatening to structures.
LS None required. -
Impact NOISE-5: Airport and Airstrip Noise. The project site is outside noise contours established by the Stockton
Metropolitan Airport ALUCP. No private airstrips are in the vicinity.
NI None required. -
15.0 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Impact PSR-1: Fire Protection Service. New or expanded
facilities may be required in the future, but project would not trigger this requirement. Public Facility Fees will be paid, and future facilities would be subject to CEQA review.
Recommended Fire Service Protection Improvement
Measures discussed in the EIR include Early Suppression Fast Response sprinkler systems.
PS PSR-1: Project buildings shall include an Early Suppression, Fast Response (ESFR) fire sprinkler system.
PSR-2: City departments, including Fire, Community Development, and Finance, together with industrial project proponents, shall develop and implement a plan for financing, construction and staffing of a new fire station in the vicinity of the project site.
Development and implementation of the plan will involve a multi- year process helping the Department meet increasing service demands and to reduce response times. The project applicant shall contribute to the costs of constructing and staffing the new fire station in accordance with the adopted plan.
LS
Impact PSR-2: Police Protection Services. New or expanded facilities may be required in the future, but project would not trigger this requirement. Public Facility Fees will be paid, and future facilities would be subject to CEQA review.
LS None required. -
Impact PSR-3: Schools. The project involves industrial
development, which does not directly generate new student load. New industrial development would be responsible for LS None required. -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-30 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only. the payment of school impact fees.
Impact PSR-4: Parks and Recreational Services. The project would not involve any direct effects on parks or recreational facilities, nor would it generate a demand for new or
expanded recreational facilities or services.
LS None required. -
Impact PSR-5: Other Public Facilities. The project would not generate additional demand for library, hospital, and
courthouse services, and therefore would not require new or expanded facilities.
LS None required. -
16.0 TRANSPORTATION
Impact TRANS-1: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-
Intersections. Under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions, only four intersections affected by the project would not operate at LOS above minimally acceptable City of Stockton standards. Recommended Intersection
Improvement Measures would improve LOS at two
intersections, while other two intersections would not require improvements. LOS is not a measure of CEQA impacts.
Not applicable
under LOS
analysis
TRANS-1: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and 8th Street/Farmington Road intersection that would split the northeast-bound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeast-bound through lane and a “free” northeast-bound-to-southeast-bound right-turn lane. Existing pavement width is considered adequate to accommodate this improvement.
TRANS-2: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and Carpenter Road intersection that would widen the northeast-bound Carpenter Road approach to include an exclusive northeast-bound-to northwest- bound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right-turn lane. (See also Mitigation Measure AIR-1 in Chapter 6.0, Air Quality.) -
Impact TRANS-2: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-
Roadway Segments. Under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Project conditions, only two roadway segments affected by the project would not operate at LOS above minimally acceptable City of Stockton standards. Recommended
Roadway Segment Improvement Measure would improve
LOS at one segment, while other segment would not require improvements. LOS is not a measure of CEQA impacts.
Not applicable
under LOS
analysis
TRANS-3: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the segment of Mariposa Road from SR 99 to 8th Street/Farmington Road that would widen the portions of this roadway segment that are currently one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
-
Impact TRANS-3: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Ramp Junctions. Under Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus
Not applicable
under LOS
None. -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-31 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Project conditions, three ramp junctions affected by the project would not operate at LOS above minimally acceptable City of Stockton standards. However, these facilities would operate within standards of the City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines. LOS is not a measure of CEQA impacts.
analysis
Impact TRANS-4: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Truck Routes. Project proposes STAA truck routes; however, this would not conflict significantly with motor vehicle
transportation plans applicable to trucks.
LS None required. -
Impact TRANS-5: Conflicts with Non-Motor Vehicle
Transportation Plans. The project would not conflict with non-motor vehicle transportation plans or their
implementation.
LS None required. -
Impact TRANS-6: Consistency with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3(b). The project would generate increases in VMT. Mitigation is expected to reduce the amount of VMT generated, but it would not be reduced by a level indicated by Stockton General Plan standard. [This issue was not analyzed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR.]
PS TRANS-1: The project shall provide "end-of-trip" facilities for bicycle riders to encourage the use of bicycling as a viable form of travel to destinations, especially to work. End-of-trip facilities shall include showers, secure bicycle lockers, and changing spaces.
TRANS-2: The project shall implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work, while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges shall be set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
TRANS-3: The project shall implement SJVAPCD Rule 9410. Rule 9410, which requires employers with at least 100 employees to implement a trip reduction/transportation demand management program, or ETRIP. [See Air Quality section above.] ETRIP requirements are consistent with a Commute Trip Reduction program recommended by the traffic impact study as a mitigation measure. See also EIR Mitigation Measures TRANS-1 and TRANS- 2, which require "end-of-trip" facilities and an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle.
SU
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-32 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Impact TRANS-7: Safety Hazards. The traffic impact study did not identify any traffic hazards that would result from the project. Project construction would involve routine but potential traffic hazards, but contractors will be required to provide traffic safety control as warranted.
LS None required. -
Impact TRANS-8: Emergency Access. Adequate emergency
access would be provided to the project site.
LS None required. -
17.0 UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Impact UTIL-1: Wastewater Services and Facilities. City has adequate capacity at its treatment plant to accommodate project. Existing sewer lines are in vicinity.
LS None required. -
Impact UTIL-2: Water Services and Facilities. City has
adequate water supplies for project. Existing water lines are in vicinity.
LS None required. -
Impact UTIL-3: Stormwater Services and Facilities. Project would not connect to City’s drainage system, but would
provide own system that would collect and discharge runoff to North Littlejohns Creek without causing downstream
flooding or reduced water quality.
LS None required. -
Impact UTIL-4: Solid Waste. Existing landfills in the County would have adequate capacity to accommodate project solid waste. The project would comply with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
PS UTIL-1: As a Condition of Approval, the project applicant shall comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Sections
8.28.020 through 8.28.070 regarding construction and demolition waste. Permit applicants for the project shall be required to meet the waste diversion requirement of at least 50 percent of materials generated as discards by the project, regardless of whether the permit applicant performs the work or hires contractors, subcontractors, or others to perform the work.
LS
Impact UTIL-5: Energy and Telecommunications Facilities.
Existing electrical, natural gas, and telephone lines are available near the project site.
LS None required. -
Attachment G
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Before Significance After
Potential Impact Mitigation Mitigation Measures Mitigation
Mariposa Industrial Park Final EIR 2-33 November 2022
Notes: S = Significant, PS = Potentially Significant, LS = Less than Significant, NI = No Impact, SU = Significant and Unavoidable (SU impacts addressed in the Stockton General Plan EIR)
* Not mitigation measures, as they address issues not considered environmental impacts per CEQA Guidelines. Presented for informational purposes only.
Impact UTIL-6: Project Energy Consumption. The project
would not consume energy in a manner that is wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary.
PS UTIL-2: As a Condition of Approval, the project applicant shall comply with the most recent version of the California Energy Code adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of project approval.
AIR-9: Employers with 100 employees shall submit an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval.
AIR-12: Buildings to be solar ready and install solar panels to provide power for operational base power use.
LS
Attachment G
APPENDIX D
ADOPTED MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
Attachment G
EXHIBIT 3 - MMRP
MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK
City of Stockton, CA
State Clearinghouse No: 2020120283
City of Stockton Project No. P20-0805
November 22, 2022
Prepared for:
CITY OF STOCKTON
345 N. El Dorado Street
Stockton, CA 95202
(209) 937-8266
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan Page 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document is the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Mariposa Industrial Park project, as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The primary source document for the MMRP is the Environmental Impact Report for the Mariposa Industrial Park Project (SCH# 2020120283) (the "EIR"). When referenced as such, the “EIR” for the project includes the Public Review Draft EIR (the DEIR) dated August 24, 2021 and the certified Revised Final EIR (the FEIR) dated November 15, 2022, as well as any documents that have been incorporated into the DEIR and FEIR by reference.
1.1 P URPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency prepare and certify an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) when a proposed project may involve significant environmental effects, as defined by CEQA. Prior to project approval, the Lead Agency must adopt an MMRP that lists all mitigation measures identified in the certified EIR and describes responsibility for their implementation and/or monitoring.
The mitigation measures are listed together with implementation and monitoring responsibility in the table following.
CEQA also requires that the Lead Agency make written findings specific to each of the significant environmental effects or potentially significant environmental effects of the project as described in the EIR. The “CEQA Findings” for the Mariposa Industrial Park project, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations, are contained in a separate document to be adopted by the Stockton City Council.
The proposed project, a summary of the project’s environmental review process, the environmental documentation prepared for the project, and mitigation measures that must be implemented in conjunction with the project are discussed below.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves annexation and pre-zoning of the project site and approval of plans for industrial development of approximately 203 acres of land located adjacent to and south of Mariposa Road. The project site, consisting of nine parcels, is in the San Joaquin County unincorporated area, adjacent to the southeastern limits of the City of Stockton. The site location is shown on the attached figures.
The project would involve the development of “high-cube” warehousing and storage buildings that are typically 200,000 square feet of floor area or greater. The conceptual site plan for the project site proposes seven buildings with a maximum height of 36 feet and floor area totaling 3.6 million square feet including ancillary office space. Project site Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan Page 2 development would also include the construction of circulation and parking for light vehicles and trucks, utilities and landscaping. Access would be developed from Mariposa Road; improvements would include widening of Mariposa Road to accommodate turn pockets and acceleration/deceleration lanes.
1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT UNDER
CEQA
The project’s environmental effects, mitigation measures needed to address these effects and alternatives to the project are discussed in detail the EIR prepared by the City of Stockton in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. EIR processing steps have included preparation and distribution of a Notice of Preparation, a scoping meeting, publication and distribution of a Draft EIR for public review, preparation of a Final EIR addressing comments received during the public review period for City Council certification, and preparation of a CEQA Findings document and this Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan for adoption by the Stockton City Council. Additional detail regarding the CEQA processing of the project can be found in the Revised Final EIR, which is incorporated by reference below.
Revised Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mariposa Industrial Park Project, Stockton, CA. November 15, 2022. Prepared for City of Stockton Department of Community Development, 345 N. El Dorado Street, Stockton, CA 95202. Prepared by BaseCamp Environmental, Inc., 802 West Lodi Avenue, Lodi, CA 95240. State Clearinghouse Number 2020120283.
Attachment G
ampB Case
Figure 1
REGIONAL LOCATION MAPBaseCamp Environmental
Humboldt
San Diego Imperial
Orange
Riverside
San Bernardino
Los AngelesVentura
Santa Barbara
KernSan Luis
Obispo
Inyo
Tulare
KingsMonterey
FresnoSan
Benito
Mono
Madera
Mariposa
Tuolumne
Calaveras
Amador
El Dorado
Sacra-
mento
Alpine
Santa
Clara
San
Joaquin
Contra
Costa
Merced
Marin
Napa
Yolo
Solano
Sutter
Placer
Nevada
Sierra
Plumas
ButteGlenn
Lake
Mendocino
LassenShasta
Tehama
Trinity
Colusa Yuba
Sonoma
StanislausAlameda
Santa Cruz
San Mateo
San Francisco
w w w .c s a c .c ounti e s .o r g
PROJECT LOCATION
®
tt.. Morada
Lil'ltlen
@ Lil'\Coln
,tillage
@
sanJo
~(,,0
1}i-, stoc\<.\OO
©
er
r'olt
ii
®
French earn?
p.tlanta -
@)
Attachment G
Figure 2
ASSESSOR PARCEL MAPBaseCamp Environmental
PROJECT SITE
SOURCE: SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ASSESSOR
PARCEL OFFICE.
THE PROJECT INCLUDES PARCELS:
179-220-019, 018,017,016,015,014, 013, 012,
011, 010, 024, 046
--\ ---------\ s£C,69 -- -- PTN. OF PAR. 6
"'·"Ai'..--,o @ --.,.\'Ji.C, ~
------ s(C,60 \ 54,SJACS
\
2649.44
<:-89'56'E.
\
\
THIS MAP IS FOR ASSESSMENT USE ONLY 179-22
NOTE: -Assessor's Parcel Numbers Shown in Circles.
Assessor's Block Numbers Shown in Ellipses.
Attachment G
ampB Case
Figure 3
PROPOSED ANNEXATION AND PREZONINGBaseCamp Environmental
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
AND PREZONING BOUNDARY
PROPOSED PREZONING: AG-40
(COUNTY) TO IL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
EXISTING
CITY LIMITS
EXISTING ZONING: IL - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
6-STTJ.C'-l.'t~
P,i/ PA'
lffll/JN:S,-HCT
---__ ..,...
__ _,
rl'·';J.DJ'
-- 4
<3:i
1H.8f lc:i. .W.11
Attachment G
D A O R A O G R A F R A M
BLDG 3
FOOTPRINT: 1,021,440 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 4
FOOTPRINT:1,021,440 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 1
FOOTPRINT: 670,320 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 2
FOOTPRINT: 637,450 SF
CLR. HGT: 36'
BLDG 6
100,980 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
DETENTION
570' 570'
570' 570'
170'
1792' 1792'
594'
1176' 1176'
D A O R K R A L C
BLDG 7
100,980 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
170'
594'
BLDG 5
64,260 SF
CLR. HGT:
32'
378'
MARIPOSA ROAD
scheme: 1
ampB Case
Figure 4
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLANBaseCamp Environmental
SOURCE: Ware Malcomb
+ +
H-.
,--,-
IE -I
I. _.1._
I l-
1--f I
OCHOA
2008-149798
--- PARCEL 2
Attachment G
Mariposa Industrial Park, Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan Page 7
2.0 MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM
CEQA requires more than just preparing environmental documents; it also requires the Lead Agency to change or place conditions on a project, or to adopt plans or ordinances for a broader class of projects, which would address the potentially significant or significant environmental effects of a project. To ensure that mitigation measures within the Lead Agency’s purview are actually implemented, CEQA requires the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and/or reporting program (MMRP). Specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(d) requires that a public agency, when making findings for the significant impacts of a project,
“shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures." Mitigation measures that are not feasible, or are within the jurisdiction of other agencies, are addressed through the findings required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and shown in the CEQA Findings document for the project.
The Revised FEIR for the Mariposa Industrial Park project sets forth a series of mitigation measures that are applicable to the project and will address the potentially significant effects of the project. The following table summarizes the potentially significant environmental effects that could result from approval of the Mariposa Industrial Park project as described in the EIR. The table identifies 1) each effect, 2) how each significant effect would be mitigated, 3) the responsibility for implementation of each mitigation measure, and 4) the responsibility for monitoring of each of the mitigation measures. The table follows the same sequence as the impact analysis in the EIR.
The mitigation measures shown in the table include those arising from the analysis and conclusions of the Draft EIR as well as additional mitigation measures resulting from public and agency comments on the Draft EIR, an initial version of the Final EIR dated February 28, 2022 and further discussion with the comment authors in the months leading up to this publication. The comments received on the EIR and the City’s responses to those comments are discussed in Chapter 22.0 of the Revised Final EIR.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 1
4.0 AESTHETICS
Impact AES-3: Visual Character and Quality. This is a potentially significant impact.
AES-1: New structures, landscaping, and site improvements shall conform with Section 5.02 of the City of Stockton Design Guidelines.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in the approved
plans and specifications.
Impact AES-4: Light and Glare. This is a potentially significant issue.
AES-2: The approved site plan shall conform with the most recent version of the California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11) adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of site plan approval, including compliance with Section 5.106.8, which establishes mandatory requirements for outdoor lighting systems of nonresidential development that are designed to minimize the effects of light pollution.
AES-3: The approved site plan shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Stockton Municipal Code pertaining to lighting, including Sections 16.36.060(B) and 16.32.070, which require exterior lighting to be shielded and directed away from adjoining properties and public rights-of-way. Compliance shall be documented in a photometric (lighting) plan or other documentation acceptable to the City.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in the approved
plans and specifications.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 2
AES-4: Prior to final approval, the project shall be submitted to the SanJoaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), acting in its capacity as the Airport Land Use Commission, for review of the compatibility of the project with Stockton Metropolitan Airport operations and conformance to the guidelines stipulated in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Stockton Metropolitan Airport.
CDD Planning staff is
responsible for submitting
project information to
ALUC.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
ALUC review is completed,
and any applicable
requirements incorporated are
into conditions of approval
5.0 AGRICULTURE
Conversion of Farmland. This is a significant impact.
AG-1: The project shall participate in and comply with the City’s Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program, under which developers of the property shall contribute agricultural mitigation land or shall pay the Agricultural Land Mitigation Fee to the City.
Applicant is responsible
for easement dedication or
fee payment.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
agricultural program
compliance is completed.
6.0 A IR QUALITY
Air Quality Plans and Standards – Construction Emissions. This is a potentially significant issue.
AIR-1: Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant/developer shall demonstrate compliance with the SJVAPCD Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) to reduce growth in both NOx and PM10 emissions, as required by SJVAPCD and City requirements.
Same as AIR-3 Same as AIR-3
AIR-2: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII for the control of dust emissions during project construction. A project Dust Control Plan shall be Applicant is responsible
for submittal of technical
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 3
submitted to the SJVAPCD as required by Regulation VIII. Enforcement of Regulation VIII is the direct responsibility of the SJVAPCD. City Building inspectors shall monitor conformance with approved plans and specifications. assessment. assessment
AIR-3: Architectural Coatings: Construction plans shall require that architectural and industrial maintenance coatings (e.g., paints) applied on the project site shall be consistent with a VOC content of <10 g/L. Developer or tenant is not expected to exercise control over materials painted offsite.
Applicant is responsible
for submittal of technical
assessment.
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
assessment
AIR-4 SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Compliance: Construction plans and specifications shall include a Dust Control Plan incorporating the applicable requirements of Regulation VIII, which shall be submitted to the SJVAPCD for review and approval prior to beginning construction in accordance with the requirements of Regulation VIII.
Applicant is responsible
for compliance with AQ-2
and AQ-3
CDD Planning is responsible
for ensuring compliance has
been completed.
AIR-5: Construction Worker Trip Reduction: Project construction plans and specifications will require contractor to provide transit and ridesharing information for construction workers.
Applicant is responsible
for required analysis
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
analysis
AIR-6: Construction Meal Destinations: Project construction plans and specifications will require the contractor to establish one or more locations for food or catering truck service to construction workers and to cooperate with food service providers to provide consistent food service.
Applicant is responsible
for Rule 9510 compliance
and submittal of
documentation to the City.
CDD Planning is responsible
for ensuring compliance has
been completed.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 4
AIR-7: To reduce impacts from construction-related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available off-road construction equipment, including the latest tier equipment (recommended by SJVAPCD).
Applicant is responsible
for Regulation VIII
compliance and submittal
of documentation to the
City.
CDD Planning is responsible
for ensuring Regulation VIII
compliance has been
completed.
Air Quality Plans and Standards- Operational Emissions. This is a significant issue.
See AIR-3 See AIR-3
AIR-8: The project shall comply with the emission reduction requirements of SJVAPCD Rule 9510 for project operations.
Applicant is responsible
for preparation and
submittal of Dust Control
Plan
SJVAPCD is responsible for
review and approval of Dust
Control Plan.
AIR-9: Prior to building occupancy, employers with 100 or more eligible employees shall submit an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval, as required by SJVAPCD Rule 9410. A copy of the ETRIP shall be provided to the SJVAPCD. Employers shall facilitate participation in the implementation of the ETRIP by providing information to its employees explaining methods for participation in the Plan and the purpose, requirements, and applicability of Rule 9410.
Applicant is responsible
for preparation and
submittal of ETRIP
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
ETRIP
AIR-10: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4101, which prohibits emissions of visible air contaminants to the atmosphere and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants.
Applicant and CDD
Planning will responsible
for VERA discussion and
decision.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
VERA discussion occurred.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 5
AIR-11: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4601, which limits project has agreed to abide by more stringent VOC emissions requirements. emissions of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings by specifying storage, clean up and labeling requirements.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in plans and
specifications.
AIR-12: The project shall comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4601, which limits emissions of volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings by specifying storage, clean up and labeling requirements. (The project has agreed to abide by more stringent VOC emissions requirements.
See Construction AIR-1 See Construction AIR-1
AIR-12: Solar Power: Owners, operators or tenants shall include with the building permit application, sufficient solar panels to provide power for the operation’s base power use at the start of operations and as base power use demand increases.
Project sponsor shall include analysis of (a) projected power requirements at the start of operations and as base power demand increases corresponding to the implementation of the “clean fleet” requirements, and (b) generating capacity of the solar installation.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in plans and
specifications.
AIR -12 (continued): CDD shall verify the size and scope of the solar project based upon the analysis of the projected power requirements and generating capacity as well as the available solar panel installation space. The photovoltaic system shall include a battery storage system to serve the facility in the event of a power outage to the extent required by the 2022 or later California Building Standards Code.
Applicant is responsible
for compliance and
submittal of
documentation
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
documentation
AIR -12 (continued): In the event sufficient space is not available on the subject lot to accommodate the needed number of solar panels to produce the operation’s base or anticipated power use, the applicant shall demonstrate how all available space has been maximized (e.g., roof, parking areas, etc.). Areas which provide truck movement may be excluded from these calculations unless otherwise deemed acceptable by the supplied reports.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 6
AIR -12 (continued): The developer or tenant, or qualified solar provider engaged by the developer or tenant shall timely order all equipment and shall install the system when the City has approved building permits and the necessary equipment has arrived. The developer or tenant shall commence operation of the system when it has received permission to operate from the utility. The photovoltaic system owner shall be responsible for maintaining the system(s) at not less than 80% of the rated power for 20 years. At the end of the 20-year period, the building owner shall install a new photovoltaic system meeting the capacity and operational requirements of this measure, or continue to maintain the existing system, for the life of the project.
AIR -13: Emission Standards for Heavy-Duty Trucks: The following mi tigation measures shal l be implemented during all on -going business operations and shall be included as part of contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all on-going operational responsibilities.
The property owner /tenant/lessee shall ensure that all heavy -duty trucks (Class 7 and 8) domic iled on the projec t site are model year 2014 or later from start of operations and shall expedite a transition to zero-emission vehicles, with the fleet fully zero -emission by Dece mber 31, 2025 or when commercially available for the intended application, whichever date is later.
A zero-emission vehicle shall ordinarily be considered commercially available if the vehicle is capable of serving the intended purpose and is included in California’s Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project, https://californiahvip.org/ or listed as available in the US on the Global Commercial Vehicle Drive to Zero inventory, https://globaldrivetozero.org/. The City shall be responsible for the final determination of commercial availability and may (but is not required to) consult with the California Air Resources Board before making such final determination. In order for the City to make a determination that such vehicles are commercially unavailable, the operator must submit documentation from a minimum of three (3) EV dealers identified on the californiahvip.org website demonstrating the inability to obtain the required EVs or equipment needed Applicant or tenant is
responsible for
compliance and submittal
of documentation
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
documentation
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 7
within 6 months
"Domiciled at the project site shall mean the vehicle is ei ther (i) parked or k ept overnight at the project site more than 70% of the calendar year or (ii) dedicated to the proje ct site (defined as more than 70% of the truck routes (during the calendar year) that start at the project site even if parked or kept elsewhere) Zero-emission heavy-duty trucks which require service can be temporarily replaced with m odel year 2014 or later trucks. Replacement trucks shall be used for only the minimum time required for servicing fleet trucks.
AIR-14: Zero Emission Vehi cles: The property owner/tenant/ lessee shall utilize a "clean fleet" of vehicles/delivery vans/trucks (Class 2 through 6) as part of business operations as follows: For any vehi cle (Class 2 through 6) domiciled at the project site, the following "clean fleet" requirements apply: (i) 33% of the fleet will be zero emission vehicles at start of operations, (ii) 65% of the fleet will be zero emissi on vehicles by December 31, 2023, (iii) 80% of the fleet will be zero emis sion vehicl es by December 31, 2025, and ( iv) 100% of the fleet will be zero emission vehicles by December 31, 2027.
"Domiciled at the project site" shall mean the vehicle is either (i) parked or kept overnight at the project site more than 70% of the calendar year or (ii) dedicated to the project site (defined as more than 70% of the truck routes (during the calendar year) that start at the project site even if parked or kept elsewhere).
Zero-emission vehicles which req uire service can be temporarily replac ed with alternate vehicles. Replacement vehicles shall be used for only t he minimum time required for servicing fleet vehicles.
The proper ty owner/tenan t/lessee shall not be responsi ble to meet "clean fleet" requirem ents for vehicles used by common carrier s operating u nder their own authority that provide delivery services to or f rom the project s ite.
Applicant or tenant is
responsible for
compliance and submittal
of documentation
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
documentation
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 8
AIR-15: Demonstrat e Compliance with Clean Fleet Requirements: The applicant, property owner, tenant, less ee, or other party operating the facility (the "Operator ") shall utilize the zero emis sion vehi cles/trucks required to meet the "clean fleet" requireme nts in AIR-13 (for Class 7 and 8 vehicles) and AIR-14 (for Class 2 through 6 vehicles) above. Within 30-days of occupancy, the Operator shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of CDD staff, that the applicabl e clean fleet requireme nts are being met.
Applicant or tenant is
responsible for
compliance and submittal
of documentation
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
documentation
AIR-15 (continued): In the event that vehicles/trucks are not commercially available for the inten ded application, the " clean fleet requirements " may be adjusted as minima lly as pos sible by the CDD to accommodate t he unavailability of commercially available vehicles /trucks.
AIR-15 (continued) : The City shall quantify the air pollution and GHG emissions resulting from any modification of this condition. Within 12 months of failing to meet a “clean fleet” requirement the property owner/tenant/lessee shall implement a Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement (VERA) providing pound for pound mitigation of the criteria pollutant, toxic air contaminants, and GHG emissions quantified by the City through a process that develops, funds, and implements emission reduction projects, with the Air District serving a role of administrator of the emission reduction projects and verifier of the successful mitigation effort. The VERA shall prioritize projects in the South Stockton and surrounding area.
Property owner/tenant/lessee shall continue to fund the VERA each year in an amount necessary to achieve pound for pound mitigation of emissions resulting from not meeting the clean fleet requirements until the owner/tenant/lessee fully complies.
AIR-15 (continued) : The Operator shall implement the proposed measures after CDD review and approval. Any extension of time granted to implement this condition shall be limited to the shortest period of time necessary to allow for 100% electrification under the clean fleet requirements. The CDD staff may seek the recommendation of the California Air Resources Board in determining whether there has been a manufacturing disruption or insufficient vehicles/trucks
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 9 commercially available for the intended application.
AIR-16: Condition of Approved Comp liance Report: The Operato r shall submit a condition of approval compl iance report within 30 days of, but not later than, the following dates: December 31, 2023, December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2027. The report shall outline clean fleet requirements applicable at each report interval and include documentation demonstrating compliance with each requirement. The City shall consid er each report at a noticed public hearing and determine whether the Operator has complied with the applicable clean fleet requirements. If the Operator has not met each 100% clean fleet requirement by December 3 1, 2027, then the Operator shal l submit subsequent reports every year until the 100% clean fleet requirement is impleme nted. The City shall consider each subsequent report at a noticed public hearing and determine whether the Operator has complied with the clean fleet requirements, including any minimal adjustments to the requirements by the CDD to accommodate the manufact uring disruption or unavailability of commercially availabl e vehicles/trucks, as described in the previous paragraph. Notice of the above hearings shall be provided to all properties located within 1,000 feet of the project site and through the ASK Stockton list serve.
Applicant or tenant is
responsible for
preparation of compliance
reports
CDD Planning is responsible
for review and acceptance of
compliance reports
AIR-16 (continue d): After the 100% clean fleet requirement has been implemented and confirmed by the CDD, the Operator shall submit to the CDD an on-going complianc e report every three years containing all necessary documentat ion to verify that the Operator is meeting the clean fleet requirements. At the time it confirms that the 100% clean fleet requirement has been implemented, the CDD will establish the due date for the first on- going compliance report . Each subsequent on -going compliance report shall be due within 30 days of, but not later than, the three-year anniversary of the preceding due date. The on-going compliance reports and accompanying documentation shall be made available to the public upon request.
AIR-17: Zero Emission Forklifts, Yard trucks and Yard Equipment: Owners, operators or tenants shall require all forklifts, yard trucks, and other equipment used Tenant or owner is
responsible for use of
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 10
for on-site movement of trucks, trailers and warehoused goods, as well as landscaping maintenance equipment used on the site, to be electrically powered or zero-emission. The owner, operator or tenant shall provide on-site electrical charging facilities to adequately service electric vehicles and equipment. complying equipment.
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-18: Truck Idling Restrictions: Owners, operators or tenants shall be required to make their best effort to restrict truck idling onsite to a maximum of three minutes, subject to exceptions defined by CARB in the document:
commercial_vehicle_idling_requirements_July 2016. Idling restrictions shall be enforced by highly-visible posting at the site entry, posting at other on-site locations frequented by truck drivers, conspicuous inclusion in employee training and guidance material and owner, operator or tenant direct action as required.
Tenant or owner is
responsible for
enforcement and signage.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-19: Electric Truck Charging: At all times during project operation, owners, operators or tenants shall be required to provide electric charging facilities on the project site sufficient to charge all electric trucks domiciled on the site and such facilities shall be made available for all electric trucks that use the project site.
Tenant or owner is
responsible for use of
complying equipment.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-20: Project Operations, Food Service: Owners, operators or tenants shall establish locations for food or catering truck service and cooperate with food service providers to provide consistent food service to operations employees.
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for
establishment of food
service locations.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-21: Project Operations, Employee Trip Reduction: Owners, operators or tenants shall provide employees transit route and schedule information on systems serving the project area and coordinate ridesharing amongst employees.
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for provision
of the required
information.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports.
AIR-22: Yard Sweeping: Owners, operators or tenants shall provide periodic yard and parking area sweeping to minimize dust generation.
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for periodic
yard sweeping.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 11
AIR-23: Diesel Generators: Owners, operators or tenants shall prohibit the use of diesel generators, except in emergency situations, in which case such generators shall have Best Available Control Technology (BACT) that meets CARB’s Tier 4 emission standards
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for
compliance with
prohibition.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-24: Truck Emission Control: Owners, operators or tenants shall ensure that trucks or truck fleets domiciled at the project site be model year 2014 or later, and maintained consistent with current CARB emission control regulations Tenant or owner will be
responsible for truck fleet
records, inspection and
maintenance.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-25: SmartWay: Owners, operators or tenants shall enroll and participate the in SmartWay program for eligible businesses
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for SmartWay
participation.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-26: Designated Smoking Areas: Owners, operators or tenants shall ensure that any outdoor areas allowing smoking are at least 25 feet from the nearest property line.
Tenant or owner will be
responsible for smoking
area designation.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for review and
acceptance of compliance
reports
AIR-27: Project construction shall be subject to all adopted City building codes, including the adopted Green Building Standards Code, version July 2022 or later.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall demonstrate (e.g., provide building plans) that the proposed buildings are designed and will be built to, at a minimum, meet the Nonresidential Voluntary Measures of the California Green Building Standards code, Divisions A5.1, 5.2 and 5.5, including but not limited to the Tier 2 standards in those Divisions, where applicable, such as the Tier 2 advanced energy efficiency requirements as outlined under Section A5.203.1.2.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in plans and
specifications.
AIR-28: All tenant lease agreements for the project site shall include a provision requiring the tenant/lessee to comply with all applicable requirements of the MMRP, a copy of which shall be attached to each tenant/lease agreement.
Applicant is responsible
for incorporating these
requirements into project
CDD Building will be
responsible to ensure that
subject requirements are
included in plans and
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 12
plans and specifications. specifications.
Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants. This is a significant issue.
AIR-29: The project applicant, to reduce carbon monoxide concentrations to an acceptable level, shall contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and Carpenter Road intersection that would widen the northeast- bound Carpenter Road approach to include an exclusive northeast-bound-to northwest-bound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right-turn lane. (See also Transportation Improvement Measure TRANS-2 in Chapter 16.0, Transportation.) Implement all mitigation measures for Impact: AIR-2, Mitigation Measures #s AIR- 8 through AIR-28.
The applicant will be
responsible for payment
of fair share costs.
As provided in the
referenced mitigation
measures
The Department of Public
Works will be responsible for
ensuring that fair share costs
are paid prior to approval of
improvement plansAs
provided in the referenced
mitigation measures
7.0 BIOLOGY
Special-Status Species and Habitats. This is a potentially significant issue.
BIO-1: The developer shall apply to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) for coverage under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Open Space and Habitat Conservation Plan (SJMSCP). The project site shall be inspected by the SJMSCP biologist, who will recommend which Incidental Take Minimization Measures (ITMMs) set forth in the SJMSCP should be implemented. The project applicant shall pay the required SJMSCP fee, if any, and be responsible for the implementation of the specified ITMMs. Setbacks along North Littlejohns Creek shall be as specified in the SJMSCP- approved buffer reduction.
The applicant will be
responsible for submitting
the SJMSCP coverage
application, payment of
required fees and
implementation of
ITMMs. The ODS’
Engineer will be
responsible for
incorporating ITMM
requirements in the
CDD Planning will verify
that SJMSCP coverage has
been obtained and that other
mitigation measures have
been implemented as required
by ITMMs.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 13
project plans and
specifications. The
Contractor will be
responsible for adherence
to the plans and
specifications, hiring a
qualified biologist if
required and
implementing the
biologist
recommendations.
Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands. This is a potentially significant issue BIO-2: Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall conduct a wetland delineation identifying jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and wetlands. The delineation shall be verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The delineation shall be used to determine if any project work will encroach upon any jurisdictional water, thereby necessitating an appropriate permit. For any development work that may affect a delineated jurisdictional Water, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to the start of development work within these locations. Depending on the Corps permit issued, the project applicant shall also apply for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, or if phased development occurs in areas where no wetlands have been identified, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
The applicant will be
responsible for obtaining
the required wetland
delineation and
verification, for proposing
adequate mitigation, for
obtaining required permits
and providing proof of
issuance to the City.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
the wetland delineation has
been completed, required
permits have been issued and
that specified mitigation
measures are incorporated
into project plans and
specifications.
BIO-3: Prior to the start of construction work in North Littlejohns Creek, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
The project developer shall comply with all conditions attached to any required permit.
The applicant will be
responsible for obtaining
the required permits and
providing proof of
issuance to the City.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
required permits have been
issued.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 14
BIO-4:Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall obtain any necessary Waste Discharge Requirements from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pursuant to the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, the filling of seasonal wetlands containing vernal pool invertebrates shall be delayed until the wetlands are dry and SJCOG biologists can collect the surface soils from the wetlands, to store them for future use on off-site seasonal wetland creation on SJCOG preserve lands. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
The applicant will be
responsible for obtaining
Waste Discharge
Requirements if necessary
and for timing of fill in
coordination with the
SJCOG biologists.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
Waste Discharge
Requirements have been
obtained and that seasonal
wetland fill is coordinated
with SJCOG.
Fish and Wildlife Migration
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. As provided for BIO-1 As provided for BIO-1 Local Biological Requirements. This is a potentially significant issue.
BIO-5: If removal of any oak tree on the project site is required, a certified arborist shall survey the oak trees proposed for removal to determine if they are Heritage Trees as defined in Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The arborist report with its findings shall be submitted to the City’s Community Development Department. If Heritage Trees are determined to exist on the property, removal of any such tree shall require a permit to be issued by the City in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The permittee shall comply with all permit conditions, including tree replacement at specified ratios.
The applicant will be
responsible for surveying
oak trees to be removed,
preparation of an arborist
report and obtaining
permits for removal of
Heritage trees, if any.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for review of the
arborist report and ensuring
that any necessary tree
removal permits have been
obtained.
Habitat Conservation Plans. This is a potentially significant issue.
Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-1. As provided for BIO-1 As provided for BIO-1
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 15
Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources. This is a potentially significant issue.
CULT-1: As noted, the field surveys conducted by Solano Archaeological Services on the project site led to the recording of two potential historical resources: three transmission lines and the remains of a well. Both resources were evaluated on the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (see Regulatory Framework above). Neither were determined to meet any of the criteria for such listing. Since these criteria are very similar to those for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the resources also would not meet criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. As such, the two resources are not considered to have historical value. The project would have no impact on historical resources. It should be noted that the project is unlikely to affect the three transmission lines in any case.
The applicant will be
responsible for
incorporating these
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
Contractor will be
responsible for reporting
discoveries to the City, for
hiring a qualified
archaeologist to analyze
the discovery and
coordinate with Native
American tribes as
necessary, and for
implementing the
archaeologist’s treatment
recommendations.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
cultural resource
requirements have been
incorporated into project
plans and specifications and
that discovery reports are
properly documented.
Impact CULT-2: Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources . This is a potentially significant issue.
CULT-1: If any subsurface archaeological resources, including human burials and associated funerary objects, are encountered during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified archaeologist can examine these materials and evaluate their significance. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. If burial resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered, the City shall notify the appropriate tribal representative, who may examine the materials with the The applicant and
contractor will be
responsible for suspending
construction activity if
human remains are
encountered, reporting
finds to the City and
County Coroner and
CDD Planning will be
responsible for responding to
reports of burial or human
remain finds as required,
including notification of and
coordination with Native
American representatives.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 16
archaeologist and advise the City as to their significance.
The archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal representative if contacted, shall recommend mitigation measures needed to reduce potential cultural resource effects to a level that is less than significant in a written report to the City, with a copy to the tribal representative. The City shall be responsible for implementing the report recommendations. Avoidance is the preferred means of disposition of tribal cultural resources. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
CULT-2: The project shall comply with the provisions of the City of Stockton Municipal Code Section 16.36.050. If a historical or archaeological resource or human remains may be impacted by the project, the Secretary of the Cultural Heritage Board shall be notified, any survey needed to determine the significance of the resource shall be conducted, and the proper environmental documents shall be prepared.
CULT-3: In the event that archaeological resources are discovered during any construction, construction activities shall cease, and the Community Development Department shall be notified so that the extent and location of discovered materials may be recorded by a qualified archaeologist, and disposition of artifacts may occur in compliance with State and federal law.
retaining a qualified
archaeologist to evaluate
the find and provide a
written report to the City.
The City will be
responsible for notifying
Native American
representatives and for
overseeing compliance
with Public Resources
Code requirements.
9.0 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact GEO-1: Faulting and Seismicity. This is a potentially significant issue.
GEO-1: The project shall obtain a Notice of Intent issued by the SWRCB for Applicant will be CDD Building and Public Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 17
compliance with the Construction General Permit. The project shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including a site map, description of construction activities and identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction- related pollutants
responsible for all
activities related to the
Construction General
Permit and incorporation
of these standards in
project plans and
specifications.
Works will be responsible for
ensuring that project has
complied with Construction
General Permit
GEO-2: The project applicant shall comply with Stockton Municipal Code Section
15.48.050, which requires construction activities to be designed and conducted to minimize discharge of sediment and all other pollutants and Section 15.48.070, which contains standards for implementation of Best Management Practices.
Impact GEO-3: Soil Erosion. This is a potentially significant issue.
GEO-3: The project applicant shall submit a geologic soils report, prepared by a registered civil engineer, in compliance with Stockton Municipal Code Section
16.192.020. The report’s recommendations shall be incorporated into the final design and construction plans.
Applicant will be
responsible for submittal
of the soils report.
CDD Building will be
responsible for review and
approval of the geotechnical
report and project plans and
specifications.
GEO-4: Project plans and specifications shall comply with the most recent version of the California Building Code adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of project approval.
Applicant will be
responsible for
preparation of plans and
submittal of conforming
plans and specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible for review of
project plans and
specifications.
Impact GEO-5: Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features. This is a potentially significant issue.
GEO-5: If any subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified paleontologist can examine these The ODS will be
responsible for
incorporating
The City will be responsible
for ensuring that
paleontology requirements
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 18
materials, initially evaluate their significance and, if potentially significant, recommend measures on the disposition of the resource. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
requirements in project
plans and specifications.
The ODS contractor will
be responsible for
suspending construction
activity if paleontological
resources are encountered,
reporting finds to the City
and retaining a qualified
paleontologist to evaluate
the find and provide a
written report to the City.
have been incorporated into
project plans and
specifications and that
discovery reports are properly
documented.
10.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impact GHG-1: Project GHG Construction Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies. This is a potentially significant impact.
GHG-1: The project shall implement the Off-Road Vehicles Best Management Practices specified in the Stockton Climate Action Plan. At least three (3) percent of the construction vehicle and equipment fleet shall be powered by electricity.
Construction equipment and vehicles shall not idle their engines for longer than three (3) minutes.
AIR-2: The project applicant shall comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the California Air Resources Board’s Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled The applicant will be
responsible for
incorporating these
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
contractor will be
responsible for
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for overseeing
implementation of these
requirements and review and
acceptance of written reports.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 19
Fleets, which applies to all self-propelled off-road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater used in California and most two-engine vehicles (except on-road two- engine sweepers). These provisions include imposing limits on idling and requiring a written idling policy. It also requires fleets to reduce their emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or by installing Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategies (i.e., exhaust retrofits).
AIR-1: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 for project construction.
AIR-2: Comply with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII for the control of dust emissions, submit a project Dust Control Plan.
AIR-3: Architectural Coatings: VOC content of <10 g/L.
AIR-4: Comply with SJVAPCD:
AIR-5: Provide transit and ridesharing information for construction workers.
AIR-6: Contractor to locations for food or catering truck service to construction workers.
AIR-7: Use cleanest available off-road construction equipment (recommended by SJVAPCD).
periodically reporting
compliance with these
conditions to the
Community Development
Department.
Impact GHG-2: Project GHG Operational Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies. This is a potentially significant impact.
AIR-8: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 requirements for project operations.
AIR-9: Employers with 100 employees shall submit an Employer Trip As provided in Chapter
6.0 Air Quality
As provided in Chapter 6.0
Air Quality
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 20 Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval.
AIR-10: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4101prohibiting emissions of visible air contaminants.
AIR-11: Comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4601 limiting VOC emissions from architectural coatings.
AIR-12: Buildings to be solar ready, and install solar panels to provide power for operational base power use.
AIR-13: Emission standards for heavy-duty trucks (Class 7 and 8) domiciled on the project site, clean vehicle requirements.
AIR-14: Zero Emission Vehicles: Emission standards for vehicles/delivery vans/trucks (Class 2 through 6), clean vehicle requirements.
AIR-15: Demonstrate compliance with “clean fleet” requirements in AMM-2 and AMM-3 within 30-days of occupancy. Operator shall submit Clean Fleet condition of approval compliance report at December 31, 2023, 2025 and 2027, tri- annually afterward. In the event of a disruption in clean fleet supply, the applicant will implement a Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement (VERA).
AIR-16: Submittal of Clean Fleet condition of approval compliance report within 30 days of, but not later than, the following dates: December 31, 2023, December 31, 2025, and December 31, 2027.
AIR-17: Requirement for forklifts, yard trucks and yard equipment, all zero emission.
AIR-18: Limit truck idling to a maximum of three minutes.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 21
AIR-19: Operators to provide electric truck charging facility.
AIR-20: O perators to provide locations for food or catering truck service.
AIR-21: Operators to provide employees with alternative commute information.
AIR-22: Yard Sweeping: Operators to provide periodic yard and parking area sweeping to minimize dust generation.
AIR-23: Diesel Generators: Operators shall prohibit the use of diesel generators.
AIR-24: Emission controls for trucks or truck fleets domiciled at the project site.
AIR-25: Operators participate in EPA SmartWay.
AIR-26: Operators shall designate smoking areas at least 25 feet from the nearest property line.
AIR-27: Project construction is subject to adopted City building codes, including adopted Green Building Standards Code, Tier 2 advanced energy efficiency requirements for specified divisions.
AIR-28:
All tenant lease agreements for the project site shall include a provision requiring the tenant/lessee to comply with all applicable requirements of the MMRP, a copy of which shall be attached to each tenant/lease agreement.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 22
11.0 HAZARDS
Impact HAZ-1: Hazardous Material Transportation and Storage. This is a potentially significant issue.
HAZ-1: New business on the project site that may handle quantities of hazardous materials equal to or greater than 55 gallons of a liquid, 500 pounds of a solid, or 200 cubic feet of a compressed gas at any given time shall submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan to the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) of San Joaquin County. The Hazardous Materials Business Plan shall include an inventory of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes and an emergency response plan for incidents involving hazardous materials and wastes.
HAZ-2: Proposed business uses that involve the manufacture, storage, handling, or processing of hazardous materials in sufficient quantities that would require s Hazardous Materials Business Plan and the use is within 1,000 feet of a residential zoning district, the project shall comply with Stockton Municipal Code Section
16.36.080, which governs use, handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials.
Applicant will be
responsible for
compliance with
hazardous material
regulations.
The San Joaquin County
CUPA will be responsible for
monitoring compliance.
Impact HAZ-2: Hazardous Materials Release. This is a potentially significant issue.
GEO-1: The project shall obtain a Notice of Intent issued by the SWRCB for compliance with the Construction General Permit. The project shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) including a site map, description of construction activities and identification of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction- related pollutants.
Applicant will be
responsible for all
activities related to the
Construction General
Permit.
CDD Building and Public
Works will be responsible for
ensuring that project has
complied with Construction
General Permit
GEO-2: The project applicant shall comply with Stockton Municipal Code Section
15.48.050, which requires construction activities to be designed and conducted to minimize discharge of sediment and all other pollutants and Section 15.48.070, Applicant will be
responsible for
incorporation of these
CDD Building and Public
Works will be responsible for
ensuring that project has
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 23
which contains standards for implementation of Best Management Practices. standards in project plans and specifications.
complied with Construction
General Permit
Impact HAZ-4: Airport Hazards. This is a potentially significant issue.
HAZ-3: The project shall be submitted to the San Joaquin County Airport Land Use Commission for review of project-associated objects that exceed 100 feet in height CDD Planning staff is
responsible for submitting
project information to
ALUC.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
ALUC review is completed,
and requirements
incorporated into conditions
of approval
12.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact: HYDRO -1: Surface Water Resources and Quality. This is a potentially significant issue.
Implement storm water quality protections described in GEO-HYDRO-1: Industrial uses on the project shall obtain coverage under the Central Valley RWQCB Industrial General Permit program and implement pollution control measures using the best available technology economically achievable and best conventional pollutant control technology. All facility operators shall prepare, retain on site, and implement a SWPPP implementing applicable Industrial General Permit requirements, including a monitoring program.
As described in GEO-1
Applicant will be
responsible for obtaining
coverage under the
Industrial General Permit.
As described in GEO-1
Municipal Utilities will be
responsible for ensuring that
Industrial Permit coverage is
obtained.
13.0 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 24
There are no potentially significant or significant impacts in this issue area.
14.0 NOISE
Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Traffic. This is a significant issue.
NOISE-1: The applicant, the City of Stockton and other project developers impacting Mariposa Road traffic shall consider the use of noise-reducing pavement and utilize it where feasible in planned widening projects for Mariposa Road.
Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Other Project Noise. This is a potentially significant issue NOISE-2: Sound walls and/or berms 10 feet in height shall be required where existing residential uses or residentially zoned areas are located adjacent to the project site. Figure 3 of the project noise study (Figure 14-2 of this EIR the DEIR) shows the locations of the recommended sound walls based on the proposed conceptual plan. Where openings in sound walls occur for access or emergency access, solid gates shall be installed. 10-foot sound walls are expected to provide a 10 dB reduction in noise levels. Site plan modifications, and/or additional noise analysis by a qualified acoustical consultant may warrant changes to these requirements, assuming that compliance with City noise standards is maintained.
NOISE-3: Project operation shall at all times comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.60, including:
Section 16.60.040, which states that new or expanded commercial, industrial, and The applicant will be
responsible for
incorporating noise wall
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The ODS
will be responsible for
retaining a noise
consultant to review and
recommend alternative
noise wall requirements as
appropriate.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring that
noise wall requirements are
met in project plans and
specifications and for review
and approval of any proposed
noise wall modifications,
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 25 other land use-related noise sources shall mitigate their noise levels such that they do not adversely impact noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residences) and do not exceed City noise standards.
Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Construction. This is a potentially significant issue.
NOISE-4: Construction activities associated with the project shall adhere to the requirements of the City of Stockton Municipal Code with respect to hours of operation. The applicant shall ordinarily limit construction activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No construction shall occur on Sundays or national holidays without a written permit from the City. All construction equipment shall be in good working order and shall be fitted with factory-equipped mufflers.
NOISE-5: Project construction comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.60, including:
Section 16.60.030, which contains restrictions on construction noise, including operating or causing the operation of tools or equipment on private property used in alteration, construction, demolition, drilling, or repair work between the 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. [Proposed EIR mitigation measure NOISE-2 more restrictive on construction days and hours.
The applicant will be
responsible for
incorporating these
requirements in the
project plans and
specifications. The
Contractor will be
responsible for
conformance with noise
requirements.
The CDD Planning will be
responsible for monitoring
compliance with these
requirements.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 26
15.0 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Impact PSR-1: Fire Protection Services. This is a potentially significant issue.
PSR-1: Project buildings shall include an Early Suppression, Fast Response (ESFR) fire sprinkler system.
Applicant will be
responsible for design and
installation of the ESFR
system
CDD Building will be
responsible for checking
plans for and inspection of
the required system
PSR-2: City departments, including Fire, Community Development, and Finance, together with industrial project proponents, shall develop and implement a plan for financing, construction and staffing of a new fire station in the vicinity of the project site. Development and implementation of the plan will involve a multi-year process helping the Department meet increasing service demands and to reduce response times. The project applicant shall contribute to the costs of constructing and staffing the new fire station in accordance with the adopted plan.
Stockton Fire will be
responsible overseeing
new fire station and CFD
process
16.0 TRANSPORTATION
TRANS-1: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans – Intersections. Level of significance is not applicable under LOS analysis.
TRANS-1: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and 8th Street/Farmington Road intersection that would split the northeast-bound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeast-bound through lane and a “free” northeast-bound-to-southeast- bound right-turn lane. Existing pavement width is considered adequate to accommodate this improvement.
The applicant will be
responsible for design and
install of “end of trip”
facilities.
CDD Planning will be
responsible for ensuring plans
and specs include required
facilities
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 27
TRANS-2: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and Carpenter Road intersection that would widen the northeast-bound Carpenter Road approach to include an exclusive northeast-bound-to northwest-bound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right- turn lane. (See also Mitigation Measure AIR-1 in Chapter 6.0, Air Quality.) Owner or tenant will be
responsible for
implementing vanpool or
shuttle program and
submittal of
documentation to the city
CDD Planning will be
responsible for verifying that
program is in place an
operating
TRANS-2: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans - Roadway Segments. Level of significance is not applicable under LOS analysis.
TRANS-3: The project applicant should contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the segment of Mariposa Road from SR 99 to 8th Street/Farmington Road that would widen the portions of this roadway segment that are currently one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
Owner or tenant will be
responsible for
implementing vanpool or
shuttle program and
submittal of
documentation to the city
CDD Planning will be
responsible for verifying that
program is in place an
operating
TRANS-6: Consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Level of significance is not applicable under LOS analysis.
TRANS-1: The project shall provide "end-of-trip" facilities for bicycle riders to encourage the use of bicycling as a viable form of travel to destinations, especially to work. End-of-trip facilities shall include showers, secure bicycle lockers, and changing spaces.
TRANS-2: The project shall implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work, while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers.
Owner or tenant will be
responsible for
implementing vanpool or
shuttle program and
submittal of
documentation to the city
CDD Planning will be
responsible for verifying that
program is in place an
operating
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 28
Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges shall be set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
TRANS-3: The project shall implement SJVAPCD Rule 9410. Rule 9410, which requires employers with at least 100 employees to implement a trip reduction/transportation demand management program, or ETRIP. [See Air Quality section above.] ETRIP requirements are consistent with a Commute Trip Reduction program recommended by the traffic impact study as a mitigation measure. See also EIR Mitigation Measures TRANS-1 and TRANS-2, which require "end-of-trip" facilities and an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle.
17.0 UTILITIES AND ENERGY
Impact UTIL-4: Solid Waste. This is a potentially significant impact.
Attachment G
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Page 29 UTIL-1: As a Condition of Approval, the project applicant shall comply with the provisions of Stockton Municipal Code Sections 8.28.020 through 8.28.070 regarding construction and demolition waste. Permit applicants for the project shall be required to meet the waste diversion requirement of at least 50 percent of materials generated as discards by the project, regardless of whether the permit applicant performs the work or hires contractors, subcontractors, or others to perform the work.
Applicant will be
responsible for
compliance with
construction waste
recycling requirements.
CDD Building will be
responsible for overseeing
construction waste recycling.
Impact UTIL-6: Project Energy Consumption. This is a potentially significant impact.
UTIL-2: As a Condition of Approval, the project applicant shall comply with the most recent version of the California Energy Code adopted by the City of Stockton at the time of project approval.
AIR-9: Employers with 100 employees shall submit an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (ETRIP) to the City for review and approval.
AIR-12: Buildings to be solar ready, and install solar panels to provide power for operational base power use.
Applicant will be
responsible for
incorporating Energy
Code requirements in
project plans and
specifications.
CDD Building will be
responsible for review and
approval of building plans
and specifications.
Attachment G