Turlock City Council
November 12, 2024

WHEREAS, the cost of said services is estimated to be $37,684.04; and WHEREAS, funding is available from Fund 115 “Measure A – Roads” account number 115-10-115.43327 “Construction Management” for costs associated with said City Project; and
WHEREAS, this action is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Section 15378 (Project) of the CEQA guidelines because it consists of “organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.” NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby determine the Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B is exempt from the provisions of CEQA in accordance with Section 15378 and approve Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B under the terms of the Master Agreement (City Contract No. 2024- 112) with CCME, Inc. (Merced, California office) for Construction Management and Inspection Services for the City of Turlock’s Roads Initiative Program in the amount of $37,684.04 to be funded by Fund 115 “Measure A – Roads” account number 115-10- 115.43327 “Construction Management,” for Bid Package 1 for City Project No. 23-031 as “CCME CM Task Order No. 1B for City Project No. 23-031, Bid Package 1.” PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

NOT PARTICIPATING:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
__________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2024-112, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B AMENDMENT NO. 3 FOR TASK ORDER NO. 1B
Under the Terms of the

MASTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TURLOCK
and
CCME, INC.
for

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES
City Contract No. 2024-112
City Project No. 23-031
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 for Task Order No. 1B under the terms of City Contract No. 2024-112 is entered into by and between the CITY OF TURLOCK, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and CCME, INC., a California corporation (“Professional”), on this ______ day of ___________ 2024 (the “Effective Date of Task Order No. 1B”). City and Professional may be collectively referred to herein as the “Parties” or individually as “Party.” There are no other parties to this Amendment No. 3.

WHEREAS, the Parties hereto previously entered into a Master Agreement (City Contract No. 2024-112) dated February 27, 2024, for Construction Management and Inspection Services for Roads Program Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects (“Agreement”); and WHEREAS, Construction Management and Inspection Services comprise three (3) components: Pre-Construction, Construction Management and Inspection, and Post- Construction; and
WHEREAS, Agreement stipulates that the scope of services and fees associated with specific projects will be agreed upon through task orders approved under the terms of Agreement by a written amendment to the Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 provided for the scope of services and fees for “Pre- Construction” services for Bid Package 1 for City Project No. 23-031 as “CCME CM Task Order No. 1 for City Project No. 23-031, Bid Package 1;” and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 was executed in order to provide for the scope of services and associated fees for “Construction Management and Inspection” and “Post-Construction” services for Bid Package 1 for City Project No. 23-031 as “CCME CM Task Order No. 1A for City Project No. 23-031, Bid Package 1;” however, the scope of services and fees associated with “Post-Construction” activities were inadvertently omitted; and

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2024-112, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B WHEREAS, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B provides for the scope of services and associated fees for said omitted services.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto mutually agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

1.Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby added to the Agreement.

2. Recital B of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

B.Professional has made a proposal to City to provide such professional services. A description of the services Professional proposes to provide is included in the Scope of Services in Exhibits A through D attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Services”). City desires to retain Professional to perform the Services, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

4. Recital C of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

C.The Parties anticipate that one or more projects for Services shall be determined through creation of a Task Order as a City-requested modification of services under Section 5.2 of this Agreement which shall be approved by written amendment to this Agreement. The Parties shall outline the schedule or timeline for providing the Services agreed upon under each Task Order (“Completion Schedule”), which shall be included in one or more written amendments to this Agreement. Such Completion Schedule is included in Exhibit D.

5. Recital D of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

D.The Parties shall outline the rates and method of payment to Professional for its performance of the Services under this Agreement as determined under each Task Order (“Compensation Schedule”), which shall be included in one or more written amendments to this Agreement. Such Compensation Schedule is included in Exhibit D.

6. Section 5 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

5.1. Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Professional shall provide City the Services described in Exhibits A through D. Any request for Services not included in Exhibits A through D will be considered a request for additional or modified Services (“Modification” or “Modifications”).

Professional shall not receive additional compensation for any Modification of the Services unless the Parties agree otherwise in a writing executed by both Parties.

5.2. City Requested Modification of Services. City may, by written order, authorize Modifications to the Services described in Exhibits A through D. If such Modifications cause an increase in the cost or time required for performance of Professional’s Services, the Parties shall enter into a written amendment to this Agreement to adjust the Services and the compensation to be paid to Professional and, if necessary, amend the Completion Schedule or Compensation Schedule. The Services, Completion Schedule, or Compensation Schedule shall not be revised

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2024-112, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B unless City and Professional mutually agree to a written amendment to this Agreement reflecting such revisions, additional compensation, time for performance or such other terms or conditions mutually agreed upon by the Parties.

7. Section 6 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:

6.1. Amount, Time and Manner of Payment for Professional Services. City shall pay Professional according to the rates and timing set forth in the Compensation Schedule for each Task Order within each Amendment to the Agreement. Each Compensation Schedule shall include an exhibit based on Exhibit 10-H of Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM). Professional will be allowed to include an amount for the anticipated salary increases as calculated per Exhibit 10-H. City’s total compensation to Professional shall not exceed the cumulative amount resulting from each Task Order with each approved Amendment to the Agreement. The compensation for Amendment No. 1B shall not exceed Thirty-Seven Thousand Six- Hundred-Eighty-Four Dollars and Four Cents ($37,684.04), and Three-Hundred- Eighty-Eight Thousand Twenty-Eight Dollars and Twenty-Seven Cents ($388,028.27) for City Project No. 23-031, Bid Package 1 (“Maximum Payment”), unless the Parties mutually agree in writing otherwise.

Amendment 1 for Task Order No. 1 $ 26,663.22
Amendment 2 for Task Order No. 1A $323,681.01
Amendment 3 for Task Order No. 1B $ 37,684.04
Project 23-031, Bid Package 1 Not-to-Exceed Amount $388,028.27

8. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the Term of the Agreement.
[Signatures on Following Page]

CITY CONTRACT NO. 2024-112, Amendment No. 3 for Task Order No. 1B IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment No. 3 to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized.

PROFESSIONAL
CCME, INC., a California corporation
By:

Ramon Montes De Oca, Vice President
Date
CITY
City of Turlock, a California
municipal corporation
By:

Gary R. Hampton, Acting City Manager
Date:

APPROVED AS TO SUFFICIENCY:

By:

Christopher Fisher,
Municipal Services Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney
ATTEST:

By:

Julie Christel, City Clerk

CM and Inspection Roads Program CIP Projects
City of Turlock

SCOPE OF WORK
CCME, Inc. (CCME) will furnish a Project Manager, Construction Manager / Resident Engineer, and associated personnel including inspectors, arborists, material testers, and office engineers for the duration of this project. The CCME construction manager will be responsible for all matters related to the consultant team and report directly to the City’s project manager. CCME will also coordinate, when needed, regarding project issues and critical items with the City’s designer, other City consultants, third parties, or others.

It is anticipated that this task will be completed by January 31, 2025.

C Post Construction Services
C.1 As-Builts - Prepare final redline as-builts of the plans in accordance with LAPM and Caltrans construction manual and return them to the City’s designer for CADD revisions.

Deliverables: As-Built Red Lines
C.2 Deliver Project Files- CCME will deliver to the City all hard copy and electronic project files at the end of the project. During the project progress, City PM will have access to read electronic files via the City’s requested file management software CMIS as well as Dropbox, OneDrive, or other file sharing services. CCME will compile all project information, review for completeness, and provide the City with a digital copy (thumb drive) of all project documents at the end of the project.

Key Staff- Bryan Kroeger, Principal In Charge, Construction Manager Registered Civil Engineer #79177, QSD
Bryan has a master’s degree in Civil Engineering from California State University Fresno and 16 years of experience delivering public projects. As a Construction Manager and Resident Engineer, Bryan has worked on all aspects of project delivery including helping with preconstruction permitting issues and utility agreements. Bryan has vast experience working on both the State Highway System as well as Local Roads.

Key Staff - Ramon Montes De Oca, Project Manager, Resident Engineer Registered Civil Engineer #78212, QSD
Ramon has a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Ramon has over 17 years of experience and, in addition to his PE license, is a Qualified SWPPP Developer/ Practitioner.

Throughout the years, Ramon has been a Structures Representative and Resident Engineer on a variety of Road, Bridge, and retaining wall projects. Ramon is currently assisting on your City of Turlock CIP Roads Projects.

Key Staff - Rick Bettencourt, Lead Inspector
Richard has 21 years of experience verifying construction quality. As an Inspector, Richard has worked as both Quality Control and Quality Assurance, on projects ranging from small local projects to the $6.5 Billion Bay Bridge Eastern Span Replacement Project. Richard has vast experience working on both the State Highway System and local roadways. Richard is currently inspecting the grinding and paving operations on your City of Turlock CIP Roads Projects.

Key Staff - Kareem Abonofal, Resident Engineer
Registered Civil Engineer #94485, CMIT
Kareem has a bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from California State University, Fresno and 4 years of experience working on a variety of different heavy infrastructure projects. Kareem has extensive experience working on the California High-Speed Rail Project as well as roadway and bridge projects for different municipalities across the Central Valley. Kareem is a License Professional Civil Engineer and Certified Construction Manager-in-Training.

Resumes of key staff have been previously provided.

Bryan Kroeger Construction ManagerRamon Montes De Oca Project ManagerKareem Abonofal Resident EngineerRick Bettencourt InspectorBlackburnBlake WatkinsMozamo No Sub
Mark-
Up
Hourly Rate $248.06 $248.06 $198.45 $172.76
TASK

3.0 CONST. MGMT SER. POST CON.

3.1 As-Builts 4 8 12 $2,976.72 $0 $2,976.72

3.2 Deliver Project Files / Closeout 24 80 24 24 152 $34,707.32 $0 $34,707.32 Subtotal Task 3 0 88 24 24 164 $37,684.04 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,684.04 TOTAL HOURS 28 88 24 24 164
OTHER DIRECT COSTS $0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL COST $6,946 $21,829 $4,763 $4,146 $37,684.04 $0 $0 $0 $0 $37,684.04 Total Prime
Cost
Subconsultants
TOTAL
COSTTotal
Hours
CCME

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024

From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: Stephen Fremming, Principal Civil Engineer Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Ordinance: Second and final reading of an ordinance amending Turlock Municipal Code Title 4 (Public Safety), Chapter 7 (Traffic), Article 14 (Special Speed Zones)

2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

The City of Turlock establishes, posts, and enforces speed limits within its jurisdictional boundaries. A speed limit is enforceable provided that the speed limit was determined by an Engineering and Traffic Survey (ETS). An ETS is a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with methods determined by statute and considers prevailing speeds, accident records, and conditions not readily apparent to the driver. An ETS consists of data collection, validation, analysis, and a final report. The required processes and methods for the ETS and resulting recommended speed limits are outlined in the California Vehicle Code (CVC) and California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).

A speed limit that is not based on an ETS, or whose speed was determined from an ETS completed longer ago than allowed by the CVC, is by definition a “speed trap” per CVC §40802 and may not be enforceable. For its referenced speed limits to not be considered speed traps, an ETS must be no older than:
• five (5) years
• seven (7) years, provided specific enforcement training and radar equipment standards are met per CVC §40802
• fourteen (14) years, provided specific enforcement training and radar equipment standards are met per CVC §40802, and a registered engineer evaluates the ETS and determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred.

On October 13, 2020, City Council approved a professional services agreement with GHD, Inc. for City Project No. 20-023 “Engineering and Traffic Surveys.” The scope of work included the data collection, analysis, and report necessary for the approval of a new ETS, which was finalized on June 25, 2024. On July 9, 2024, staff presented the Introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending the Turlock Municipal Code (TMC) Title 4, Chapter 7, Article 14 related to the speed limits listed there. On July 23, 2024, City Council adopted the ordinance, which resulted in approximately 100 modifications to the TMC. Staff recently discovered one error made in the preparation of the ordinance amendment adopted on July 23, 2024. One segment, W. Linwood Avenue from 1400 feet west of Walnut Road to S. Tegner Road, is completely missing from the newly adopted ordinance, although it did appear in the ETS with a recommended posted speed limit of 45 mph. The ordinance must now be modified to include the missing segment to be consistent with the Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

ETS finalized on June 25, 2024 and to allow the speed limit to be enforceable, once its speed limit signs have been properly revised.

To mitigate the potential for similar clerical errors being made in the future, City staff recommend that the TMC be updated to allow this change to be included in the TMC as an exhibit. Two public hearings are required before a change to the TMC may be effective.

The first public hearing was held on October 22, 2024 and the second public hearing and request for approval of amending of the TMC is made at this November 12 meeting.

3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:

A. Speed limits are considered a “speed trap” and not enforceable when the speed limit has not been set as recommended by an Engineering Traffic Survey (ETS), or if the speed limit is based on an ETS that was approved longer ago than allowed by the California Vehicle Code.

B. Speed limits are codified in the Turlock Municipal Code Title 4, Chapter 7, Article 14.

An amendment to the ordinance is necessary to include a road segment on W.

Linwood Avenue that had been inadvertently omitted during preparation of the amendment approved on July 23, 2024.

C. Allowing the TMC ordinance related to speed limits to be included as an attachment will mitigate the potential for clerical errors when preparing future amendments.

4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

The fiscal impact of this item is limited to the staff time for discovery of the omission and preparation of this staff report, ordinance, and associated documents.

5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend approval.

6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:

Recommend approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This action is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Section 15378 (Project) of the CEQA guidelines because it consists of “organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment”.

8. ALTERNATIVES:

A. Council could choose to not amend the Turlock Municipal Code Title 4, Chapter 7, Article 14 regarding speed limits. This alternative is not recommended as staff discovered a segment on W. Linwood Avenue that had been inadvertently omitted from the previous amendment approved on July 23, 2024.

B. Council could choose to not amend the Turlock Municipal Code Title 4, Chapter 7, Article 14 regarding speed limits and include the updated list of speed limits as an attachment. This alternative is not recommended as approving it will mitigate the Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

potential for future clerical errors when preparing future amendments.

9. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Ordinance

2. Exhibit A

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK

ORDINANCE NO. -CS

WHEREAS, the City of Turlock seeks to provide for the safe and orderly movement of traffic on its roadways and recognizes that the modification of regulatory speed limits set in accordance with state regulations and sound engineering judgment is an important factor in meeting this goal; and

WHEREAS, speed limits that are not based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey (ETS), or whose speed was determined from an ETS completed longer ago than allowed by the California Vehicle Code (CVC), is by definition a “speed trap” and may not be enforceable; and

WHEREAS, staff is recommending that the Turlock Municipal Code be amended to allow the City Council to establish altered speed limits as an attachment to this ordinance and revise them approximately every five years pursuant to California Vehicle Code (CVC) §40802; and

WHEREAS, the City wishes to make these changes to streamline adoption of speed limit modifications in the future.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Turlock as follows:

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT: Title 4, Chapter 7, Article 14, Section 02 is hereby amended to read as follows:

4-7-1402 Altered speed limits.

Pursuant to California State Vehicle Code Section 22357, “Increase of Local Speed Limits” and Section 22358, “Decrease of Local Speed Limits,” an engineering and traffic survey has been conducted to establish prima facie speed limits upon the streets or portions thereof within the City of Turlock. Pursuant to such survey, prima facie speed limits are established on the following designated streets or portions thereof as reflected below: attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference.

(a) Twenty (20) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Fifth St. Lander Ave. “F” St.
}
}
}

IN THE MATTER OF AMENDING TURLOCK
MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 4 (PUBLIC SAFETY),
CHAPTER 7 (TRAFFIC), ARTICLE 14 (SPECIAL

SPEED ZONES)
Ordinance No. -CS

(b) Twenty-five (25) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
“A” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Arbor Wy. Berkeley Ave., N. Quincy Rd., N.
“B” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Berkeley Ave., S. East Ave. Ramson Dr.

Broadway, S. Olive Ave., E. “D” St.
“C” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Castleview Dr. Johnson Rd., N. Quincy Rd., N.

Chestnut St. Grant Ave. Canal Dr., W.
“D” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Delbon Ave. Olive Ave., N. Colorado Ave.

Denair Ave., N Hawkeye Ave., E. North Ave.

El Capitan Dr. Berkeley Ave., N. Quincy Rd., N.
“F” St., E. Golden State Blvd., S. Alpha Rd.
“F” St., W. Lander Ave. Golden State Blvd., S.

First St., S. Olive Ave., E. “F” St., W.

Fullerton Dr. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Georgetown Ave. Del’s Ln. Andre Ln.

Grant Ave. Chestnut St. Main St., W.

Kilroy Rd., N. Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Paseo Del Sol
Main St., E. Lander Ave. E. Canal Dr.

Marshall St., E Minaret Ave., N. Johnson Rd., N.

McKenna Dr. Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Summerton Ln.

Minnesota Ave., W. Del’s Ln. Geer Rd.

North Ave. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Ordinance No. -CS

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Olive Ave., W. Lander Ave. West Ave. North
Palm St., N. Hawkeye Ave., E. Olive Ave., E.

Palm St., N. Olive Ave., E. Minaret Ave., N.

Panorama Ave. Springer Dr., W. Christoffersen Pkwy., W.

Park St. Soderquist Rd., N. First St., N.

Sebastian Dr. Quincy Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Springer Dr., E. Olive Ave., N. Berkeley Ave., N.

Tuolumne Rd., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Wayside Dr. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

West Ave., N. Park St. Main St., W.

(c) Thirty (30) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Alpha Rd. East Ave. Berkeley Ave., S.

Berkeley Ave., N. Hawkeye Ave., E. East Ave.

Broadway., N. Front St. Olive Ave., E.

Canal Dr., W. Broadway., N. Geer Rd.

Colorado Ave. Hawkeye Ave., E. East Ave.

Countryside Dr. Monte Vista Ave., W. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Crowell Rd. Monte Vista Ave., W. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Denair Ave., N. E. Canal Dr. Hawkeye Ave., E.

East Ave. Golden State Blvd., N. Bell St.

Fosberg Rd. Sunday Dr. Monte Vista Ave., E.

Georgetown Ave. Walnut Rd., N. Del’s Ln.

Golden State Blvd., S. Main St., W. East Ave.

Heathernoel Wy. Colorado Ave. Berkeley Ave., N.

Ordinance No. -CS

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Hedstrom Rd. Geer Rd. Colorado Ave.

Joett Dr. Fulkerth Rd. Tully Rd., N.

Johnson Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Linwood Ave., W. Lander Ave. West Ave. South
Main St., E. Canal Dr., E. Berkeley Ave., N.

Main St., W. West Ave. South Lander Ave.

Marshall St., E Golden State Blvd., S. Minaret Ave., N.

Marshall St., E Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Minaret Ave., N. Main St., E. East Ave.

Minnesota Ave., E. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Minnesota Ave., E. Olive Ave., N. Colorado Ave.

Minnesota Ave., W. Crowell Rd. Del’s Ln.

Olive Ave., N. Christoffersen Pkwy., E. Inspiration Wy.

Olive Ave., N. Canal Dr., E. Christoffersen Pkwy., E.

Olive Ave., E. Canal Dr., E. Broadway, N.

Orange St., S. Main St., W. Montana Ave.

Peacock Dr. Berkeley Ave., N. Johnson Rd., N.

Pedras Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Porsche Strasse Monte Vista Ave., W. Walnut Rd., N.

Quincy Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Roberts Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Kilroy Rd., N.

Soderquist Rd., S. Main St., W. Jordan Ave.

South Ave. Lander Ave. Tully Rd., S.

Spengler Wy. Kilroy Rd., S. Tegner Rd., S.

Springer Dr., E. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Springer Dr., W. Crowell Rd. Geer Rd.

Tegner Rd., N. Sandstone St. Taylor Rd., N.

Ordinance No. -CS

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Tuolumne Rd., E. Geer Rd. Berkeley Ave., N.

Twentieth Century Blvd. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Walnut Rd., N. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

West Ave. South Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

(d) Thirty-five (35) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Atherstone Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Tegner Rd., N.

Berkeley Ave., N. Taylor Rd., E. Hawkeye Ave., E.

Canal Dr., E. Geer Rd. Johnson Rd., N.

Canal Dr., E. Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Canal Dr., W. Soderquist Rd., N. Broadway., N.

Colorado Ave. Taylor Rd., E. Hawkeye Ave., E.

Countryside Dr. Tuolumne Rd., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Crowell Rd. Paseo Belleza Monte Vista Ave., W.

Daubenberger Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Del’s Ln. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

East Ave. Bell St. Johnson Rd., N.

Fifth St. “F” St., W. Linwood Ave., E.

First St., N. Chestnut St. Olive Ave., E.

Front St. Golden State Blvd., N. W. Canal Dr.

Fulkerth Rd. State Route 99 N. Tully Rd.

Geer Rd. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

Golden State Blvd., N. Canal Dr., W. Main St., W.

Hawkeye Ave., E. Geer Rd. Waring Rd.

Kilroy Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

Ordinance No. -CS

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Lander Ave. Main St., W. State Route 99
Linwood Ave., E. Golf Rd. Lander Ave.

Main St., W. Kilroy Rd., S. West Ave. South
Ninth St. Lander Ave. Linwood Ave., E.

Quincy Rd., N. Swan Park Dr. Tuolumne Rd., E.

Soderquist Rd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Main St., W.

Tully Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., W. Main St., W.

Tully Rd., S. Main St., W. South Ave.

Tuolumne Rd., W. Countryside Dr. Golden State Blvd., N.

Tuolumne Rd., E. Berkeley Ave., N. Waring Rd.

Walnut Rd., N. Main St., W. Canal Dr., W.

Walnut Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

(e) Forty (40) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Canal Dr., W. Tully Rd., N. Soderquist Rd., N.

Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Kilroy Rd., N.

East Ave. Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

First St., S. “F” St., W. Golf Rd.

Fulkerth Rd. Tegner Rd., N. State Route 99
Fulkerth Rd. Tully Rd., N. Golden State Blvd., N.

Glenwood Ave., W. Linwood Ave., W. Lander Ave.

Glenwood Ave., E. Lander Ave. Golf Rd.

Golden State Blvd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Canal Dr., W.

Golden State Blvd., S. East Ave. 1,100 feet south of “F” St., W.

Golf Rd. First St., S. State Route 99
Ordinance No. -CS

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Hawkeye Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Linwood Ave., W. West Ave. South 1400 ft. west of Walnut Rd.

Main St., W. Tegner Rd., S. Kilroy Rd., S.

Monte Vista Ave., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Monte Vista Ave., W. Tegner Rd., N. Geer Rd.

Tegner Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.

Walnut Rd., N. Taylor Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.

(f) Forty-five (45) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Christoffersen Pkwy., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Kilroy Rd., N. Geer Rd.

Dianne Dr. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Geer Rd. Taylor Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.

Tegner Rd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Tegner Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

Walnut Rd., S. Linwood Ave., W. Glenwood Ave., W.

Waring Rd. Hawkeye Ave., E. Tuolumne Rd., E.

(g) Fifty (50) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Fransil Ln. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Fulkerth Rd. Washington Rd., N. Tegner Rd., N.

Golden State Blvd., N. Taylor Rd., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Washington Rd., N. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Ordinance No. -CS

(h) Fifty-five (55) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Linwood Ave., W. Tegner Rd. Washington Rd., S.

Main St., W. Washington Rd., S. Tegner Rd., S.

Taylor Rd., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Taylor Rd., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Washington Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

SECTION 3. VALIDITY: If any section, subsection , sentence, clause, word, or phrase of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance. The Turlock City Council hereby declares that they would have pas sed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. ENACTMENT: Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the passage and adoption thereof, this ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the County of Stanislaus, State of California, together with names of the members of the City Council voting for and against the same.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 22nd day of October, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

NOT PARTICIPATING:

ABSENT:

Signed and approved this 12th day of November, 2024.

SIGNED:

__________________________
Amy Bublak, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ordinance No. -CS

___________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________
George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney

EXHIBIT A
to Council Ordinance XXX
Speed limits are established on the following designated streets or portions thereof as indicated in the tables below and in the attached map. If any conflict exists between the tables and the map, the tables shall govern.
(a) Twenty (20) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Fifth St. Lander Ave. “F” St.
(b) Twenty-five (25) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
“A” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Arbor Wy. Berkeley Ave., N. Quincy Rd., N.
“B” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Berkeley Ave., S. East Ave. Ramson Dr.

Broadway, S. Olive Ave., E. “D” St.
“C” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Castleview Dr. Johnson Rd., N. Quincy Rd., N.

Chestnut St. Grant Ave. Canal Dr., W.
“D” St. Lander Ave. First St., S.

Delbon Ave. Olive Ave., N. Colorado Ave.

Denair Ave., N Hawkeye Ave., E. North Ave.

El Capitan Dr. Berkeley Ave., N. Quincy Rd., N.
“F” St., E. Golden State Blvd., S. Alpha Rd.
“F” St., W. Lander Ave. Golden State Blvd., S.

First St., S. Olive Ave., E. “F” St., W.

Fullerton Dr. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 2 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
Georgetown Ave. Del’s Ln. Andre Ln.

Grant Ave. Chestnut St. Main St., W.

Kilroy Rd., N. Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Paseo Del Sol
Main St., E. Lander Ave. E. Canal Dr.

Marshall St., E Minaret Ave., N. Johnson Rd., N.

McKenna Dr. Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Summerton Ln.

Minnesota Ave., W. Del’s Ln. Geer Rd.

North Ave. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Olive Ave., W. Lander Ave. West Ave. North
Palm St., N. Hawkeye Ave., E. Olive Ave., E.

Palm St., N. Olive Ave., E. Minaret Ave., N.

Panorama Ave. Springer Dr., W. Christoffersen Pkwy., W.

Park St. Soderquist Rd., N. First St., N.

Sebastian Dr. Quincy Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Springer Dr., E. Olive Ave., N. Berkeley Ave., N.

Tuolumne Rd., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Wayside Dr. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

West Ave., N. Park St. Main St., W.
(c) Thirty (30) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Alpha Rd. East Ave. Berkeley Ave., S.

Berkeley Ave., N. Hawkeye Ave., E. East Ave.

Broadway., N. Front St. Olive Ave., E.

Canal Dr., W. Broadway., N. Geer Rd.

Colorado Ave. Hawkeye Ave., E. East Ave.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 3 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
Countryside Dr. Monte Vista Ave., W. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Crowell Rd. Monte Vista Ave., W. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Denair Ave., N. E. Canal Dr. Hawkeye Ave., E.

East Ave. Golden State Blvd., N. Bell St.

Fosberg Rd. Sunday Dr. Monte Vista Ave., E.

Georgetown Ave. Walnut Rd., N. Del’s Ln.

Golden State Blvd., S. Main St., W. East Ave.

Heathernoel Wy. Colorado Ave. Berkeley Ave., N.

Hedstrom Rd. Geer Rd. Colorado Ave.

Joett Dr. Fulkerth Rd. Tully Rd., N.

Johnson Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Linwood Ave., W. Lander Ave. West Ave. South
Main St., E. Canal Dr., E. Berkeley Ave., N.

Main St., W. West Ave. South Lander Ave.

Marshall St., E Golden State Blvd., S. Minaret Ave., N.

Marshall St., E Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Minaret Ave., N. Main St., E. East Ave.

Minnesota Ave., E. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Minnesota Ave., E. Olive Ave., N. Colorado Ave.

Minnesota Ave., W. Crowell Rd. Del’s Ln.

Olive Ave., N. Christoffersen Pkwy., E. Inspiration Wy.

Olive Ave., N. Canal Dr., E. Christoffersen Pkwy., E.

Olive Ave., E. Canal Dr., E. Broadway, N.

Orange St., S. Main St., W. Montana Ave.

Peacock Dr. Berkeley Ave., N. Johnson Rd., N.

Pedras Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Porsche Strasse Monte Vista Ave., W. Walnut Rd., N.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 4 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
Quincy Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Roberts Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Kilroy Rd., N.

Soderquist Rd., S. Main St., W. Jordan Ave.

South Ave. Lander Ave. Tully Rd., S.

Spengler Wy. Kilroy Rd., S. Tegner Rd., S.

Springer Dr., E. Geer Rd. Olive Ave., N.

Springer Dr., W. Crowell Rd. Geer Rd.

Tegner Rd., N. Sandstone St. Taylor Rd., N.

Tuolumne Rd., E. Geer Rd. Berkeley Ave., N.

Twentieth Century Blvd. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Walnut Rd., N. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

West Ave. South Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.
(d) Thirty-five (35) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Atherstone Rd. Golden State Blvd., N. Tegner Rd., N.

Berkeley Ave., N. Taylor Rd., E. Hawkeye Ave., E.

Canal Dr., E. Geer Rd. Johnson Rd., N.

Canal Dr., E. Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Canal Dr., W. Soderquist Rd., N. Broadway., N.

Colorado Ave. Taylor Rd., E. Hawkeye Ave., E.

Countryside Dr. Tuolumne Rd., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Crowell Rd. Paseo Belleza Monte Vista Ave., W.

Daubenberger Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., E. East Ave.

Del’s Ln. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

East Ave. Bell St. Johnson Rd., N.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 5 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
Fifth St. “F” St., W. Linwood Ave., E.

First St., N. Chestnut St. Olive Ave., E.

Front St. Golden State Blvd., N. W. Canal Dr.

Fulkerth Rd. State Route 99 N. Tully Rd.

Geer Rd. Monte Vista Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N.

Golden State Blvd., N. Canal Dr., W. Main St., W.

Hawkeye Ave., E. Geer Rd. Waring Rd.

Kilroy Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

Lander Ave. Main St., W. State Route 99
Linwood Ave., E. Golf Rd. Lander Ave.

Main St., W. Kilroy Rd., S. West Ave. South
Ninth St. Lander Ave. Linwood Ave., E.

Quincy Rd., N. Swan Park Dr. Tuolumne Rd., E.

Soderquist Rd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Main St., W.

Tully Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., W. Main St., W.

Tully Rd., S. Main St., W. South Ave.

Tuolumne Rd., W. Countryside Dr. Golden State Blvd., N.

Tuolumne Rd., E. Berkeley Ave., N. Waring Rd.

Walnut Rd., N. Main St., W. Canal Dr., W.

Walnut Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.
(e) Forty (40) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Canal Dr., W. Tully Rd., N. Soderquist Rd., N.

Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Kilroy Rd., N.

East Ave. Johnson Rd., N. Daubenberger Rd., N.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 6 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
First St., S. “F” St., W. Golf Rd.

Fulkerth Rd. Tegner Rd., N. State Route 99
Fulkerth Rd. Tully Rd., N. Golden State Blvd., N.

Glenwood Ave., W. Linwood Ave., W. Lander Ave.

Glenwood Ave., E. Lander Ave. Golf Rd.

Golden State Blvd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Canal Dr., W.

Golden State Blvd., S. East Ave. 1,100 feet south of “F” St., W.

Golf Rd. First St., S. State Route 99
Hawkeye Ave., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Linwood Ave., W. West Ave. South 1400 ft. west of Walnut Rd.

Main St., W. Tegner Rd., S. Kilroy Rd., S.

Monte Vista Ave., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Monte Vista Ave., W. Tegner Rd., N. Geer Rd.

Tegner Rd., N. Tuolumne Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.

Walnut Rd., N. Taylor Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.
(f) Forty-five (45) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Christoffersen Pkwy., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Christoffersen Pkwy., W. Kilroy Rd., N. Geer Rd.

Dianne Dr. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Geer Rd. Taylor Rd., W. Monte Vista Ave., W.

Linwood Ave., W. 1400’ west of Walnut Rd. Tegner Road, S.

Tegner Rd., N. Fulkerth Rd. Tuolumne Rd., W.

Tegner Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

Walnut Rd., S. Linwood Ave., W. Glenwood Ave., W.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 7 of 9
Primary St. Beginning Ending
Waring Rd. Hawkeye Ave., E. Tuolumne Rd., E.
(g) Fifty (50) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Fransil Ln. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Fulkerth Rd. Washington Rd., N. Tegner Rd., N.

Golden State Blvd., N. Taylor Rd., W. Fulkerth Rd.

Washington Rd., N. Main St., W. Fulkerth Rd.
(h) Fifty-five (55) mph speed limit.

Primary St. Beginning Ending
Linwood Ave., W. Tegner Rd. Washington Rd., S.

Main St., W. Washington Rd., S. Tegner Rd., S.

Taylor Rd., E. Geer Rd. East City limits
Taylor Rd., W. Golden State Blvd., N. Geer Rd.

Washington Rd., S. Main St., W. Linwood Ave., W.

Exhibit A to Council Ordinance XXX Page 9 of 9

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024
From: Adrienne Werner, Director of Development Services Prepared by: Adrienne Werner, Director of Development Services Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Second and Final Reading of the Ordinance:

Ordinance: In the matter of amending the Zoning Map of the City of Turlock, California, attached to Title 9 of the Turlock Municipal Code [Rezone 2024-01 Planned Development 283] at 337 West Avenue South, Stanislaus County APN 050-003-042
Resolution: In the matter of establishing Conditions of Approval for Planned Development 283 at 337 West Avenue South, Stanislaus County APN 050- 003-042

2. SYNOPSIS:

Adopting a mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program and considering the request to rezone the property at 337 West Avenue South to Planned Development 283 to allow for deviations from the Municipal Code Standards to allow for the development of a 30-lot single family residential subdivision.

3. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

The applicant is proposing to subdivide the approximately 2.67-acre parcel, into 30 single-family residential lots. The subject site is zoned Medium Density Residential (RM).

The lots will range in size from 2,500 square feet to 4,352 square feet. A Planned Development is proposed to allow for deviations from the lot size standards and setbacks. Setbacks will be measured from the property line to that portion of the building or structure that is closest to the property line. The proposed setbacks for the development are as follows:

Single-story homes: Two-story homes:

Front Yard 10’ Front Yard habitable space 25’
Front Yard Garage 25’ Front Yard Porch 15’
Interior Side Yard 3’ Front Yard Garage 18’
Rear Livable area 10’ Interior Side Yard 3’
Rear Yard Garage 3’ Rear Yard Habitable area 10’
Background

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

The project is proposed on an approximately 2.7-acre parcel. The applicant is proposing to subdivide the lot into 30 single family residential lots. The property is zoned Medium Density Residential (RM) with a General Plan designation of Medium Density Residential (MDR).

Adjacent Properties
The project site is surrounded by
properties zoned RM. The
properties to the north are
developed with single family
homes. The Union Pacific railroad
runs along the southern property
line with single family homes and
multi-family projects developed
south of the railroad line. The
properties to the east are also
developed with single family
homes. The western edge of the
project abuts a long narrow parcel
with a single-family home fronting
onto High Street.

PROJECT EVALUATION
Rezone / Planned Development Request
The 2.7-acre parcel is zoned Medium Density Residential, this designation allows for a density of 7 to 15 units per acre. For the proposed site a minimum of 19 units and maximum of 41 units are required to meet the density range. The project is proposing to subdivide the lot into 30 single-family lots meeting the required minimum density and not exceeding the maximum density.

Turlock Municipal Code 9-2-113 describes the purpose of a Planned Development as follows:
(a) Purpose. The purpose of the planned development standards and procedures is:
(1) To ensure orderly and thorough planning and review procedures that will result in quality urban design;
(2) To encourage variety and avoid monotony in developments by allowing greater freedom and flexibility with the use of alternative development standards; (3) To provide a mechanism whereby the City may authorize desirable developments consistent with the Turlock General Plan;

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

(4) To encourage allocation and improvement of common open space in residential areas, and provide for maintenance of the open space at the expense of those who will directly benefit from it;
(5) To encourage the preservation of serviceable existing structures of historic value or artistic merit by providing the opportunity to use them imaginatively for purposes other than that for which they were originally intended; and (6) To encourage the assembly of properties that might otherwise be developed in unrelated increments to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods.

The applicant has requested a Planned Development to allow deviations from the development standards in the Medium Density Residential (RM) zoning district. The property is a long narrow lot approximately 639’ long and 188’ wide and abutting the Union Pacific railroad along the southern property line. General Plan policy 9.4-f prohibits new residences being located within 100 feet of the railroad tracks. The constraints of the lot size and abutting the railroad make it difficult to develop the this long narrow parcel without requesting deviations from the development standards.

In accordance with Planned Development purpose #3, the Planned Development designation allows the project to deviate from the development standards in order to allow a parcel that would otherwise be difficult to develop.

General Plan Policies
General Plan policy 2.5-a encourages diversity in the citywide mix of housing types by providing for a broad range of densities and prices, including small-lot single-family homes, townhouses, apartments, and condominiums. The property is zoned Medium Density Residential (RM). The minimum lot size in the RM zoning district is 6,000 square feet. At the minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet the project would barely meet the minimum density at approximately 20-units but would not be able to meet standards such as setbacks and public improvements, e.g. standard roadway widths and sidewalks.

Policy 6.2-i calls for the review of the zoning ordinance standards in residential zones to allow for all housing types of the appropriate densities. As proposed, the 2.7-acre property will be subdivided into 30-single family lots ranging in size from 2,500 square feet to 4,352 square feet.

General Plan policies 2.5-c, 6.1-h and 6.2-c encourages infill development on vacant parcels while preserving the scale and character of existing neighborhoods. The property is zoned RM, currently vacant and surrounded by properties zoned RM and developed with single-family and multi-family projects. The proposed small lot single family project meets the intent of the RM zoning district while also blending with the existing single- family homes in the area.

Setbacks
In order to meet the required number of units the project proposes smaller lots than the minimum lot size in the RM zoning district as well as deviations from the setbacks. The Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

lots will range in size from 2,500 square feet to 4,352 square feet. The proposed setbacks are as follows:

Single-story homes: Two-story homes:

Front Yard 10’ Front Yard habitable space 25’
Front Yard Garage 25’ Front Yard Porch 15’
Interior Side Yard 3’ Front Yard Garage 18’
Rear Livable area 10’ Interior Side Yard 3’
Rear Yard Garage 3’ Rear Yard Habitable area 10’
*NOTE: Setbacks shall be measured from that portion of the building or structure closest to a property line.

In comparison, the setbacks for lots in the RM zoning district are:

Minimum Lot Size – 6,000 square feet
Front Yard – 20’
Side Yard – 10’
Corner Side Yard – 15’
Rear Yard – 10’/story
The deviations from the setbacks and minimum lot size allow the project to be developed as small lot single family homes and at a denser rate than typical single-family developments. Although a Planned Development is being requested to allow for deviations from some of the development standards the project is within the allowable density range for the zoning district.

Parking
The houses will each have a two-car garage. Three (3) garage options are proposed. A tandem garage and a recessed garage option for the single-story homes or the typical garage dominant elevation for the two-story home.

Noise

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

General Plan policy 9.4-f requires that new development near railroad tracks be limited to avoid impact from excessive noise vibration. This policy specifically prohibits the construction of new homes stating:
“No new residences or other buildings where people sleep may be located within 100 feet of railroad tracks. These include multi-family dwellings, houses, hospital patient rooms, and hotels.”
The Union Pacific railroad runs the entire length of the southern property line. Requiring residences to be setback 100-feet from the railroad tracks reduces the 188’ wide lot to 88’ ultimately making it difficult for development to occur and meet city standards.

General Plan policy 9.4-d requires a noise analysis be done for projects located in a noise contour. The southern property line is less than 10’ from the railroad. An acoustical analysis was done my WJV Acoustics (WJVA) on May 24, 2024 and submitted as part of the application. The analysis concluded that the railroad line is no longer operational, and there are no known plans for the railroad line to be used at a future date. An excerpt of the analysis is included as Attachment 5 of this report. Since the railroad line is no longer operational WJVA used historical data provided by the Federal Railroad Administration for the analysis. WJVA calculated the project site noise exposure to be approximately 60dB CNEL at the closest residential lots to the historical railroad line.

The noise levels would equal but not exceed the City’s 60 dB CNEL exterior noise level standard. Additionally, interior noise levels would not exceed the City’s 45 dB CNEL interior noise levels if historic operations were to resume.

The acoustical analysis concluded that any significant change in the project, future railroad operations, or noise standards would require reevaluation of the findings in the report.

Elevations
House plans for the subdivision have not been included in this application. Once the house plans have been developed the developer will be required to submit elevations and floor plans to the Planning Division for approval. A Minor Administrative Approval (MAA) will be required to confirm that the house plans comply with the design guidelines.

Public Services & Facilities
Connection to City services is required for this project. The subdivision will also be required to annex to the Community Facilities District 2 (CFD #2) to mitigate the ongoing costs of public services.

Public Comments and Planning Commission Hearing
Staff did not receive any calls or correspondence from the public with questions and concerns about the proposed project prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Several residents from the area attended the September 5th Planning Commission and spoke in favor of the project.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

The Planning Commission voted 4-0-3 to recommend the City Council approve the proposed project.

4. BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION:

A. Applications for Planned Developments require City Council approval. At their September 5, 2024 Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission voted 4-0, with three members absent, to recommend the City Council approve the proposed project.

5. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

Fiscal Impact: The cost of reviewing this request was paid for by the applicant. Further, as a condition of approval, the property will be annexed to CFD #2 and CFD #3 (when formed) to mitigate the project’s impacts on police, fire, and public maintenance operations.

6. CITY MANAGER’S COMMENTS:

Recommend Approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The proposed project would result in rezoning the property at 337 West Avenue South, totaling approximately 2.7-acres, from Medium Density Residential (RM) to Planned Development 283 to allow for the development of 30 single-family homes. The development is consistent with the allowable densities of the RM zoning district.

The environmental impacts associated with Rezone 2024-01, and Planned Development 283 have been reviewed by the City pursuant to the Turlock Municipal Code and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon analysis, information, and mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project, it has been determined that no significant environmental impacts are associated with the proposed project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code 21080(c)(2) and 21157.5 of CEQA, the proposed project was analyzed to establish its potential impacts beyond those described in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Feasible mitigation measures have been added to the project, in accordance with Public Resources Code 21080(c)(2) and 21157.5 of CEQA, to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance.

On August 2, 2024 a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and posted with the Stanislaus County Clerk, stating that the proposed development would not have a significant effect upon the environment because mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR, initial study, and mitigation monitoring program have been added to the project. The initial study and mitigation monitoring program are provided as Attachments #3 and #4.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/24

8. ALTERNATIVES:

A. The City Council may choose to not approve Rezone 2024-01 (PD 283). If the City Council chooses to not approve the Planned Development, the applicant would be required to design the project to meet all of the required standards for the underlying zoning district resulting in a reduction in the total number of lots and the project not meeting the development standards of Medium Density Residential zoning district.

B. The City Council may choose to add or modify Conditions of Approval. The City Council may choose to add to or modify any of the proposed conditions of approval if desired.

10. ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft PD 281 Resolution

2. Draft Ordinance

3. VTSM 2024-01

4. WJV Acoustical Analysis

EXHIBITS
A. Initial Study
B. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF ESTABLISHING } RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR }
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 283 (PD 283) AT }
337 WEST AVENUE SOUTH, STANISLAUS }
COUNTY APN 050-003-042 }
}
WHEREAS, RBK Development has submitted an application to subdivide approximately

2.7 acres into 30-single family residential lots; and
WHEREAS, typical lot sizes will range from 2,500 to 4,352 square feet; and WHEREAS, lot widths range from 36’ wide to 45’ wide; and WHEREAS, lot depths range from 75’ deep to 78’ deep; and WHEREAS, the project will be developed generally in accordance with standards established for the Medium Density Residential (RM) zoning district; and WHEREAS, the property affected by this Resolution is described as Stanislaus County Assessor Parcel No. 050-003-042; and,
WHEREAS, said applications have been studied by City Staff and recommendations made to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the request on September 5, 2024, and recommended that the proposed amendment to the official City of Turlock Zoning Map and establishment of Planned Community Development District No. 283 [PD-283 (Rezone 2024-01)] be authorized by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on October 22, 2024, the City Council considered the request, the Planning Commission recommendation, and the Environmental Review documentation and testimony and found that Rezone No. 2024-01, and Planned Community Development District No. 283 (PD- 283) will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment and directed that a Notice of Determination for a Mitigated Negative Declaration be filed; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 22, 2024, and considered the public testimony before introducing the ordinance amending the zoning map of the City of Turlock, attached to Title 9 of the Turlock Municipal Code for Rezone 2024-01; and WHEREAS, a second reading of the ordinance occurred on November 12, 2024 at a public noticed meeting, the Turlock City Council voted to enact the ordinance amending the zoning map of the City of Turlock, attached to Title 9 of the Turlock Municipal Code for Rezone 2024-01 (PD 283).

ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 2024-

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Turlock as follows:

Section 1.The City Council adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Effect and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, having determined that the City of Turlock, as lead agency for the proposed project, has prepared an initial study to make the following findings:

1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the proposed activity is adequately described and is within the scope of the General Plan EIR.

2. All feasible mitigation measures developed in the General Plan EIR have been incorporated into the project.

3. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(c)(2) and 21157.5, the initial study prepared for the proposed project has identified potential new or significant effects that were not adequately analyzed in the General Plan EIR, but feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated to revise the proposed subsequent project to avoid or mitigate the identified effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.

4. There is no substantial evidence before the lead agency that that the subsequent project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.

5. The analyses of cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment contained in the General Plan EIR are adequate for this subsequent project.

6. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the General Plan EIR by Turlock City Council Resolution 2012-156. As identified in the Turlock General Plan EIR, development in the project area would result in significant, and unavoidable, impacts in the areas of noise, regional air quality, and the eventual loss of agricultural land. The magnitude of these impacts can be reduced, but not eliminated by the mitigation measures referenced in the initial study prepared for this project and General Plan EIR. Therefore, mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR, and its respective Statements of Overriding Considerations (contained in Turlock City Council Resolution No. 2012-156), are adequate to mitigate the impacts from the proposed project where feasible, and are hereby incorporated by reference.

7. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21157.6(a), having reviewed the General Plan EIR, the City of Turlock finds and determines that:
a. There are no substantial changes that have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan EIR was certified, and
b. There is no new available information which was not and could not have been known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified.

Section 2. That the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby approve the development of Planned Community Development District No. 283 (PD-283), in accordance with the plan filed as part of the Planning Commission consideration, referred to above, and which is on file in the office of the Turlock Planning Division. The following conditions shall apply, as well as compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances and shall be complied with prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, or its equivalent, unless otherwise stipulated:

CONDITIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 283 (PD-283)

1. This approval authorizes the rezoning of approximately 2.7-acres from Medium Density Residential (RM) to Planned Development 283 to allow for the development of a 30-lot single family residential subdivision.

Resolution No. 2024-

2. All development on the property shall be subject to the conditions set forth in Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 2024-01, and all conditions therein

3. Planned Development 283 authorizes the development of 30 residential lots generally in conformance with the standards of the RM zoning district as contained the Turlock Municipal Code § 9-3-200ART, unless otherwise stated herein.

4. Typical lot sizes will range from 2,500 to 4,352 square feet.

5. Typical lot widths will range from 36’ wide to 45’ wide.

6. Typical lot depths will range from 75’ deep to 78’ deep.

7. The subdivision shall be developed in accordance with the vesting tentative subdivision map submitted as part of the application for this project, except as may be amended herein:

Single-story homes: Two-story homes:

Front Yard 10’ Front Yard habitable space 25’
Front Yard Garage 25’ Front Yard Porch 15’
Interior Side Yard 3’ Front Yard Garage 18’
Rear Livable area 10’ Interior Side Yard 3’
Rear Yard Garage 3’ Rear Yard Habitable area 10’

8. All mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project are hereby made conditions of approval for Rezone 2021-01 and Planned Development 283
Section 3. That said Rezoning is hereby approved subject to compliance with all applicable codes and ordinances, and subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein.

Section 4. The Director of Development Services, or designee, is hereby directed to record this Resolution at the office of the County Recorder of the County of Stanislaus.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

NOT PARTICIPATING:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
___________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus, State of
California

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF AMENDING THE ZONING } ORDINANCE NO. -CS MAP OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA, }
ATTACHED TO TITLE 9 OF THE TURLOCK }
MUNICIPAL CODE [REZONE 2024-01, PLANNED}
DEVELOPMENT 283] AT 337 WEST AVENUE }
SOUTH, STANISLAUS COUNTY APN }
050-003-042 }
________________________________________ }
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Turlock as follows:

SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION. The City Council finds that the report or declaration reflects the independent judgement of the lead agency and that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and directs that a Notice of Determination be filed.

SECTION 2. ZONING CHANGE. The Zoning Map of the City of Turlock is hereby amended to rezone the following described property from Medium Density Residential (R- M) to Planned Development No. 283, under the provisions of Title 9 of the Turlock Municipal Code, and said real property shall hereafter be subject to the provisions and regulations of this Chapter relating to property located within such Districts. Said property is described as follows:

All that portion of Lot 8 and 9 of the Crow and Browder Colony, in the County of Stanislaus, State of California, according to the official map thereof, filed in the Office of the Recorder of Stanislaus County, California, on March 17, 1905 in Volume 2 of Maps, at Page 11, described as follows:

Commencing at the true northeast corner of said Lot 9 of the said Crow and Browder Colony and running thence south along center of avenue 461 feet as the point of beginning; thence same last mentioned course 188.5 feet to a point 4.5 feet south of the north line of the avenue along the southerly side of said Lot 9; thence west and parallel with the north line of said avenue 669.5 feet to the west line of Lot 8 of said ATTACHMENT 2
Ordinance No. -CS

Crow and Browder Colony; thence north on the west line of Lot 8 a distance of 188.5 feet; thence east and parallel with the south line of said Lots 8 and 9, a distance of 669.5 feet to the point of beginning.

Excepting the south 50 feet of the east 120 feet of said Lot 9, measured to the center line of West Avenue and form the north line of Avenue on the South.

Also excepting the east 10 feet as deeded to City of Turlock in Deed recorded February 11, 1985 Instrument Number 36862 Reel 032 Image 286.

APN: 050-003-042-000
SECTION 3. ZONING MAP. The Zoning Map of the City of Turlock, California, attached to Title 9 of the Turlock Municipal Code is amended to appear as set forth on the map attached hereto (Exhibit A), which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference.

SECTION 4. VALIDITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase, of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or other wise invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance. The Turlock City Council hereby declares that they would have passed this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5. ENACTMENT. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force on and after thirty (30) days of its passage and adoption. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the passage and adoption thereof, this ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the County of Stanislaus, State of California, together with names of the members of the City Council voting for and against the same.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

Ordinance No. -CS

AYES: Abram, Bixel, Monez, Franco, Bublak (5)
NOES: None (0)
NOT PARTICIPATING: None (0)
ABSENT: None (0)
Signed and approved this 12th day of November, 2024.

SIGNED:
__________________________
Amy Bublak, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
George Petrulakis, City Attorney
Ordinance No. -CS

EXHIBIT A

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM RM
RM
RM
RM RM
RM
RM
RM
RMRM
RM RM
RM
RM
PD 283
PD 169
SLB
ELCELC
JP
JP
JP
JP
JP
PP
TEL
EX-ISP(18")(13211)±98.75RIM
EX-ISP(18")(12213)±97.99RIM
GV
WM
WM
WV
APN: 050-002-016
APN: 050-003-041
APN: 050-035-004APN: 050-035-006APN: 050-026-005
APN: 050-025-001APN: 050-025-002APN: 050-025-003APN: 050-025-004

96.096.097.097.095.896.296.296.496.496.696.696.896.8

96.296.496.696.8

96.095.896.2

96.296.496.296.496.6 97.0

96.296.496.696.8

96.095.695.8

97.096.296.496.696.897.2

97.096.897.297.297.096.496.696.896.496.696.496.696.896.496.696.897.096.496.696.8

97.096.897.2

97.097.297.497.697.8

97.096.897.297.497.096.897.297.697.897.697.8

96.496.696.296.496.6

96.296.496.296.4
GV
Ex2"G Ex2"G Ex2"G
Ex12"SS
Ex12"SS
Ex12"SS
Ex12"SD
Ex12"SD
Ex12"SDEx8"W Ex8"W
1 23'
58'43'78'
38'
43'
76'
76'
57'57'
17'77'
37'77'
38'77'
38'77'
38'77'
38'77'
38'77'
38'78'
38'78'
38'78'
38'78'
76'56'
18'37'37'37'37'37'37'37'37'37'75'
75'
75'
75'
75'
75'
76'
76'56'
76'
545'
2345678910111213
20222324252627282930
141516
171819
76'
43'
89'
STREET A125'
S. WEST AVENUE
8"SS8"W 8"SS8"W
76'
45'
55'43' 21
106'
75'3259 SF2800 SF2797 SF2793 SF2789 SF2785 SF2781 SF2777 SF2773 SF2769 SF4352 SF 28'
28'38'
76'38'
38'
B
A
35'
31'
21'
21' 21'DED.
40'EX. PAVEMENTEXISTING EASEMENT PER PLATEXISTING ELECTRICAL BOXESTO BE RELOCATEDEXISTING HOUSE

EXISTING HOUSE
R28'R28'R28'R28' R25'R25'
10' P.U.E.
10' P.U.E. REMOVE CURB, GUTTERAND SIDEWALK

CCONNECT TO EXISTINGSEWER WITH MANHOLE

CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERCONNECT TO EXISTINGSTORM WITH MANHOLE 2739 SF2751 SF3134 SF
3111 SF2577 SF2523 SF
3084 SF2960 SF2956 SF2951 SF2947 SF2943 SF2939 SF2935 SF2931 SF2927 SF2923 SF2842 SF3193 SF120'NO PARKING NO PARKING36'36' 16'38' 36'36'16'

BASKETBALL HOOP

BASKETBALL HOOP

FIRE TRUCK DRIVE-OVERVERTICAL CURBING(SEE DETAIL A)

VEHICLE TURN AROUND
35' TYPICAL INTERIOR STREETA
35'18'F/C C/L10'10'P.U.E.TRAVEL LANE7'PARKINGLANE10'TRAVEL LANE18'10'TRAVEL LANE7'PARKINGLANE0.5' N.T.S.

P/L

VERTICAL CURBAND GUTTER
5'SIDE-WALKP.P.E. F/C10'P.U.E.0.5'P/L
5'SIDE-WALKP.P.E.
21' FIRE LANEB
21'10'P.U.E.

N.T.S.

P/L 10'P.U.E.P/LFIRE LANE(NO PARKING)S. WEST AVENUECN.T.S. 56'31'F/C C/L12'EX. TRAVEL LANE8'EX. PARKINGLANE
R/W6'PARKWAY5'SIDE-WALK 25'F/C12'8'5'SIDE-WALKEX. TRAVEL LANEEX. PARKINGLANEVERTICAL CURB R/W

STREET A
3'36' TYP.10'REAR43' TYP.10'REAR10'LIVABLE
20' X 20' GARAGE

LIVABLE
PORCH100 SF
3'3'
20' X 20' GARAGE
2,080 SF2,080 SF
PORCH100 SF
75' MIN.
10' P.U.E.25'LIVABLE18'GARAGE
25'LIVABLE
18'GARAGE15'PORCH5' P.P.E.
15'PORCHFIRE TRUCK DRIVE-OVERVERTICAL CURBING(SEE DETAIL A)

FIRE LANE

STREET A
36' TYP.10'LIV. 43' TYP.10'

LIVABLE
3'3'
3' GARAGE
10'LIV.3' GARAGE3'

LIVABLE
20' X 20' GARAGE20' X 20' GARAGE
985 SF985 SF
75' MIN.
10' P.U.E.
9' WIDE DRIVEWAY9' WIDE DRIVEWAY10'LIV./PORCH
10'LIV./PORCH5' P.P.E.

FIRE LANE

FIRE TRUCK DRIVE-OVERVERTICAL CURBING(SEE DETAIL A)STREET A 36' TYP.10'REAR43' TYP.10'REAR10'LIVABLE
10' X 40'TANDEMGARAGE
3'3'1,100 SF
3' LIVABLE
10' X 40'TANDEMGARAGE
1,100 SF
75' MIN.
10' P.U.E.10'LIVABLE
25'GARAGE
10'LIVABLE25'GARAGE5' P.P.E.

FIRE LANE

FIRE TRUCK DRIVE-OVERVERTICAL CURBING(SEE DETAIL A)

APPROVED
SHEETNUMBER DATEDESCRIPTIONSREVISIONSNO.

CALIFORNIA
JOB #:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN:DESIGN:CHK'D:

PLOTTED: 09/24/2024 14:39 PLOTTED BY: PhurbanDWGNAME: F:\24-3467 337 S West Avenue\Planning\TM\TM1.1.dwg TM1.1COPYRIGHT © 2024 NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING GROUP, INC 24-3467JEPMHPMH09/24/2024
TURLOCK,337 S. WEST AVENUETENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

AS SHOWN
01" = 40204040'
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP337 S. WEST AVENUETURLOCK, CALIFORNIA

1.ALL IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS PER CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARDPLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS EXCEPT AS NOTED.2.STORM DRAINAGE TO BE CONVEYED TO TWO CATCH BASINS WITH FILTRATIONDEVICES, THEN CONNECT TO THE EXISTING MAIN IN S. WEST AVENUE.3.SANITARY SEWER TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARDS ANDSPECIFICATIONS.4.WATER SYSTEM TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARDS ANDSPECIFICATIONS.5.STREET LIGHTING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS.6.PUBLIC UTILITIES ARE TO BE INSTALLED UNDER GROUND IN EASEMENTS.7.THE SUBDIVIDER HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FILE "MULTIPLE SUBDIVISION MAPS"AS SET FORTH BY THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 66456.1., AND FILEPARCEL MAPS FOR REASON OF SALE. ALL PARCEL LINES SHALL CONFORM TO THISTENTATIVE MAP.8.PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED ALONG ALL STREET IN-TRACTFRONTAGES.9.ALL EXISTING STRUCTURES AND TREES ARE TO BE REMOVED UNLESS OTHERWISENOTED. SEPTIC TANKS, LEACH FIELDS, AND WELLS ON SITE WILL BE REMOVED ORABANDONED AS PER CITY OF CITY OF TURLOCK REQUIREMENTS.10.APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE ACCESS AGREEMENT IN PERPETUITY FOR CITY TO INSPECTALL POST-CONSTRUCTION BMP'S.11.HOUSE FOOTPRINTS SHOWN ARE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. HOUSEFOOTPRINTS MAY VARY IN THE FUTURE, BUT THE SETBACKS ARE TO REMAINCONSTANT.12.ALL STREETS ARE TO BE PUBLIC STREETS.13.NO PARKING ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF LOTS 17 THRU 19 AND PORTION OF 30.14.STREET A TO UTILIZE STANISLAUS COUNTY STANDARD DRIVE-OVER CURB AT THEPROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS ONLY AND THEN TRANSITIONWITHIN 3 FEET TO THE CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARD 6” CURB AND GUTTER.

GENERAL NOTES
A. REGULATORY AGENCY: CITY OF TURLOCKPLANNING DIVISION 156 S. BROADWAY, STE. 120TURLOCK, CA 95380T: (209) 668-5640CONTACT: KATIE QUINTERO B. APPLICANT:RON KATAKIS1850 ARBOR WAYTURLOCK, CA 95380T: (209) 483-8159C. ENGINEER:NORTHSTAR ENGINEERING GROUP, INC620 12th STREETMODESTO CA, 95354T: (209) 524-3525CONTACT: MALLORIE FENRICHD. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:050-003-042E. EXISTING LAND USE:VACANT LOTF. PROPOSED LAND USE: RESIDENTIALG. EXISTING ZONING / GP:RM/ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIALH. PROPOSED ZONING / GP:RM/ MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH PD OVERLAYI. TOTAL PROJECT SIZE:2.7± ACRESK. TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS:30L. MAXIMUM FOOTPRINT COVERAGE:60%M. PARKING:MINIMUM TWO CAR GARAGE, AND TWO DRIVEWAY SPACES PER LOTN. SETBACKS:SEE LOT FIT PLANSO. CONTOURS: 0.2' INTERVALS PER SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 2/27/24P. NOISE CONTOURS60 TO 65 dB PER NOISE ELEMENT OF THE ADOPTEDGENERAL PLANQ. RETURNS: PER CITY OF TURLOCK STANDARDSR. UTILITIES:WATER SYSTEM - CITY OF TURLOCKSANITARY SEWER - CITY OF TURLOCKSTORM DRAINAGE - CITY OF TURLOCKGAS - PG&EELECTRIC - TURLOCK IRRIGATION DIST. TELEPHONE - AT&TSCHOOL DISTRICT - TURLOCK UNIFIED

PROJECT INFORMATION
VICINITY MAPN.T.S.

PROPOSEDEXISTINGLEGENDBOUNDARY LINECENTERLINERIGHT-OF-WAYPARCEL LINELOT LINELOT NUMBERLOT DIMENSIONCURB AND GUTTERSIDEWALKEDGE OF PAVEMENTPAVEMENTMASONRY WALLSIGNCONTOUROVER HEAD ELECTRICALGAS (MAIN)SERVICE POLESTORM DRAIN (MAIN)STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE HOLEWATER (MAIN)SEWER MAINTENANCE HOLESEWER (MAIN)PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (P.U.E.)/PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT (P.P.E.)NO PARKING N/AN/A45'50N/AN/A

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A
SP
ExWWN/AN/AN/A
TWO-STORY LOT FIT PLANSCALE: 1" = 20'
HIGHWAY 99W. MAIN STREETGOLDEN STATE BLVD.

S. SODERQUIST RD.S. WEST AVE.HIGH STREET
W. CANAL DR.

VERMONT STREET
ALL THAT PORTION OF LOT 8 AND 9 OF THE CROW AND BROWDER COLONY, IN THECOUNTY OF STANISLAUS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL MAPTHEREOF, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF STANISLAUS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA,ON MARCH 17, 1905 IN VOLUME 2 OF MAPS, AT PAGE 11.

LEGAL DESCRIPTIONSINGLE-STORY LOT FIT PLAN, OPTION 1SCALE: 1" = 20'SINGLE-STORY LOT FIT PLAN, OPTION 2SCALE: 1" = 20'

96.0 N/AN/A
6"12"3"
8"4"18"
3"
6" 12"
2"
NTSFIRE TRUCK DRIVE-OVER CURB DETAIL - DETAIL A4"
4"
SEAL ALL JOINTSWITH RS-1 TACKCOAT AT 0.12GAL/SQ.YD.6" MINIMUM CONCRETE SIDEWALKAT MODIFIED DRIVE-OVER CURB.

CONCRETE THICKENEDEDGE#4 BAR CONTINUOUSBOTH WAYS @ 24" O.CCLASS "B" CONCRETEAGGREGATE BASE #4 BAR CONTINUOSAC PAVEMENT

ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS

337 WEST AVENUE SOUTH
TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA

WJVA Project No. 24‐28

PREPARED FOR

RBK DEVELOPMENT, INC.
1850 ARBOR STREET
TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA 95380

PREPARED BY

WJV ACOUSTICS, INC.

VISALIA, CALIFORNIA

MAY 24, 2024

113 North Church Street, Suite 203 ∙ Visalia, CA 93291∙ (559) 627-4923

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
2 INTRODUCTION

The project is a proposed 30‐lot single‐family residential deve lopment to be located in Turlock, California. The project site is bordered to the south by a Unio n Pacific Railroad line. The railroad line is no longer operational. However, the City of Turlock has  requested an acoustical analysis to determine project site noise exposure if railroad operations  were to occur along the railroad line.  This  analysis,  prepared  by WJV  Acoustics,  Inc.  (WJVA),  is  based  upon  a  project  site  plan provided by the project applicant, railroad data provided by the Federal Railroad Administration and the findings of on‐site noise level measurements. Revisions  to the site plan may affect the findings and recommendations of this report. The site plan is provided as Figure 1.

Appendix  A  provides  a  description  of  the  acoustical  terminology  used  in  this  report.    Unless otherwise  stated,  all  sound  levels  reported  are  in  A‐weighted  d ecibels  (dB).  A‐weighting de‐emphasizes  the  very  low  and  very  high  frequencies  of  sound  in  a  manner  similar  to  the human ear. Most community noise standards utilize A‐weighting, as it provides a high degree of correlation with human annoyance and health effects. Appendix B  provides typical A‐weighted sound levels for common noise sources.

I n  t e r m s  o f  h u m a n  p e r c e p t i o n ,  a  5  d B  i n c r e a s e  o r  d e c r e a s e  i s  c on s i d e r e d  t o  b e  a  n o t i c e a b l e change in noise levels.  Additionally, a 10 dB increase or decrease is perceived by the human ear as  half  as  loud  or  twice  as  loud.  In  terms  of  perception,  generally  speaking  the  human  ear cannot perceive an increase (or decrease) in noise levels less than 3 dB.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
3 CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTABLE NOISE EXPOSURE

The Noise Element of the City of Turlock General Plan establish es noise level standards for both transportation  and  non‐transporta tion  (stationary)  noise  source s .  T a b l e  I  p r o v i d e s  t h e maximum interior and exterior noise level standards for various  land use categories, in terms of the  CNEL.  The  CNEL  (Community  Noise  Equivalent  Level)  is  the  time‐weighted  average  noise level  for  a  24‐hour  day  with  penalties  of  4.77  dB  added  to  noise  levels  occurring  during  the evening  hours  (7:00  p.m‐10:00  p.m.)  and  10  dB  added  to  noise  levels  occurring  during  the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m‐7:00 a.m.).

The  noise  element  establishes  an  exterior  noise  standard  of  60  dB  CNEL  for  exterior  noise exposure within outdoor activity areas of residential land uses . Outdoor activity areas include backyards of single‐family residences, individual patios or dec ks of multi‐family developments and common outdoor recreation areas of multi‐family development s. The intent of the exterior noise  level  requirement  is  to  provide  an  acceptable  noise  environment  for  outdoor  activities and  recreation.  There  is  no  applicable  exterior  noise  level  stan d a r d  f o r  c o m m e r c i a l  o r  o f f i c e land uses provided in the General Plan Noise Element.

The Noise Element also requires that interior noise levels attr ibutable to exterior noise sources not  exceed  45  dB  CNEL.  The  inten t  of  the  interior  noise  level  s tandard  is  to  provide  an acceptable  noise  environment  for  indoor  communication  and  sleep.  The  Noise  Element  also establishes an interior noise level standard of 50 dB CNEL for commercial and office land uses.

TABLE I

ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE

CITY OF TURLOCK GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT
dBA, CNEL

Land Use Categories  Outdoor Activity
Areas1  Interior Spaces2
Residential  60  45
Motels, Hotels  60  45
Hospitals, Nursing Homes, Schools, Libraries, Museums, Churches 6 0   4 5 Playgrounds, Parks, Recreation Uses  65  50
Commercial and Office Uses  65  50
Industrial Uses  70  65
1 For non‐residential uses, where an outdoor activity area is not proposed, the standard does not apply. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving use.

2. Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to the allowable maximum, levels up to 5 dB higher may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reductions measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.

Source: City of Turlock General Plan
24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
4 T a b l e  I I  p r o v i d e s  n o i s e  l e v e l  p e r f o r m a n c e  s t a n d a r d s  f o r  n o n ‐ t r ansportation  (stationary)  noise sources, as provided in the City of Turlock General Plan Noise  Element. The non‐transportation noise  level  standards  are  provided  in  terms  of  the  energy  avera g e  n o i s e  l e v e l  ( Leq)  and maximum allowable noise level (L max), and become 10 dB more restrictive during the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).

TABLE II

NOISE LEVEL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, NON-TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES

CITY OF TURLOCK GENERAL PLAN
dBA

Noise Level Descriptor  Daytime
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.

Nighttime
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

Hourly Leq, dB  55  45
Maximum Level, dB  75  65
Note: Each of the noise levels specified above shall be lowered by 5 dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.

Source: City of Turlock General Plan

Additionally,  section  5‐28‐108  (Noise  Limits)  of  the  City  of  Turlock  Municipal  Code  provide exterior  noise  limits  applicable   to  the  project.  Table  III  prov i d e s  t h e  n o i s e  l e v e l  s t a n d a r d s provided in the Municipal Code.

TABLE III

EXTERIOR NOISE LIMITS
LEVELS NOT TO BE EXCEEDED MORE THAN 30 MINUTES IN ANY HOUR (L50)

CITY OF TURLOCK MUNICIPAL CODE

Receiving Land Use Category
L50 A‐Weighted Decibels, dBA
Sources
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.  10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

One‐ and Two‐Family Residential  60  50
Multiple Dwelling Resdiential  60  55
Public Spaces  65  ‐‐
Motels/Hotels, Hospitals, Nursing Homes, Schools,
Libraries, Museums, Churches  60  55
All Other Commercial  65  60
Light Industrial  70  70
Heavy Industrial  75  75

Source: City of Turlock Municipal Code

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
5 In regards to the noise level standards described in Table III, section 5‐28‐109 (Maximum permissible sound levels by receiving land uses) of the City of Turlock Municipal Code states the following:

The maximum sound levels shall be determined as follows:
(a) The noise standards for the various categories of land use identified by the Noise Control Officer as set forth in TMC 5‐28‐108, unless otherwise specifically indicated, shall apply to all such property within a designated zone. (b) No person shall operate, or cause to be operated, any source of sound at any location within the incorporated City, or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level, when measured on any other property, either incorporated or unincorporated, to exceed:
(1) The noise standard for that land use as specified in TMC 5‐28‐108 for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; or (2) The noise standard plus five (5) dB for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour; or
(3) The noise standard plus ten (10) dB for a cumulative period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour; or
(4) The noise standard plus fifteen (15) dB for a cumulative period of more than one (1) minute in any hour; or
(5) The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB or the maximum measured ambient level for any period of time.
(c) If the measured ambient level differs from that permissible within any of the first four (4) noise limit categories set forth in subsection (b) of this section, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be adjusted in five (5) dB increments in each category as appropriate to encompass or reflect such ambient noise level. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category, the maximum allowable noise level under such category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level.
(d) If the measurement location is on a boundary between two (2) different zones, the noise level limit applicable to the lower noise zone, plus five (5) dB, shall apply.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
6 Table  IV  summarizes  the  noise  level  standards  provided  in  secti o n  5 ‐ 2 8 ‐ 1 0 9  o f  t h e  C i t y  o f Turlock Municipal Code. The nois e ordinance addresses the stati stical distribution of noise over time and allows for progressively shorter periods of exposure t o levels of increasing loudness.

Table IV summarizes the exterior noise level standards of the o rdinance. The ordinance is to be applied  during  any  one‐hour  time  period  of  the  day  or  night  and   the  standards  are  more r e s t r i c t i v e  d u r i n g  t h e  n i g h t t i m e  h o u r s  o f  1 0 : 0 0  p . m .  t o  7 : 0 0  a .m.  The  standards  of  the  noise ordinance  may  be  adjusted  upward  (made  less  restrictive)  if  exi sting  ambient  noise  levels without the source of concern already exceed the noise ordinance standards.

TABLE IV

EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS, dBA

CITY OF TURLOCK MUNICIPAL CODE
CUMULATIVE # MIN/HR. (Ln)
DAYTIME, 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. (NIGHTTIME, 10 P.M. to 7 A.M.)

Receiving Land Use Category  30 (L50)  15 (L25)  5 (L8.3)  1 (L1.7)  0 (Lmax) One‐ and Two‐Family Residential  60 (50)  65 (55)  70 (60)  75 (65)   80 (70) Multiple Dwelling Resdiential  60 (55)  65 (60)  70 (65)  75 (70)  80 (75) Public Spaces  65  70  75  80  85
Motels/Hotels, Hospitals, Nursing
Homes, Schools, Libraries, Museums,
Churches
60 (55)  65 (60)  70 (65)  75 (70)  80 (75)
All Other Commercial  65 (60)  70 (65)  75 (70)  80 (75)  85 (80) Light Industrial  70  75  80  85  90
Heavy Industrial  75  80  85  90  95

Note:  In layman’s terms, the noise level standards shown may no t be exceeded for more than the specified number of minutes within any one‐hour time period.  The Ln value shown in parenthesis indicates the percent of the time during an hour that a particular noise level may not be exceeded. For example, the L50 represents 50% of the hour, or 30 minutes.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
7 PROJECT SITE NOISE EXPOSURE

The  project  site  is  located  at  337  West  Avenue  South,  in  the  Cit y  o f  T u r l o c k ,  C a l i f o r n i a .  T h e project site is bordered to the south by a Union Pacific (UP) R ailroad line. The closest proposed residential  backyards  for  the  proposed  lots  are  located  approximately  40  feet  from  the  UP Railroad line.

The railroad line is no longer o perational. Figure 2 provides a  photo taken immediately east of the project site, which shows a sign installed in the middle of  the railroad line, confirming that the  railroad  line  is  not  operational  in  the  project  vicinity.  However,  this  analysis  quantifies project site railroad noise exposure based on historical usage along the railroad line.

Project Site Ambient Noise Levels:

WJVA conducted a site visit and ambient noise level measurement  at the project site on May 14, 2024. Observed noise sources  during the project site visit  and ambient noise measurement included  vehicle  traffic  along  West  Avenue  South,  barking  dogs,   noise  associated  with landscaping activities and occasional aircraft overflights.

Noise  monitoring  equipment  consisted  of  a  Larson‐Davis  Laboratories  Model  LDL‐820  sound level analyzer equipped with a B&K Type 4176 1/2” microphone. T he equipment complies with the  specifications  of  the  American  National  Standards  Institute ( A N S I )  f o r  T y p e  I  ( P r e c i s i o n ) sound  level  meters.  The  meter  was  calibrated  with  a  B&K  Type  4230  acoustic  calibrator  to ensure the accuracy of the measurements.

Ambient noise levels were measured at one (1) location within t he project site. The location of the ambient noise measurement site is provided as Figure 3. A photograph of the ambient noise measurement site is provided as Figure 4.

Noise  measurement  data  included  energy  average  (L eq)  maximum  (Lmax)  as  well  as  five  (5)
individual  statistical  parameters.  Observations  were  made  of  th e  dominant  noise  sources affecting  the  measurements.  The  statistical  parameters  describe t h e  p e r c e n t  o f  t i m e  a  n o i s e level  was  exceeded  during  the  measurement  period.  Table  V  summarizes  short‐term  noise measurement results.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
8 TABLE V

SUMMARY OF SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA
337 WEST AVENUE SOUTH, TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA
MAY 14, 2024

Site  Time  A‐Weighted Decibels, dBA  Sources Leq  Lmax  L2  L8  L25  L50  L90 ST‐1  2:30 P.m.  52.6  60.3  57.9  56.3  53.3  50.9  49.1  TR, D, L TR: Traffic   AC: Aircraft   V: Voices  D: Dogs Barking  B: Birds  C: Construction Activities  L: Landscaping Activities Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc.

Railroad Noise Exposure:

The  Union  Pacific  (UP)  Railroad  line  is  located  approximately  40  feet  from  the  rear  of  the proposed  residential  lots.  As  described  above,  the  railroad  line  is  no  longer  operational  and there  are  currently  no  known  plans  for  the  railroad  line  to  become  operational.  According  to data provided by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), his torical usage of the railroad line included two (2) daily operations, with trains traveling at a m aximum speed of 10 mph (miles per hour).

Train  engineers  are  required  to  sound  warning  horns  when  within  approximately  ¼  mile  of  a grade crossing. As the entire pr oject site railroad frontage is  located within ¼ mile of the West A v e n u e  S o u t h  g r a d e  c r o s s i n g ,  a l l  l o t s  a d j a c e n t  t o  t h e  U P  l i n e  would  be  impacted  by  train warning horns if railroad operations were to occur along the railroad line.

As the UP line is non‐operationa l, no rail operations were obse rved by WJVA during the project site inspection on May 14, 2024. It was therefore necessary to  calculate historical railroad noise exposure  within  the  site  based  on  noise  measurement  data  obtain ed  by  WJVA  during  the performance of previous noise studies along various railroad li nes in the central valley area. A total of 17 measurements have been obtained over the past several years. WJVA has found that there  is  substantial  variability  in  the  noise  levels  produced  by  individual  train  pass‐bys  due  to train length, speed, horn usage, and other factors. At distance s of 500 feet or less from a grade crossing,  the  average  Sound  Exposu re  Level  (SEL)  during  low‐spe e d  t r a i n  o p e r a t i o n s  w a s determined to be 106.4 dBA at an assumed distance of 40 feet fr om the track. WJVA calculated project  site  noise  exposure  based  upon  this  assumed  noise  level   and  two  daily  daytime operations.

The  SEL  is  a  measure  of  the  total  energy  of  a  noise  event,  including  consideration  of  event duration. The SEL is not actually heard, but is a derived value used for the calculation of energy‐ based noise exposure metrics such as the CNEL.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
9 Railroad noise exposure may be quantified in terms of the CNEL using the following formula:

CNEL =SEL+ 10 log Neq – 49.4

where,

SEL is the average SEL for a train pass‐by, N
eq is the equivalent number of passbys
in  a  typical  24‐hour  period  determined  by  adding  10  times  the  n umber  of nighttime events  (10  p.m.  ‐  7  a.m.)  to  3  times the  number  of  evening events (7 p.m.  –  10  p.m.)  to  the  actual  number  of  daytime  events  (7  a.m. –  7  p.m.),  and

49.4 is a time constant equal to 10 log the number of seconds in the day.

Using  the  above‐described  formula,  railroad  operations  data  and n o i s e  m e a s u r e m e n t  r e s u l t s , the  railroad  noise  exposure  at  the  closest  proposed  residential  l o t s  t o  t h e  r a i l r o a d  w a s calculated to be approximately 60 dB CNEL. This noise level equals but does not exceed the City of Turlock exterior noise level standard of 60 dB CNEL.

INTERIOR NOISE COMPLIANCE‐
The City of Turlock interior noise level standard applicable to  the project is 45 dB CNEL. Exterior noise exposure at the closest residential lots to the UP Railro ad line would be expected to be approximately 60 dB CNEL if railroad operations were to occur b ased upon historical usage (the railroad  line  is  no  longer  operational).  This  means  that  the  proposed  residential  construction must  be  capable  of  providing  a  minimum  outdoor‐to‐indoor  noise  l e v e l  r e d u c t i o n  ( N L R )  o f approximately 15 dB (60‐45=15).

A specific analysis of interior noise levels was not performed.  However, it may be assumed that construction methods complying with current building code requi rements will reduce exterior noise  levels  by  at  least  25  dB  if  windows  and  doors  are  closed.   This  will  be  sufficient  for compliance  with  the  City’s  45  dB  CNEL  interior  standard  at  all  proposed  residential  lots.

Requiring  that  it  be  possible  for  windows  and  doors  to  remain  closed  for  sound  insulation means that air conditioning or mechanical ventilation will be required.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The project site is located adjacent to a Union Pacific Railroa d line. However, the railroad line is no longer operational, and there are no known plans for the rai lroad line to be used at a future date. WJVA has provided a photograph as Figure 2, which shows a  sign installed in the center of the  railroad  line,  further  demonstrating  that  the  railroad  line  i s  n o  l o n g e r  i n  u s e .  T h e photograph was taken a few feet east of the project site.

WJVA c alcul ated his tori cal proj ect s ite nois e ex pos ure bas e d upon historical data provided by the  Federal  Railroad  Administration,  which  indicated  that  at  one  point  the  railroad  line  was utilized for two daily train operations. Applying noise levels previously measured by WJVA along various  railroad  lines  within  the  central  valley  area,  and  the  assumed  two  daytime  train operations, WJVA calculated the  project site noise exposure to  be approximately 60 dB CNEL at the closest residential lots to the historical railroad line. S uch levels would equal but would not exceed  the  City’s  60  dB  CNEL  exterior  noise  level  standard.  Additionally,  interior  noise  levels would  not  exceed  the  City’s  45  dB  CNEL  interior  noise  level  standards  if  historic  operations were to resume.

The  conclusions  and  recommendations  of  this  acoustical  analysis   are  based  upon  the  best i n f o r m a t i o n  k n o w n  t o  W J V  A c o u s t i c s  I n c .  ( W J V A )  a t  t h e  t i m e  t h e  analysis  was  prepared concerning  the  proposed  site  plan,  residential  building  setbacks,  and  railroad  operations.  Any significant  changes  in  these  factors  will  require  a  reevaluation  of  the  findings  of  this  report.

Additionally, any significant future changes in noise regulatio ns or other factors beyond WJVA’s control may result in long‐term noise results different from those described by this analysis.

Respectfully submitted,

Walter J. Van Groningen
President

WJV:wjv
24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
11 FIGURE 1: PROJECT SITE PLAN

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
12 FIGURE 2: UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD LINE EAST OF PROJECT SITE

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
13 FIGURE 3: PROJECT SITE VICINITY AND NOISE MONITORING SITE LOCATION

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24
14 FIGURE 4: AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING SITE

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24

APPENDIX A

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY

AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL:  T h e  c o m p o s i t e  o f  n o i s e  f r o m  a l l  s o u r c e s  n e a r  a n d  f a r .   I n  t h i s c o n t e x t ,  t h e  a m b i e n t  n o i s e  l e v e l  c o n s t i t u t e s  t h e  n o r m a l  o r existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

CNEL:  C o m m u n i t y  N o i s e  E q u i v a l e n t  L e v e l .   T h e  a v e r a g e  e q u i v a l e n t sound  level  during  a  24‐hour  day,  obtained  after  addition  of approximately five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and ten de cibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m.

DECIBEL, dB:  A unit for describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 time s the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of th e sound  measured  to  the  reference  pressure,  which  is  20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter).

DNL/L
dn:  Day/Night Average Sound Level.  The average equivalent sound level  during  a  24‐hour  day,  obtained  after  addition  of  ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and befo re 7:00 a.m.

L
eq:  Equivalent  Sound  Level.    The  sound  level  containing  the  same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample perio d.

Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24‐hour sample periods.

NOTE:    The  CNEL  and  DNL  represent  daily  levels  of  noise  exposure averaged  on  an  annual  basis,  while  Leq  represents  the  average noise exposure for a shorter time period, typically one hour.

L
max:      The maximum noise level rec orded during a noise event.

L
n:      The  sound  level  exceeded  "n"   percent  of  the  time  during  a sample  interval  (L90,  L50,  L10,  e t c . ) .   F o r  e x a m p l e ,  L10  equals  the level exceeded 10 percent of the time.

24‐28 (337 West Avenue South, Turlock) 5‐24‐24

A-2

ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY

NOISE EXPOSURE
CONTOURS:    Lines  drawn  about  a  noise  source  indicating  constant  levels  o f noise  exposure.    CNEL and  DNL  contours  are  frequently  utilized to describe community exposure to noise.

NOISE LEVEL
REDUCTION (NLR):  The noise reduction between i ndoor and outdoor environments o r  b e t w e e n  t w o  r o o m s  t h a t  i s  t h e  n u m e r i c a l  d i f f e r e n c e ,  i n decibels, of the average sound pr essure levels in those areas o r rooms.    A  measurement  of  Anoise  level  reduction@  combines the effect of the transmission loss performance of the structur e plus  the  effect  of  acoustic  absorption  present  in  the  receiving room.

SEL or SENEL:    Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Noise Exposure Level.  T he level  of  noise  accumulated  during  a  single  noise  event,  such  as an aircraft overflight, with reference to a duration of one second.

More  specifically,  it  is  the  time‐integrated  A‐weighted  squared sound  pressure  for  a  stated  time  interval  or  event,  based  on  a reference pressure of 20 micropascals and a reference duration of one second.

SOUND LEVEL:    The  sound  pressure  level  in  decibels  as  measured  on  a  sound level  meter  using  the  A‐weighting  filter  network.    The  A‐ weighting  filter  de‐emphasizes  the  very  low  and  very  high frequency  components  of  the  sound  i n  a  m a n n e r  s i m i l a r  t o  t h e r e s p o n s e  o f  t h e  h u m a n  e a r  a n d  g i v e s  g o o d  c o r r e l a t i o n  w i t h subjective reactions to noise.

SOUND TRANSMISSION
CLASS (STC):    The  single‐number  rating  of  sound  transmission  loss  for  a construction  element  (window,  d oor,  etc.)  over  a  frequency range where speech intelligibility largely occurs.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
1 1)Project Title: Rezone 2024-01, Planned Development 283, VTSM 2024-01
2)Lead Agency Name and Address:City of Turlock
156 South Broadway, Ste. 120
Turlock, CA 95380
3)Contact Person & Phone Number:Katie Quintero – Senior Planner Services (209) 668-5640
4)Project Location:337 West Avenue South, (Stanislaus County APN 050-003- 042)
5)Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:Ron Katakis, RBK Development 1850 Arbor Way, Turlock, CA 95380
6)General Plan Designation:Medium Density Residential (MDR) 7)Zoning: Existing: Medium Density Residential (RM)
Proposed: Planned Development 283
8)Description of the Project:
9)Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings) The subject sites are bound on the
northern and western property line
by parcels zoned Medium Density
Residential. The property is bound
on the south by Union Pacific right-
of-way and one smaller property on
south eastern corner of the property
zoned Medium Density Residential
developed with a single-family
home. Along the eastern edge of
the project site is West Avenue
South. West Avenue South will
provide access to the proposed
development.
10) Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing approval, or participation agreement).

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
Regional Water Quality Control Board

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
2 11) Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality?
The Yokuts tribe was contacted in writing on July 17, 2024 with the project description as part of the Early Public Consultation process. Consultation has not been requested by the Yokuts tribes for this project.

NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. 12) EARLIER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. [Section 15183]
1)Earlier analyses used. (Available for review at the City of Turlock –Development Services Department, 156 S. Broadway, Suite 120, Turlock, CA).

City of Turlock General Plan, 2012 (City Council Resolution No. 2012-173) Turlock General Plan – EIR, 2012 (Turlock City Council Resolution No. 2012-156) City of Turlock, Housing Element, Certified in 2016
City of Turlock, Water Master Plan Update, 2003 (updated 2009) Turlock Parks Master Plan, 1995 (Reviewed in 2003)
City of Turlock, Waste Water Master Plan, 1991 (Updated 2014) City of Turlock, Storm Water Master Plan, 2013 (Adopted 2016) City of Turlock, Urban Water Management Plan, 2010 (Adopted 2011), 2015 Update Adopted in 2016
City of Turlock, Sewer System Master Plan, 2013
Turlock Municipal Code
City of Turlock Capital Facilities Fee Nexus Study (Turlock City Council Resolution No. 2013- 202)
2) Impacts adequately addressed. (Effects from the checklist below, were within the scope of, and adequately analyzed during an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis).

As identified in the Turlock General Plan EIR, development in the project area would result in significant, and unavoidable, impacts in the areas of transportation, noise, regional air quality, and the eventual loss of agricultural land and soil resources. The magnitude of these impacts

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
3 can be reduced, but not eliminated, by applying the policies, programs and mitigation measures identified in the Turlock General Plan to the project and identifying mitigation measures as necessary in this initial study. The intensity of the proposed development will result in project level impacts that are equal to, or of lesser severity, than those anticipated in the General Plan EIR, and they would not be different from cumulative effects anticipated by the Turlock General Plan EIR. Potential secondary environmental impacts from the project will be of equal or lesser severity than those identified in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR, and their respective Statements of Overriding Considerations (contained in Turlock City Council Resolution No. 2012-156), are adequate to mitigate the impacts from the proposed project where feasible, and are hereby incorporated by reference. 3) Mitigation Measures. (For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Project level impacts will be mitigated by application of mitigation measures identified in this initial study, and by appropriate conditions of approval. All cumulative environmental effects related to the ultimate development of the project area will be mitigated through compliance with the policies, standards, and
mitigation measures of the Turlock General Plan and General Plan MEA/EIR, as well as the standards of the Turlock Municipal Code, and are herein incorporated by reference where not specifically identified.

The project is not located on a site which is included in one or more Hazardous Waste and Substance Site Lists, compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Hazards & Hazardous
Materials X Transportation
Agricultural and
Forestry Resources X Hydrology/Water
Quality
Tribal Cultural
Resources
X Air Quality Land Use/Planning X Utilities/Service
Systems
X Biological Resources Mineral Resources Wildfire
X Cultural Resources X Noise
X Energy Population/Housing
X Geology/Soils X Public Services
X Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Recreation

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
4 RECOMMENDED FINDINGS:

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(1), the City of Turlock, as lead agency for the proposed project, has prepared an initial study to make the following findings:

1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, the proposed activity is adequately described and is within the scope of the General Plan EIR.

2. All feasible mitigation measures developed in the General Plan EIR have been incorporated into the project.

3. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 21080(c)(2) and 21157.5, the initial study prepared for the proposed project has identified potential new or significant effects that were not adequately analyzed in the General Plan EIR, but feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated to revise the proposed subsequent project to avoid or mitigate the identified effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.

4. There is no substantial evidence before the lead agency that the subsequent project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.

5. The analyses of cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects on the environment contained in the General Plan EIR are adequate for this subsequent project.

6. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for the General Plan EIR (City Council Resolution 2012-156). As identified in the Turlock General Plan EIR, development in the project area would result in significant, and unavoidable, impacts in the areas of noise, regional air quality, and the eventual loss of agricultural land. The magnitude of these impacts can be reduced, but not eliminated by the mitigation measures referenced in the initial study prepared for this project and General Plan EIR. Therefore, mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR, and its respective Statements of Overriding Considerations, are adequate to mitigate the impacts from the proposed project where feasible, and are hereby incorporated by reference.

7. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21157.6(a), having reviewed the General Plan EIR, the City of Turlock finds and determines that:
a. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan EIR was certified, and
b. That there is no new available information which was not and could not have been known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified.

DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

X
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potential significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DEDCLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
__________________________________________________________________________________ Katie Quintero, Senior Planner Date

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) “Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, “Earlier Analysis,” may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

Section 15063 (c) (3) (d). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
(a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
6 (b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The analysis of each issue should identify: (a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and (b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
7 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

1. Aesthetics – Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point.) If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
Response:
a) The proposed project is located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix of residential uses.

The General Plan EIR notes that the primary scenic views lie on the City’s boundary, at its agricultural edge. The General Plan recognizes the relatively flat topography of Turlock results in few scenic vistas. The General Plan further concludes within most of the existing urbanized area, infill development and redevelopment would not have a significant effect on the visual quality of the city, because new development would likely be similar in scale and character to existing development. The proposed buildings will not exceed 35-feet in overall height, which is within the maximum height limit allowed in the RM Zoning District. The maximum height limit in the surrounding residential zoning districts is 35-feet, therefore the buildings will be in scale with the surrounding buildings.
b) There are no scenic or historic resources on the project site. A site visit conducted by staff on July 18, 2024 confirmed the property is currently undeveloped and has no historic buildings, or other distinctive natural or historic resources. State scenic highways refer to those highways that are officially designated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as scenic. There are currently no highways in the General Plan study area eligible or officially designated as scenic highways by The Master Plan of State Highways Eligible for Official Scenic Highway Designation. The nearest State scenic highway is State Highway 5, which is designated scenic from the Merced county line to the San Joaquin county line. State Highway 5 is located approximately 20 miles from the project site. Due to the distance and intervening topography the project site would not be visible.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
8 c) Located in an urbanized area and surrounded by a mix of residential uses the residential project is proposed to be constructed on undeveloped parcels zoned for residential uses. The proposed buildings will develop in accordance with City standards in the General Plan Urban Design Element, Zoning Ordinance, and the adopted design guidelines. Elevations for the building have not been proposed yet but they will be subject to review by the Planning Division to ensure compliance with the adopted Design Guidelines. Review of the elevations will ensure there is change in materials, finishes, and colors on the buildings to create variation within the subdivision and will provide a visually pleasing product. The General Plan notes that new development that implements the General Plan Urban Design Element creates a more aesthetically pleasing character for the City. While evaluation of visual impacts is subjective, any development of the site would affect the existing visual character of the undeveloped site; however, using the design elements noted above the project meets the intent of the General Plan Urban Design Element, Zoning Ordinance, and the adopted design guidelines and would not conflict with applicable zoning or regulations governing scenic quality.

1. d) The development of the project area will produce additional light and glare from required on-site lighting. In accordance with the Turlock Municipal Code and the Turlock General Plan, all types of illumination generated by the project shall not be a source of light and glare upon adjoining properties. The Turlock General Plan EIR concludes that any new development has the potential to create new sources of light and glare; but would generally not be out of character with the existing urban environment, and would not rise to a level of being significant. The project will implement design measures to ensure the potential light and glare impacts are less than significant level. The project will be required to comply with TMC§9-2-122(l) All lighting fixtures must be shielded to confine light spread within the site boundaries.

Sources: City of Turlock, General Plan and MEIR, 2012; Aesthetics and Visual Resources, City Design Element, 2012; City of Turlock, Standard Specifications, Section 18; City of Turlock Beautification Master Plan, 2003; Caltrans Scenic Highway Program;
Mitigation:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
9 2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the states inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources agency, to non-
agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use of a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
X
Response:
a) The project is proposed to be developed on property designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land” on the 2016 Stanislaus County Important Farmland Map as compiled by the California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The infill property is currently undeveloped, surrounded by urban uses and no agricultural uses on the property. Therefore, the project will not be converting prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
10 b) The property is not enrolled in Williamson Act contracts or adjacent to any properties that are enrolled in the Williamson Act. The site is zoned for urbanized uses and will not conflict with any agricultural zoning districts or land held in Williamson Act Contract. c), d) The project site is located within the City of Turlock in an area designated for urban uses. There are no forest lands or timberlands within the City of Turlock. e) The site is currently designated for urban uses and is an infill site. The surrounding properties are all developed with a mix of residential uses. Development of the site will not involve changes in the existing environment which will result in conversion of farmland or forest land as many of the properties in the area are already developed with industrial and residential uses or are zoned for industrial and residential uses.

Sources: CA Dept. of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, 2016: City of Turlock, General Plan, Land Use Element, 2012; City of Turlock, General Plan EIR, 2012; Mitigation:

None required.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

3. Air Quality - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
substantial number of people? X
Response:
a), b), c) The project will not conflict with, or obstruct, implementation of the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan, the 2016 Ozone Plan, or the 2012, 2015 and 2018 PM2.5 Plan or

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
11 related subsequent progress reports of these plans. SJVAPCD has established thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM 10 & PM 2.5 emissions. The project will be subject to San Joaquin Valley Air District rules and regulations designed to control criteria pollutants, such as Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII. The project is required to obtain these permits to construct and operate. As such, the project is not expected to cause a conflict with, or obstruct implementation of applicable air quality plans.

Based on the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.26 analysis run on August 1, 2024, the project is located in an urbanized area surrounded by residential uses in Climate Zone 3, wind speeds 3.1 m/s, and 29 days precipitation frequency. When the construction emissions and operational emissions were calculated in the CalEEMOD models, it was found that emissions would not exceed the established Air Quality Thresholds of Significance for both Construction and Operational Emissions for ROG (10 tons per year), NOx (10 tpy), PM 10 (15 tpy) & PM 2.5 (15 tpy) emissions. The construction emissions and operational emissions calculated in the CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.26 model, will not exceeded 5 tons per year for each of the established thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM 10 & PM 2.5.

Overall Construction Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.26: ROG .2074 tpy, NOx 1.0669 tpy, CO 1.22 tpy SO 2 .0023 tpy, PM10E .04 tpy, PM 10D .03 tpy, PM 10T .07tpy, and PM 2.5E 0.04 tpy, PM2.5D .0129 tpy, PM2.5T .05t py.

Overall Operational Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.26: ROG .5057 tpy, NOx .2771 tpy, CO 1.9784 tpy SO 2 .0046 tpy, PM10E .0471 tpy, PM 10D .0916 tpy, PM 10T .3386 tpy, and PM 2.5E 0.0454 tpy, PM 2.5D .0743 tpy, PM2.5T .1197 tpy
Furthermore, to ensure compliance with District standards the mitigation measures identified below will be incorporated as conditions of approval for the project.

The project will not violate any air quality standards, result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Compliance with the General Plan policies and standards, and the SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations is expected to reduce the project impacts; however, the Turlock General Plan EIR found that there would be significant and unavoidable air quality impacts even with implementation of these measures with the build out of the General Plan primarily due to local and regional vehicle emissions generated by future population growth associated with the build out of the proposed plan. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted as part of that process.

Additionally, the City of Turlock adopted an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Element demonstrating that the General Plan would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Compliance with the State’s greenhouse gas emissions targets for 2030 relied on the adoption of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). StanCOG’s SCS has been adopted and was approved by the California Air

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
12 Resources Board. StanCOG has found that the City of Turlock’s General Plan complies with the SCS. This project is consistent with the General Plan; therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions.
d) The proposed residential development will not produce other pollutants such as odors.

The proposed development is not expected to expose sensitive receptors to increased pollutants. The project may produce odors during the construction phase, however, these impacts are short-term in nature and are anticipated to be of a less-than-significant impact.

Sources: San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard, 2010 PM-10 Maintenance Plan, 2012 and 2015 PM-2.5 Plan; SJVAPCD’s Guide For Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (revised March 19, 2015); California Air Resources Board Air Quality and Land Use Handbook; A Community Health Perspective; Turlock General Plan EIR, 2012, Turlock General Plan, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Element Section, 2012; Statement of Overriding Considerations (Turlock City Council Resolution 2012-156); StanCOG Regional Transportation plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Letter of Consistency for the Turlock General Plan dated January 25, 2015; SJVUAPCD (June 2005) Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans; Planned Development 283 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis report dated August 1, 2024 available upon request;
Mitigation:

1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations.

2. The applicant shall contact the SJVAPCD prior to submitting an application for a building, grading and/or encroachment permit. Compliance with Rule 9510 shall be demonstrated to the Planning Division prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

4. Biological Resources - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.

S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
13 b) Have a substantially adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified
in local or regional plans, policies,
and regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede
the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Conservation Community
Plan, other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
14 Response:
a) The General Plan states that the Study Area contains mostly human-modified habitats, with almost all the land being urban (52%) or under agricultural production (46%). The General Plan further states that development proposed under the General Plan would be situated on infill sites or land contiguous to existing development. The proposed residential development is an infill project proposed to be constructed on undeveloped parcels.

Located in an urbanized area the project site is surrounded by a mix of residential uses.

The proposed project would not have any direct effects on species, riparian habitat, wetlands, nor would it interfere with the movement of any resident or migratory fish, conflict with policies protecting biological resources or the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Virtually all of the land within the urban boundaries of Turlock, as well as unincorporated land within the City’s Sphere of Influence, have been modified from its native state, primarily converted into urban or agricultural production. The site has been actively cleared for many years.

The California Natural Diversity Database has identified two special-status species within the General Plan Study area, the Swainson’s Hawk and the Hoary bat. While the General Plan Study Area does not contain land that is typical for the Hawk’s breeding and nesting, it is presumed to be present and mitigation measures have been incorporated to address any potential impacts. The proposed project site is undeveloped. The Hoary bat is not listed as a Species of Special Concern by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife but it is monitored in the CNDDB. The subject site is out of the area in which the Hoary bat is presumed to be present. Due to the property’s proximity to urban development, the property has little habitat value for these species. Mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR, (General Plan Policy 7.4-d), consistent with the comments received on the Turlock General Plan, have been added to the project to reduce the impacts of the project to a less than significant level. The General Plan concludes that potential impacts on biological resources would be reduced to less than significant through implementation of General Plan policies, as well as regional, State, and federal regulations. b) There are no rivers, lakes or streams located within the City of Turlock. There are no irrigation facilities, such as canals, located on or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the project will have no impact on riparian habitats or species. c) The General Plan EIR identifies the federally protected wetlands located within the City of Turlock and the surrounding Study Area. These areas are located west of Highway 99 and are not identified on the subject property.
d) The project is located within the City of Turlock in an urbanized and developed area. No migratory wildlife corridors have been designated on, near or through the project site; therefore, the project would not impede the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. The General Plan identifies mitigation measures that will be incorporated in to the project requiring the investigation of the existence of any wildlife nursery sites on the project site.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
15 e) There are no natural features on the undeveloped property that offer habitat opportunities except the land itself which could potentially offer foraging habitat for Swainson’s Hawk.

The land has been a grassy field, kept clear for a number of years. See “a” above for mitigation measures.
f) There is no Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, other approved local or regional conservation plan that encompasses the project site.

Sources: California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife: Natural Diversity Data Base; California Native Plant Protection Act; U.S. Dept. of Agriculture: Land Capability Classification Maps; California Dept. of Conservation: Important Farmlands Maps & Monitoring Program; Stanislaus County Williamson Act Contract Maps; Turlock General Plan, Conservation Element, 2012; US Fish and Wildlife Service – Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, 1998

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
16 Mitigation:

1. GP 7.4-e, 7.4-f ; If ground disturbing activities, such as grading, occurs during the typical nesting season for songbirds and raptors, February through mid-September, the developer is required to have a qualified biologist conduct a survey of the site no more than 10 days prior to the start of disturbance activities. If nests are found, no- disturbance buffers around active nests shall be established as follows until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist determines that the birds have fledged and are no longer on the nest for survival: 250 feet for non-listed bird species; 500 feet for migratory bird species; and one-half mile for listed species and fully protected species.

2. GP 7.4-e, 7.4-f; If nests are found, they should be continuously surveyed for the first 24 hours prior to any construction related activities to establish a behavioral baseline.

Once work commences the nest shall be continuously monitored to detect any behavioral changes as a result of the project. If behavioral changes are observed, the work causing the change should cease and the Department consulted for additional avoidance and minimization measures.

3. GP 7.4e, If Swainson’s Hawks are found foraging on the site prior to or during construction, the applicant shall consult a qualified biologist for recommended proper action, and incorporate appropriate mitigation measures. Mitigation may include, but are not limited to: establishing a one-half mile buffer around the nest until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist determines that the birds have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest for survival. Mitigating habitat loss within a 10 mile radius Mitigating habitat loss within a 10 mile radius of known nest sites as follows: providing a minimum of one acre of habitat management land or each acre of development for projects within one mile of an active nest tree. Provide a minimum of .75 acres of habitat management land for each acre of development for projects within between one and five miles of an active nest tree. Provide a minimum of .5 acres of habitat management land for each acre of development for projects within between five and 10 miles of an active nest tree.

4. GP 7.4e, The applicant shall comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations related to the protection and preservation of endangered and/or threatened species through consultations with appropriate agencies.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

5. Cultural Resources - Would the project:

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
17 a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5? X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resources pursuant
to Section 15064.5? X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? X
Response:
a) The proposed project is an infill project proposed to be constructed on undeveloped parcel located in an urbanized area surrounded by residential uses. The project would not alter or destroy any historic archaeological site, building, structure, or object, nor would it alter or affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict religious or sacred uses. The City of Turlock consulted with California Native American tribes as required under SB 18 when developing the General Plan EIR. The closest historic resource identified in the General Plan EIR is located more than 1.5 miles away. In addition, the City has conducted a Cultural Records Search as part of the Turlock General Plan and found no evidence of significant historic or cultural resources on or near this site.
b) and c) As a result of many years of extensive agricultural production, virtually all of the land in the City of Turlock has been previously altered from its native or riparian state. The proposed residential development is an in-fill project located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix of residential uses. The project would not alter or destroy any historic archaeological site, building, structure, or object, nor would it alter or affect unique ethnic cultural values or restrict religious or sacred uses. The City of Turlock consulted with California Native American tribes as required under SB 18 when developing the General Plan EIR. The closest historic resource identified in the General Plan EIR is located more than 1.5 miles away. In addition, the City has conducted a Cultural Records Search as part of the Turlock General Plan and found no evidence of significant historic or cultural resources on or near this site. As a result of many years of extensive agricultural production virtually all of the land in the Plan area has been previously altered from its native or riparian state. There are no known sites of unique prehistoric or ethnic cultural value. Mitigation measures have been added in the event anything is discovered during construction.

Sources: Turlock General Plan, Conservation Element, 2012; City of Turlock General Plan EIR, 2012; Cultural Resources Records Search, 2008
Mitigation:

1. GP 7.5a, 7.5c, In accordance with State Law, if potentially significant cultural, archaeological, or Native American resources are discovered during construction, work shall halt in that area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the find, and, if necessary develop appropriate treatment measures in consultation with Stanislaus County, Native American tribes, and other appropriate agencies and

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
18 interested parties.

2. GP 7.5a, 7.5c, If human remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the coroner determines that no investigation of the cause of death is required and if the remains are of Native American origin, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which in turn will inform a most likely descendant. The descendant will then recommend to the landowner appropriate disposition of the remains and any grave goods.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

6. Energy – Would the project:
a)Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? X
Response:
a)and b) The residential project is proposed on undeveloped property surrounded by residential uses and is zoned and planned for the intended use. The project site is easily accessed by the existing roadway infrastructure, and the Turlock Transit bus system, and is within approximately 300 feet of the bus stop located on West Avenue South. The homes will have access to existing electrical and telecommunication services. No new transportation, electrical or telecommunication facilities are required to support the project leading to unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Compliance with the California Green Building Standards Code and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District standards during construction and operation of the project will further ensure the efficient consumption of energy resources.

Sources: Turlock General Plan, Conservation Element, Air Quality & Greenhouse Gases Element, 2012; California Building Standards Code.; San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Mitigation:

1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations.

2. The project shall comply with the California Green Building Code Standards (CBC), requirements regulating energy efficiency.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
19 Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

7. Geology and Soils - Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- a-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
20 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X
Response:
a) Several geologic hazards have a low potential to occur within the Turlock General Plan study area. The greatest seismic hazard identified in the Turlock General Plan EIR is posed by ground shaking from a fault located at least 45 miles away. While no specific liquefaction hazard is located within the Turlock General Plan study area, the potential for liquefaction is recognized throughout the San Joaquin Valley. The risk to people and structures was identified as a less than significant impact addressed through compliance with the California Building Codes. Turlock is located in Seismic Zone 3 according to the State of California and the Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones Act. All building permits are reviewed to ensure compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for compliance with standards to reduce the potential damage that could be associated with seismic events. The property is flat and is not located adjacent to areas subject to landslides. In addition, the City enforces the provisions of the Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zones Act that limits development in areas identified as having special seismic hazards. b) and c) The General Plan EIR notes that soils on this project site have a “low” susceptibility to soil erosion. Erosion hazards are highest during construction. Chapter 7-4 of the Turlock Municipal Code requires all construction activities to include engineering practices for erosion control. Furthermore, future development projects are required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit requirements. Project applicants are required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP) and comply with the City’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit (MS4) to minimize the discharge of pollutants during and post- construction. Compliance with existing policies and programs will reduce this impact to less than significant levels.
d) Less than one percent of the soils located in the General Plan study area are considered to have moderate potential for expansion. As required by the Turlock Municipal Code, building permit applications must be accompanied by a preliminary soil management report that characterizes soil properties in the development area. e) Development within the project area will be required to connect to the City of Turlock’s waste water system and will not utilize any type of septic system or alternative wastewater system.
f) The proposed residential development is an infill project located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix uses. As a result of many years of extensive agricultural production, virtually all of the land in the City of Turlock has been previously altered from its native state.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
21 Sources: California Uniform Building Code; City of Turlock, Standard Specifications, Grading Practices; City of Turlock Municipal Code, Title 8, (Building Regulations); City of Turlock, General Plan, Safety Element, 2012;
Mitigation:

1. GP 10.2-a, 10.2-b; The project shall comply with the current California Building Code (CBC) requirements for Seismic Zone 3, which stipulates building structural material and reinforcement.

2. GP 10.2-a, 10.2-b, The project shall comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 19100 et seq. (Earthquake Protection Law), which requires that buildings be designed to resist stresses produced by natural forces caused earthquakes and wind.

3. GP 10.2-1, 10.2-b; The project shall comply with the California Building Code (CBC), requirements regulating grading activities including drainage and erosion control.

4. GP 10.2-h; The project shall comply with the City’s NPDES permitting requirements by providing a grading and erosion control plan, including but not limited to the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevent Plan and Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.

5. GP 10.2-a, 10.2-b, 10.2-g; The project shall comply with the California Building Code (CBC) requirements for specific site development and construction standards for specified soils types.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment? X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases? X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
22 Response:
a), b) The proposed residential development is an infill project proposed on parcels zoned for the intended use, located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix of residential uses.

Based on the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.26 analysis run on August 1, 2024 the project is located in an urbanized area surrounded residential uses in Climate Zone 3, wind speeds 3.1 m/s, and 29 days precipitation frequency. When the construction emissions and operational emissions were calculated in the respective CalEEMOD models, it was found that emissions would not exceed the established Air Quality Thresholds of Significance for both Construction and Operational Emissions for ROG (10 tons per year), NOx (10 tpy), PM 10 (15 tpy) & PM 2.5 (15 tpy) emissions.

Overall Construction Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.26: ROG .2074 tpy, NOx 1.0669 tpy, CO 1.22 tpy SO 2 .0023 tpy, PM10E .04 tpy, PM 10D .03 tpy, PM 10T .07tpy, and PM 2.5E 0.04 tpy, PM2.5D .0129 tpy, PM2.5T .05t py.

Overall Operational Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.26: ROG .5057 tpy, NOx .2771 tpy, CO 1.9784 tpy SO 2 .0046 tpy, PM10E .0471 tpy, PM 10D .0916 tpy, PM 10T .3386 tpy, and PM 2.5E 0.0454 tpy, PM 2.5D .0743 tpy, PM2.5T .1197 tpy
Additionally, the City of Turlock adopted an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Element demonstrating that the General Plan would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Compliance with the State’s greenhouse gas emissions targets for 2030 relied on the adoption of the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). StanCOG’s SCS has been adopted and was approved by the California Air Resources Board. Furthermore, StanCOG has found that the City of Turlock’s General Plan complies with the SCS. This project is consistent with the General Plan and the NWTSP; therefore, the project is expected to have a less than significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

Sources: City of Turlock 2012 General Plan, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases chapter; AB 32 Scoping Plan; 2014 Stanislaus Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy; Planned Development 283 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis report dated August 1, 2024 available upon request.

Mitigation:

1. GP 8.1-b, 8.1-j, 8.1-l; The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Less
Than
Signific
ant
No
Impact

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
23 Impact Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Impact

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials? X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area
X
f) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?

X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? X
Response:
a) b) and c)The proposed infill project is a single family residential subdivision development.

The residential development does not propose any industrial process or commercial operation that would create the risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances through the transport or accidental use of hazardous materials.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
24 d) The General Plan EIR does not identify any active cleanup sites located on or near the project site. In addition, the project is not located on a site which is included in one or more Hazardous Waste and Substance Site List, compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5. There are no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (REC), controlled RECs or historical RECs in conjunction with the subject site. e) The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and is not located within a planning area boundary for an airport. f) The proposed project will not impair the implementation of an adopted emergency response/evacuation plan. The project generates traffic that is consistent with the projections contained within the Turlock General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR found that anticipated growth, and the resulting traffic levels, would not impeded emergency evacuation routes or otherwise prevent public safety agencies from responding in an emergency.
g) There are no designated wildland fire areas within or adjoining the project site.

Sources: City of Turlock, Emergency Operation Plan, 2017; Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2010- 2015; Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission Plan, 1978, amended May 20, 2004, updated October 6, 2016; Stanislaus County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, updated 2022; City of Turlock, General Plan, Safety Element, 2012; City of Turlock, Municipal Code, Title 8, (Building Regulations)
Mitigation:

None required.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

10. Hydrology and Water Quality – Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
25 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would?
X
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?

X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan? X
Response:
a) The proposed residential development will be required to comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s construction requirements to reduce the potential impact of pollution from water runoff at the time of construction and post-construction. Upon development, the project will be required to connect to City utility systems, including water and sewer; therefore, development of the project area would not result in water quality or waste discharge violations.
b) The proposed development lies within the City of Turlock. The City has developed an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) that evaluates the long-range water needs of the City including water conservation and other measures that are necessary to reduce the impact of growth on groundwater supplies. The project has been reviewed by the City of Turlock Municipal Services, the water provider for the City of Turlock, and no concerns were raised regarding the ability of the City to provide adequate potable water to the project.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
26 c), d) and e) The proposed infill project is proposed on an undeveloped parcel surrounded by a mix of residential uses. The City of Turlock requires that all development construct the necessary storm water collection systems to convey runoff to detention basins within the project area. Grading plans for construction within the project area will be reviewed to ensure compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s regulations and the City’s NPDES discharge permit. Grading and improvement plans for the project are required and will be reviewed by the Engineering Division to ensure that storm water runoff from the project area is adequately conveyed to the storm water collection system that will be implemented with the project.

The project site is not located in a flood area. The project does not involve property acquisition, management, construction or improvements within a 100 year floodplain (Zones A or V) identified by FEMA maps, and does not involve a “critical action” (e.g., emergency facilities, facility for mobility impaired persons, etc.) within a 500 year floodplain (Zone B). The entire City of Turlock is located in Flood Zone "X", according to FEMA. The City of Turlock's Community Number is 060392; Panel Numbers are: 0570E, 0600E, 0800E, 0825E. Revised update September 26, 2008.

The project site is located outside the Dam Inundation Area for New Don Pedro Dam and for New Exchequer Dam (the two inundation areas located closest to the City of Turlock Municipal Boundary).

Sources: Federal Emergency Management Agency Floodplain regulations; City of Turlock, Storm Drain Master Plan, 1987;Turlock General Plan EIR, 2012; Turlock General Plan, 2012 ; City of Turlock, Water Master Plan Update, 2009; City of Turlock, Storm Water Master Plan, 2013; City of Turlock Urban Water Management Plan, 2010 (Adopted 2011), 2015 Updated Adopted in 2016; City of Turlock Sewer System Master Plan, 2013; City of Turlock, Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 2, Water Conservation Landscape Ordinance; Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board comment letter dated February 27, 2019.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
27 Mitigation:

1. GP 3.3-a, 3.3-f, The project shall connect to the City's Master Water and Storm Drainage System.

2. GP 3.3-o, 3.3-ae, 6.4-f, The project shall comply with the Regional Water Control Board’s regulations and standards to maintain and improve groundwater and surface water quality. The applicant shall conform to the requirements of the Construction Storm Water General Permit and the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit, including both Best Management Practices and Low Impact Development (post- construction) requirements.

3. If the project includes construction dewatering and it is necessary to discharge the groundwater to water of the United States, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.

4. Site grading shall be designed to create positive drainage throughout the site and to collect the storm water for the storm water drainage system. If the project will involve the discharge of dredged or fill material in navigable waters or wetlands, a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act may be needed from the United State Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). If a USACOE permit or any other federal permit is required for this project due to the disturbance of water of the United States then a Water Quality Certification must be obtained from the Central Valley Water Board prior to the initiation of project activities. If the USCACOE determines that only non- jurisdictional water of the State are present in the proposed project are, the proposed project will require a Waste Discharge Requirements permit to be issued by the Central Valley Water Board.

5. The discharge of oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, or any other petroleum derivative, or any toxic chemical or hazardous waste is prohibited.

6. Materials and equipment shall be stored so as to ensure that spills or leaks cannot enter storm drains, or the drainage ditches or detention basins.

7. A spill prevention and cleanup plan shall be implemented.

8. GP 3.3-ae, The builder and/or developer shall utilize cost-effective urban runoff controls, including Best Management Practices (BMP’s), to limit urban pollutants from entering the drainage ditches. A General Construction permit shall be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared and implemented as part of this permit.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

11. Land Use Planning – Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
28 b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
X
Response:
a) Located in an urbanized area and surrounded by a mix of residential uses the project is proposed to be constructed on an undeveloped parcel zoned for the intended use. The proposed project will not physically divide an established community. b)The proposed infill project is a residential subdivision proposed to be constructed on a parcel designated for Residential uses. The proposed use and density is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning for the property.

Sources: Turlock General Plan, 2012 & Adopted Housing Element, 2014-23; City of Turlock General Plan EIR, 2012; Turlock Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 3; US Fish and Wildlife Service – Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, 1998 Mitigation:

None required.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

12. Mineral Resources – Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state? X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
29 Response:
a), b) Any development that may ultimately occur in the City does result in the utilization of natural resources (water, natural gas, construction materials, etc.); however, these resources will not be depleted by this project. The only known mineral resources within the City of Turlock are sand and gravel from the Modesto and Riverbank formations. The project will result in only minor excavation of the site.

Sources: City of Turlock, General Plan, Conservation Element, 2012 Mitigation:

None required.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

13. Noise – Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
30 Response:
a) The proposed residential development is located in a fully urbanized area and is surrounded by residential uses. The residential uses are sensitive receptors and the project will increase existing ambient noise levels associated with development of an undeveloped property. Typical ongoing noise would most likely be generated by mechanical equipment such as heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning equipment. The General Plan and City Noise Ordinance (TMC 5-28-100ART) establish noise standards that must be met for all new development. The proposed residential development is not anticipated to generate noise levels in excess of the standards established in the General Plan or City Noise Ordinance. Furthermore, the project is subject to the City’s noise ordinance which prohibits construction on weekdays from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., on weekends and holidays from 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. Turlock’s Noise Ordinance (TMC 5-28- 100ART) standards and enforcement mechanisms would apply. A noise study was conducted by WJV Acoustics on May 24, 2024. The project site is located within approximately 40 feet of the UP Railroad line. It was confirmed the line is not operational and is not a source for noise for the future residents. It was also determined that compliance with current building code requirements would be sufficient for the future houses to meet the City of Turlock noise standards.
b) Project-related construction will result in short-term increases in noise levels and vibration on and immediately surrounding the project site. The standards of Turlock's Noise Ordinance (TMC5-28-100ART) are applicable to the development during construction and occupancy. The City’s ordinance addresses both temporary construction-related noise as well as ongoing noise from equipment and other operations of this facility. The project is subject to the City’s noise ordinance which prohibits construction on weekdays from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., on weekends and holidays from 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. The project is subject to the City’s noise ordinance which requires reduced noise levels from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
c) The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.

Therefore, the project will not be impacted by noise from the operations of any public or private airport.

Sources: City of Turlock, General Plan, Noise Element, 2012; City of Turlock, Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 2, Noise Regulations; Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission Plan, as Amended May 20, 2004, updated October 6, 2016; Merced County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, June 12, 2012; Turlock General Plan, Circulation Element, 2012; WJV Acoustics Acoustical Analysis, May 24, 2024.

Mitigation:

1. GP 9.4-I, TMC§5-28ART; Compliance with the standards of the City of Turlock’s Noise Ordinance (TMC5-28-100ART).

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Less
Than
Signific
ant
No
Impact

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
31 Impact Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Impact

14. Population and Housing – Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

X
Response:
a) The proposed infill project is a residential development proposed on properties currently zoned for Residential uses. The project will develop within the allowed density range. No new expanded infrastructure is proposed that could accommodate additional growth in the area that is not already possible with existing infrastructure, so no indirect population growth will occur. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause expansion of the area beyond what is planned in the Turlock General Plan. b) The property is currently undeveloped and zoned for Residential use. The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing, and would not displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project site is surrounded by existing urban uses and all roads and infrastructure are immediately available along the property frontage.

Sources: City of Turlock, General Plan, 2012 & Housing Element, 2016; Mitigation:

None required.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
32 15. Public Services – Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire Protection? X
b) Police Protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Response:
a) The residential project is an infill project located in an urbanized area. The project site is surrounded by a mix of residential uses. The Turlock Fire Department provides fire and emergency response within the city limits. The Fire Department operates four fire stations located to maximize efficiency and help reduce response times. The Fire Department reviews all development applications to determine the adequacy of fire protection for the proposed development. This infill project will not have a significant impact on fire response times and will not otherwise create a substantially greater need for fire protection services than already exists. The Fire Department has commented on this project and has not indicated that the development could not be adequately served or would create an impact on the ability of the Department to serve the City as a whole. The Turlock Municipal Code and the State Fire Code establish standards of service for all new development in the City. Those standards and regulations are applicable to the project.

The project will also be required to annex into CFD #2 to offset the ongoing costs residential projects have on fire services.
b) Development of the project will not result in any unique circumstances that cannot be handled with the existing level of police resources. The Police Department was routed the project and did not indicate that the development of the project could not be adequately served. No new or expanded police facilities will need to be constructed as a result of this project. Therefore, it is anticipated the impacts from the development of the property on police services will be less-than-significant. The developer will be required to pay Capital Facilities Fees upon development, a portion of which is used to fund Police Service capital improvements. The project will also be required to annex into CFD #2 to mitigate the ongoing costs the residential development will have on police services. c) Under the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, the satisfaction by the developer of his statutory fee under California Government Code Section 65995 is deemed “full and complete mitigation” of school impacts. Therefore, mitigation of impacts upon school facilities shall be accomplished by the payment of the fees set forth and established by the Turlock Unified School District.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
33 d) Demand for park and recreational facilities are generally the direct result of residential development. The development is consistent with the number of residential units anticipated in the General Plan for this property and therefore has the demand for park and recreational facilities of these units has been planned for in the General Plan and will not result in a significant increase in the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks beyond what was anticipated in the General Plan EIR.
e) The City has prepared and adopted a Capital Facility Program that identifies the public service needs of roads, police, fire, and general government that will be required through build-out of the General Plan area. This program includes the collection of Capital Facility Fees from all new development. Development fees are also collected from all new development for recreational lands and facilities. Conditions of development will require payment of these fees and charges, where appropriate and allowed by law.

Sources: Stanislaus County, Public Facilities Plan; City of Turlock, Capital Facility Fees Program, City of Turlock Capital Improvement Program (CIP); Turlock Unified School District, School Facilities Needs Analysis; City of Turlock, General Plan, Parks and Recreational Open Space and Safety Elements, 2012;
Mitigation:

1. GP 10.4-d; The applicant, developer or successor in interest shall pay all applicable Citywide Capital Facility for public facility service improvements.

2. GP 10.4-d; Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall pay the applicable development-related school impact fees to fully mitigate its impacts upon school facilities pursuant to California statutes.

3. The property shall annex into CFD #2
Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

16. Recreation

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
34 a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
Response:
a) and b) The proposed residential development is consistent with the Residential zoning and General Plan designation of the property. Park fees will be paid as part of the development. The development of the will not result in a significant increase in use of existing neighborhood or regional parks beyond what has been anticipated in the General Plan EIR.

Sources: City of Turlock General Plan 2012: City of Turlock Parks Master Plan, 2003; Mitigation:

None required.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

17. Transportation– Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
35 c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Response:
a) and b) The proposed residential development is an infill project proposed on an undeveloped parcel currently zoned for Residential use. The project site is surrounded by a mix of residential uses. Access to the project will be provided by the existing roadway system.

The proposed development is consistent with the density allowed and anticipated in the General Plan for the Medium Density Residential Zoning.

The City has adopted a Capital Facility Program with traffic improvements planned for build out of the General Plan. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed traffic circulation pattern for the area and evaluated its potential impact on the operation of the local roadways serving the site, and has determined current roadway improvements can adequately accommodate the vehicular traffic generated by the project.

The project is located within 300 feet of the bus stop located West Avenue South Street. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.3(b) land use projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.

A condition of each new development is payment of a Citywide Capital Facility Fee, a portion of which is used to fund circulation improvements required for cumulative impacts added by development. The mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR and the Statement of Overriding Considerations are adequate to mitigate the transportation and traffic impacts associated with the project. Therefore, no significant traffic issues will be generated by the project.
c) The project is as an infill project. The project site is accessed using the existing roadway system. Any required frontage improvements must meet current City standards. The proposed project will not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment). d) The Turlock Fire Department reviews all development proposals for adequate emergency access. The project will either meet or exceed the Fire Department needs for emergency vehicle access throughout the project site.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
36 Sources: City of Turlock, Capital Improvement Program (CIP); City of Turlock, General Plan, 2012;StanCOG, Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy, 2014; Stanislaus Assn. of Governments, Congestion Mgmt. Plan, 1992; City of Turlock, Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 2, Rental Storage Facility, and California Green Building Code, ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition.

Mitigation:

1. GP 5.2i - The applicant, developer or successor in interest shall pay all applicable Citywide Capital Facility Fees for transportation improvements. These include the development of new bicycle and pedestrian facilities, traffic calming, traffic management, and other projects to improve air quality and reduce congestion, as well as roadway, intersection and interchange improvements.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

18. Tribal Cultural Resources -
a)Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
37 Response:
a)The Turlock General Plan EIR found that there are no known Native American cultural resources within the City of Turlock. The properties are not listed or eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. In compliance with AB52 notices were sent to the North Valley Yokuts Tribe on July 17, 2024 with the project description. The Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Tribe sent a letter to the City of Turlock on April 19, 2017 formally asking the City to remove them from future project notifications. The City of Turlock has not received comments on the project from the North Valley Yokuts Tribe.

Sources: Turlock General Plan, Conservation Element, 2012; City of Turlock General Plan EIR, 2012; Cultural Resources Records Search, 2008;
Mitigation:

None required.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact

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

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
38 d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? X
Response:
a)and b) The project is proposed as an infill project on parcels zoned for residential uses.

The project site has access to existing infrastructure including water, wastewater and storm water drainage facilities. The proposed project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board. Sewer, or wastewater, systems are currently available to the site. The type of wastewater anticipated by the project is readily handled by the current waste water system. The proposed project will not result in the need to construct a new water or wastewater treatment facility. The existing water and wastewater facilities which serve the City of Turlock are sufficient to serve this use. The project site has access to existing electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications and will not require or result in the construction of new or expanded facilities.
b)and c) The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Turlock’s Storm Water Master Plan and Urban Water Management Plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use and growth assumptions that were used to update the City’s Urban Water Management Plan. The applicant must construct any project-related water infrastructure to ensure adequate water service to City of Turlock standards. Mitigation of the increasing demand for storm water facilities will be through the owner, or successor in interest, paying storm drainage fees, and constructing any project-related storm drain infrastructure to ensure adequate storm drainage, as determined necessary by the City Engineer. Furthermore, mitigation measures requiring the payment of the Specific Plan and City Wide fees is adequate to mitigate a project’s impacts upon the storm water collection and treatment system because it ensures adequate capacity and infrastructure is available. This development is consistent with what has been anticipated in the General Plan and planned for in the Storm Water Master Plan.

Mitigation of the need for the alteration to water systems will be through the requirement that the applicant, prior to the issuance of building permits, pay the adopted water connection fees, reflecting the pro rata share of the necessary improvements to the existing City water system for each new water user. This is a standard condition of all development in Turlock. Furthermore, a condition of each new development is payment of a Capital Facility Fee, a portion of which is used to fund water improvements.

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
39 d) The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Turlock’s Water Master Plan and Urban Water Management Plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use and growth assumptions that were used to update the City’s Urban Water Management Plan. The applicant must construct any project-related water infrastructure to ensure adequate water service to City of Turlock standards. Mitigation of the need for the alteration to water systems will be through the requirement that the applicant, prior to the issuance of building permits, pay the adopted water connection fees, reflecting the pro rata share of the necessary improvements to the existing City water system for each new water user. This is a standard condition of all development in Turlock. Furthermore, a condition of each new development is payment of a Capital Facility Fee, a portion of which is used to fund water improvements.
e) Solid waste will be of a domestic nature and will comply with all federal, State and local statutes. Upon completion of the project, the property owner(s), or successor(s) in interest shall contract with the City of Turlock’s designated waste hauler, Turlock Scavenger, for solid waste disposal. Turlock Scavenger has an adopted waste diversion/recycling program which has resulted in waste diversion exceeding state-mandated California Integrated Waste Management Board timeframes under Public Resources Code 41000 et seq. The project is required to install a trash enclosure that will accommodate recycled materials. Sufficient capacity remains for the additional solid waste needs to support this project.

Sources: City of Turlock, Capital Improvement Program (CIP); City of Turlock, General Plan, 2012; City of Turlock, Water Master Plan Update, 2009; City of Turlock, Waste Water Master Plan, 1991; City of Turlock, Storm Water Master Plan, 2013; City of Turlock Urban Water Management Plan, 2016; City of Turlock Sewer System Master Plan, 2013, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board comment letter dated February 27, 2019.

Mitigation:

1. GP 3.3-k, 3.3-u, 4.3-c; The developer or successor in interest shall pay the City of Turlock’s Capital Facility Fee and infrastructure master plan fees.

Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt Impact
With
Mitigation
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Im
pa
ct

20. Wildfire - If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a)Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
b)Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
40 the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
d)Expose people or structure to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
X
Response:
a) The proposed project will not impair the implementation of an adopted emergency response/evacuation plan. The project generates traffic that is consistent with the projections contained within the Turlock General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR found that anticipated growth, and the resulting traffic levels, would not impeded emergency evacuation routes or otherwise prevent public safety agencies from responding in an emergency. b), c), and d) There are no wildlands or steep slopes in the City of Turlock, making the risk of wildland fire low; likewise, the Turlock General Plan notes the city topography as flat urbanized or agricultural land with a low fire risk. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) designates the City of Turlock as a Low Risk Area (LRA). There are no rivers, lakes or streams located within the City of Turlock that would expose people of structures to significant risks of flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Sources: City of Turlock, Emergency Operation Plan, 2017; Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2010-2015; Stanislaus County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, updated 2022 City of Turlock, General Plan, Safety Element, 2012;
Mitigation:

None
Potenti
ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt Impact
With
Mitigation
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Im
pa
ct
21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
X

CITY OF TURLOCK

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
41 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
The proposed residential subdivision is an infill project within the City surrounded by residential uses, on a property zoned for Medium Density Residential uses. As discussed in Section 1, no scenic vistas, scenic resources, or the visual character of the area will be substantially impacted and the project will not result in excessive light or glare. The project site is located within an urbanized area and surrounded by urban uses. No evidence of significant historic or cultural resources were identified on or near the project site. As a result of many years of agricultural production virtually all of the land in the General Plan area has been altered.

The project site is not known to have any association with an important example of California’s history or prehistory. Construction-phase procedures will be implemented in the event an archaeological or cultural resource is discovered consistent with the Mitigation Measures contained in Sections 4. As discussed in Section 4, there are no rivers, lakes or streams located within the City of Turlock; therefore, the project would have no impact on riparian habitats or species.

The context for assessing air quality impacts is the immediate project vicinity with respects to emissions generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project. The environmental analysis provided in Section 3 concludes that operational and construction emissions would not exceed the air quality thresholds established by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).

Furthermore, Mitigation Measures identified in Sections 3 & 8 would reduce potential impacts to less-than-significant levels.

Mitigation measures for any potentially significant project-level impacts have been included in this document and will reduce the impacts to less-than-significant levels. Based on the analysis above, the City finds that impacts related to environmental effects that could cause adverse effects on human beings would be less than significant.

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024

From: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director
Prepared by: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Resolution: Determining extension of City of Turlock water and/or sewer lines and connection of the existing property at 1000 Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Number 042-021-005, located outside the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Turlock, is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303(d) [New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures] of the CEQA Guidelines.

Motion: Approving an Out-of-Boundary Service Agreement for Water and/or Sewer Connection Affecting Real Property located at 1000 Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 045-021- 005 establishing the conditions under which the City would provide water and/or sanitary sewer services to the property and authorizing the City Manager to execute all documents, applications, assurances, agreements, and statements that may be required to implement the agreement.

Motion: Authorizing the City Manager to certify a Stanislaus LAFCO Out-of-Boundary Service Application and submit the application requesting LAFCO approval for the connection of property located at 1000 Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Number 045-021-005 to the City of Turlock water and/or sanitary sewer systems.

2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

Brianna Dale is the owner of an approximately 0.25-acre vacant parcel at 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue. The property is located in a County Island, outside of the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Turlock. In September 2024, Ms. Dale submitted an application to the Stanislaus County Building Department proposing to construct two single family homes and two ADUs on the property. As part of the building permit review process, Stanislaus County Environmental Resources contacted the Municipal Services Department asking if the property would be able to connect to the City of Turlock’s water and sanitary sewer systems to service the new residential units. There is an existing water main and sewer main along the Mitchell Avenue frontage of the property with adequate capacity for future service. There is a City sewer main in Starr Avenue that terminates at the eastern edge of the property and has adequate capacity to allow the City to provide services to the property as requested. This request is to extend the sanitary sewer line along the Starr frontage and connect to the water and sewer lines along the Mitchell Avenue frontage to service the property and the proposed residential units. At this time the Ms. Dale hasn’t requested to extend the water main along the Starr Avenue frontage but it is a possibility and would provide another option to provide water and sewer to the property and the proposed residential units.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

The City of Turlock is allowed to provide water and sewer services outside of its service boundaries upon approval of an out-of-boundary service application by the Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Turlock Municipal Code Sections 6-4-205 and 6-5-115 require an agreement between the City and Owner before services may be provided to territories outside the City limits

Turlock Municipal Code (TMC) Section 6-4-205 regulates providing sewer services to territories outside the City. The TMC Section requires an agreement between the City and the property owner before services may be extended to territories outside the City:

6-4-205 Sewer service outside the City limit.

When sewer main or sewer lateral extensions are necessary before sewer service can be provided to a parcel or parcels outside the City limit, the City shall require an agreement with the record owner of the property and the lessee(s), if there is one. Such agreement shall be approved by the City Council and shall provide the basis upon which such extension shall be constructed and financed. Such agreement shall include the property owner’s consent not to oppose the future annexation of the property. Any additional requirements deemed necessary by the Municipal Services Director and/or the Development Services Director or his or her designee may be added to the agreement.

Before sewer service may be provided to a parcel or parcels outside the City limit, the City shall require an agreement with the record owner of the property and the lessee(s), if there is one. Such agreement shall provide the basis on which the sewer service will be provided, including the property owner’s consent not to oppose the future annexation of the property. Any additional requirements deemed necessary by the Municipal Services Director and/or the Development Services Director or his or her designee may be added to the agreement.

Turlock Municipal Code (TMC) Section 6-5-115 regulates providing water services to territories outside the City. The TMC Section requires an agreement between the City and the property owner before water services may be extended to territories outside the City:

6-5-115 Water service to territory outside the City.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

When water main extensions are required before water service can be provided to territory outside the City, the City shall require an agreement with the property owner and lessee.

Such agreement shall be approved by the City Council and shall provide the basis upon which such lines will be constructed and financed. Such agreement may include the requirement that such territory annex to the City at the earliest opportunity.

The General Plan does not specifically address the issue of out of boundary service connections. General Plan Implementing Policy 3.1-m calls for coordination with Stanislaus County to develop a financing plan to implement infrastructure improvements within county islands prior to annexation. Once a comprehensive financing plan has been established with the County, the City will pursue annexation of County Islands. The Turlock General Plan identifies this area for future residential uses.

If approved, staff will submit an application to LAFCO in accordance with Government Code Section 56133 (Cortese-Knox Hertzberg Act). This law specifies that a city or special district must apply for and obtain the approval of LAFCO before providing new or extended services outside its jurisdictional boundaries. Each LAFCO establishes the standards and procedures for processing such requests.

The Stanislaus LAFCO has adopted a set of policies and procedures for the conduct of its business. The latest version was adopted on July 24, 2024 and is available on their website. While the Stanislaus LAFCO generally prefers that services be extended upon annexation, the Commission’s policies do allow for individual service requests under Government Code Section 56133(b) to be considered on a case-by-case basis. The applicant cannot move forward with the service connection until LAFCO approves their application.

Although the City has no specific policies or criteria established for when an out-of- boundary service connection should be approved, staff does recommend approval of this agreement. This parcel is located in a county island identified in the General Plan for residential uses and future annexation. Getting this parcel connected to City services is a step towards getting the county island improved to City standards.

3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:

1. Pursuant to Turlock Municipal Code Sections 6-4-205 and 6-5-115 an agreement between the City and the property owner is required before services may be provided to territories outside the City limits.

2. Staff recommends approval of this agreement because the properties are located within a county island identified in the General Plan for future annexation.

4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

The property owner has paid the application fee for staff time to process the application.

The property owner will be responsible for the construction of the water and sewer line extension and will pay for all required plans, permits, fees and approvals associated with the extension of the lines and the connection of the lines to their property.

5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend approval.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:

Recommend approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The project is to allow a vacant property located outside the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Turlock to connect to existing City of Turlock water and sewer services. The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303(d) [New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures] of the CEQA Guidelines pursuant to the attached resolution.

8. ALTERNATIVES:

1. The City Council may choose not to approve the agreement. In this case, the applicant will not be able to complete the LAFCO Out-of-Boundary Service Application and will be unable to connect to the City Water and Sewer System.

2. The City Council may choose to modify the conditions of the Out-of-Boundary Service Agreement.

9. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Attachment 1 OBA 24-02 Resolution

2. Attachment 2 OBA 2024-02 Agreement Dale

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
}
WHEREAS, the property owner of 1000 Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Number 042-021-005, which is located outside the City of Turlock’s jurisdictional boundary has submitted a request to connect to City of Turlock water and sanitary sewer services; and
WHEREAS, the property is currently undeveloped and is identified in the Turlock General Plan for future residential uses; and
WHEREAS, the property owner plans to submit building permits to Stanislaus County for the construction of two single-family residences and two accessory dwelling units (ADUs); and
WHEREAS, there are water and sewer mains along the Mitchell Avenue frontage and have adequate capacity; and
WHEREAS, the property owner is requesting to extend water and/or sewer services along the Starr Avenue frontage; and
WHEREAS, Turlock Municipal Code Sections 6-4-205 and 6-5-115 require an agreement between the City of Turlock and the property owner in order to provide services outside of the City of Turlock jurisdictional boundary; and WHEREAS, any extension of City services to a property located outside of the City of Turlock jurisdictional boundary must be reviewed and approved by the Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) prior to extension; and WHEREAS, the application of LAFCO for the Out-of-Boundary service extension requires certification by the City of Turlock and the submittal of a draft agreement between the City of Turlock and the property owner establishing the conditions under which the service is to be provided; and
WHEREAS, allowing connection to the City water system is a “project” as }
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XXDETERMINING EXTENSION OF CITY OF TURLOCK

WATER AND/OR SEWER LINES AND CONNECTION
OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY AT 1000 MITCHELL
AVENUE, STANISLAUS COUNTY ASSESSOR’S
PARCEL NUMBER 042-021-005, LOCATED OUTSIDE

THE JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF

TURLOCK, IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303(d) [NEW

CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL
STRUCTURES] OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 2024-XXX

defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as it involves the exercise of discretionary powers by the City of Turlock to provide a water service connection and the connection would result in a physical change in the environment; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21084 of the California Public Resources Code, the CEQA Guidelines lists the classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, Section 15303(d) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines exempts projects such as water and sewer mains of a reasonable length to serve small structures; and
WHEREAS, the connection to the City of Turlock water and/or sewer service lines are small service structures of reasonable length to serve only the approved use of the property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Turlock considered the evidence contained within the staff report and the public testimony in making this CEQA determination and rendering its decision on the project at a properly noticed meeting held on November 12, 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby determine that extension of City of Turlock water and/or sewer lines and connection of the existing property at 1000 Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 042-021-005, located outside the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Turlock, is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303(d) [New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures] of the CEQA Guidelines.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
NOT PARTICIPATING: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ATTEST:
__________________________
_
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of
Stanislaus,
State of California
City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 1 of 12

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO :

City of Turlock
Attention: City Clerk
156 S. Broadway, Suite 230
Turlock, California 95380-5456
Exempt from fee per Government Code §6103
(Above for Recorder’s Use Only)

OUT-OF-BOUNDARY SERVICE AGREEMENT
for Water and Sanitary Sewer Connection Affecting Real Property THIS AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as “Agreement”), is made and entered into this 12th day of November, 2024, by and between the CITY OF TURLOCK (hereinafter referred to as “City”) and Brianna Dale, (hereinafter referred to as “Owner”) whose address of record is 4145 Pin Oak Court, Turlock, California, 95382, for the property located at 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue, Stanislaus County APN 042-021-005.

WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of real property in the unincorporated area of the County of Stanislaus identified under Paragraph 24 of this Agreement, which property is noncontiguous to City (hereinafter referred to as “Property”) but outside the City limit; and
WHEREAS, Owner has plans to develop two single-family dwellings and two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on the property located at 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue; and
WHEREAS, Owner desires the City extend water and sanitary sewer services to the property located at 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue; and WHEREAS, in exchange for water and sanitary sewer services to the property located at 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue, Owner agrees to the future annexation of the real Property identified under Paragraph 24 of this Agreement to the City; and
WHEREAS, under State law, permission to extend such services must be obtained from the Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Commission (hereinafter referred to as “LAFCO”); and
WHEREAS, Turlock Municipal Code § 6-4-205 and § 6-5-115 requires an agreement between the City and Owner before water and sanitary sewer services may be extended to the territories outside the City; and WHEREAS, this Agreement does not convey or imply the future provision of storm water collection services to the Property.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter recited, hereby agree as follows:

ATTACHMENT 2
City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 2 of 12

1. PROVISION OF WATER SERVICE AND SEWER SERVICES. City agrees to provide water and sanitary sewer services to Owner for Owner’s future development of two single-family residences and two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) only. This right may not be sold, transferred, or otherwise conveyed to any other owner or property. This Agreement does not create any right to utilize any of City’s services except such services for which rights are expressly granted herein. Owner has no right under this Agreement to receive storm water service from City.

2. PRIVATE PROPERTY. City makes no warranty whatsoever as to the current or continued condition of any private property utilized by Owner to receive City’s extraterritorial services. For the purpose of this section, “Private property” shall mean any property that is not owned or leased by City and shall include, but not be limited to, any water and sanitary sewer lines that are not owned by City. In the event that Owner does not have access to City’s services due to any malfunction of any private property, Owner shall still be liable to City for all applicable monthly or other fees.

3. RIGHT OF ENTRY. Owner hereby expressly grants consent to City to enter upon Owner’s Property in the manner and according to the procedures prescribed by City for the purpose of disconnecting service when Owner’s account is delinquent. No further consent shall be required.

4. CHARGES FOR SERVICE. Owner agrees to pay sanitary sewer and water service and usage charges at metered rate in such sum as from time-to-time may be established by the City Council. The City will issue monthly billing statements to Owner for water and sanitary sewer service and usage which will be due and payable as stated on billing statement.

5. FEES AND DEPOSITS. Owner shall be an extraterritorial customer of the City’s water system and sanitary sewer system and hereby agrees to be subject to all water and sanitary sewer service laws, policies and ordinances applicable to customers within City boundaries. Owner also agrees to pay all applicable fees, including connection fees, deposits and usage fees and sewer trunk capacity fees, outlined in the City’s ordinance and/or water and sanitary sewer fee schedule as now existing or herein after amended. Owner further agrees that, as an extraterritorial customer, Owner will not be entitled to notice or protest rights under Proposition 218 where fee increases are contemplated and initiated by City.

6. LAFCO APPLICATION. Once this agreement has been executed, Owner shall then submit the required fees to the Stanislaus County LAFCO and City shall then submit an application to the Stanislaus LAFCO for permission to extend water and sanitary sewer services to the Property. The Owner shall comply with any additional conditions that may be required by LAFCO prior to the installation of City water or sewer services to the property.

Prior to providing any services outside of its territorial boundaries, City must first obtain approval from the Stanislaus County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).

LAFCO charges a fee and may require additional steps prior to approving extraterritorial service.

Property owner shall pay all LAFCO fees and any other costs related to the LAFCO process. This may include the preparation of an environmental document satisfying the requirements of LAFCO at an additional cost to Owner. City will have no obligation to provide service until LAFCO approval is finalized.

City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 3 of 12
LAFCO is the responsible entity for decisions regarding service extensions. City makes no representations or warranties as to any action or decision that may or may not be taken by LAFCO.

7. DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. Owner agrees to pay City all City-wide development impact fees, including but not limited to Water Capital Charges and Sewer Development fees appropriate for the nature and extent of the intended use of the Properties, in such amount as is established by the City in effect at the time of Owner’s connection to the water and/or sanitary sewer system.

8. WATERLINE AND SANITARY SEWER LINE. Owner agrees at his own expense to cause a water line and sanitary sewer line, of such size as shall be determined by City Engineer, to be constructed and installed according to City standards, at such location as shall be determined by City Engineer as necessary or desirable to serve Owner’s Property and comply with City extension requirements.

Upon acceptance by City, waterline and/or sewer line, and all appurtenances up to the required backflow device(s) shall become property of the City. All facilities downstream of this point shall be privately owned and maintained.

The sewer line on private property shall belong to the owner and shall be installed and maintained at the expense of the owner. All sewer lines and appurtenant facilities constructed in or under streets, easements, or alleys shall become property of the City upon the complete installation and final inspection and approval of all the lines by the Public Works Department.

9. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. Owner shall submit an application for an encroachment permit to the City of Turlock and Stanislaus County (if required), with improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer.

10. IMPROVEMENT PLANS. Developer shall submit on-site and off-site (Non- structural) improvement plans to the Engineering Division for review and approval. Please submit an improvement plan application along with the current plan check fee, five (5) sets of civil improvement plans including erosion control and landscape plans, an erosion and sediment control plan (ESCP) worksheet, one (1) copy of the soils report (California Building Code requirement) and one (1) copy of the land use permit. Landscape plans shall meet the requirements of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). All projects disturbing more than one acre of land must apply for a Notice of Intent with the State of California Water Quality Control Board. The W.D.I.D. number, which is provided by the state, must be provided prior to grading permit issuance. Water pipe, valves, meter, backflow devices and any and all other improvements and appurtenances specified by City shall be installed by Owner per City standards.
a. Connection to the City of Turlock water system shall require the abandonment of any and all existing private (non-City owned) wells on the property. Wells shall be capped and plugged pursuant to the standards of Stanislaus County and the State of California.
b. Septic tank removal. To connect to the City’s sanitary sewer system all sewer waste generated on the premises shall be conveyed through the new sewer service. Once the new service is complete, any and all on-site septic tanks and leach lines shall be abandoned and destroyed in accordance with County and State regulations.

City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 4 of 12
c. All improvements shall be constructed to the applicable City standards. Improvement plans shall be submitted prior to the installation of any improvements. Backflow prevention devices shall be installed
d. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, water utilities shall be reviewed and approved by Turlock Municipal Services.
e. The developer shall pay all applicable City of Turlock city wide and specific plan development impact fees adjusted to the current Engineering News Record, prior to issuance of any permits.
f. Developer shall procure an encroachment permit from the Engineering Division for all off-site work done within existing City of Turlock right-of-way, proposed right-of- way and within any easements prior to the issuance of any building permits. Upon approval of the off-site improvement plans, please submit an encroachment permit application, a cost estimate for all off-site work, liability insurance as detailed in the encroachment permit application listing the City of Turlock as additional insured, and an improvement security equal to 110% of the valuation of the work in the form of a bond, letter of credit, cash or check.
g. All utility improvements shall be installed per City of Turlock Standards and Specifications.
h. Any existing or new domestic, landscape, and fire water services shall be fitted with backflow prevention devices that meet the current City Standards. All water services shall have its own tap off the main.
i. Developer shall repave all trenching in existing right-of-way per Stanislaus County Standards.
j. Developer shall implement source control measures consistent with recommendations from the CASQA Stormwater BMP Handbook for New Development and Redevelopment for the pollutant generating activities listed in Section E.12.d of the Phase II MS4 General Permit.
k. Developer shall incorporate all post construction BMPs necessary to comply with the Phase II MS4 General Permit issued by the State Water Resources Control Board to the City of Turlock.
l. If any survey monuments will be at risk during construction activities, the City of Turlock will require that there is an individual in responsible charge of the Land Surveying activities within the bounds of proposed development as follows:
•Acknowledgement of Monument Responsibility certificate signed and sealed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or a Professional Engineer authorized to perform Land Surveying in the State of California, will be required prior to issuance of the grading and/or encroachment permit.
•Acknowledgement of Monument Preservation certificate signed and sealed by a Licensed Land Surveyor or a Professional Engineer authorized to perform Land Surveying in the State of California, will be required prior to final sign acceptance of the grading and/or encroachment permit. m. The project shall comply with the Current California Fire Code, National Fire Code (NFPA), California Mechanical Code, and the Turlock Municipal Code in effect at the time of permit application.

11. COST OF FEES. Owner shall bear all costs of construction of the improvements, in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, and shall pay all permit, plan check, inspection, application fees, water and sanitary sewer connection fee based upon service size, the City’s Water Grid Fee, the City’s Sewer Grid Fee and any and all other applicable fees, including all sanitary sewer and potable water-related development impact fees.

City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 5 of 12

12. CONFORMANCE WITH CITY ORDINANCES. Owner agrees to cause all future improvements and construction on said Property to conform to the subdivision, zoning, housing, plumbing, electrical, building, fire, park dedication and other codes, ordinances and regulations of City, including payment of fees stipulated therein. In addition, all applicable requirements of Title 6 of the Turlock Municipal Code, as now existing or hereafter amended, dealing with the water system of the City of Turlock including, but not limited to, Turlock Municipal Code Sections 6-5, 6-6 and 6-7 and the sanitary sewer system of the City of Turlock including, but not limited to, 6-4 are incorporated herein by reference are incorporated herein by reference.

13. DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC USE. Owner agrees to dedicate to public use, at no cost to City, and without any demands, conditions or requirements, any easements, streets, alleys or other public ways which the City, City Planning Commission and/or the City Council find necessary and desirable for the future development of the Property or for the protection and maintenance of utilities.

14. COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND. City agrees to furnish water service and sanitary sewer service for the benefit of Owner’s real Property hereinafter described. The obligations of Owner stated in this Agreement are covenants running with the land, and are intended by City and by Owner to be binding upon Owner and Owner’s heirs, administrators, assignees and successors in interest in the land described herein.

15. COVENANT TO ANNEX. Owner hereby covenants and binds itself and its successors-in-interest to annex said real Property to City when the City Council determines that such annexation shall be made, and Owner hereby acknowledges that this writing is a request and a consent by Owner to so annex the said real Property, and Owner for itself and its successors-in-interest further agrees not to protest annexation of said Property either by itself or as part of a larger parcel of land and hereby specifically waives the provisions of all sections of law now existing or hereafter to be enacted permitting protests to be filed in annexation proceedings.

16. RESULT OF FAILURE TO ANNEX. It is further understood and agreed that state law provides that application must be made to the Local Agency Formation Commission before the real Property herein described may be annexed to the City, and if said Commission should not give its consent to annex, or if it places conditions or modifications upon annexation which are not acceptable to City, in its sole and unfettered discretion, then, and in that event, the City in its sole and unfettered discretion, may cancel and terminate this Agreement and City shall cease to provide water service and may disconnect City water lines from said Property upon giving the notice provided for in this Agreement, and neither Owner nor its successor-in- interest shall be entitled to any refund of charges previously paid to City.

17. CONSENT TO PAY TAXES UPON ANNEXATION. Upon annexation, Owner consents to be taxed and agrees to pay Owner’s proportionate share of the City’s general indebtedness existing at the time of annexation, pursuant to Government Code Section 57328.

18. AGREEMENT TO NOTIFY PURCHASER OR GRANTEE. In the event Owner’s land, or any lot or parcel thereof, is to be sold or conveyed, Owner agrees to notify said purchaser or grantee of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, however the binding effect of this Agreement upon said purchaser or grantee shall not be lessened by the failure of the Owner to give such notice.

In the event of a transfer of Owner’s Property by any means, including but not limited to, sale, gift, bequests, etc., City, in its sole and unfettered discretion, may terminate this City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 6 of 12
Agreement, may renegotiate the terms of this Agreement or may take any and all other action it deems necessary or appropriate.

19. FAILURE TO PAY. Upon the failure of Owner or Owner's successors in interest to make the payments at the time and in the manner as herein provided, or to keep or perform any of the agreements or covenants on their part to be kept or performed as herein provided, City may cease to give water service and/or sanitary sewer service and may disconnect City water and/or sewer lines from said Property upon giving the Owner or Owner's successor in interest 60 days’ written notice of City’s intention so to do, which said notice shall be by personal service or by mail to Owner or Owner's successor in interest at his or her last known mailing address.

Unpaid service charges for the Property described below shall constitute a debt of the Owner or Owner's successors in interest to the City. The Owner or the Owner's successor in interest who incurred the debt shall be liable in a civil action for the amount of the unpaid service charges, for the cost of suit, and for reasonable attorney fees. The service charges shall also constitute a lien against said Property for the amount of the unpaid service charges.

Any lien shall be enforceable against Owner and Owner's successors in interest, and shall be subject to the same penalties and procedures under foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency as provided for ordinary municipal taxes.

20. APPROVALS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. The furnishing of water and sanitary sewer services set forth in Paragraph 1 shall not be effective and no construction shall take place before approval of the extension of the services by LAFCO, all plans and specifications have been approved, and all required permits have been obtained and any and all fees have been paid.

21. SUBSEQUENTLY ENACTED OR ADOPTED CHARGES. If the City Council shall hereafter increase or enact or adopt any other charges, fees or other requirements related to water and/or sanitary sewer service, annexation or any other aspect of the subject matter of this Agreement, Owner agrees to pay or perform the same, in the same manner, and to the same extent, as any other person similarly situated.

22. DAMAGES TO FACILITIES. When a discharge of waste causes an obstruction, damage, or any other impairment to the sewer system and/or the City publicly owned treatment works, the City may assess a charge against the user, premises owner, and/or person violating the provisions of the Municipal Code for the work required to clean or repair the facility and add the charge to the user’s sewer service charge.

23. INTENDED USE OF PROPERTY. Owner’s intended use of said Property is residential for two single-family dwellings and two accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Water and sanitary sewer service for other than Owner’s proposed use, or any increase in the scale or intensity of its future operation, shall require further approval by City and, if so approved, will be charged for in accordance with the charges then in effect. City may impose other or different conditions upon such approval or may deny the same, in City’s sole discretion. The City Council has the right to delegate authority to one or more designated persons to amend this Agreement as to the type of use or the number of connections which may be made. Until or unless such delegation of authority is affected by resolution or ordinance, amendment of this Agreement requires the approval of the City Council.

24. PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS. The Property herein referred to are described as follows:

City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 7 of 12
Address: 1000 N. Mitchell Avenue, Turlock, CA 95380
Assessor’s Parcel Number: 042-021-005
Legal Description: See Exhibit “A”

25. RECORDATION OF AGREEMENT. The City shall record this Agreement with the Stanislaus County Recorder's Office within thirty (30) days of execution thereof. No permit shall be issued pursuant to this Agreement until this Agreement has been recorded in the official records of Stanislaus County.

26. PARTIAL INVALIDITY. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by any court of competent jurisdiction or arbitrator to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, such provision shall, to the extent of such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability, be severed, and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in effect.

27. SUCCESSORS. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the respective successors, assigns and representatives of the Parties.

28. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND ARBITRATION. In the event of any litigation, including arbitration, between the Parties hereto arising out of this Agreement or the performance thereof, the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

29. WAIVER. The waiver of any breach of this Agreement by either party shall not constitute a continuing waiver of any subsequent breach by such breaching party of the same or different provision.

30. AMBIGUITY. This Agreement has been jointly negotiated and in the event of any ambiguity, said ambiguity shall be given a reasonable interpretation and shall not be construed against either party.

31. ANNEXATION. Upon annexation into the City of the Property affected by this Agreement, this Agreement shall automatically terminate, and the annexed Property shall become a customer within the City with all rights and obligations pertaining thereto.

32. SUBDIVISION. This Agreement will automatically terminate as to any parcel(s) which are subdivided at any point after execution of this Agreement and the subdivided parcel(s) is not receiving City water service.

33. TERM AND VOLUNTARY TERMINATION BY CITY. The initial term of this Agreement is for five (5) years from the date of execution. If the improvements have not been installed and the water and/or sanitary sewer connections have not been made within five years from the date of execution of this Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate. If the connections are made, after the initial term, this Agreement will automatically renew on a year-to-year basis.

City may terminate this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving notice of termination not less than ninety (90) days prior to the date of termination.

34. TERMINATION BY CITY. In addition to the City’s right to terminate this Agreement as set forth in Paragraph 32, City may terminate this Agreement upon any material breach of this Agreement by Owner or upon any violation of any City ordinance, policy, regulation or other requirement conditioned upon City providing due notice to Owner that City would otherwise provide to a customer located within the City prior to termination or suspension City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 8 of 12
of water service. Grounds for termination include, but are not limited to: (1) illegally connecting to City’s system, (2) contaminating City’s water supply, (3) tampering with water meters or taking other steps to disguise the amount of water used or avoid paying the established rate, (4) involuntary abandonment of right to receive service in accordance with the procedures contained in City’s ordinances. (5) discharging material from the premise that is detrimental or injurious to the sewer system or to other premises (6) where the Director finds that negligent or wasteful use of water exists at any premises which adversely affects the sewer system (7) if the Director determines the action is necessary, to protect the City against abuse or fraud (8) if there is an immediate or imminent public nuisance. Upon termination, Owner is responsible for disconnecting its Property from City’s services. If Owner fails to disconnect the Property from City services, City may perform the work needed to disconnect and recover the costs as a lien against the Property or through any other lawful method. Upon termination, Owner is responsible for disconnecting its Property from City’s services. If Owner fails to disconnect the Property from City services, City may perform the work needed to disconnect and recover the costs as a lien against the Property or through any other lawful method.

35. TERMINATION FOR INADEQUATE WATER OR SEWER SUPPLY. As City’s customers within its boundaries have first claim on City’s resources, City may terminate this Agreement at any time in which City has, in its sole and unfettered discretion, determined there is inadequate water and/or sanitary sewer capacity to supply City’s customers within its boundaries. City may terminate this Agreement upon the occurrence of any significant event which renders the City unable to perform this Agreement, including but not limited to severe drought, contamination of City facilities, or destruction of City facilities. For purposes of this section, City is unable to perform this Agreement if City’s capacity or facilities become insufficient to serve its existing customers within City boundaries. This paragraph shall not be deemed in any way to limit the City’s right to terminate this Agreement as set forth in Paragraphs 32 and 33 of this Agreement.

36. TERMINATION BY OWNER. Owner may terminate service at any time by requesting and recording an agreement of voluntary abandonment in accordance with City ordinances. Owner will be responsible for any charges accruing up to the date of abandonment, and Owner will be responsible for disconnecting its Property from City’s services. If Owner fails to disconnect the Property from City services, City may perform the work needed to disconnect and recover the costs as a lien against the Property or through any other lawful method.

36. INDEMNIFICATION. In consideration of the City’s processing and consideration of this Agreement, the LAFCO application for service extension, and/or the related California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) consideration by City, Owner agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Turlock (“City”) from liability or loss connected, directly or indirectly, with this Agreement, the LAFCO application and/or process, and/or the CEQA process, as follows:
a. The Owner shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul this Agreement, the LAFCO application and/or process, and/or the CEQA process, or any prior or subsequent approvals regarding this Agreement, the LAFCO application and/or process, and/or the CEQA process, or any condition imposed by the City or any of its agencies, departments, commissions, agents, officers or employees concerning the same, or to impose personal liability against such agents, officers or employees resulting from their involvement in the same, including any claim for private attorney general fees claimed by or awarded to any party from City. The obligations of City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 9 of 12
Owner under this Indemnification shall apply regardless of whether this Agreement and/or the LAFCO outside service application is approved.
b. The City will promptly notify Owner of any such claim, action, or proceedings that is or may be subject to this Indemnification and, will cooperate fully in the defense.
c. The City may, within its unlimited discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding if the City defends the claim, actions, or proceeding in good faith. To the extent that City uses any of its resources responding to such claim, action, or proceeding, Owner will reimburse City upon demand. Such resources include, but are not limited to, staff time, court costs, City Attorney’s time at their regular rate for external or non-City agencies, and any other direct or indirect cost associated with responding to the claim, action, or proceedings, including, but not limited to, the use of special counsel. d. Owner shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement by the City of such claim, action or proceeding unless the settlement is approved in writing by Owner, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
e. Owner shall pay all court ordered costs and attorney fees. f. This Indemnification represents the complete understanding between Owner and the City with respect to matters set forth in this Paragraph 36.

37. NOTICE. Whenever notice is required or convenient to effect this Agreement, Customer shall give notice to the City at the current address of City’s main office to the attention of the City Manager. City shall give notice by either mailing notice to the record owner, by providing notice within or in the same manner as the monthly water bill, or by posting notice at the appropriate property.

38. CITY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR. The City’s contract administrator and contact person for this Agreement is:

Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director
Development Services Department
156 S. Broadway, Suite 120
Turlock, California 95380
Telephone: (209) 668-5640
E-mail: [email protected]

39. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in separate counterparts, each of which is effective and enforceable. Signatures delivered by facsimile shall be effective and enforceable.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized.

CITY OF TURLOCK, a municipal corporationBrianna Dale
By ________________________________ By ________________________________ Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager Brianna Dale, Property Owner City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 10 of 12
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By ________________________________
George Petrulakis, City Attorney
ATTEST:

By ________________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk
City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 11 of 12

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

THE LAND REFFERED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN AN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF STANISLAUS COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIED AS FOLLOWS:

LOTS 26, 27 AND 28 IN BLOCK 2 OF THE KENWOOD PARK, IN THE COUNTY OF

STANISLAUS, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL MAP THEREOF FILED JANUARY 15, 1910 IN VOLUME 4 OF MAPS AT PAGE 44, STANISLAUS COUNTY RECORDS.

APN: 042-021-005-000
(End of Legal Description)
City Contract No. XX-XXXX Page 12 of 12
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE §1189 State of California )
County of ___________________________ )
On ____________________ before me, ____________________________________________________________, Date Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared ____________________________________________________________________________ Name(s) of Signer(s)
_____________________________________________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

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

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature
___________________________________
Signature of Notary Public
Place Notary Seal above
_______________________________________ OPTIONAL ___________________________________________ Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.

Description of Attached Document
Title of Type of Document: _________________________________ Document Date: _________________ Number of Pages: ______ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: __________________________________ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer’s Name: ____________________________ Signer’s Name: ____________________________ Corporate Officer – Title(s): ________________ Corporate Officer – Title(s): ________________ Partner -- Limited General Partner -- Limited General Individual Attorney in Fact Individual Attorney in Fact Trustee Guardian or Conservator Trustee Guardian or Conservator Other: _________________________________ Other: _________________________________ Signer Is Representing: ______________________ Signer Is Representing: ______________________ _________________________________________ ________
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024

From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: James Governale, Administrative Analyst
Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Ordinance: Introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending Turlock Municipal Code Title 6 (Sanitation and Health), Chapter 6-4 (Sewage Disposal), Article 4 (Fees and Charges) to add Section 6-4-409 "Sewer Service User Rate Updates"

2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

To respond to feedback from City Council about the frequency that sewer service rate studies take place, staff propose the addition of Section 6-4-409 "Sewer Service User Rate Updates" to the Turlock Municipal Code, as shown in the attached ordinance.

It is generally accepted as "best practice" for agencies who provide sewer treatment services to perform cost of service studies on a reocurring basis to ensure that customers are being charged in line with customer usage and net revenue requirements. At the October 8 City Council meeting and following an extensive cost-of-service study and full Proposition 218 process which can be reviewed in those respective staff reports (from the August 13 and October 8 City Council meetings), Council adopted updated sewer rates.

These updated sewer rates, not evaluated since 2013, represented a significant increase for Significant Industrial Users.

During the October 8 meeting and with consideration for mitigating sudden significant increases to sewer rates, Council directed the City Manager to present an ordinance that would amend the Turlock Municipal Code to include language about the regularity that cost of service studies would be performed and new rates would be adopted. Staff suggest adding a new section, 6-4-409 "Sewer Service User Rate Updates" to the Turlock Municipal Code, detailed in the attached draft ordinance in response to Council's feedback.

Following the approval of this action, the second and final reading of this ordinance will be presented to City Council at the December 10 City Council meeting and then formally included in the Turlock Municipal Code soon thereafter, pursuant to the ordinance.

3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:

A. It is generally accepted to be best practice for agencies to perform cost of service studies on a regular basis of about every five years.

B. City Council provided feedback to the City Manager at the October 8, 2024 Council meeting that an ordinance should be presented to formalize this practice in the Turlock Municipal Code.

4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Future costs of study will be budgeted for and presented to the City Council for approval with current financial information.

5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend approval.

6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:

Recommend approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The Ordinance has been reviewed with respect to applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines. The Ordinance is not a project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4) because the Ordinance does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, as the Ordinance merely requires the City to review and adopt updated sewer service user rates at least every five years and does not involve any commitment to any specific project.

8. ALTERNATIVES:

A. City Council could choose to not add Section 6-4-409 "Sewer Service User Rate Updates". This alternative is not recommended because this is the way to formalize the addition of this practice to the Turlock Municipal Code, as was Council's request.

B. Provide staff direction on how to proceed.

9. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Ordinance

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK

ORDINANCE NO. -CS
WHEREAS, on October 8, 2024, the City of Turlock (“City”) recently adopted updated Sewer Service User Rates by adopting Resolution 2024-153; and WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of Resolution 2024-153, the City had not increased its sewer rates since January 1, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City wants to establish a policy whereby sewer rates will be updated in a timely manner in order to ensure that rates are proportionately aligned with costs of service and to avoid the need for significant rate realignments or increases.

BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Turlock as follows:

SECTION 1. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Ordinance has been reviewed with respect to applicability of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines. The Ordinance is not a project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4) because the Ordinance does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, as the Ordinance merely requires the City to review and adopt updated sewer service user rates at least every five years and does not involve any commitment to any specific project.

SECTION 2. AMENDMENT: Title 6, Chapter 6-4, Article 4, shall hereby be amended to add Section 6-4-409, as follows:
6-4-409. Sewer Service User Rate Updates
The City will endeavor to review its costs of service and adopt updated sewer service user rates, pursuant to all applicable laws, at least every five years. Rates may be updated sooner than five years if warranted by significant changes in the City’s costs of service or the flows and/or loadings received by the City’s sewer system.

SECTION 3. VALIDITY: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance. The Turlock City Council hereby declares that they would have passed this ordinance, and each }
}
}

IN THE MATTER OF AMENDING TURLOCK
MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 6 (SANITATION AND
HEALTH), CHAPTER 6-4 (SEWAGE DISPOSAL),
ARTICLE 4 (FEES AND CHARGES) TO ADD
SECTION 6-4-409 "SEWER SERVICE USER
RATE UPDATES"
}
}
}
}
}
}
Ordinance No. -CS

section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, word, or phrase be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. ENACTMENT: Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days from the passage and adoption thereof, this ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the County of Stanislaus, State of California, together with names of the members of the City Council voting for and against the same.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

NOT PARTICIPATING:

ABSENT:

Signed and approved this 10th day of December, 2024.

SIGNED:
__________________________
AMY BUBLAK, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024

From: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director
Prepared by: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Authorizing the submittal of the 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for the required 90-day review period.

2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

The City of Turlock is mandated by the State of California to develop a Housing Element as part of its General Plan. The Housing Element is designed to promote affordable and decent housing throughout the community, aligning with state-wide housing goals. The update process commenced in May 2021, with Dyett and Bhatia Regional Planners contracted to assist in this endeavor.

In compliance with state law, the City engaged citizens throughout the Housing Element update process.

A dedicated webpage has been established to provide information about the process. In 2023, several community pop-up events were organized, including one during National Night Out at Columbia Park, employing a "go to them" strategy to increase awareness and encourage public participation.

Additionally, a citywide survey was conducted from February 1 to March 1, 2024, allowing residents to identify and assess strategies for accommodating new housing that meets local needs and legal requirements. Approximately 33,000 surveys were mailed, yielding over 1,500 responses. The findings from the survey informed the selection of sites and strategies to address the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 5,802 housing units for the 2023-2031 planning period.

Focus group discussions involved affordable and market-rate developers, non-profit organizations, architects, service providers for older citizens, and other stakeholders, all contributing to the formulation of the Housing Element’s policies and programs.

Two study sessions were held with the Planning Commission, where staff presented community feedback and gathered input. The Draft Housing Element was made available for a 30-day public review on the City’s website starting October 2, 2024.

Following the 30-day public review period, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 7, 2024, to collect any additional public comments and make a formal recommendation to the City Council regarding the submission of the Draft Housing Element to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for their 90-day review. Any feedback from the state during this period will be incorporated into the Housing Element prior to its final adoption by the City Council.

3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:

To comply with State law, the City of Turlock must update the Housing Element every eight years.

4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

A portion of the cost of updating the Housing Element is funded through the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) grant and from Fund 241 “Asset Replacement”, the holding account for projects necessary to update the City’s General Plan. Staff time was paid from the Planning Division budget.

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend approval.

6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:

Recommend approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations) and/or Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the CEQA Guidelines.

8. ALTERNATIVES:

1. The City Council may choose not to authorize the submittal of the Draft Housing Element to HCD. Staff does not recommend this alternative as the deadline to submit the City’s Housing Element was December 31, 2023. HCD has committed to continue working with staff and the consultant to expeditiously review the draft Housing Element in order for the City to comply with State housing law.

2. The City Council may choose to modify the draft document. Any changes will be incorporated into the draft document submitted to the State Housing and Community Development (HCD) Department.

9. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution Authorizing Submittal to HCD

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
WHEREAS, State Housing Element law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires every city and county in California to adopt a comprehensive General Plan that includes seven mandated elements; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element is one of the required elements and the only element reviewed and certified by the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD); and WHEREAS, the housing element has to be updated every eight years; and WHEREAS, the City of Turlock is in the process of updating the housing element to meet the State Housing Element law; and
WHEREAS, the 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element was provided to the City Council for review under separate cover and is available on the City website.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby authorize the submittal of the 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for the mandated 90-day review period.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 12th day of November, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
NOT PARTICIPATING: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ATTEST:
___________________________
Julie Christel, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XXXIN THE MATTER OF AUTHORIZING
THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 2023-2031

DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT TO THE

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

HOUSING AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT (HCD) DEPARTMENT
FOR THE REQUIRED 90-DAY REVIEW
PERIOD

City Council Staff Report
November 12, 2024

From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: James Governale, Administrative Analyst
Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:

Motion: Determining the project is exempt from CEQA in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301, 15269, and 15359; and accepting improvements for City Project No. 24-046 "Emergency Repair of Farr Street Sanitary Sewer Main (Between Columbia Street and W. Main Street)” and authorizing the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion

2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:

On the afternoon of Wednesday, October 23, 2024, following construction activities through the Roads Program City Project 23-033 by George Reed Inc., City crews discovered damage to a six-inch sewer main, which resulted in the temporary loss of sewer service for five residential homes and one business on Farr Street between W. Main Street and Columbia Street. A task force of City staff was immediately formed and focused on the logistics of the necessary repairs and on providing communication and services to those impacted. Later that day, Acting City Manager Sarah Eddy declared, under the authority delegated to the City Manager by City Resolution No. 2010-028 (Attachment 1), that the replacement of the sewer main was an emergency (Attachment 2) and ordered the replacement of the infrastructure without giving notice for bids to let contracts as authorized by Section 22050(b)(1) of the Public Contract Code. City staff coordinated with United Pavement Maintenance, Inc., who was mobilized nearby for a different City project. During this time, City staff arranged for those affected to have temporary accommodations, including lodging at Holiday Inn and per diem for meals, while construction was taking place. The contractor worked through the night to replace the approximately 300-foot section of the sewer main, and service was fully restored by 6 a.m. on Thursday, October 24, 2024.

The repairs are organized within City Project No. 24-046 "Emergency Repair of Farr Street Sanitary Sewer Main (Between Columbia Street and W. Main Street)” and were contracted with United Pavement Maintenance, Inc (Attachment 3). At the conclusion of this project, which represents the end of the emergency situation (Attachment 4), the roadway surface is left with a trench patch running the full length of the sewer main. Staff intend to make arrangements for a contractor to return to this area to construct a new, rehabilitated street surface there, which was the goal of the Roads Program construction project in the first place.

The emergency declaration was terminated on October 24 (Attachment 4) when sewer service was restored to the affected parcels.

The goals of this staff report are to fulfill the requirement set forth by Public Contract Code section 22050(b)(3) and to recommend that City Council authorize the City Engineer to sign Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

and record the Notice of Completion (Attachment 5) for City Project No. 24-046 "Emergency Repair of Farr Street Sanitary Sewer Main (Between Columbia Street and W.

Main Street)”.

3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:

A. Public Contract Code Section 20167 allows contracting for emergency work without competitive solicitation, provided that the procedures set forth in Public Contract Code Section 22050 are followed, including that the Council, or the City Manager under City of Turlock Resolution No. 2010-028, make a finding “based on substantial evidence, that the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from competitive solicitation of bids and that the action is necessary.” B. Public Contract Code Section 22050(b)(3) requires the Acting City Manager to report to the City Council at its next meeting the reasons justifying why the emergency did not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids and why the action was necessary to respond to the emergency.

C. California Civil Code Section 9204 allows the City Council to authorize the City Engineer to record the Notice of Completion.

4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:

While there is no fiscal impact associated with recording the Notice of Completion, there were several costs associated with this emergency, including the following:

Contract 2025-073 with United Pavement
Maintenance, Inc.
expensed to 115-10-115.51270
$70,993.61
Lodging for three rooms at Holiday Inn for
one night
expensed to 410-51-530.47095_000
$976.20
Per Diem for three individuals for one
breakfast, one lunch, and one dinner for
three days
expensed to 410-51-530.47095_000
$888
Total Impact of Emergency $72,857.81

Appropriate funds were available within these accounts, therefore no appropriation is needed.

5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Recommend approval.

6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:

Recommend approval.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Agenda Staff Report
11/12/2024

This project is statutorily exempt under California Code of Regulations Sections 15269, 15301, and 15359 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

8. ALTERNATIVES:

1. Council could choose to deny authorizing the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion. Staff does not recommend this alternative as all work has been completed in accordance with the contract documents.

9. ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 2010-028

2. Signed Declaration

3. Signed Termination

4. Draft NOC

RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF:

CITY OF TURLOCK
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

CITY OF TURLOCK
Office of the City Clerk
156 S. Broadway, Suite 230
TURLOCK, CA 95380-5454

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
CITY PROJECT NO. 24-046
Emergency Repair of Farr Street Sanitary Sewer Main
(Between Columbia Street and W. Main Street)
Notice is hereby given that work on the above-referenced emergency repair project located on Farr Street (between Columbia Street and W. Main Street) in Turlock, California, was completed by the undersigned agency on October 24, 2024. The contractor of work is United Pavement Maintenance, Inc., 7017 Hughson Avenue, Hughson, California, 95326, and the owner is the City of Turlock, 156 South Broadway, Suite 150, Turlock, California, 95380. Kindly, refer to said Project Number on all communications relating to this work.

Date:
(Signature - William D. Morris, P.E., P.L.S.; City Engineer; Owner’s Agent) City of Turlock

VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, City Engineer of the owner of the aforesaid interest, have read this notice; I know and understand the contents thereof; and the facts stated therein are true of my own knowledge.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

CITY OF TURLOCK
___________________________
William D. Morris, P.E., P.L.S.

CITY ENGINEER
OWNER’S AGENT
Executed on _____________, 2024 at Turlock, California, Stanislaus County

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
October 2024 - Monthly Report

BUILDING

HOUSING

PLANNING

The Development
Services Department
continues to strive to
provide excellent
customer service while
ensuring the health,
safety, enhancement,
and prosperity of our
community.

2 BUILDING

October 2024 - Update

Building Stats
• Projects in active review - 52
• Projects waiting for customer response - 60
• Inspections for Oct – 402

25 126
9 Permits Applied

MINOR REVIEW PROJECTS OVER THE COUNTER PROJECTS

PLAN CHECK PROJECTS
0 50 100 150 200
Permits Issued
Permits Complete
Permits Issued &
Completed

3 HOUSING DIVISION UPDATE
_____________________________________

Nine of the 21 homes in the Montana Estates subdivision have new homeowners. The Housing Division was able to provide first time homebuyer loans for the new residents. Staff continues to work with Self-Help Enterprises to get potential first time homebuyers funded and into homeownership.

The new dining hall and kitchen at 219 S. Broadway is open and We Care is preparing daily meals.

The Housing staff is beginning discussion with Stanislaus County staff on the preparation of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan (Con Plan). The Con Plan is a document used by states and local jurisdictions to assess their affordable housing and community development needs, analyze market conditions, and identify priorities for allocating federal funding from various HUD grant programs. An item will be brought to a future Council meeting requesting to enter into an MOU with Stanislaus County for professional services from a consultant to help draft the Con Plan and first year Annual Action Plan (AAP).

The anticipated completion date of the Con Plan and 1st Year AAP is May 2025.

Housing Financial Report

Funds with HUD:

Prepared: 11/5/2024
Stanislaus Housing Consortium
CHDO 259,546.65
Administrative Funds 841,307.79
HOME 5,152,798.90
6,253,653.34
CDBG-CV 759,022.53
CDBG 726,453.96

HOME-ARP
Administrative and Planning Funds 593,395.51
Home Activities Funds 4,524,907.00
5,118,302.51
Notes:

Funds with California Department of Housing and Community Development:

Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) 1,011,607.00 Funds with City:

Stan County HOME Lead Consortium Fund 254 -
CDBG (with City) Fund 255 (87,540.86)
HOME Consortium Fund 256 14,959.85
State HOME Fund 257
State Home Funds 2,672,301.52
Cal HOME Program 1,600,561.18
HEAP 91,053.02
4,363,915.72
Housing Stimulus Fund 258 44,652.78
HOME-ARP Fund 259 (139,982.57)
PLHA-Permanent Local Housing Allocation Fund 260 53,018.63 Successor Agency - LMI Fund 625 2,230,857.20
TOTAL OF ALL FUNDS: 20,348,920.09$
Notes: None
-Funds stated above do not reflect expenditures that have not been submitted for reimbursement
Planning Projects
_____________________________________

The Planning Division has received the following applications in the month of October 2024.

• The Planning Division received an application for a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development, Rezone, and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map. The applicant is seeking approval to subdivide two parcels totaling approximately 13.6 acres at 1601 W. Monte Vista & 3201 Four Seasons Drive (the strawberry field & fruit stand) and develop a 114-lot single-family residential subdivision.

• The 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element was released for 30-day public review on October 2, 2024.

The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on November 7th to take public comment and consider a recommendation to the City Council to submit the 6th Cycle Update to its draft Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for the mandatory 90-day review. The updated element addresses new housing targets established by the Stanislaus Council of Governments for the 2023-2031 planning period.

• The Planning Division coordinated and hosted 5 Predevelopment meetings in October.

DEVELOPMENT

SERVICES

DEPARTMENT

BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS TYPE BUSINESS NAME
101 LANDER AVE 1 ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION THE WERK SPACE 1080 DELBON AVE ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION ELITE MEDICAL HEALTH & WELLNES 1125 N GOLDEN STATE BLVD F ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION CREATIVE WEST GRAPHIC SOLUTION 1203 SHADY LN HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 365 DYNAMIC RESOURCE CONSULTIN 130 W MAIN ST ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION Grays Tavern 1419 SYCAMORE ST HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT TINY OVEN
1480 ALEX CIR HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT WARDA ESSENTIALS GLOBAL, LLC 1505 ELLERD DR B ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION MARY ANN'S BAKERY 1885 ARBOR WAY HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT NURTURING MOTHERHOOD DOULA & L 2180 CARLETON DR HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT PLAA APPRAISALS 2535 STONE MEADOW RD HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT BUBBLES CO2 262 GREENHOUSE WAY HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 3 FRIENDS MAID SERVICES 2803 GEER RD ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION EYE PROS 2810 MAJESTIC CT HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT TPR CONSULTANTS 3106 GEER RD ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION WINGSTOP 3162 ANDRE LN HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT MIXIN CONFECTIONS
3210 COUNTRYSIDE DR ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION KALI SMILES KIDS DENTAL 331 E MAIN ST ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION BALANCED BOOKS 357 S GOLDEN STATE BLVD ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION JP FURNITURE 3650 COLORADO AVE HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT FINESTSHINECA
4172 PICCADILLY LN HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT VNTG NOMADS 209 537 MARSHALL ST HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT ALL THINGS GOLF
543 ANGELUS ST HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT A & A JUMPER RENTALS 711 E CANAL DR B ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION PRIME LENDING 741 E MAIN ST ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION GHITTERMAN, GHITTERMAN & FELD 923 W MAIN ST ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION LIV BEAUTIFUL ESTHETICS 991 E MONTE VISTA AVE 1 ZONING CERTIFICATE/OCCUPANCY INSPECTION MONTE VISTA OPTOMETRY

ECONOMICDEVELOPMENT
& COMMUNICATIONS
Monthly Report - October 2024
PAGE 1
Business Retention and Expansion (BRE)
Business Retention and Expansion (BRE) is a critical component of economic development. The primary focus of BRE initiatives is to support existing businesses within the City.

Existing businesses contribute significantly to job creation and economic stability. By helping them grow, communities can sustain economic health and reduce the risk of business closures.

During the months of October 2024, City of Turlock Economic Development Department staff met with 16 local businesses.
*Annual Business Retention and Expansion (BRE) Visits: 72 meetings and counting! (reporting period is 7/1/2024 - June 30/2025)
Monthly Report - October 2024
Pictured Below:

Turlock Business, Rise N’ Brew Bakery and Coffee
Shop featured on GoodDay Sacramento
Pictured Below:

Owner’s of The Grand Oak celebrate their
5 Year Anniversary
PAGE 2
Workforce Development -
Talent Development
Workforce development within economic development
refers to a set of strategies and activities designed to enhance the skills, knowledge, and capabilities of the local labor force to meet current and future economic and
industry needs.

It is an important element of economic development
because a well-trained and adaptable workforce is vital for attracting and retaining businesses, fostering innovation, and driving economic growth.

Monthly Report - October 2024
The City recently partnered with Fresno State - Parent University to offer no-cost virtual courses to all Turlock residents (of all ages). Upon completion of each 4 week course, participants will receive a certificate from Fresno State University.

The annual City of Turlock Job
Fair will take place Wednesday,
November 13, 2024 from 10 a.m. -
2 p.m. at New Life Christian
Center. This year’s event
anticipates having 60 local
employers participating.

Free Fresno State - Parent University
Virtual Courses for All Turlock
Residents!
Annual City Job Fair
Attraction strategies within economic development are designed to draw new businesses, industries, and investments to a region. These strategies typically involve a combination of marketing, incentives, infrastructure development, and partnership-building to create a compelling case for businesses to relocate or expand.

On October 15, 2024, the City of Turlock Economic Development and Development Services team provided a tour of the City and the Westside Industrial Specific Plan (WISP) to Real Estate Professionals and Commercial Developers. The objective of the tour was to showcase the City as an optimum place to develop and thrive as a business.

PAGE 3Attraction
Monthly Report - October 2024
Supporting start-ups and entrepreneurs is a strategic investment within economic development.

Innovation can drive new ideas, technologies, and create the “Spark” of a new business to open up, resulting in job creation, and adding more value to the local economy. One of the ways that the City of Turlock supports start-ups and entrepreneurs is by providing no-cost business workshops. Business workshops take place within the City of Turlock monthly, and have different topics and strategies presented by different guest speakers.

On Tuesday, October 29, 2024, from 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. the City of Turlock partnered with celebrated News Reporter, Alan Sanchez to host a second session on “How to Get your Business on the News”. The event was hosted at Carnegie Arts Center.

PAGE 4
Business Workshops
Monthly Report - October 2024
In collaboration with Pressert Marketing, the City of Turlock’s newly launched Small Business Development and Assistance Program provides strategic consulting and business development strategies to elevate Turlock small businesses. The businesses eligible to participate must be Turlock businesses that have a business license with the City of Turlock, operate out of a commercial location in Turlock, have no more than 50 employees, and not be part of a franchise or corporate chain.

The business development program is limited to 100 businesses and will provide up to $3,500 (while funds last) for online business ads through Google Search Ads and Meta (Facebook/Instagram) Ads.

For more information on City of Turlock business workshops & business development programs please reach out to:

Anthony Sims - Economic Development Director
[email protected]
City of Turlock Small Business Development & Assistance Program PAGE 5
Monthly Report - October 2024
Community Events
Community Conversation about City Communication and Engagement 10/24/2024 The City of Turlock is in the beginning stages of putting together a City of Turlock Communications Plan.

The City hosted a community workshop on 10/24/2024 at Carnegie Arts Center.

Members of the public in attendance had the opportunity to share constructive feedback and identify the ways to improve City communication.

Stay tuned for exciting updates as our new Communications Plan takes shape in the months ahead.

City of Turlock Mobile App
Career Fair at Stan State
PAGE 6
Monthly Report - October 2024
Community Events
PAGE 7
Monthly Report - October 2024
Finance Department Monthly Report
November 12, 2024
From: Isaac Moreno, Finance Director
Prepared by: Isaac Moreno, Finance Director
Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager
Staffing – The Finance Department is currently in the process of filling the following positions:

Billing: 1 - Account Clerk, Sr.

Procurement Policy – Currently with City Attorney’s office and under final review with Finance staff and consultant.

Transient Occupancy Tax – This ballet measure was approved by Council on June 25, 2024.

All necessary additional documents for ballet have been issued.

Measure A Committee – Please see attached report from October 15th meeting.

Contracts Executed by Acting City Manager – Please see table below for the executed contracts within the month of October 2024.

Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Audit – Draft Citywide report has been received and under final review.

Utility Billing Division Report – Please see attached memorandum.

Projects:

User Fee Study – Review of RFP is complete and expected to be issued mid-November but will not be awarded until January 2025.

Impact Fee Study – Pending completion of infrastructure master plan updates.

Enterprise and Internal Service Funds Reserve Policies – Reviewing draft and expect to adopt prior to the implementation of the Sewer rate increase.

Community Facilities District – Formation of this new CFD is expected to be completed prior to the end of the calendar year.

Department Monthly Report
November 12, 2024

Angelica Gonsalves FINANCE DEPARTMENT

FINANCIAL CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR UTILITY BILLING
[email protected]
156 S. BROADWAY, SUITE 114 | TURLOCK, CALIFORNIA 95380 | PHONE 209-668-5570 | FAX 209-668-5565 DATE: November 4, 2024
TO: Isaac Moreno
FROM: Angelica Gonsalves
SUBJECT: October 2024 Department updates
For the month of October 2024:

Finance processed a total of 2,186 receipt payments in the office by walk in customers 951 by mailed/drop box, and took 537 phone payments. The department answered 1,724 call during the month of October. Processed 182 utility move-in’s, and 152 move-out and exception bills. Payment agreements: 314 current and 12 past due payment agreements.

Utility billing processed and mailed 20,161 utility bills and issued 2,462 penalties.

Delinquent notices were mailed to 565 customers. 244 account were terminated on October 23, 2024 and 113 remained off at the end of the day.

Business license processed 62 new applications and closed 36 business licenses.

The City of Turlock currently has 6,561 active licenses.

We welcomed two Account Clerk I into the team, Sherice Martinez and Melissa Croft.

Tentatively
MEASURE A (Roads) - Accountability Report
Prepared: 10/11/24
Fund: 115-Measure A Roads
FISCAL YEAR: 2024-2025
Period: 07/01/2024-09/30/2024
2024-2025 Remaining Budget
Revenues $ 7,310,421 $ 7,310,421 0% Expenditures
Administration Salaries & Benefits - Measure A $ 229,631 $ 47,709.83 $ 181,921 21% Contract Attorney $ 10,000 $ - City Engineering Services $ 350,000 $ - $ 350,000 0% Construction Management $ 2,335,000 $ 172,821.23 $ 2,162,179 7% Roads Design $ 3,236,500 $ 84,840.64 $ 3,151,659 3% Construction Project $ 13,050,000 $ 1,293,372.79 $ 11,756,627 10% Total Expenditures $ 19,211,131.00 $ 1,598,744.49 $ 17,602,387 8% Revenue Over / (Under) Expenses $ (11,900,710) $ (1,598,744.49)

FUND BALANCE
Balance Forward from Prior Fiscal Year $ 11,488,292.46 Net Change to Fund Balance $ (1,598,744.49)
Current Balance $ 9,889,547.97
2023-2024
City Engineering Services Allocation Actual to
Date
P#23031 Design Services for Roads CIP Task #1 $ 736,114.10 P#23033 Design Services for Roads CIP Task #1 $ 557,258.69 $ 1,293,372.79
2024-2025 Amended
Budget
2024-2025
Actual to Date
% of Budget Received/
Expended
MEASURE A (General) - Accountability Report
Prepared: 10/11/24
Fund: 118-Measure A General
FISCAL YEAR: 2024-2025
Period: 07/01/2024-09/30/2024
Revenues $ 7,310,421 $ - $ 7,310,421 0% Expenditures
Services, Supplies and Equipment:

Sales Tax Contingency Audit $ 15,000 $ 15,000 0% Public Safety Building HVAC Project $ 325,377 $ 325,377 0% Pierce Volcity Pumper Debt Payment $ 151,415 $ 151,415 0% Salaries & Benefits:

Administration Salaries & Benefits - City Manager $ 81,408 $ 73,724.25 $ 7,684 91% Administration Salaries & Benefits - Economic Development $ 81,777 $ 75,888.10 Administration Salaries & Benefits - Finance $ 76,440 $ 63,258.06 $ 13,182 83% Administration Salaries & Benefits - Human Relations $ 43,266 $ 36,163.69 $ 7,102 84% Police Salaries & Benefits - Special Operations $ 144,664 $ 39,721.41 $ 104,943 27% Police Salaries & Benefits - Support Operations $ 539,499 $ 164,208.14 $ 375,291 30% Police Salaries & Benefits - Field Operations $ 2,668,799 $ 312,212.62 $ 2,356,586 12% Fire Salaries & Benefits - Operations $ 1,578,142 $ 333,364.32 $ 1,244,778 21% Development Services Salaries & Benefits - Planning $ 63,463 $ 4,284.00 $ 59,179 7% Municipal Services and Benefits - Public Facilities $ 34,458 $ 26,957.52 $ 7,500 78% Parks Salaries & Benefits - Maintenance $ 254,093 $ 54,554.07 $ 199,539 21% Recreation Salaries & Benefits - Recreation Administration $ 102,410 $ 100,686.95 $ 1,723 98% Transfers Out:

Transfers Out - General Fund Unassigned Reserve (10% of actuals) $ 1,462,084 $ 1,462,084 0% Total Expenditures $ 7,622,295 $ 1,285,023.13 $ 5,839,591 17% Revenue Over / (Under) Expenses $ (311,874) $ (1,285,023.13)

FUND BALANCE
Balance Forward from Prior Fiscal Year $ 6,431,244.04 Net Change to Fund Balance $ (1,285,023.13)
Current Balance $ 5,146,220.91
2024-2025
Amended
Budget
2024-2025
Actual to Date
2024-2025 Remaining
Budget
% of Budget Received/
Expended
Full Time Employee's Funded by Measure A - General
Fiscal Year 2024-2025
As of 09/30/2024
Note: Measure A adopted policy will changes new total FTE as of 10/01/2024 Police Fire
Qty. Position Qty. Position
1 Public Affairs Analyst 1 Fire Division Chief - Training 1 Public Safety Business Analyst 3 Fire Engineer
1 Police Support Operations Manager 3 Firefighter
1 Public Safety Communication Supervisors 1 Fire Prevention Inspector 1 Police Lieutenant 1 Fire Operations Support Analyst
1 Community Service Officer I 9
1 Community Service Officer II
1 Code Enforcement Supervisor Planning
2 Code Enforcement Officer Qty. Position
2 Police Officer I 1 Planning Manager
1 Staff Services Assistant 1
1 Code Compliance Technician
14 City Manager
Qty. Position
1 Economic Development Director/Communications Officer
Public Works 1 Risk Management Director
Qty. Position 2
1 Staff Services Analyst
1 Maintenance Worker I Finance

0.24 Executive Admin Assistant Qty. Position

0.4 Parks, Streets, & Public Fac. Superintendent 0.7 Accountant III

0.24 Deputy Public Works Director 1 Purchasing Specialist

0.24 Public Works Director 1.7

0.4 Staff Services Assistant
1 Recreation Superintendent

4.52 Human Relations
Qty. Position
1 Human Relations Specialist
1 Total Full Time Employees Measure A General: 33.22
Full Time Employee's Funded by Measure A - Roads
Fiscal Year 2024-2025
Measure A
Qty. Position
1Construction Inspector Sr.

Total Full Time Employees Measure A Roads: 1
Human Relations
Department

Career Opportunities
Human Relations
Department

New Hires & Promotions
Administrative AnalystWater Treatment
Plant Operator I
Staff Services Assistant
Public Facilities
Maintenance Team Leader
Public Facilities
Maintenance Team Leader
Upcoming Events
Human Relations
Department
Don’t miss out on this opportunityto meet with multiple employersand take the next big step in yourcareer journey!

City of Turlock Job Fair
Wednesday, November 13th, 2024
Human Relations
Department

The High 5 Committee Update

City Council Staff Update
November 12th, 2024

From: Nick Showalter, IT Director

Prepared by: Nick Showalter, IT Director

Agendized by: Reagan M. Wilson, City Manager

Subject: Website, Server Migration, Backup System Upgrade Planning

For October 2024, the Information Technology (IT) Department has the following to report:

Website
IT Staff reviewed the 11 submitted proposals for Hosted Website Services. IT Staff have selected proposals from interested vendors for demonstration and will invite individuals from each department to review and provide feedback during the selection process.

Server Migrations
Throughout the month, IT Staff scheduled and performed virtual server migrations to the new virtual server cluster. Several critical servers had their migrations scheduled with proper notice to staff, departments, and divisions, and a maintenance window was prepared to perform the migrations. Currently, 80% of the virtual servers have been migrated.

Backup System Upgrade Planning
IT Staff reviewed systems that perform secure data backups. As the use of server storage and data resources continues to grow, an updated backup solution is necessary to have multiple copies of data for restoration and recovery purposes. IT staff have been reviewing and researching solutions that have additional layers of cybersecurity protections that protect backup data.

Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Upgrades
IT Staff are in the final steps of preparing a scope of services for the audio/visual upgrades for the EOC. Multiple visits were made throughout the month to take measurements and prepare specifications.

Completed IT Requests*
IT completed 147 requests for service during October 2024.

*Resolved requests shown are estimated and do not include ad hoc phone and verbal requests or certain long-term projects.

Admin
16 Development
Services
12 Finance
12 Fire
10 HR
10IT
5 Municipal Services
48 Police
34 Completed Requests By Department October 2024

ALL WATER DELIVERED TO CITY OF CERES AND CITY OF TURLOCK MET OR EXCEEDED WATER QUALITY

REQUIREMENTS AS MANDATED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CITY OF CERES 128.68 Million gallons of water was delivered

CITY OF
TURLOCK 245.93 Million gallons of water was delivered

ZERO POSTIVE SYSTEM BACTI SAMPLES

MUNICIPAL SERVICES
MONTHLY REPORT~ NOVEMBER 12, 2024 ~
WATER PRODUCTION:

OCTOBER 2024

SRWA WATER PRODUCTION
VS

WELL WATER PRODUCTION

UTILITIES

WATER LEAKS

WATER TAPS/NEW SERVICE

METER REPAIR/REPLACE/INSTALLS

SEWER MAIN REPAIRS
32 1
16 28
4 4
1 CATCH BASINS CLEANED

STORM PUMPS CHECKED
2 24
CITY BAC-T SAMPLES COLLECTED105
14,890-FT TOTAL SEWER FOOTAGE CLEANED

SEWER PLUGS

CLEAN-OUTS INSTALLED

CROSS CONNECTIONS/

OCCUPANCY INSPECTIONS

Replaced backflow device at Four Seasons Park, following car accident.

WQC

H5N1 Detections
Potential Sources of H5 in Wastewater
- Wastewater testing cannot determine the source of the H5 virus; it could come from a human, animal, or animal product source (such as milk from an infected cow). - Given the large influenza A (H5) outbreak among dairy cows and other animals, the presence of H5 in wastewater does not necessarily suggest human infection.

Current Status in California
- As of October 11th, 100 dairies have had confirmed H5N1 outbreaks. There have been 6 confirmed human cases of H5 in the Central Valley who had contact with dairy cattle/farms. Symptoms were mild conjunctivitis. Visit this site for more information: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/AHFSS/Animal_Health/HPAI.html Instead, it could suggest the introduction of H5 virus particles into the wastewater system from livestock or other animal sources.

Monthly Lab Analysis
Type Wastewater Drinking WaterNew Construction Industry Liquid Waste Hauler
# of
Samples 401 107 38 93 15
# of
Analyses 4246 139 136 1055 75
Comments
Industrial sampling – Week 37, 38, 39, 40
Sac State PWS Sampling (Well 32) – Week 37
Monthly Well analysis – Week 38
Biosolids Event #6 – Week 38
Monthly Environmental Compliance Totals
Type Inspections/Site
Visits/NOVs
Pre-development/
Planning/Meetings
Data Entry
& Reports
Grease/Sand &
Oil Interceptors
Totals 13 40 20 5
Type Compliance
SIU Samples
Grab Samples
& Process Control
FOG/pH/
EC Compliance
Maintenance
& Cleaning
Totals 93 12 24 96

STAGES
Risk Assessment
Permitting
Monitoring, Reporting,
& Inspections
Corrective Action
An Industrial User is subject to categorical
pretreatment standard, and subject to
these compliance monitoring actions.

Environmental Compliance Monitoring Framework for Industrial Users COMPLIANCE MONITORING ACTION IS DEFINED AS:A discharge of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to thepublicly owned treatment works (POTW) (excluding sanitary, noncontact-cooling, and boiler-blowdown wastewater)Contributes process wastewater to the POTW which makes up 5% or more ofthe average dry-weather hydraulic capacity of the Wastewater TreatmentPlantContributes process wastewater to the POTW which makes up 5% or more ofthe organic capacity of the Wastewater Treatment Plant or is designated assuch by the POTW because the industrial user has a reasonable potential foradversely affecting the Wastewater Treatment Plant’s operations and sewersystem or for violating any federal EPA pretreatment requirement. 0 2 4 6 8 1012
Parcel Maps (review)
Parcel Maps (approved)
Subdivision Maps (review)
Subdivision Maps (approved)
Lot Line Adjustments
Grading Permits Issued
Encroachment Permits Issued
Road Dedications & PUEs

DEVELOPMENT

PROJECTS
Improvement Plans
In Review: 19
29 Approved, but
pending other City
requirements:

ASES ELOP PLAY
Self Defense DanceAdult Softball

ACTIVE SUBMITTALS

ENGINEERING

RECREATION

AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMPARTICIPANTS

SCAN HERE FOR MORE

INFORMATION ON
RECREATION PROGRAMS!

OTHER RECREATION PROGRAMPARTICIPANTS
511
836
189
80 65 TEAMS
96 OPEN REGISTRATION:
-BABYSITTING CLASS
-SELF DEFENSE (WINTER)
-NOVEMBER’S MOVIE NIGHT
(REFUNDABLE DEPOSIT)

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE FOLLOWING EMPLOYEES
WHO WERE HIRED OR RECEIVED PROMOTIONS THIS MONTH:

DANIEL MARTINEZ, PART TIME EMPLOYEE
October’s Family Fun Day featured a showing of Monsters’ Inc and a canned food drive hosted by Turlock Together!
Registration for the annual Christmas Parade closed this month and staff are making preparations for the event.

ROADS PROGRAM
0 50 100150200250300350
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5

MAINTENANCE

Construction activities continue on the four (4) contracts to rehabilitate a total of twenty-two (22) streets.

Columbia Street (from West Ave. S to Lander Ave.), S. Beech Street, Tokay Avenue, and N.

Quincy Rd. (from E. Canal Dr. to Marie Dr.) were paved; bottom mat of pavement was placed on Murphy Drive; and paving operations were completed with placement of the top mat of pavement on Farr Street, Lane Street, and N. Quincy Road (from E. Marshall St. to E. Canal Dr.).

On October 23, 2024, a damaged sewer main led to temporary service loss for five homes and one business, prompting an emergency repair authorized by the City Manager under City Resolution No. 2010-028 and Public Contract Code section 22050, with repairs completed by United Pavement Maintenance, Inc. by 6 a.m. on October 24; a detailed report will be presented at the November 12 City Council meeting.

POTHOLES FILLED IN OCTOBER
Pothole repairs were temporarily low due
to equipment going down near the end of
the month. The equipment is operational
as of early November.

Major graphic graffiti and vandalism at
Ferreira Ranch Park required 3 full-time
staff to spend 8 hours removing all of it.

Installed landscape, irrigation, 5 trees,
and ground cover at West Ave South and
Montana Ave intersection.

Replaced 6 Active Military Banners
Prepared the sandbag-filling station in
anticipation of winter storms.

TRANSIT
In October, Transit officially surpassed the 9,000 rides milestone for the first time, achieving a remarkable total of 9,024 fixed-route trips—a new record. For context, in February 2020, just before the pandemic, our peak one-week total was 4,631 trips. This recent achievement reflects an impressive nearly 95% increase since that period.

CITY MANAGER’S MONTHLY UPDATE
As we conclude the month of October, I want to express my sincere appreciation for everyone’s contributions to our recent Open House event. With over 200 people in attendance, the event provided a valuable opportunity for community
engagement and education. My thanks go to our dedicated administrative staff and department personnel who devoted their time and efforts to ensuring its success. Highlights of the event included a popular obstacle course for the children, fostering early interest in fire safety, and an auto extrication demonstration that offered the public insight into the complex and skilled work our teams perform daily.

I also wish to recognize Turlock Firefighters Local 2434 for their continued commitment to our community. This October, they sold over 800 pink t-shirts, with proceeds benefitting the Bill and Elsie Ahlem Cancer Endowment at the Emanuel
Medical Center Cancer Center. Support for this initiative directly aids cancer care and makes a meaningful impact in our community.

Thank you to everyone who helped make this event possible and to all who support our ongoing efforts in community risk reduction and outreach

TURLOCK FIRE DEPARTMENT
OCtober 2024
CHIEF’S

MESSAGE

OPERATI ONS

DI VI SI ON

CALLS BY

DI STRI CT
Total MVA:
29 Total EMS:
476
Total Fire (NFIRS Series 100):
22 FI RE

PREVENTI ON

DI VI SI ON
Type of Inspection Total
Occupancy Inspections 8
Re-Inspections 22
Solar 7
Final Fire Alarm/Sprinkler 4
Blue Sheet/Building Final 7
Hydro/Visual 6
Hydrant Flow Reports 12
Food Vendor 9
Pre-Developments Meetings5
Miscellaneous Inspections 29

gency 911
AKEN
RESTS
STOPS
SSUED0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
14 CATS SEIZED
5,242
33 DOGS SEIZED

MONTHLY CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

FIELD & SUPPORT OPERATIONS
2,405

ADMINISTRATION

REPORTSTAKEN ARRESTS TRAFFICSTOPS CITATIONSISSUED
38 ANIMALS ADOPTED/RETURNED

TO OWNER/TRANSPORTED TO
RESCUE.
633
O ctober 2 0 2 4
181 194

NON-EMERGENCYCALLS
Patrol &
C o m m u n ic a tio n s
Animal Services
911 CALLS
669
On October 4, 2024, the Turlock Police Department
hosted their first Café y Conchas con la Policía at Tesoro Fine Mexican Restaurant. We had an incredible turnout
and enjoyed connecting with our amazing community.

On October 24, 2024, the Turlock Police Department
hosted their Trick-or-Treat & Meet: A Community Safety and Recruitment Event. Staff had a fantastic time passing out candy and hanging out with our locals.

On October 28, 2024, Turlock Police Department swore
in their newest police officer, Officer Tyrell Reed! Tyrell comes with several years of experience from Stockton
PD and more recently, Stanislaus State University PD.

UPCOMING:

Operation Blue Santa
2025 Community Academy

NEW CASES

LOSED CASES
ACTIVE CASES supp digital
arrestd0
20 40
60 80
100
120
140
164
110

CLETSENTRIES

MONTHLY CITY MANAGER'S REPORT

WARRANTS
404
196

REPORTSPROCESSED

REPORTSRELEASED

BACKGROUNDLOCAL CHECKS
MISC.PERMITS

SPECIAL
1,059
44 24 22

NEW CASES CLOSEDCASES SUPPLEMENTALREPORTSTOTALACTIVECASES 123
23 OPERATIONS
Records
Professional Standards
Detectives Social Media
25 DIGITALFORENSICEXAM REPORT

23.4k269

5.1k

49.8k
90 9.6k

REACH NEWLIKES / FOLLOWS PROFILEVISITS

IN S T A G R A MF A C E B O O K
9 ARRESTS
1 ADMIN.INVESTIGATION
6 SCHOOLSPROCESSED
O ctober 2 0 2 4