{CW095164.6}
Contract No. Page 8 of 8
Title:
Date
Date:
APPROVED AS TO SUFFICIENCY:
By:
Jason Hedden, Chief of Police
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney
ATTEST:
By:
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk
City Council Staff Report
June 10, 2025
From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: David Huff, Water Quality Control Manager
Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Approving Amendment No. 3 (City Contract 2020-87) with Carollo Engineers, Inc. for Engineering and Construction Management Services for City Project No. 20-032 "Chemical System Upgrades Project at RWQCF" in the amount of $659,468 for a revised total compensation not to exceed $2,427,317 to be funded by Fund 410 "Water Quality Control (WQC)"
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
The City of Turlock owns and maintains the Regional Water Quality Control Facility (RWQCF), which treats wastewater from the City's current population of 73,556 along with industries, businesses, California State University, Stanislaus, and the neighboring Community Service Districts of Denair and Keyes, and primary treated wastewater from the City of Ceres.
Throughout the wastewater treatment process, chemicals are added to improve water quality. The RWQCF currently uses coagulant chemicals to aid in the removal of suspended solids, chlorine to inactivate pathogenic organisms, and dechlorination chemicals to remove chlorine compounds before being discharged to receiving waters. Each of these systems is required to meet the City's waste discharge requirements set forth by the State Water Resources Control Board.
On June 23, 2020, the City Council approved an agreement with Carollo Engineers of Walnut Creek, California, in the amount of $726,784 for professional engineering design, engineering services during construction, and construction management for City Project No. 20-032 "Chemical System Upgrades Project at RWQCF" (Project).
On December 8, 2020, the City Council approved Amendment No. 1 with Carollo Engineers in the amount of $241,590 for additional work related to final design tasks identified as being necessary, as the option to convert to sodium hypochlorite in lieu of rehabilitating the existing chlorine disinfection system.
On January 25, 2022, the City Council approved Amendment No. 2 with Carollo Engineers in the amount of $799,475, to convert not only the sodium hypochlorite system to VTScada but also the remaining components of the tertiary system, which include the tertiary cloth filters, high-rate flocculation system, and dechlorination system, as part of the Project.
AMENDMENT NO. 3
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) technology is comprised of hardware, software, and protocols to remotely monitor and retrieve data, create logs, send information
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
and alarms, and in some cases, operate critical equipment that support the City's water, sewer, storm, and wastewater treatment services. The City of Turlock has established new SCADA technology and standards and has already converted the potable water system. The City of Turlock intends to convert the remaining SCADA system at the Wastewater Treatment Facility in the upcoming FY 25/26 budget, with the project estimated at $14.8 million and a construction schedule of three years. The current project converts a portion of the SCADA system sooner than initially planned to align with industry standards.
During the project, staff identified the need to replace two additional ancillary facilities ahead of schedule for the system to operate effectively. Specifically, the RWQCF delivers recycled water to Pedretti Park for irrigation and to the TID Walnut Energy Center for cooling water.
Both remote sites provide status information to our system and receive data from the tertiary system to ensure compliance with water quality standards. Should water quality decline, these ancillary facilities will automatically shut down. Failure to halt the delivery of recycled water could result in noncompliance with the City's Waste Discharge Requirements, leading to penalties and administrative civil liability. This need for additional work is the basis of Amendment No. 3.
The amendment encompasses Engineering Design Services During Construction (EDSC) and Construction Management (CM) services, in addition to the necessary integration of ancillary facilities. The chemical system upgrade project began on August 5, 2021, and was initially expected to be completed by March 11, 2022. However, the project faced delays mainly due to significant equipment delays, supply chain issues, and additional EDSC/CM services that were approved in Amendment No. 2 to complete the migration of the SCADA system for the entire tertiary treatment system.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
• The City of Turlock is required to maintain the wastewater treatment facility to ensure permit compliance.
• Funding is available in Fund 410 and is supported by the City's 5-year Capital Improvement Project Plan.
• SCADA programming is required at two additional ancillary facilities ahead of schedule for the system to operate efficiently.
• Additional EDSC/CM services were required due to the additional scope approved in Amendment No. 2, the two additional necessary ancillary facilities, and project delays.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
Not to exceed a total compensation of $2,427,317 over the term of the Agreement. (NonGeneral Fund) Account number 410-51-534.51407 “Chemical Storage/Component Replace Project” is the designated source to fund this agreement. Appropriate funds have been allocated during the Fiscal Year budget process to cover this amendment.
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
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(b)(5) of the CEQA guidelines. This action consists of “organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment” and therefore is not considered a project.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
1. Do not approve the agreement. This alternative is not recommended as the additional SCADA programming work and EDSC/CM services are required to complete the Chemical System Upgrades Project at the Regional Water Quality Control Facility.
2. Provide staff direction on how to proceed.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution
2. City Contract 2020-087 - Amendment No. 3
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock owns and operates the Regional Water Quality Control Facility (RWQCF), which treats wastewater from residential, commercial, and industrial sources within Turlock and surrounding communities; and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2020, the City Council approved City Contract No. 2020- 87 with Carollo Engineers Inc. for engineering and construction management services related to the Chemical System Upgrades Project at the RWQCF; and WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 and Amendment No. 2 to the contract were previously approved to support the transition from chlorine gas to sodium hypochlorite and to implement SCADA system upgrades for the tertiary treatment components; and WHEREAS, Amendment No. 3 is required to provide for additional engineering and construction management services, including SCADA programming at two ancillary facilities (Pedretti Park and TID Walnut Energy Center) that are critical for monitoring water quality and ensuring compliance with the City’s Waste Discharge Requirements; and
WHEREAS, these ancillary systems must be upgraded to ensure the continued and reliable operation of the recycled water system and avoid potential regulatory penalties and compliance issues; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Amendment No. 3 will increase the total not-to-exceed compensation under the agreement to $2,427,317, to be funded from Non-General Fund Account No. 410-51-534.51407 “Chemical Storage/Component Replace Project,” with funds previously allocated in the City’s budget; 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” }
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING
AMENDMENT NO. 3 (CITY CONTRACT
2020-87) WITH CAROLLO ENGINEERS,
INC. FOR ENGINEERING AND
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES FOR CITY PROJECT NO. 20-032
"CHEMICAL SYSTEM UPGRADES
PROJECT AT RWQCF" IN THE AMOUNT
OF $659,468 FOR A REVISED TOTAL
COMPENSATION NOT TO EXCEED
$2,427,317 TO BE FUNDED BY FUND 410
"WATER QUALITY CONTROL (WQC)"
Resolution No. 2025-
and therefore is not considered a project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby approve Amendment No. 3 (City Contract 2020-87) with Carollo Engineers, Inc. for Engineering and Construction Management Services for City Project No. 20-032 "Chemical System Upgrades Project at RWQCF" in the amount of $659,468 for a revised total compensation not to exceed $2,427,317 to be funded by Fund 410 "Water Quality Control (WQC)".
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2020-087, Amendment No. 3
04/09/2025 {PLA}
AMENDMENT NO. 3
to the
Agreement between the
CITY OF TURLOCK
and
CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC.
For
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR CHEMICAL
SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT AT THE REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL
FACILITY
CITY CONTRACT 2020-087
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3, dated June 10, 2025, is entered into by and between the CITY OF TURLOCK, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "CITY") and Carollo Engineers, Inc., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter "PROFESSIONAL”).
WHEREAS, the parties hereto previously entered into an Agreement dated June 23, 2020, whereby PROFESSIONAL will perform Engineering and Construction Management Services for Chemical System Upgrades Project at the Regional Water Quality Control Facility (hereinafter the “Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2020, Amendment No. 1 was executed in order to modify Paragraph 5 “Work” and Paragraph 6 “Compensation”; and
WHEREAS, on January 25, 2022, Amendment No. 2 was executed in order to modify Paragraph 5 “Work” and Paragraph 6 “Compensation”; and
WHEREAS, the Parties enter into Amendment No. 3 to amend Paragraph 2, titled “Term”, Paragraph 6, titled “Compensation 6.1 Amount, Time and Manner of Payment for Professional Services”, Paragraph 25 titled “Insurance Coverage” and Paragraph 27 titled “Indemnification by Professional”.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree to amend said Agreement as follows:
1. Paragraph 2 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:
“2. Term: The term of this Agreement shall be six (6) year(s), effective on June 23, 2020 and terminate on June 23, 2026, subject to City’s availability of funds, unless the Parties mutually agree in writing to terminate the Agreement earlier or extend the Term pursuant to this Agreement. There will be no extensions beyond the termination date of June 23, 2026.”
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2020-087, Amendment No. 3
04/09/2025 {PLA}
2. Paragraph 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. On each anniversary date of the Effective Date, Professional will be allowed to increase prices with thirty (30) days’ written notice to City. Increases may not exceed increases in the San Francisco-Oakland Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers or percentage increases in Professional’s published prices, whichever is lower. In all cases, City may cancel this Agreement if a requested price increase is not acceptable.
City’s total compensation to Professional shall not exceed Two million four hundred twenty-seven thousand three hundred seventeen dollars and No/100ths Dollars ($2,427,317) (“Maximum Payment”), unless the Parties mutually agree in writing otherwise.”
3. Paragraph 25 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:
“25. Insurance Coverage: During the Term, the Professional, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain in full force and effect policies of insurance set forth herein, which shall be placed with insurers with a current A M Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII and will provide City with written proof of said insurance. Professional shall maintain coverage as follows.
25.1. Commercial General Liability. Professional shall carry commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CG 00 01, in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence, Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00) general aggregate, and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) products and completed operations for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If commercial general liability insurance or another form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Project or the general aggregate shall be Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00).25.1 Commercial General Liability.
25.2 Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability.
Professional shall carry workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California under the Labor Code. Professional shall also carry employer’s liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident, with a One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) policy limit for bodily injury by disease, and a One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) limit for each employee’s bodily injury by disease.
25.3. Professional Liability. Professional shall carry professional liability insurance that insures against professional errors and omissions that may be made in performing professional services in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) per claim and in the aggregate or greater if appropriate for the Professional's profession. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At the option of City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to City, its elected and appointed councils, commissions, directors, officers, employees, agents, and representatives (“City’s Agents”); or the Professional shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2020-087, Amendment No. 3
04/09/2025 {PLA}
25.4. Commercial Automobile Liability. Professional shall carry commercial automobile liability insurance using ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 (or equivalent) in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) or greater per accident for owned, leased, hired, and non-owned, borrowed automobiles.
25.5. Umbrella or Excess Policy. Professional may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability and automobile Liability insurance. No insurance coverage or policies maintained by the City (“Additional Insured”), whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Professional’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
25.6. Waiver of Subrogation. With the exception of professional liability, Contractor hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. The commercial general liability policy, automobile liability policy, and workers’ compensation policy shall be endorsed to contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of City for all work performed by Contractor, its agents, employees, independent contractors and subcontractors.
Contractor shall provide written proof of waiver of subrogation in the Certificate of Insurance. Additionally, Contractor agrees to obtain any available endorsements that may be necessary to effectuate this waiver of subrogation.
4. Paragraph 26 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:
“26. Additional Insurance Requirements. Within five (5) days of the Effective Date, Professional shall provide City with certificates of insurance and amendatory endorsements for all of the policies required under this Agreement (“Certificates and Endorsements”). Such Certificates and Endorsements shall be kept current for the Term of the Agreement and Professional shall be responsible for providing updated copies. With the exception of the workers’ compensation insurance, all of the insurance policies required in this Agreement shall: (a) provide that the policy will not be cancelled, allowed to expire, or materially reduced in coverage without at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to City of such cancellation, expiration, or reduction and each policy shall be endorsed to state such; (b) name City, and City’s Agents as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of Services, work or operations performed by or on behalf of Professional and shall be endorsed to state such; (c) cover products and completed operations of Professional, premises owned, occupied, or used by the Professional, or automobiles owned, leased, or hired or borrowed by the Professional; contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City; (d) allow and be endorsed primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering City or City’s Agents and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City or City’s Agents shall be in excess of Professional’s insurance and shall not contribute to it; (e) contain standard separation of insured provisions; and (f) state that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy including breaches of warranties shall not affect the coverage provided to City.
5. Paragraph 27 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows:
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2020-087, Amendment No. 3
04/09/2025 {PLA}
“27 Indemnification By Professional: To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation, California Civil Code 2782 and 2782.8), Professional shall defend with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to City, indemnify and hold harmless City and City’s Agents from and against any and all claims, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, injury to or death of an employee of Professional or its subcontractors), expense and liability of every kind, nature and description that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligent or reckless acts or omissions, or willful misconduct of Professional, or any direct or indirect subcontractor, employee, contractor, representative or agent of Professional, or anyone that Professional controls (collectively “Liabilities”). Such obligations to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify City and City’s Agents shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in whole by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of City or City’s Agents, but shall apply to all other Liabilities. With respect to third party claims against the Professional, the Professional waives any and all rights of any type of express or implied indemnity against City and City’s Agents. In no event shall the cost to defend charged to Professional exceed the Professional’s proportionate percentage of fault.
6. Execution and Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed simultaneously, and in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Parties agree that this Amendment and any other documents to be delivered in connection herewith may be electronically signed utilizing services such as DocuSign and Nitro Sign, or by transmitting signatures in pdf or similar format, and that any electronic signatures appearing on this Agreement or such other documents are the same as handwritten signatures for the purposes of validity, enforceability, and admissibility.
7. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
Signatures on following page
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2020-087, Amendment No. 3
04/09/2025 {PLA}
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed by and through their respective officers thereunto duly authorized on the date first written hereinabove.
CITY OF TURLOCK, a municipal corporation CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC. 1 By: _______________________________ By: ______________________________ Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
Title: _____________________________
Date: _____________________________
Print name: ________________________
APPROVED AS TO SUFFICIENCY:
Date: _____________________________
By: _______________________________
Christopher Fisher,
Municipal Services Director
By: ______________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Title: _____________________________
By: _______________________________
George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney Print name: ________________________ ATTEST: Date: _____________________________
By: _______________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk
Executive Vice President
Anne E. Prudhel
05/29/2025
Vice President
Ryan Sellman
06/01/2025
City Council Staff Report
June 10, 2025
From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: Mike Murphy, Parks, Streets, and Public Facilities Maintenance Superintendent
Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Approving an agreement with Julian Tree Care, Inc. of Richmond, California, for Tree Trimming and Maintenance Services for one year, with the option for two (2) additional one (1) year terms in an annual amount not to exceed $150,000 and a total compensation not to exceed $450,000 if all extensions are exercised, in response to Request for Bids 24-018, expensed to various General Ledger account(s) ending in 43077 "Tree Trimming" or 43314 "Contract Help - Services"
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
The City of Turlock relies on contracted professional tree trimming services as a critical component of urban forestry management. While in-house crews perform small-scale or routine maintenance, many aspects of tree care—such as major pruning, removal of hazardous limbs, emergency response, and crane-assisted operations—require technical expertise, specialized equipment, and staffing that exceed the City's internal capabilities.
Contracted support helps ensure public safety, protects City infrastructure, and maintains compliance with arboricultural best practices and safety standards.
The Purchasing Division issued Request for Bids (RFB) 24-018 for tree trimming and maintenance services. Nine (9) vendors were solicited, and Julian Tree Care Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Their rates are in line with the industry standard and comparable with other organizations' contracts.
Staff recommend approval of a contract with Julian Tree Care Inc. for tree trimming, pruning and maintenance services.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. The City relies on contracted services to perform tree maintenance work beyond the capabilities or capacity of in-house staff.
B. Staff conducted a formal bidding process in accordance with TMC §2-7-09(c).
C. Julian Tree Care, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid, consistent with TMC §2-7-09(c)(5) requirements.
D. The proposed contract exceeds the Interim City Manager’s signing authority under TMC §2-7-08(f) and is therefore subject to City Council approval.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
The maximum fiscal impact is $150,000 per year and up to $450,000 in total if both
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
extensions are utilized. Staff anticipated using the accounts listed below.
Sufficient funds are being requested in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget process in the following accounts:
Fund 205 (Regional Sports
Complex)
205-60-602.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$11,000
Fund 205 (Pedretti Sports
Complex)
205-60-604.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$14,000
Fund 246 (Landscape
Assessment)
246-60-600.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$15,000
Fund 110 (General Fund -
Public Facilities)
110-50-500.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$20,000
Fund 110 (General Fund -
Parks)
110-60-600.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$20,000
Fund 217 (Streets - Gas Tax) 217-50-510.43077 - Tree
Trimming
$20,000
Fund 410 (Water Quality
Control)
410-51-530.43314 - Contract
Help - Services
$50,000
Total Annual Not-ToExceed$150,000
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This action is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(h). The work authorized under this agreement consists of routine maintenance of existing trees in developed areas.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
A. Council could direct staff to reject all bids in accordance with TMC §2-7-09(c)(4) and initiate a new solicitation process. This is not recommended as the procurement was conducted in accordance with City procedures and yielded a competitive result.
Rebidding would delay service continuity and could expose the City to increased costs or liability.
B. Provide staff direction on how to proceed.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
1. Draft Resolution
2. City Contract 2025-194 with Julian Tree Care
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock contracts with professional service providers for tree trimming and maintenance to supplement in-house crews and address specialized tasks such as major pruning, hazardous limb removal, crane-assisted operations, and emergency response needs; and
WHEREAS, the City issued Request for Bids (RFB) No. 24-018 for Tree Trimming and Maintenance Services in accordance with Turlock Municipal Code (TMC) Section 2- 7-09(c); and
WHEREAS, Julian Tree Care, Inc. of Richmond, California submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid in accordance with TMC Section 2-7-09(c)(5); and WHEREAS, the proposed contract amount exceeds the Interim City Manager’s authority under TMC Section 2-7-08(f) and therefore requires approval by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are budgeted and available in Fiscal Year 2025–26 in the respective General Ledger accounts; and
WHEREAS, this action is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(h), as it consists of routine maintenance of existing landscaping and trees in developed areas.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby approve an agreement with Julian Tree Care, Inc. of Richmond, California, for Tree Trimming and Maintenance Services for one year, with the option for two (2) additional one (1) year terms in an annual amount not to exceed $150,000 and a total }
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING AN
AGREEMENT WITH JULIAN TREE CARE,
INC. OF RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA, FOR
TREE TRIMMING AND MAINTENANCE
SERVICES FOR ONE YEAR, WITH THE
OPTION FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE
(1) YEAR TERMS IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $150,000 AND A TOTAL
COMPENSATION NOT TO EXCEED
$450,000 IF ALL EXTENSIONS ARE
EXERCISED, IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST
FOR BIDS 24-018, EXPENSED TO
VARIOUS GENERAL LEDGER
ACCOUNT(S) ENDING IN 43077 "TREE
TRIMMING" OR 43314 "CONTRACT HELP -
SERVICES"
Resolution No. 2025-
compensation not to exceed $450,000 if all extensions are exercised, in response to Request for Bids 24-018, expensed to various General Ledger account(s) ending in 43077 "Tree Trimming" or 43314 "Contract Help - Services".
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 1
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
SERVICE PROVIDER (PREVAILING WAGE) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF TURLOCK
and
JULIAN TREE CARE INC.
for
TREE TRIMMING & MAINTENANCE SERVICES
City Contract No. 2025-194
THIS SERVICE PROVIDER AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is entered into by and between the CITY OF TURLOCK, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and Julian Tree Care Inc. a California corporation (“Service Provider”), on this 10th day of June, 2025 (the “Effective Date”). City and Service Provider may be collectively referred to herein as the “Parties” or individually as “Party.” There are no other parties to this Agreement.
RECITALS
A. City seeks to hire an independent contractor to perform Service Provider services to assist City with tree trimming, pruning and maintenance services (the “Project”).
B. Service Provider has made a proposal to City to provide such Service Provider services. A description of the services Service Provider proposes to provide is included in the Scope of Services in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Services”).
City desires to retain Service Provider to perform the Services, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
C. The Parties have outlined the schedule or timeline for providing the Services (“Completion Schedule”), which shall be included in the Scope of Services in Exhibit A.
D. The Parties have outlined the rates and method of payment to Service Provider for its performance of the Services under this Agreement (“Compensation Schedule”), which shall be included in the Scope of Services in Exhibit A.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants set forth below, the Parties agree as follows:
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 2
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
AGREEMENT
1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above (“Recitals”) are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into and made part of this Agreement by this reference. In the event of any inconsistency between the Recitals and Sections 1 through 52 of this Agreement, Sections 1 through 52 shall prevail.
2. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be one (1) year and will commence on the Effective Date and terminate on the 27th day of May, 2026 (“Term”) unless the Parties mutually agree in writing to terminate the Agreement earlier or extend the Term pursuant to this Agreement.
3. Extension of Agreement. City may elect to extend this Agreement for two (2) additional one (1) year terms, on the same terms and conditions, upon issuing an “Election to Extend Agreement” letter executed by the City Manager and Service Provider thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of this Agreement.
4. Effective Date. This Agreement shall only become effective once all of the Parties have executed the Agreement (the “Effective Date”).
5. Work.
5.1. Services. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Service Provider shall provide City the Services described in Exhibit A. Any request for Services not included in Exhibit A will be considered a request for additional or modified Services (“Modification” or “Modifications”). Service Provider 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 Exhibit A. If such Modifications cause an increase in the cost or time required for performance of Service Provider’s Services, the Parties shall enter into a written amendment to this Agreement to adjust the Services and the compensation to be paid to Service Provider and, if necessary, amend the Completion Schedule or Compensation Schedule.
The Services, Completion Schedule, or Compensation Schedule shall not be revised unless City and Service Provider 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.
5.3. Service Provider Requested Modification in Services. Service Provider shall not be compensated for work outside the Services described in this Agreement, unless, prior to the commencement of the Services:
(a) Service Provider provides City with written notice that specific work requested by City or required to complete the Project is outside the agreed upon Services. Such notice shall: (1) be supported by substantial evidence that the work is outside the Services; (2) set forth the Service Provider’s proposed course of action for completing the work and a specific request for City to approve the Modification to the Services; (3) set forth the Service Provider’s
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 3
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
proposed revisions, if any, to the Completion Schedule; and (4) set forth the Service Provider’s proposed revisions, if any, to the Compensation Schedule; and (b) City agrees that the work requires a Modification;
(c) City approves all adjustments, if any, to the Completion Schedule and Compensation Schedule.
6. Compensation.
6.1. Amount, Time and Manner of Payment for Service Provider Services. City shall pay Service Provider according to the rates and timing set forth in the Compensation Schedule. On each anniversary date of the Effective Date, Service Provider will be allowed to increase prices with thirty (30) days’ written notice to City. Increases may not exceed increases in the San Francisco-Oakland Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers or percentage increases in Service Provider’s published prices, whichever is lower. In all cases, City may cancel this Agreement if a requested price increase is not acceptable. City’s annual compensation to Service Provider shall not exceed One Hundred Fifty Thousand and No/100ths Dollars ($150,000) and total compensation to Service Provider shall not exceed Four Hundred Fifty Thousand and No/100ths Dollars ($450,000) (“Maximum Payment”), unless the Parties mutually agree in writing otherwise.
6.2. Deposit. {Intentionally Omitted}
6.3. Subsequent Payments. City shall make monthly payments in the amount invoiced by Service Provider within thirty (30) calendar days of receiving such invoice. In the event that an amount of an invoice is in dispute, City shall inform Service Provider of the amount and basis for the dispute and may withhold the amount which is in dispute until the dispute has been resolved.
6.4. Invoices. Service Provider shall provide City with monthly invoices sufficiently evidencing Service Provider’s expenses and completion of the Services. All invoices furnished to City by Service Provider shall be in a form approved by City. The payments specified shall be the only payments made to Service Provider for performance of the Services, including compensation for any Modification. Service Provider shall submit all billings for Services to City within fortyfive (45) days of the performance of such Services. City shall issue payment according to City’s customary procedures and practices for issuing payments to independent contractors.
7. Notice to Proceed. Service Provider shall not commence the performance of the Services until it has been given notice by City (“Notice to Proceed”).
8. Time of Performance. Service Provider warrants that it will commence performance of the Services within seven (7) calendar day(s) of the date the agreement was executed and shall conform to the Completion Schedule. The time of performance is a material term of this Agreement relied on by City in entering into this Agreement.
9. City Assistance to Service Provider. {Intentionally Omitted}
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 4
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
10. Time and Personnel Devoted to Services. Service Provider shall devote such time and personnel to the performance of this Agreement, as is necessary to perform the Services in compliance with the Completion Schedule, Compensation Schedule, and this Agreement.
11. Performance by Qualified Personnel; No Subcontracting. Services under this Agreement shall be performed only by competent personnel under the supervision and direct employment of Service Provider. Service Provider will conform with City’s reasonable requests regarding assignment of personnel, but all personnel, including those assigned at City’s request, shall be supervised by Service Provider. Service Provider is prohibited from subcontracting this Agreement or any part of it unless such subcontracting is expressly approved by City in writing.
Neither Party shall, on the basis of this Agreement, contract on behalf of, or in the name of the other Party. An agreement made in violation of this provision shall confer no rights on any Party and shall be null and void.
11.1. Payment of Prevailing Wage:
(a) Monitoring and Enforcement. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 1725.5, 1771.1, 1771.3, and 1771.4 of the Labor Code, some work performed under the Contract is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”).
Some work performed by Contractor or its subcontractors under the Contract is subject to the requirements of Labor Code section 1720 et seq. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or by Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 of the Labor Code at the time the contract is awarded. Contractor and its subcontractors shall furnish the records specified in Section 1776 of the Labor Code directly to the Labor Commissioner, at least monthly, in the format prescribed by the Labor Commissioner.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 1773.3 of the Labor Code, City shall provide notice to DIR of the award of this Contract within thirty (30) working days of the award. The notice shall be transmitted electronically in a format specified by DIR and shall include the name of Contractor, any subcontractor listed on the successful bid, the bid and contract award dates, the contract amount, the estimated start and completion dates, Project location, and any additional information DIR specifies that aids in the administration and enforcement of Section 1720 et seq. of the Labor Code.
(b) Wages & Hours of Employment: In the performance of the Services under the Contract, eight (8) hours shall be the maximum hours of labor on any calendar day, and the minimum wages of compensation of persons performing labor in the execution of this agreement shall be the current prevailing scale of wages determined by DIR for the community. Contractor shall forfeit as penalty Twenty-five and no/100ths Dollars ($25.00) to be paid to City for each workman employed in the execution of the Contract by Contractor or its subcontractor(s), for each calendar day during which any workman is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours, in violation of provisions of Labor Code section 1810 et seq. Contractor shall post prevailing wage rates at the
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 5
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
Project no later than the first day Contractor commences performance of the Services under the Contract.
12. Representations of Service Provider. City relies upon the following representations by Service Provider in entering into this Agreement:
12.1. Qualifications. Service Provider represents that it is qualified to perform the Services provided in Exhibit A and that it possesses the necessary licenses and permits required to perform the Services or will obtain such licenses or permits prior to the time such licenses or permits are required. Service Provider shall also ensure that all subcontractors are similarly licensed and qualified. Service Provider and all subcontractors shall also obtain a business license from City before they commence performance of the Services. Service Provider represents and warrants to City that Service Provider shall, at Service Provider's sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the Term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Service Provider to practice Service Provider's profession at the time the Services are rendered.
12.2. Service Provider Performance. Service Provider represents that all Services under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional manner and shall conform to the customs and standards of practice observed on similar, successfully completed projects by providers of the Services to be provided. Service Provider shall adhere to accepted Service Provider standards as set forth by relevant Service Provider associations and shall perform all Services required under this Agreement in a manner consistent with generally accepted Service Provider customs, procedures and standards for such Services. Service Provider agrees that, if a Service is not so performed, in addition to all of its obligations under this Agreement and at law, Service Provider shall re-perform or replace unsatisfactory Service at no additional expense to City.
12.3. No Waiver of Claims. The granting of any progress payment by City, or the receipt thereof by Service Provider, or any inspection, review, approval or oral statement by any representative of City, or state certification shall not, in any way, waive, limit, or replace any certification or approval procedures normally required or lessen the liability of Service Provider to re-perform or replace unsatisfactory Service, including, but not limited to, cases where the unsatisfactory character of such Service may not have been apparent or detected at the time of such payment, inspection, review or approval.
12.4. City’s Remedies are Cumulative. Nothing in this Section shall constitute a waiver or limitation of any right or remedy, whether in equity or at law, which City or Service Provider may have under this Agreement or any applicable law. All rights and remedies of City, whether under this Agreement or applicable law, shall be cumulative.
12.5. No Conflict of Interest. Service Provider represents that no conflict of interest will be created under state or federal law by entering into or in carrying out this Agreement.
13. Conformity with Law and Safety. Service Provider shall observe and comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, codes and regulations of governmental agencies, including federal,
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 6
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
state, municipal and local governing bodies having jurisdiction over any or all of the scope of Services, including all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1979 as amended, all California Occupational Safety and Health Regulations, the California Building Code, the Americans with Disabilities Act, any copyright, patent, or trademark law, and all other applicable federal, state, municipal and local safety regulations, appropriate trade association safety standards, and appropriate equipment manufacturer instructions. All Services performed by Service Provider must be in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes and regulations. Service Provider’s failure to comply with any laws, ordinances, codes, or regulations applicable to the performance of the Services hereunder shall constitute a breach of contract. In cases where standards conflict, the standard providing the highest degree of protection shall prevail.
If a death, serious personal injury or substantial property damage occurs in connection with the performance of this Agreement, Service Provider shall immediately notify City's risk manager by telephone. If any accident occurs in connection with this Agreement, Service Provider shall promptly submit a written report to City, in such form as City may require. This report shall include the following information: (a) name and address of the injured or deceased person(s); (b) name and address of Service Provider's subcontractor, if any; (c) name and address of Service Provider's liability insurance carrier; and (d) a detailed description of the accident, including whether any of City's equipment, tools or materials were involved.
If a release of a hazardous material, substance, or waste occurs in connection with the performance of this Agreement, Service Provider shall immediately notify City. Service Provider shall not store hazardous materials or hazardous waste within City limits without a proper permit from City.
14. Confidentiality. Service Provider understands and agrees that, in the performance of Services under this Agreement or in the contemplation thereof, Service Provider may have access to private or confidential information that may be owned or controlled by City and that such information may contain proprietary or confidential details, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to City (“Confidential Information”).
Service Provider shall not, either during or after the Term, disclose to any third party any Confidential Information without the prior written consent of City. If City gives Service Provider written authorization to make any such disclosure, Service Provider shall do so only within the limits and to the extent of that authorization. Service Provider may be directed or advised by the City Attorney on various matters relating to the performance of the Services on the Project or on other matters pertaining to the Project and, in such event, Service Provider agrees that it will treat all communications between itself, its employees and its subcontractors as being communications which are within the attorney-client privilege.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Service Provider may disclose Confidential Information required to be disclosed under law, provided that, prior to disclosure, Service Provider shall first give notice to City and make a reasonable effort to obtain a protective order requiring that City’s Confidential Information not be disclosed. This exception is limited to the extent disclosure is required under law.
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 7
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
15. Excusable Delays; Notice to Other Party of Delay. Service Provider shall not be in breach of this Agreement in the event that performance of Services is temporarily interrupted or discontinued due to a “Force Majeure” event which is defined as: riots, wars, sabotage, civil disturbances, insurrections, explosion, natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, landslides, fires, strikes, lockouts and other labor disturbances or other catastrophic events, which are beyond the reasonable control of Service Provider. Force Majeure does not include: (a) Service Provider’s financial inability to perform; (b) Service Provider’s failure to obtain any necessary permits or licenses from other governmental agencies; or (c) Service Provider’s failure to obtain the right to use the facilities of any public utility where such failure is due solely to the acts or omissions of the Service Provider.
16. Assignment Prohibited. No Party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempt or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
17. Suspension of Services by City. City reserves the right to suspend Service Provider's Services under this Agreement when City determines that it is necessary to do so. When possible, City shall give Service Provider notice of such suspension and Service Provider shall, upon receipt of said notice, suspend all Services except any Services, the completion of which is authorized by the notice given by City. If the Services are suspended by City for more than sixty (60) consecutive days, for reasons other than the fault of the Service Provider, the Service Provider shall be compensated for Services performed prior to notice of such suspension. When the Project is resumed, the Service Provider's compensation shall be equitably adjusted by City to provide for expenses incurred by the interruption of the Services. In this regard, Service Provider shall furnish to City such financial information that, in the judgment of the City Manager, is necessary to determine the reasonable value of the Services rendered by Service Provider during the period when Services were suspended.
If the Parties are unable to agree upon the amount of extra compensation which is due to Service Provider within thirty (30) days of Service Provider resuming Services, the amount of such additional compensation, if any, that is required to appropriately compensate the Service Provider for its expenses incurred by the interruption of Services may, upon the request of either Party, be determined by arbitration conducted in accordance with the “Arbitration of Disputes” section of this Agreement. Such arbitration shall be commenced by the Service Provider no later than sixty (60) calendar days following the event which entitles the Parties to pursue arbitration unless the Parties agree in writing to an extended time period for commencement of arbitration. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, all Parties shall carry on the Services and perform their duties during any arbitration proceedings, and City shall continue to make payments for the Services in progress as required by this Agreement.
18. Ownership of Work Product. Any and all work, artwork, copy, posters, billboards, photographs, videotapes, audiotapes, systems designs, software, reports, designs, specifications, drawings, diagrams, surveys, source codes, Service Provider or technical information or data, photographs, notes, letters, emails or any original works of authorship created by Service Provider or its subcontractors or subcontractors in connection with Services performed under this Agreement (“Products”) shall be works for hire as defined under Title 17 of the United States
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 8
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
Code, and all copyrights in such works are the property of City. In the event it is ever determined that any Product created by Service Provider or its subcontractors, or subcontractors under this Agreement, are not works for hire under U.S. law, Service Provider hereby assigns all copyrights to such Products to City. With the prior written approval of City's point of contact for the Project, Service Provider may retain and use copies of such Products for reference and as documentation of its experience and capabilities.
All Products shall become the property of City irrespective of where located or stored, and Service Provider agrees to deliver all such documents and information to City, without charge and in whatever form it exists, on the completion of the Service Provider's Services hereunder. Service Provider shall have no ownership interest in such Products.
All work product of Service Provider under this Agreement, including written information which City will cause to be distributed for either internal or public circulation, including both preliminary and final drafts, shall be delivered to City in both printed and electronic form, or as may be specified in Exhibit A.
When this Agreement is terminated, Service Provider agrees to return to City all documents, drawings, photographs and other written or graphic material, however produced, that it received from City, its contractors or agents, in connection with the performance of its Services under this Agreement. All materials shall be returned in the same condition as received.
19. Termination of Work by City for Its Convenience. City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time for its convenience by giving notice of such termination to Service Provider. In the event City shall give such notice of termination, Service Provider shall cease rendering Services upon receipt of said notice given as required in this Agreement. If City terminates this Agreement:
(a) Service Provider shall deliver copies of all Products prepared by it pursuant to this Agreement.
(b) If City terminates this Agreement for convenience before City issues the Notice to Proceed to Service Provider or before Service Provider commences any Services hereunder, whichever last occurs, City shall not be obligated to make any payment to Service Provider. If City terminates this Agreement after City has issued the Notice to Proceed to Service Provider and after Service Provider has commenced performance under this Agreement, City shall pay Service Provider the reasonable value of the Services rendered by Service Provider pursuant to this Agreement prior to termination of this Agreement. City shall not in any manner be liable for Service Provider's actual or projected lost profits had Service Provider completed the Services.
Service Provider shall furnish to City such financial information that, in the judgment of the City Manager, is necessary to determine the reasonable value of the Services rendered by Service Provider prior to termination. In the event of a dispute as to the reasonable value of the Services rendered by Service Provider prior to termination and the Parties are unable to agree upon said amount within sixty (60) calendar days following the date of the notice of termination by City, such dispute may, upon the request of either Party, be resolved by arbitration conducted in accordance with the “Arbitration of Disputes” section of this Agreement.
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 9
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
(c) Except as provided in this Agreement, in no event shall City be liable for costs incurred by or on behalf of Service Provider after the date of the notice of termination.
20. Assurance of Performance. If, at any time, City believes Service Provider may not be adequately performing its obligations under this Agreement or may fail to complete the Services as required by this Agreement, City may submit a written request to Service Provider for written assurances of performance and a plan to correct observed deficiencies in Service Provider's performance. Failure to provide written assurances subsequent to such written request, constitutes grounds to declare a breach under this Agreement.
21. Cancellation for Breach by Either Party. Should either Party fail to substantially perform its obligations in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the other Party shall thereupon have the right to cancel the Agreement by giving written notice and specifying the effective date of such cancellation. If City cancels this Agreement for breach and it is subsequently determined that Service Provider did not fail to substantially perform its obligations in accordance with this Agreement, then cancellation for breach by City shall be deemed, and treated, as termination for convenience.
Neither Party waives the right to recover damages against the other for breach of this Agreement, including any amount necessary to compensate City for all detriment proximately caused by Service Provider's failure to perform its obligations hereunder or which in the ordinary course of things would be likely to result therefrom. City reserves the right to offset such damages against any payments owed to Service Provider.
City shall not in any manner be liable for Service Provider's actual or projected lost profits had Service Provider completed the Services required by this Agreement.
22. Non-Discrimination. In its performance of the Services, Service Provider shall adhere to City’s EEO Policy which states, “The City is committed to ensuring that all qualified individuals have a full and fair opportunity to compete in all phase of the hiring process and promotion, and to enjoy the benefits of employment with the City. All employees and applicants shall receive equal consideration and treatment in employment without regard to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, marital status, amnesty, or status as a covered veteran in accordance with applicable federal or state statutes, the City’s ordinances, resolutions, rules or regulations.”
In addition, all agreements with sub-contractors will include language as required by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) that requires sub-contractors to maintain equal employment opportunity policies, and, as necessary, affirmative action policies.
23. Arbitration of Disputes. All claims, disputes, and other matters in question between City and Service Provider arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof, including claims of Service Provider for extra compensation for Services related to the Project, shall be decided by arbitration before a single arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of Sections 1281 to 1284.2 of the California Code of Civil Procedure (the “Arbitration Laws”) unless the Parties
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 10
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
mutually agree otherwise. The provisions of Section 1283.05 of the Arbitration Laws apply to any arbitration proceeding except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. The arbitrator shall have authority to decide all issues between the Parties including, but not limited to, claims for extras, delay and liquidated damages, if any, provided for in this Agreement, matters involving defects in the work product of the Service Provider, rights to payment, and whether the necessary procedures for arbitration have been followed. The award rendered by the arbitrator shall be final, and judgment may be entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof.
Notice of the demand for arbitration shall be filed in writing with the other Party. The demand for arbitration shall be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute, or other matter in question has arisen, and in no event shall it be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute, or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitation.
The Parties shall jointly appoint an arbitrator within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of giving of the notice of the demand for arbitration. If the Parties are unable to jointly agree upon the appointment of an arbitrator within said fifteen (15) calendar day period, and do not agree in writing to extend said period for a fixed period, then either Party may seek to have the arbitrator appointed by the Superior Court of Stanislaus County in accordance with the Arbitration Laws.
If any proceeding is brought to contest the right to arbitrate and it is determined that such right exists, the losing Party shall pay all costs and attorneys' fees incurred by the prevailing party.
In addition to the other rules of law which may be applicable to any arbitration hereunder, the following shall apply:
(a) Promptly upon the filing of the arbitration, each Party shall be required to set forth in writing and to serve upon each other Party a detailed statement of its contentions of fact and law.
(b) All parties to the arbitration shall be entitled to the discovery procedures as provided in Section 1283.05 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. (c) The arbitration shall be commenced and conducted as expeditiously as possible consistent with affording reasonable discovery as provided herein. (d) These additional rules shall be implemented and applied by the arbitrator.
The costs of arbitration shall be borne by the Parties as determined by the arbitrator, but each Party shall bear its own attorney's fees associated with the dispute with the other Party and to the arbitration.
24. Insurance Coverage. During the Term, the Service Provider shall maintain in full force and effect policies of insurance set forth herein, which shall be placed with insurers with a current
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 11
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
A M Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII and will provide City with written proof of said insurance.
Service Provider shall maintain coverage as follows:
24.1 Commercial General Liability. Service Provider shall carry commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CG 00 01, in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence, Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00) general aggregate, and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) products and completed operations for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If commercial general liability insurance or another form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this Project or the general aggregate shall be Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000.00).
24.2 Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability. Service Provider shall carry workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California under the Labor Code. Service Provider shall also carry employer’s liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident, with a One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) policy limit for bodily injury by disease, and a One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) limit for each employee’s bodily injury by disease.
24.3 Professional Liability. {Intentionally Omitted}
24.4 Commercial Automobile Liability. Service Provider shall carry commercial automobile liability insurance using ISO Business Auto Coverage form CA 00 01 (or equivalent) in the amount of no less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) or greater per accident for owned, leased, hired, and non-owned or borrowed automobiles.
24.5 Umbrella or Excess Policy. Service Provider may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability and automobile Liability insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the Additional Insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Service Provider’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
24.6 Waiver of Subrogation. With the exception of professional liability, Contractor hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. The commercial general liability policy, automobile liability policy, and workers’ compensation policy shall be endorsed to contain a waiver of subrogation in favor of City for all work performed by Contractor, its agents, employees, independent contractors and subcontractors. Contractor shall provide written proof of waiver of subrogation in the Certificate of Insurance. Additionally, Contractor agrees to obtain any available endorsements that may be necessary to effectuate this waiver of subrogation.
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 12
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
25. Additional Insurance Requirements. Within five (5) days of the Effective Date, Service Provider shall provide City with certificates of insurance and amendatory endorsements for all of the policies required under this Agreement (“Certificates and Endorsements”). Such Certificates and Endorsements shall be kept current for the Term of the Agreement and Service Provider shall be responsible for providing updated copies. With the exception of the workers’ compensation insurance, all of the insurance policies required in this Agreement shall: (a) provide that the policy will not be cancelled, allowed to expire, or materially reduced in coverage without at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to City of such cancellation, expiration, or reduction and each policy shall be endorsed to state such; (b) name City, and City’s Agents as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of Services, work or operations performed by or on behalf of Service Provider and shall be endorsed to state such; (c) cover products and completed operations of Service Provider, premises owned, occupied, or used by the Service Provider, or automobiles owned, leased, or hired or borrowed by the Service Provider; contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City; (d) allow and be endorsed primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering City or City’s Agents and any insurance or selfinsurance maintained by City or City’s Agents shall be in excess of Service Provider’s insurance and shall not contribute to it; (e) contain standard separation of insured provisions; and (f) state that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy including breaches of warranties shall not affect the coverage provided to City.
26. Indemnifications.
26.1 Indemnification for Professional Liability. When the law establishes a professional standard of care for any portion of the Services provided under this Agreement, to the fullest extent permitted by law. Service Provider shall defend with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to City, indemnify and hold harmless City and City’s Agents from and against any and all claims, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, injury to or death of an employee of Service Provider or its subcontractors), expense and liability of every kind, nature and description that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to acts or omissions of Service Provider, or any direct or indirect subcontractor, employee, contractor, representative or agent of Service Provider, or anyone that Service Provider controls (collectively “Liabilities”). Such obligations to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify City and City’s Agents shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in whole by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of City or City’s Agents, but shall apply to all other Liabilities. With respect to third party claims against the Service Provider, the Service Provider waives any and all rights of any type of express or implied indemnity against City and City’s Agents.
26.2 Indemnification for Other Than Professional Liability. Other than in the performance of professional services and to the full extent permitted by law, Service Provider shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and any and all of its elective and appointive boards, officers, officials, agents, employees or volunteers from and against any liability (including liability for claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, including legal counsel’s fees and costs, court costs, interest, defense costs, and expert witness fees), where the same arise out of, are a consequence of, or are in any way attributable to, in whole or in part, the performance of this Agreement by Service Provider or by any individual or agency for which
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 13
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
Service Provider is legally liable, including, but not limited to, officers, agents, employees, or subcontractors of Service Provider.
27. Liability of City. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall City be liable, regardless of whether any claim is based on contract or tort, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, including, but not limited to, lost profits or revenue, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement or the Services performed in connection with this Agreement.
28. Independent Contractor. At all times during the Term, Service Provider shall be deemed to be an independent contractor and shall be wholly responsible for the manner in which Service Provider performs the Services required under this Agreement. Service Provider shall be liable for its acts and omissions and those of its employees, contractors, subcontractors, representatives, volunteers, and its agents. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as creating an employment, agency or partnership relationship between City and Service Provider. City shall have the right to control Service Provider only insofar as the result of Service Provider’s Services rendered pursuant to this Agreement; however, City shall not have the right to control the means by which Service Provider accomplishes Services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
29. Service Provider Not Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Service Provider shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Service Provider shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
30. Payment of Taxes and Other Expenses. Payment of any taxes, including California sales and use taxes, levied upon this Agreement, the transaction, or the Services or goods delivered pursuant hereto, shall be the obligation of Service Provider.
31. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or transmitted by certified mail, postage prepaid. Any Party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days’ written notice to the other Party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below.
If to City: City of Turlock
Attn: Christopher Fisher
156 S. Broadway, Suite 270
Turlock, California 95380
With courtesy copies to: City of Turlock, City Attorney’s Office Attn: George A. Petrulakis, City Attorney
156 S. Broadway
Turlock, California 95380-5456
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 14
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
If to Service Provider: Julian Tree Care Inc.
Attn: Julian Cabrera
561 Juliga Woods St
Richmond, CA 94804
32. City Contract Administrator. City’s contract administrator and contact person for this Agreement is:
Mike Murphy
Parks, Streets and Public Facilities Maintenance Superintendent 144 S. Broadway
Turlock, California 95380
Telephone: (209) 668-5423
E-mail: [email protected]
33. Interpretation. As used herein, any gender includes each other gender, the singular includes the plural and vice versa.
34. Use of City Project Number. {Intentionally Omitted}
35. Modification. No alteration, amendment, modification, or termination of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and executed by all of the Parties to this Agreement.
36. Waiver. No covenant, term, or condition or the breach thereof shall be deemed waived, except by written consent of the Party against whom the waiver is claimed, and any waiver of the breach of any covenant, term, or condition shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of the same or any other covenant, term, or condition.
37. Assignment. No Party to this Agreement shall assign, transfer, or otherwise dispose of this Agreement, in whole or in part, to any individual, firm, or corporation without the prior written consent of the other Party. Subject to the forgoing provisions, this Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the respective successors and assigns of the Parties hereto.
38. Authority. All Parties to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the power and authority to enter into this Agreement and the names, titles, and capacities herein stated on behalf of any entities, persons, states, or firms represented or purported to be represented by such entities, persons, states or firms and that all former requirements necessary or required by state or federal law in order to enter into the Agreement have been fully complied with. Further, by entering into this Agreement, neither Party hereto shall have breached the terms or conditions of any other contract or agreement to which such Party is obligated, which such breach would have a material effect hereon.
39. Drafting and Ambiguities. Each Party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement with its own legal counsel, and based upon the advice of that counsel, freely entered into this Agreement. Each Party has participated fully in the review and revision of this Agreement. Any
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 15
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
rule of construction that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party does not apply in interpreting this Agreement.
40. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of California.
41. Venue. Venue for all legal proceedings shall be in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Stanislaus.
42. Severability. If this Agreement in its entirety is determined by a court to be invalid or unenforceable, this Agreement shall automatically terminate as of the date of final entry of judgment. If any provision of this Agreement shall be determined by a court to be invalid and unenforceable, or if any provision of this Agreement is rendered invalid or unenforceable according to the terms of any federal or state statute, which becomes effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect and shall be construed to give effect to the intent of this Agreement.
43. Execution and Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously, and in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Parties agree that this Agreement and any other documents to be delivered in connection herewith may be electronically signed utilizing services such as DocuSign and Nitro Sign, or by transmitting signatures in pdf or similar format, and that any electronic signatures appearing on this Agreement or such other documents are the same as handwritten signatures for the purposes of validity, enforceability, and admissibility.
44. Audit. City shall have access at all reasonable times to all reports, contract records, contract documents, contract files, and personnel necessary to audit and verify Service Provider’s charges to City under this Agreement.
45. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, together with its specific references, attachments, and exhibits, constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matters hereof and supersedes any and all prior negotiations, understanding, and agreements with respect hereto, whether oral or written. Should any conflict exist between the terms and conditions of the Agreement and any and all exhibits attached hereto, the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall prevail.
46. Supersedes Prior Agreement. It is the intention of the Parties hereto that this Agreement shall supersede any prior agreements, discussions, commitments, or representations, whether written, electronic or oral, between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
47. Mandatory and Permissive. “Shall” and “will” and “agrees” are mandatory. “May” and “can” are permissive.
48. Successors and Assigns. All representations, covenants, and warranties specifically set forth in this Agreement, by or on behalf of, or for the benefit of, any or all of the Parties hereto, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of such Party, its successors and assigns.
CITY CONTRACT NO. 2025-194 16
{PLA2024}
04/09/2025
49. Headings. Headings used in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered in construing this Agreement.
50. Attorney’s Fees and Costs. If any action at law or in equity not resolved pursuant to the “Arbitration of Disputes” section of this Agreement, including action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which such Party may be entitled.
51. Necessary Acts and Further Assurances. The Parties shall at their own cost and expense execute and deliver such further documents and instruments and shall take such other actions as may be reasonably required or appropriate to evidence or carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement.
52. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement for each covenant and term of a condition herein.
[Signatures on Following Page]
1. Purpose
The City of Turlock is seeking a qualified contractor to provide professional tree trimming, pruning, maintenance and removal services. The contractor will work under the direction of the City’s Public Works Maintenance Supervisor and ensure compliance with all safety, regulatory, and industry standards to maintain the health and safety of trees within the city’s public spaces.
2. Scope of Services
The contractor will be responsible for the following tasks:
2.1. Tree Pruning Services
Remove dead, diseased, or damaged branches to enhance tree health, safety, and appearance.
Perform crown thinning, reduction, and raising for adequate street and sidewalk clearance per the City of Turlock’s Municipal Code 10-2-05.
Perform utility line clearance pruning as necessary.
The contractor is responsible to properly dispose of all wood, branches, and other materials from tree pruning sites when requested by the city.
2.2. Tree Removal Services
Remove hazardous, dead, or dying trees as directed by the City’s Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee.
Notify USA North 811 prior to removal of any tree.
Grind stumps to a depth of 6–12 inches below grade, including cleanup of debris. The contractor is responsible to properly dispose of all wood, branches, and other materials from tree removal sites when requested by the city.
2.3. Emergency Services (As Needed)
The City’s Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee will inform the contractor if the emergency call is critical or high-priority.
Respond to emergency calls for service for tree-related issues from storm damage or fallen trees at any and all times day or night during the term of this agreement within:
o Two (2) hours for critical emergencies when public safety is at risk o Twenty-four (24) hours for high-priority, but non-life-threatening issues The contractor is responsible to properly dispose of all wood, branches, and other materials from tree removal sites when requested by the city.
3. Standards and Compliance
All services must comply with:
ANSI A300-2023 Standards for Tree Care Operations.
ANSI Z133 Safety Standards for Arboricultural Operations. OSHA Regulations for worker safety and temporary traffic control. Applicable local ordinances and municipal codes.
4. Direction and Coordination
All work locations will be assigned by the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee. It is the responsibility of the contractor to report any issues with assigned work locations.
The contractor must report any issues encountered, including hazardous conditions, directly to the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee. The contractor must report any trees with damage or disease to the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee.
Coordinate scheduling and priority work with the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee to minimize disruptions to the community.
5. Traffic Control Requirements
The contractor is solely responsible for planning, setting up, and maintaining all temporary traffic control measures according to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).
Traffic control plans must be submitted to the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee for approval when required, especially for projects involving lane closures or work within the public right-of-way.
Traffic control measures must ensure the safety of the public, workers, and property.
6. Equipment and Labor
The contractor will:
Provide all necessary tools, equipment, and personnel to complete assigned tasks. Ensure all equipment is in safe working condition and complies with OSHA standards. Employ qualified personnel trained in tree care and traffic control operations.
7. Rates and Billing
The contractor must submit a schedule of rates, including:
Normal Hourly Rates: Applicable during standard working hours (Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM).
Overtime Hourly Rates: Applicable for work performed outside standard hours, on weekends, or holidays.
Rates must account for labor, equipment, and administrative costs.
8. Reporting Requirements
Submit daily reports to the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee detailing work performed, locations, tree species, and any issues encountered. Provide immediate notification of urgent or hazardous conditions that require City intervention to the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee.
9. Insurance and Licensing
The contractor must:
Maintain and provide proof of at least one of the following:
o Valid California C61/D49 contractor’s license for Tree Services. o Valid California C49 contractor’s license for Tree and Palm Services. Maintain and provide proof of general liability insurance, auto insurance, and worker’s compensation as required by the agreement.
Maintain current City of Turlock business license during term of agreement.
10. Duration and Scheduling
Work will be assigned on an as-needed basis for the duration of the contract. Services must be completed within the timeframes established by the Public Works Maintenance Supervisor or designee.
11. Compliance and Performance
The City will conduct inspections upon completion of the work to ensure it meets the City of Turlock’s required standards for tree care. Failure to adhere to the requirements in this Scope of Work may result in termination of the contract.
п¹ » ç ±º î é
Julian Tree Care Inc.
Julian Cabrera
561 Juliga Woods St Richmond CA 94804
510-256-7009
[email protected]
1000909997
1009796
N/A
п¹ » ï 𠱺 î é
85 105
110
Certified arborist report: $100
Specialty equipment rental crane $148/ hour
City Council Staff Report
June 10, 2025
From: Christopher Fisher, Municipal Services Director
Prepared by: Fred Pezeshk, P.E., Roads Program Manager
Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Determining the award of bid is exempt from the provisions of CEQA in accordance with section 15301 of the CEQA guidelines, awarding bid, and approving an Agreement between the City of Turlock and Mountain Cascade, Inc., of Livermore, CA, in the amount of $8,025,215.00 and a contingency amount of $800,000.00 (10%) to be funded by Fund 218 “Measure L” for construction of Bid Package 3 for City Project No. 23- 067 “Mark Thomas Task Order No. 3 for Roads Program CIP Projects"
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
On February 27, 2024, the City Council approved Task Order No. 3 as Amendment No. 3 under the terms of the Master Agreement with Mark Thomas & Company, Inc. for City Project No. 23-067 “Mark Thomas Task Order No. 3 for Roads Program CIP Project” for the rehabilitation of a grouping of street sections. The City Council also authorized staff to proceed with advertising the project for construction upon completion of bid documents.
Bid Package 3 is the last bid package under this Task Order to be completed and includes the following streets:
23-067 Bid Package 3
Street Name From To Length (ft) District
N. Quincy Rd. Marie Dr. E. Hawkeye Ave. 1,115.00 1
Linn Ct. Mira Flores Dr. North End 436.00 1
La Sombra Ct. Mira Flores Dr. Mira Flores Dr. 1,177.00 1 Novo Dr. E. Canal Dr. Mira Flores Dr. 948.00 1
Arbor Wy. N. Berkeley Ave. N. Quincy Rd. 2,680.00 1
Karen Wy. Arbor Wy. Christine Wy. 259.00 1
Christine Wy. Karen Wy. Heppner Wy. 692.00 1
Heppner Wy. Arbor Wy. Christine Wy. 262.00 1
California Ave. N. Berkeley Ave. N. Johnson Rd. 1,332.00 1 El Paseo Dr. E. Canal Dr. Arbor Wy. 1,787.00 1
Linda Vista Dr. El Paseo Dr. N. Johnson Rd. 456.00 1
Zinfandel Ln. N. Johnson Rd. Corello St. 2,386.00 1
Charles Pl. Wallace Street N. Johnson Rd. 636.00 1
Wallace St. E. Marshall St. Charles Pl. 335.00 1
Total Length (ft) 14,501.00
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
City Project No. 23-067 (Bid Package 3) was advertised for construction bids on May 5, 2025 through the City’s website and the Turlock Journal.
Bids for City Projects No. 23-067 (Bid Package 3) were opened on May 30, 2025 at 2:00PM.
A total of three (3) bids were received:
Staff reviewed the bids for bidder responsiveness and responsibility and recommends approval of an agreement for City Projects No. 23-067 (Bid Package 3) with Mountain Cascade, Inc., of Livermore, CA, as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder with a bid amount of $8,025,215.00.
Per contract documents, the contractor is allowed ten (10) days after the date of the City’s mailing him/her the Agreement and the Notice of Award to return the signed Agreement along with required bonds and certificate of insurance. The City will then review the submittal for adequacy, execute the Agreement, and issue a Notice to Proceed. The Contractor is required to start work no later than ten (10) working days after Notice to Proceed has been issued. Based on this timeline, anticipated start of work will be in early July 2025.
BIDDER BID AMOUNT
Mountain Cascade, Inc.; Livermore, CA $8,025,215.00
Granite Construction Company; Fresno, CA $8,247,821.00
United Pavement Maintenance, Inc.; Hughson, CA $9,978,683.50
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. Per the Public Contract Code, § 20160 et seq., the City Council has the discretion to decide if a bid shall be awarded or rejected. If Council decides to award the bid, the bid has to be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder submitting a responsive bid.
B. This action is consistent with Council’s stated goal of utilizing Measure L revenues to expedite road repair projects. Measure L was approved by Stanislaus County voters and raised the sales tax effective April 1, 2017, by one-half cent for a total period of 25 years to improve local streets and roads, improve connectivity and reduce congestion.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
The total estimated fiscal impact of the proposed action will be $8,825,215.00 which will be funded by Fund 218 “Measure L”, account number 218-40-461.51270. The overall fiscal impact, including “Measure A” allocations are shown below.
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
23-067 Bid Package 3 Fund 115 “Measure A” Fund 218 “Measure L” Design (Mark Thomas) * $ 330,285.00
CM & Inspection (NV5) $1,257,431.71
Construction Contract $8,025,215.00
Construction Contingency $ 800,000.00
Sub-Total $1,587,716.71 $8,825,215.00
Total Estimated Cost $10,412,931.71
*Design cost is pro-rated based on the linear footage of street sections included in Bid Package 3.
All Roads Program staff time is expensed directly to Fund 115 "Measure A - Roads Program". Staff time is directly allocated to each project by the Finance Department at the end of the fiscal year.
Appropriate funds have been allocated during Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget process to cover these costs.
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) as this project involves negligible or no expansion of use of the existing facilities, and specifically no additional automobile lanes will be created by the projects.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
A. Council could reject the bids submitted for this project. Staff does not recommend this alternative as the proposed improvements are needed and funding is available.
B. Provide staff with direction on how to proceed.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Bidder's Summary
3. Agreement between the City of Turlock and Mountain Cascade, Inc., of Livermore, CA, for construction of Bid Package 3 for City Project No. 23-067
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF DETERMINING THE AWARD } RESOLUTION NO. 2025- OF BID IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF }
CEQA IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15301 }
OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES, AWARDING BID, }
AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN }
THE CITY OF TURLOCK AND MOUNTAIN }
CASCADE, INC., OF LIVERMORE, CA, IN THE }
IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,025,215.00 AND A }
CONTINGENCY AMOUNT $800,000.00 (10%) }
TO BE FUNDED BY FUND 218 “MEASURE L” }
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BID PACKAGE 3 FOR }
FOR CITY PROJECT NO. 23-067 “MARK }
THOMAS TASK ORDER NO. 3 FOR ROADS }
PROGRAM CIP PROJECTS” }
_________________________________________ }
WHEREAS, City Project No. 23-067 “Mark Thomas Task Order No. 3 for Roads Program CIP Projects" (Bid Package 3) will rehabilitate a grouping of street sections as approved by the City Council on February 27, 2024, and will include installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and ADA-compliant curb ramps; and
WHEREAS, on May 30, 2025, three (3) bids were received for the construction of City Project No. 23-067 (Bid Package 3), with Mountain Cascade, Inc., of Livermore, CA, submitting the lowest responsive, responsible bid in the amount of $8,025,215.00; and WHEREAS, the fiscal impact is estimated to be $8,825,215.00 which includes the construction contract in the amount of $8,025,215.00 and the contingency for potential change orders in the amount of $800,000.00; and
WHEREAS, funding is available from Fund 218 “Measure L”, account number 218-40-461.51270; and
WHEREAS, this project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) as this project involves negligible or no expansion of use of the existing facilities, and specifically no additional automobile lanes will be created by project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby determine the award of bid is exempt from the provisions of CEQA in accordance with section 15301 of the CEQA guidelines, award bid, and approve an Agreement between the City of Turlock and Mountain Cascade, Inc., of Livermore, CA, in the amount of $8,025,215.00 and a contingency amount of $800,000.00 (10%) to be funded by Fund 218 “Measure L” for construction of Bid Package 3 for City Project No. 23-067 “Mark Thomas Task Order No. 3 for Roads Program CIP Projects." PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Resolution No. 2025-
Turlock this 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
CITY OF TURLOCK
BIDDER'S SUMMARY
PROJECT TITLE: 23-067 Package 3 - Roads Program CIP
PROJECT NUMBER: 23-067BP3
BID OPENING:
2:00 P.M.
ANTICIPATED COUNCIL AWARD DATE: June 10, 2025
Item Unit of Estimated
No. Item Description Measure Quantity Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1 Potholes Existing Utilities LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $275,028.00 $275,028.00 2 Construction Area Signs EA 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,720.00 $1,720.00 $43,500.00 $43,500.00 $10,800.00 $10,800.00 3 Traffic Control System LS 1 $385,000.00 $385,000.00 $385,000.00 $385,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $457,000.00 $457,000.00 4 Portable Changeable Message Sign EA 8 $6,500.00 $52,000.00 $16,700.00 $133,600.00 $6,000.00 $48,000.00 $6,240.00 $49,920.00 5 Construction Funding Sign EA 12 $1,500.00 $18,000.00 $4,000.00 $48,000.00 $1,250.00 $15,000.00 $1,309.00 $15,708.00 6 Job Site Management LS 1 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $6,050.00 $6,050.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $143,520.00 $143,520.00 7 Prepare Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $2,180.00 $2,180.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $17,820.00 $17,820.00 8 Erosion and Dust Control BMPs LS 1 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $75,020.00 $75,020.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $38,000.00 $38,000.00 9 Construction Staking LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $48,865.00 $48,865.00 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 $53,751.00 $53,751.00 10 Clearing and Grubbing LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $1,310,000.00 $1,310,000.00 $125,580.00 $125,580.00 11 Remove Concrete (Curb Ramps, Sidewalk, Valley Gutter, Driveways, Curb and Gutter)SY 8,570 $48.00 $411,360.00 $62.00 $531,340.00 $40.00 $342,800.00 $70.75 $606,327.50 12 Roadway Excavation (F) CY 2,800 $110.00 $308,000.00 $160.00 $448,000.00 $80.00 $224,000.00 $56.50 $158,200.00 13 Unsuitable Material CY 1,250 $60.00 $75,000.00 $100.00 $125,000.00 $153.00 $191,250.00 $204.00 $255,000.00 14 Remove Asphalt Concrete Pavement SF 180 $15.00 $2,700.00 $29.00 $5,220.00 $20.00 $3,600.00 $40.00 $7,200.00 15 Cold Plane AC Pavement (Var Depth) SY 45,200 $10.00 $452,000.00 $8.00 $361,600.00 $3.30 $149,160.00 $12.00 $542,400.00 16 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 11,600 $120.00 $1,392,000.00 $160.00 $1,856,000.00 $107.00 $1,241,200.00 $190.00 $2,204,000.00 17 Full Depth Reclamation-Cement SY 48,800 $15.00 $732,000.00 $14.00 $683,200.00 $15.00 $732,000.00 $23.06 $1,125,328.00 18 Cement (Full Depth Reclamation-Cement) TON 1,030 $240.00 $247,200.00 $226.00 $232,780.00 $197.50 $203,425.00 $207.00 $213,210.00 19 Mix Design (Full-Depth Reclamation-Cement) LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $14,500.00 $14,500.00 $14,500.00 $14,500.00 $106,835.00 $106,835.00 20 Aggregate Base (Class 2) CY 120 $400.00 $48,000.00 $1,150.00 $138,000.00 $300.00 $36,000.00 $578.00 $69,360.00 21 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 17,700 $60.00 $1,062,000.00 $40.00 $708,000.00 $55.00 $973,500.00 $64.00 $1,132,800.00 22 Minor Concrete (Retaining Curb) LF 87 $40.00 $3,480.00 $50.00 $4,350.00 $73.00 $6,351.00 $123.00 $10,701.00 23 Minor Concrete (Curb Ramp) SF 3,570 $30.00 $107,100.00 $20.00 $71,400.00 $30.00 $107,100.00 $47.40 $169,218.00 24 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SF 27,100 $14.00 $379,400.00 $10.25 $277,775.00 $8.00 $216,800.00 $17.50 $474,250.00 25 Minor Concrete (Valley Gutter) SF 3,590 $15.00 $53,850.00 $14.00 $50,260.00 $15.00 $53,850.00 $26.00 $93,340.00 26 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SF 24,500 $20.00 $490,000.00 $12.00 $294,000.00 $13.00 $318,500.00 $20.40 $499,800.00 27 Excavate and Expose Utility LF 6,450 $32.00 $206,400.00 $16.00 $103,200.00 $64.00 $412,800.00 $37.00 $238,650.00 28 Concrete Slurry (2-sack) LF 1,000 $100.00 $100,000.00 $120.00 $120,000.00 $25.00 $25,000.00 $100.00 $100,000.00 29 Detectable Warning Surface (Truncated Domes) SF 650 $30.00 $19,500.00 $36.00 $23,400.00 $40.00 $26,000.00 $29.00 $18,850.00 30 Adjust Drainage Inlet to Grade EA 15 $3,000.00 $45,000.00 $2,750.00 $41,250.00 $5,000.00 $75,000.00 $2,500.00 $37,500.00 31 Replace Drainage Inlet (SD-3) EA 4 $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $7,750.00 $31,000.00 $8,000.00 $32,000.00 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 32 Install Drainage Inlet (SD-3) EA 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $6,300.00 $6,300.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00 33 12” Reinforced Concrete Pipe LF 54 $175.00 $9,450.00 $375.00 $20,250.00 $340.00 $18,360.00 $350.00 $18,900.00 34 Relocate Fire Hydrant EA 2 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $10,300.00 $20,600.00 $6,850.00 $13,700.00 $5,000.00 $10,000.00 35 Remove and Replace Monument EA 6 $1,200.00 $7,200.00 $1,700.00 $10,200.00 $1,700.00 $10,200.00 $3,000.00 $18,000.00 36 Adjust Manhole Frame and Cover (Sewer) EA 21 $1,300.00 $27,300.00 $1,500.00 $31,500.00 $2,000.00 $42,000.00 $1,500.00 $31,500.00 37 Adjust Manhole Frame and Cover (Storm Drain) EA 1 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 38 Adjust Frame and Cover to Grade (Water Valve) EA 38 $1,000.00 $38,000.00 $950.00 $36,100.00 $1,300.00 $49,400.00 $750.00 $28,500.00 39 Adjust Frame and Cover to Grade (Water Meter) EA 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $950.00 $950.00 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 $2,236.00 $2,236.00 40 Chain Link Fence (Type CL-4) LF 480 $130.00 $62,400.00 $42.00 $20,160.00 $37.00 $17,760.00 $96.80 $46,464.00 41 4’ Chain Link Gate (Type CL-4) EA 1 $4,170.00 $4,170.00 $3,170.00 $3,170.00 $2,735.00 $2,735.00 $2,230.00 $2,230.00 42 Remove Fence LF 970 $20.00 $19,400.00 $10.00 $9,700.00 $9.00 $8,730.00 $26.40 $25,608.00 43 Install Roadside Sign – One Post EA 27 $550.00 $14,850.00 $600.00 $16,200.00 $575.00 $15,525.00 $506.00 $13,662.00 44 Relocate Roadside Sign EA 9 $550.00 $4,950.00 $250.00 $2,250.00 $350.00 $3,150.00 $385.00 $3,465.00 45 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 3,360 $5.00 $16,800.00 $4.00 $13,440.00 $4.00 $13,440.00 $4.40 $14,784.00 46 Thermoplastic Pavement Markings SF 4,630 $15.00 $69,450.00 $9.50 $43,985.00 $9.50 $43,985.00 $13.20 $61,116.00 47 Remove Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 240 $5.00 $1,200.00 $15.00 $3,600.00 $15.00 $3,600.00 $5.50 $1,320.00 48 Remove Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SF 130 $12.00 $1,560.00 $20.00 $2,600.00 $20.00 $2,600.00 $8.80 $1,144.00 49 Video Sewer and Storm Drain Inspection LS 1 $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $160,615.00 $160,615.00 50 Mobilization LS 1 $756,000.00 $756,000.00 $417,000.00 $417,000.00 $820,000.00 $820,000.00 $235,543.00 $235,543.00 3 United Pavement Maintenance, Inc.
$9,978,683.50
Highlighted cells indicate corrected total per
unit price for the item and the total bid.
Lowest responsible and responsive
Bidder
May 30, 2025
1 2
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE Mountain Cascade, Inc. Granite Construction Company Total $8,311,520.00 $8,025,215.00 $8,247,821.00
City Council Staff Report
June 10, 2025
From: Adrienne Werner, Development Services Director
Prepared by: Katie Quintero, Senior Planner
Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Rezone 2025-01, Planned Development 285 (PD 285) 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 2025-01 (Planned Development 285)] at 3130 E. Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007 Motion: Directing staff to proceed with one of the three options below:
1. Agendize the Planned Development 285 resolution;
2. Agendize an alternative version of the revised Planned Development 285 and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map resolution;
3. Forward the matter to the Planning Commission for their decision.
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
The applicant is proposing to subdivide one 11.42-acre parcel into 22 single family residential lots with one remainder. The subject property is located at 3130 E. Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007. A Planned Development is proposed to allow for various deviations from the Residential Estate development standards in the East Tuolumne Master Plan (ETMP) detailed below. A dual use drainage basin will be installed and landscaped to handle the stormwater for the development. The development will meet the required density of the Residential Estate Zoning District.
Background
The project site is located at 3130 E. Tuolumne Road on an approximately 11.42-acre parcel. The parcel is currently developed with a single-family home with crop land. The parcel is zoned Residential Estate and was annexed into the City limits in 2006 as part of the East Tuolumne Master Plan. The project was originally scheduled for the April Planning Commission meeting but was continued to the May meeting to give the applicant and the City more time to work on design alternatives after receiving initial public comments on the project. After meeting with nearby residents the applicant relocated the basin from the original layout to the lot next to the existing homes to the south along Waring Road to provide more open space between the neighbors and the proposed development. The wall along Waring Road will not extend along the basin where it fronts onto Waring Road giving an open area for the adjacent residents as well as more open and landscaped area visible to Waring Road.
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
Adjacent Properties
The subject property is bound on the north by E. Tuolumne Road and the Fairbanks Ranch and Les Chateaux subdivisions. To the west is the Balisha Ranch subdivision currently under construction. Castleview Drive will be extended from the Balisha Ranch subdivision into this proposed subdivision.
To the south is the Wyndfair Estates subdivision. The property is bound on the east by Waring Road and the City limit.
PROJECT EVALUATION
The Planned Development is requested to allow for deviations from the minimum lot width, and setbacks required in the R-E Zoning District as established in the East Tuolumne Master Plan as well as deviations from the roadway standards. These deviations would make it possible to subdivide the parcel into more single-family lots than the existing development standards would accommodate, and will help the houses better fit onto the proposed lots. The proposed deviations from the development standards are described below. • Reduce the 15’ wide landscaped area and PUE adjacent to the wall along Waring Road to 10’.
• Eliminate the 6’ wide landscape strip between the curb and the sidewalk area along Waring Road, reducing the right-of-way along Waring Road from 56’ to 50’. • Eliminate the 8’ wide landscaped center median for the entry roadway into the subdivision on proposed Leslie Lane.
Exceptions to the ETMP Development Standards for lots 1-3 (Fronting Tuolumne) ETMP Required Standard Lots 1-3 Fronting
Tuolumne
Minimum Lot Width 90’ 75’
Setbacks:
Interior Side
Porch 10’ 5’
Living Space 10’ 5’
Garage 10’ 5’
Exception to the ETMP Development Standards for all lots:
Setbacks: ETMP Required Standard Proposed Standards for all lots
Front:
Living Space (2nd Story) 30’ 25’
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
Garage 35’ 25’
Corner Yard:
Porch 20’ 15’
Living Space (1st Story) 25’ 20’
Living Space (2nd Story) 30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Development Standards for lots 1-13
Rear:
Living Space 30’ 10’
Development Standards for lots 14 through 21 (Along Waring Road) ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 40’ minimum *
*30% of a lot’s width to have a reduced rear setback of 30-feet for either an attached or detached accessory structure or patio. Structures within this area to be single story only.
Lot 22
ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 30’ minimum
The Master Plan requires a 15’ wide PUE and TID easement along the wall along Waring Road. The 15’ wide landscape area was installed adjacent to the Les Chateau subdivision to the north of this site along Waring Road. This 15’ area was required in the Master Plan because there is a TID irrigation line that runs along Waring Road, but the irrigation line does not extend down to the portion of Waring Road that is adjacent to this project site because the line turns at Tuolumne Road. Because the irrigation line is not in the portion of Waring Road adjacent to this project the 15’ wide easement is not needed to accommodate utilities, 10’ wide for a PUE is adequate to accommodate utilities. The reduction from 15’ to 10’ would reduce the amount of landscaping in the area but 10’ is still adequate to provide a landscaped area to soften the wall.
The applicant also proposes to remove the 8’ wide landscape median required in the Master Plan for the entry roadway into the subdivision. This deviation is supported as the entryway median landscaping was not required in the adjacent Balisha Ranch subdivision and the proposed entryway would only be approximately 100’ in length due to the layout of the
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
subdivision.
The applicant also requested to eliminate the 6’ wide landscape strip between the back of the curb and the sidewalk area. This option was not recommended by staff because the 6’ landscape area is part of the Master Plan right of way exhibit for Waring Road and the landscaping provides additional separation between the pedestrians and the roadway, provides additional area for trees to help provide shade for the sidewalk area as well as additional landscaping to help soften the wall along Waring Road. The applicant proposed eliminating the 6’ wide landscape strip, and providing curb adjacent sidewalk because if the 6’ landscape strip is installed the 10’ PUE in the new area will be offset 6’ from the existing PUE to the south along the fronts of the existing homes along Waring Road. Also, with the 6’ wide landscape strip the sidewalk will end into the landscape area of the adjacent property, without the 6’ strip the sidewalk would end more in line with the gravel area along the front of the property. At the Planning Commission meeting on May 1, 2025 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the removal of the 6’ wide landscape strip to the City Council.
After the Planning Commission hearing the City Engineer in working with the applicant developed a design alternative that better addresses the applicant’s goal of reducing the right-of-way area by 6’ so the sidewalk and PUE better align with the existing adjacent properties but also maintains the 6’ wide landscape strip between the roadway and the sidewalk. This option would still reduce the half width of Waring Road from 36’ to 30’ as recommended by the Planning Commission but this option would reduce the travel lane on Waring Road from 20’ wide to a 12’ wide travel lane with a 2’ wide striping buffer area leaving the 5’ wide sidewalk, 6’ wide park strip and 5’ wide bike lane. The applicant, staff and residents in the area have looked at this new design option and feel it is a better design option for this section as it provides a better transition between existing houses and the new subdivision.
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;
(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 Pleasant Valley Estates subdivision, located to the west of the subject parcel has an underlying designation of very low density residential but a Planned Development was
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
approved to allow for a reduction in the minimum lot size to 8,500 square feet and to allow a reduction in the required setbacks to be more similar to the setbacks in the RL Zoning District and was developed at approximately 2.3 units per acre. The Balisha Ranch subdivision immediately adjacent to the west of the site was granted a Planned Development to allow for reductions in lot size, lot dimensions and setbacks. The proposed setbacks for the Atherton Estates subdivision are similar to what was approved for the adjacent Balisha Ranch subdivision.
The Wyndfair subdivision to the south of the subject site also has an underlying designation of very low density residential and a Planned Development was approved to allow a reduction in the minimum lot width to 97’ but the subdivision met all other standards of the R-E zoning district and was developed at approximately 2.25 units per acre.
The East Tuolumne Master Plan was originally adopted in 2005. As part of the 2012 General Plan update Policy 3.1-o called for updating existing master and specific plans and specifically identified the East Tuolumne Master Plan. In 2014, an amendment to the East Tuolumne Master Plan was adopted to rezone two of the properties in the Master Plan from RE to RL. This was done to increase the density allowed on the two lots to help meet the goals of the General Plan for increasing residential densities and promoting more compact development. The other two larger vacant parcels within the Master Plan area, which includes the subject site and the adjacent property to the west, were not included in the Master Plan update in 2014 because the Master Plan update was a private application, not a City initiated amendment and the subject property was not part of the application.
The current Planned Development request meets the intent of General Plan Policy 3.1-o by re-evaluating some of the development standards applicable to the property while also keeping within the density range allowable in the zoning district to develop at a similar density to the adjacent existing subdivisions but at a higher density than the lot size and dimension standards would allow for.
The project also includes a Vesting Tentative Subdivision map. In reviewing this project, the Planning Commission had seven findings that must be made in order to approve the proposed subdivision map. These findings are established by Government Code Section 66474.
1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and any applicable Specific Plans.
2. The design or improvements of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and any applicable Specific Plan.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
7. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with public easements for access through, or use of, property within the subdivision unless it finds that alternate easements will be provided and will be substantially equivalent.
Zoning
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 and master plan and the proposed uses and intensity of use are consistent with the zoning of the property.
General Plan
The General Plan designation of the property is Very Low Density Residential (VLDR). The intent of this zoning district is to be developed with single family homes on larger lots to create a buffer between the higher density urban uses in Turlock and the lower density rural uses in Denair.
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) and CFD #3 (once created) to mitigate the ongoing costs of public services.
Public Comments and Planning Commission Hearing
During the public hearing neighbors spoke in favor of the design change made by the applicant to move the basin to the lot adjacent to the existing homes to the south but with concerns about the 5’ reduction in the landscaping along the wall and the elimination of the 6’ wide landscape strip along the sidewalk area siting this area was supposed to be a buffer area between the City limits and the agricultural area across the street. Neighbors also spoke about concerns about speeding along Waring Road and the impacts of additional houses on the traffic and speeding in the area.
The Planning Commission voted 5-1 with one member not participating to approve the proposed project with the modification to the recommended option to remove the 6’ wide landscaped area reducing the right of way along Waring Road and installing curb adjacent sidewalk in this area.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
1. Applications for Planned Developments require City Council action. At their May 1, 2025 Planning Commission meeting the Planning Commission voted with five members recommending approval, one recommending denial and one not participating due to a conflict for Council to approve the proposed project.
4. 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.
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The proposed project would result in rezoning the property from Residential Estate Density Residential (RE) to Planned Development 285 to allow for the development of 22 singlefamily homes. The development is consistent with the allowable densities of the RE zoning district.
The environmental impacts associated with Rezone 2025-01, and Planned Development 285 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.
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.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
1. The City Council may choose to approve the revised Planned Development and VTSM as provided in Attachment 3 to this staff report. This design option will reduce the 20’ travel lane of Waring Road to a 12’ travel lane with a 2’ wide striping buffer area.
2. The City Council may choose to not approve Rezone 2025-01 (PD 285). 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.
3. 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.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. PD 285 - CEQA Resolution
2. Initial Study PD 285
3. Mitigation Monitoring Checklist PD 285
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
4. PD 285 Ordinance
5. PD 285 Resolution Establishing Conditions
6. Attachment #1 PD 285 Map PC recommendation
7. PD 285 Resolution Establishing Conditions-Revised
8. Attachment #1 PD 285 Map City Engineer Alternative
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTING THE } RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND }
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING }
PROGRAM FOR REZONE 2025-01, PLANNED }
DEVELOPMENT 285, VTSM 25-01 AT 3130 E. }
TUOLUMNE ROAD, STANISLAUS COUNTY APN }
073-016-007 (ATHERTON ESTATES) }
WHEREAS, Torre Reich Construction Inc is requesting to rezone one approximately 11.42 acre property located at, 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007, from Residential Estate (RE), to Planned Development 285 (PD 285) to subdivide the property into 22 single-family lots, one remainder and a drainage basin; and
WHEREAS, the property affected by this Resolution is located at 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007; and
WHEREAS, a notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration for the project was mailed to applicable responsible and interested agencies on March 4, 2025; and
WHEREAS, a notice of intent to adopt a mitigated negative declaration was posted at the Stanislaus County Recorder’s Office on March 7, 2025; and WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Turlock on May 1, 2025, to consider public input and testimony on the potential environmental impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Turlock considered information provided in the Initial Study, the responses and comments on the Initial Study, and the comments received during the public hearing in making its findings and determinations, and recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Effect and Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Turlock held a duly noticed public hearing on June 10, 2025, to solicit public comment and testimony regarding the environmental document and the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Effect, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, 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.
Resolution No. 2025-
2. All feasible mitigation measures developed in the General Plan EIR have been incorporated into the project.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, having reviewed the General Plan EIR, the City of Turlock finds and determines that, based on substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that new information of substantial importance shows that significant environmental effects have been identified, but that 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.
7. The City has further determined, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(b) that:
a. Revisions to the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review, would avoid the effects or mitigate the effect to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; and b. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, required pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (CEQA) to ensure compliance with the required mitigation measures or project revisions during project implementation.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
Resolution No. 2025-
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
_
Nicole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of
Stanislaus, State of California
WITNESS:
Christina Cabada, City Clerk Trainee
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
1 1. Project Title: Planned Development 285 (PD 285),
Rezone 25-01
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 2025-01
(Atherton Estates )
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Turlock
156 South Broadway, Ste. 120
Turlock, CA 95380
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Katie Quintero
(209) 668-5640
4. Project Location: 3130 E Tuolumne Road
(Stanislaus County APNs 073-016-007)
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Torre Reich Construction, INC. 219 N Broadway
Turlock, CA 95380
6. General Plan Designation: Very Low Density Residential (VLDR)
7. Master Plan: East Tuolumne Master Plan
8. Zoning: Very Low Density Residential(R-E)
9. Description of the Project:
The applicant has applied for a Vesting Tentative Subdivision map to subdivide one 11.42-acre parcel into 22 single family residential lots. The subject property is located at 3130 E. Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007. A rezoning of the property to Planned Development 285 is proposed to allow for various deviations from the Very Low-Density Residential development standards in the East Tuolumne Master Plan (ETMP) as detailed below. A dual use drainage basin will be installed and landscaped to handle the stormwater for the development as well as provide an open space area. The development will meet the required density of the Very Low-Density Residential Zoning District with a proposed density of 3 units per acre but exceptions to the development standards are proposed as follows:
Exceptions to the ETMP Development Standards for lots 1-3 (Fronting Tuolumne) ETMP Required
Standard
Lots 1-3 Fronting
Tuolumne
Minimum Lot Width 90’ 75’
Setbacks:
Interior Side
Porch 10’ 5’
Living Space 10’ 5’
Garage 10’ 5’
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
2 Exception to the ETMP Development Standards for all lots:
Setbacks: ETMP Required
Standard
Proposed Standards for
all lots
Front:
Living Space (2nd Story) 30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Corner Yard:
Porch 20’ 15’
Living Space (1st Story) 25’ 15’
Living Space (2nd Story) 30’ 15’
Garage 35’ 15’
Rear:
Living Space 30’ 10’
Development Standards for lots 13 through 22 (Along Waring Road) ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 25’ minimum
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings) The project site is located within the East Tuolumne Master Plan area that was amended on December 9, 2014. The project site is currently 11.42 acres and is developed with one single family homes as well as open ground.
The property is bounded on the north by E. Tuolumne Road. Across E. Tuolumne Road to the north are two single family subdivisions Fairbanks Ranch and Les Chateaux. To the east of the project site is a Waring Road and the current City of Turlock boundary. To the south of the project site are developed single family home subdivisions and to the west is a single family home subdivision currently under construction.
11. 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
12. 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?
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
3 The Yokuts tribe was contacted in writing on February 19, 2025 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.
13. 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 @ 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 (Draft Update 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)
• Mitigated Negative Declaration for Prezone 2005-01 (East Tuolumne Master Plan). • Traffic Analysis for East Tuolumne Master Plan – KD Anderson & Associates, Inc., August 2014
• Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 2014-01, Rezone 2014-01 (East Tuolumne Master Plan Amendment) SCH#201406268 Adopted December 9, 2014, City Council Resolution 2014-205, City Council Resolution 1204-CS. 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).
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
4 As identified in the Turlock General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), development in the project area would result in significant, and unavoidable, impacts in the areas of transportation/traffic, noise, regional air quality, and the eventual loss of agricultural land and soil resources. The magnitude of these impacts can be reduced, but not eliminated by the mitigation measures referenced 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 the General Plan EIR, as well as the standards in the East Tuolumne Master Plan and the Turlock Municipal Code, that 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 List, compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below ( X ) could be potentially affected by this project. However, these impacts would result in a less than significant on the environment by incorporating appropriate mitigation measures.
X 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
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
X Energy Population/Housing
X Geology/Soils X Public Services
X
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Recreation
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
5 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
6 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.
________________________________________________________________________________ Signature Date
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
7 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. (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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
8 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
9 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 a primarily 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 Low Density and Very Low Zoning Districts. The maximum height limit in the surrounding residential zoning districts is 35-feet, therefore the buildings will be in scale with the surrounding buildings. Pursuant to CEQA §15162, the project will not create any adverse aesthetic impacts that warrant additional environmental documentation over and above the impacts addressed in the Turlock Area General Plan EIR.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
10 b) There are no scenic or historic resources on the project site. A site visit conducted by staff on February 28, 2025 confirmed the property currently 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.
c) The project would convert vacant land to urban uses, thereby changing the existing visual character and quality of the site. The proposed project is consistent with the East Tuolumne Master Plan subdivision design and circulation system. The policies contained in the General Plan and the East Tuolumne Master Plan will ensure that residential development within the subdivision will include visual interest and variety and are designed to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. Streetscapes will include landscaping to enhance the visual quality within the project area. To insure compliance with this standard, the project specific mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
d) The development of the project area with approximately 22 single-family dwellings will produce additional light and glare from street lighting and on-site security lighting. Pursuant to CEQA §15162, the project will not create any impacts that warrant additional environmental documentation over and above the impacts addressed in the Turlock Area General Plan EIR. In accordance with the Turlock Municipal Code, all types of illumination in the master plan area shall not be a source of light and glare upon adjoining developments. To insure compliance with this standard, the project specific mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
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;
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
11 Mitigation:
1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit proposed house plans (including both master plans and custom-built homes) to the Planning Division for review and approval to ensure compliance with Chapter 3 (Community Character and Design Guidelines) of the East Tuolumne, and General Plan Policy 3.7-q (Visual interest and compatibility in residential design).
2. Prior to the approval of a grading and/or encroachment permit, the developer shall submit an improvement plan and landscaping plan for review and approval by the Planning Division to ensure that public rights-of-way are developed in accordance with Chapter 2 (Circulation) of the East Tuolumne Master Plan and General Plan Policy 6.3-d (Provide attractive, landscaped streetscapes).
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval to ensure that all lighting is designed to confine light spread within the site boundaries. Lighting shall not become a source of glare for adjoining residential properties.
4. Lighting shall be oriented to minimize impacts upon existing and planned residences. Future residential developments shall mitigate the impacts of light and glare sources through project design.
5. Sources of high illumination shall be separated from light-sensitive receptors.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 nonagricultural use?
X
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
12 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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
13 Response:
a) The development of this proposed project would result in a loss of Prime Farmland, as identified by the CA Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, however, the loss of farmland within the project area has been analyzed in the General Plan EIR and was considered a significant impact that cannot be mitigated. Consequently, the City Council of the City of Turlock adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the General Plan (Turlock City Council Resolution No. 2012-156), stating that the social and economic benefits of converting the farmland outweighed the adverse environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines § 15093). This Statement of Overriding Considerations included the farmland on the subject site.
The project does not propose any changes to the General Plan, changes in circumstance, or new information that would cause substantial agricultural impacts that were not considered in the 2012 General Plan EIR. The project lies within the municipal boundary of the City of Turlock and the project will develop in accordance with the East Tuolumne Master Plan.
General Plan Policy 3.1-g (Master Plan Areas) ensures that agricultural land is utilized and developed in an orderly manner and is not prematurely converted by establishing that master plans shall be developed once 70% of the building permits in a previous master plan area are issued. The East Tuolumne Master Plan area was originally approved in 2003 and amended in 2014 to increase densities to reduce the conversion of farmland to urban uses in accordance with General Plan Policy 7.2-e (Require Compact Development).
Pursuant to CEQA §15162, this project will not create any new significant environmental impacts related to agricultural resources and therefore no additional environmental documentation is warranted. Pursuant to CEQA §15183, this project is consistent with the General Plan and no additional environmental review is needed because there are no agricultural impacts peculiar to the project, no new significant agricultural impacts, no new offsite and cumulative agricultural impacts, or no agricultural impacts that are more significant than described in the prior General Plan EIR.
In addition, new subdivisions in the project area are required to record a Right-to-Farm Notice on all new lots to ensure that residents are aware of the impacts of agricultural operations located in the county.
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) Agricultural operations in the vicinity of the proposed project may be affected by the development of residential development proposed by the project. To mitigate this impact, the General Plan includes 7.2-J (Support Right to Farm) to ensure compliance with the Count’s Right to Farm Ordinance. The City has enacted a Right-to-Farm ordinance, consistent with the County’s Ordinance to ensure notices are recorded on the deed of each new lot created in the project area.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
14 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 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 2022.1.1.29 analysis run on February 27, 2025, the project is located in an urbanized area surrounded by residential uses in Climate Zone 3, wind speeds 3.10 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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
15 emissions and operational emissions calculated in the CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.29 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 2022.1.129 ROG 0.16 tpy, NOx 1.30 tpy, CO 1.73 tpy SO2 <0.0005 tpy, PM10 .32 tpy and PM2.5 0.30 tpy.
Overall Operational Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.129: ROG .36 tpy, NOx .20 tpy, CO 1.42 tpy SO2 <.0005 tpy, PM10 .25 tpy and PM2.5 .19 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 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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
16 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 278 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis report dated February 27, 2025 available upon request;
Mitigation:
1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations. 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
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
17 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
18 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 on an underdeveloped parcel currently containing two single family residences and a walnut orchard, surrounded on two sides with existing single-family subdivisions with two new subdivisions under construction across the street. Located in a partially 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 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 underdeveloped. 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 partially 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.
e) There are no natural features on the undeveloped property that offer habitat opportunities.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
19 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 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, nodisturbance 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 Less Less No
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
20 ally
Signific
ant
Impact
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
Impact
5. Cultural Resources - Would the project:
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 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 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:
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
21 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 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.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
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 underdeveloped 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. 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),
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
22 requirements regulating energy efficiency.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
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 onor 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
23 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 postconstruction. 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) 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.
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;
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
24 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
25 Response:
a), b) The proposed residential development is proposed on parcels zoned for the intended use, located in an urbanized area surrounded by a mix of residential uses.
Based on the CalEEMod 2022.1.1.29 analysis run on February 27, 2025, the project is located in an urbanized area surrounded residential uses in Climate Zone 3, wind speeds
3.10 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 2022.1.1.29: ROG .16 tpy, NOx 1.30 tpy, CO 1.73 tpy SO2 <.005 tpy, PM10 .32 tpy and PM2.5 0.30 tpy.
Overall Operational Emissions
CalEEMOD 2022.1.1.28: ROG .36 tpy, NOx .20 tpy, CO 1.42 tpy SO2 .<.005 tpy, PM10 .25 tpy and PM2.5 .19 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 278 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis report dated February 27, 2025 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.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
With
Less
Than
Signific
ant
No
Impact
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
26 Mitigation 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 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
27 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. A private airstrip serving a local pilot is located at 2707 East Zeering Road (APN 073-004-004), approximately 1 mile north of the project site. The Stanislaus County Zoning Ordinance has established a 1,000 foot radius around the perimeter of a private strip as a clear area not suitable for most types of development. The project site is located outside of the 1,000 foot radius. Further, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has established regulations for flight operations near built-up areas. Therefore, any future development of the project site with a residential subdivision will not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the area. However, noise generated from the operation of this airstrip may cause some degree of infrequent annoyance to future residents of this project site. Therefore, to disclose this information to future residents, the following notice shall be provided to potential property owners of this subdivision project: “This property is presently located in the vicinity of a private airstrip.
For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to aircraft operations (for example: noise and vibration). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person.
You may wish to consider what annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you.” 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 2016; 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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
28 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
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 onor 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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
29 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.
c), d) and e) 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;
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
30 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 (postconstruction) 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 nonjurisdictional 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
31 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) The proposed project will not physically divide an established community. The project is located in an urbanized area and surrounded by a mix of residential uses the project is proposed to be constructed on a parcel zoned for the intended use. The project is located within the East Tuolumne Master Plan area identified in the City of Turlock General Plan and is consistent with that development plan.
a)
b) The proposed 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 and East Tuolumne Master Plan and the RE 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
32 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
33 Response:
a)The project area is not located in an existing or future noise contour area as identified by the Turlock Area General Plan EIR. A future expressway connection may be constructed east of the project site near Waring Road but the exact location and timing are unknown at this time. The potential impact and mitigation required for construction of the expressway will be analyzed as part of that project. The proposed residential development is located in a partially 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.
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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
34 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 airport. A private airstrip serving a local pilot is located at 2707 East Zeering Road (APN 073-004-004), approximately 1 mile north of the project site. The Stanislaus County Zoning Ordinance has established a 1,000 foot radius around the perimeter of a private strip as a clear area not suitable for most types of development. The project site is located outside of the 1,000 foot radius. Further, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has established regulations for flight operations near built-up areas. Therefore, any future development of the project site with a residential subdivision will not result in a safety hazard for people residing in the area. However, noise generated from the operation of this airstrip may cause some degree of infrequent annoyance to future residents of this project site. Therefore, to disclose this information to future residents, the following notice shall be provided to potential property owners of this subdivision project: “This property is presently located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to aircraft operations (for example: noise and vibration). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you.”
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; 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
Impact
Less
Than
Significa
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
35 b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? X
Response:
a) The proposed project is a residential development proposed on property 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 Master Planned 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
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
36 e) Other public facilities? X
Response:
a) The residential project is 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 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.
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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
37 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
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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
38 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
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
39 Response:
a) and b) The proposed residential development is proposed on a 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 East Tuolumne Master Plan as well as the General Plan.
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.
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 located in a residential Master Plan area. 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.
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
Less
Than
Significa
Less
Than
Signific
No
Impact
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
40 ant
Impact
nt
Impact
With
Mitigatio
n
ant
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
Response:
a) The Turlock General Plan EIR found that there are no known Native American cultural resources within the City of Turlock. The property is 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 February 19, 2025 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
Less
Than
Signific
ant
Impact
No
Impact
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
41 With
Mitigatio
n
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
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 on parcels zoned and Master Planned 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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
42 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.
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.
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
43 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 the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
44 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 2016 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
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
CITY OF TURLOCK
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
45 The proposed residential subdivision is proposed on a property zoned and Master Planned for residential uses within the City surrounded by residential uses, on a property zoned for Very Low 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.
1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
PROJECT NAME: Rezone 2025-01, Planned Development 285, VTSM 2025-01 PROJECT LOCATION: 3130 E. Tuolumne Road (Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007)
MITIGATION MEASURES AND MONITORING PROGRAM
I. Aesthetics
The development of this project will produce additional light and glare from new parking lot and building lighting. In order to reduce lighting impacts to surrounding properties, this project shall include the following mitigation:
A. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit proposed house plans (including both master plans and custom-built homes) to the Planning Division for review and approval to ensure compliance with Chapter 3 (Community Character and Design Guidelines) of the East Tuolumne, and General Plan Policy 3.7-q (Visual interest and compatibility in residential design).
B. Prior to the approval of a grading and/or encroachment permit, the developer shall submit an improvement plan and landscaping plan for review and approval by the Planning Division to ensure that public rights-of-way are developed in accordance with Chapter 2 (Circulation) of the East Tuolumne Master Plan and General Plan Policy 6.3-d (Provide attractive, landscaped streetscapes).
C. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval to ensure that all lighting is designed to confine light spread within the site boundaries. Lighting shall not become a source of glare for adjoining residential properties.
D. Lighting shall be oriented to minimize impacts upon existing and planned residences.
Future residential developments shall mitigate the impacts of light and glare sources through project design.
E. Sources of high illumination shall be separated from light-sensitive receptors.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: During and after construction
Verified By: Engineering Division, Building/Safety Division, and Neighborhood Services
II. Air Quality
In order to mitigate potential air quality impacts from the level anticipated by intensifying land uses at this property, the project shall include the following mitigation:
2 A. The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: During construction and post-construction Verified By: Turlock Engineering and Building Divisions, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
B. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to grading permit approval and during construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions
III. Biological Resources
In order to mitigate potential impacts of the construction activity on cultural and historic resources, the project shall include the following mitigation:
A. 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 midSeptember, 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.
B. 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.
C. 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 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
3 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.
D. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, contractors or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: During construction
Verified By: Turlock Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions
IV. Cultural Resources
In order to ensure the project does not have an impact on cultural and historic resources, the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. 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 interested parties.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, contractors, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to issuance of a grading permit and during construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions
B. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, contractors, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to issuance of a grading permit and during construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions
V. Energy
4 In order to ensure the project does not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. The applicant shall comply with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules and regulations.
B. The project shall comply with the California Green Building Code Standards (CBC), requirements regulating energy efficiency.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to Building Permit Issuance, during construction and post-construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering and Building Divisions, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District
VI. Geology and Soils
In order to ensure the project does not expose people to risks associated with seismic groundshaking and to avoid erosion or loss of top soil, the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. 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.
B. 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.
C. GP 10.2-a, 10.2-b; The project shall comply with the California Building Code (CBC), Chapter 70, regulating grading activities including drainage and erosion control.
D. 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.
E. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, contractors, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a building permit and during construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
5 In order to ensure the project does not result in impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: During construction and post-construction Verified By: Turlock Engineering and Building Divisions, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality
In order to ensure the project does not result in impacts to water quality and water supplies, the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. GP 3.3-a, 3.3-f, The project shall connect to the City's Master Water and Storm Drainage System.
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. 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.
E. The discharge of oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, or any other petroleum derivative, or any toxic chemical or hazardous waste is prohibited.
F. 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.
G. A spill prevention and cleanup plan shall be implemented.
H. 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
6 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a grading or encroachment permit; during construction; and
post-construction
Verified By: Turlock Engineering and Building Divisions IX. Noise
In order to ensure people are not exposed to noise levels in excess of General Plan standards, the following mitigation measure has been added to the project:
A. GP 9.4-I, TMC§5-28ART; Compliance with the standards of the City of Turlock’s Noise Ordinance.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a building permit Verified By: Turlock Planning and Building Divisions
X. Public Services
In order to ensure the project does not have an impact on public services the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. GP 10.4-d; The applicant, developer or successor in interest shall pay all applicable Citywide Capital Facility for public facility service improvements.
B. 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.
C. The property shall annex into CFD #2.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a building permit Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions
XI. Transportation/Traffic
In order to ensure the project does not have an impact on transportation and traffic the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. 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
7 reduce congestion, as well as roadway, intersection and interchange improvements.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, grading permit or encroachment permit
Verified By: Turlock Engineering and Building Divisions XII. Utilities and Service Systems
In order to ensure the project does not have an impact on the utilities and service systems the following mitigation measures have been added to the project:
A. 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.
Responsible Agency or Organization: Applicants, or successor in interest Implementation Schedule: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, grading permit or encroachment permit
Verified By: Turlock Engineering, Municipal Services and Building Divisions
I have read and agree to comply with the Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program listed above.
________________________________________________
Applicant Signature Date
_______________________________________________
Property Owner Date
- 1 -
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 2025-01 }
(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 285)] AT 3130 E. }
TUOLUMNE ROAD, STANISLAUS COUNTY APN}
073-016-007 }
________________________________________ }
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 environmental and hereby adopts the Mitigate 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 11.42 acres located at 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007 from Residential Estate (RE) as established in the East Tuolumne Master Plan to Planned Development 285 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:
Lot 71 of Elmwood Colony as per Map filed April 11, 1905 in Vol.2 of Maps and Plats, page 13, Stanislaus County Records. Excepting therefrom the West 952.56 feet.
APN 073-016-007
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 otherwise invalid for any reason, such decision
- 2 -
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 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
Signed and approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
______________________
AMY BUBLAK, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nicole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
- 3 -
Exhibit A
RE
PD 285
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF ESTABLISHING } RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR }
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 285 AT 3130 E. }
TUOLUMNE ROAD, STANISLAUS COUNTY }
APN 073-016-007 (ATHERTON ESTATES) }
}
WHEREAS, Torre Reich Construction Inc is requesting to rezone one approximately 11.42-acre property located at, 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007, from Residential Estate (RE), to Planned Development 285 (PD 285); and
WHEREAS, the Planned Development would allow for deviations from the minimum lot dimensions, roadway standards and setback standards for the Residential Estate zoning district; and
WHEREAS, development will consist of subdividing the parcels into 22 singlefamily lots, one remainder and a drainage basin, generally consistent with the RE standards contained in the East Tuolumne Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the property affected by this Resolution is 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007; 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 May 1, 2025, and recommended that the proposed amendment to the official City of Turlock Zoning Map and establishment of Planned Community Development District No. 285 [PD-285 (Rezone 2025-01)] be authorized by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025, the City Council considered the request, the Planning Commission recommendation, and the Environmental Review documentation and testimony and found that Rezone No. 2025-01, and Planned Community Development District No. 285 (PD-285) 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 June 10, 2025, 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 2025-01 (Atherton Estates); and
WHEREAS, a second reading of the ordinance occurred on June 24, 2025 at a
Resolution No. 2025-
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 2025-01 (PD 285) (Atherton Estates).
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. 285 (PD-285), 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
Resolution No. 2025-
shall be complied with prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, or its equivalent, unless otherwise stipulated:
CONDITIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 285 (PD-285)
1. This approval authorizes the rezoning of approximately 11.42-acres located at 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007 from Residential Estate as established in the East Tuolumne Master Plan to Planned Development 285 to allow for the development of a 22-lot single family residential subdivision.
2. Minor amendments to the site layout, building design, and other conditions contained within this approval may be authorized by the Development Services Director on a case-by-case basis, provided that such amendments are consistent with the overall intent and purpose of the conditions contained herein.
3. All development on the property shall be subject to the conditions set forth in Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 2025-01, and all conditions therein.
4. Planned Development 285 authorizes the development of 22 residential lots generally in conformance with the standards of the RE zoning district as contained in the East Tuolumne Master plan and the Turlock Municipal Code § 9-3-200ART, unless otherwise stated herein.
5. 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:
6. Reduction in the 15’ wide landscaped area and PUE adjacent to the wall along Waring Road to 10’.
7. Eliminate the 6’ wide landscaped strip along Waring Road.
8. Eliminate the 8’ wide landscaped center median for the entry roadway into the subdivision on proposed Leslie Lane.
Exceptions to the ETMP Development Standards for lots 1-3 (Fronting Tuolumne) ETMP Required
Standard
Lots 1-3 Fronting
Tuolumne
Minimum Lot Width 90’ 75’
Setbacks:
Interior Side
Porch 10’ 5’
Living Space 10’ 5’
Garage 10’ 5’
Exception to the ETMP Development Standards for all lots:
Setbacks: ETMP Required
Standard
Proposed Standards
for all lots
Front:
Resolution No. 2025-
Living Space (2nd
Story)
30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Corner Yard:
Porch 20’ 15’
Living Space (1st
Story)
25’ 20’
Living Space (2nd
Story)
30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Rear:
Living Space 30’ 10’
Development Standards for lots 14 through 21 (Along Waring Road) ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 40’ minimum *
*30% of a lot’s width to have a reduced rear setback of 30 feet for either an attached or detached accessory structure or patio. Structures within this area to be single story only.
Lot 22
ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 30’ minimum
9. House fences shall maintain the same setbacks established for the homes as indicated in the above table.
10.All mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project are hereby made conditions of approval for Rezone 2025-01 and Planned Development 285.
Section 3. 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 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
Resolution No. 2025-
ATTEST:
___________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
WITNESS:
Christina Cabada, City Clerk Trainee
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE
OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH Plot April 17, 2025 at 9:12 AM X:\CIVIL 3D\Civil 3D Projects\NC23280-Atherton Estates Subdivision\EXHIBITS\N. WARING ROAD STREET SECTIONS\SCENARIO #3\NC23280-NORTH WARING ROAD - SCENARIO #3.dwg OHG
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF ESTABLISHING } RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR }
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 285 AT 3130 E. }
TUOLUMNE ROAD, STANISLAUS COUNTY }
APN 073-016-007 (ATHERTON ESTATES) }
}
WHEREAS, Torre Reich Construction Inc is requesting to rezone one approximately 11.42-acre property located at, 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007, from Residential Estate (RE), to Planned Development 285 (PD 285); and
WHEREAS, the Planned Development would allow for deviations from the minimum lot dimensions, roadway standards and setback standards for the Residential Estate zoning district; and
WHEREAS, development will consist of subdividing the parcels into 22 singlefamily lots, one remainder and a drainage basin, generally consistent with the RE standards contained in the East Tuolumne Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the property affected by this Resolution is 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007; 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 May 1, 2025, and recommended that the proposed amendment to the official City of Turlock Zoning Map and establishment of Planned Community Development District No. 285 [PD-285 (Rezone 2025-01)] be authorized by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025, the City Council considered the request, the Planning Commission recommendation, and the Environmental Review documentation and testimony and found that Rezone No. 2025-01, and Planned Community Development District No. 285 (PD-285) 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 June 10, 2025, 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 2025-01 (Atherton Estates); and
WHEREAS, a second reading of the ordinance occurred on June 24, 2025 at a
Resolution No. 2025-
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 2025-01 (PD 285) (Atherton Estates).
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. 285 (PD-285), 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
Resolution No. 2025-
shall be complied with prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, or its equivalent, unless otherwise stipulated:
CONDITIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 285 (PD-285)
1. This approval authorizes the rezoning of approximately 11.42-acres located at 3130 East Tuolumne Road, Stanislaus County APN 073-016-007 from Residential Estate as established in the East Tuolumne Master Plan to Planned Development 285 to allow for the development of a 22-lot single family residential subdivision.
2. Minor amendments to the site layout, building design, and other conditions contained within this approval may be authorized by the Development Services Director on a case-by-case basis, provided that such amendments are consistent with the overall intent and purpose of the conditions contained herein.
3. All development on the property shall be subject to the conditions set forth in Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map 2025-01, and all conditions therein.
4. Planned Development 285 authorizes the development of 22 residential lots generally in conformance with the standards of the RE zoning district as contained in the East Tuolumne Master plan and the Turlock Municipal Code § 9-3-200ART, unless otherwise stated herein.
5. 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:
6. Reduction in the 15’ wide landscaped area and PUE adjacent to the wall along Waring Road to 10’.
7. Revise the Waring Road detail to a 30’ half width Right-of-way with 5’ sidewalk, 6’ park strip, 5’ bike lane, 2’ striping buffer, 12’ travel lane with no parking allowed.
Developer to install no parking signs.
8. Eliminate the 8’ wide landscaped center median for the entry roadway into the subdivision on proposed Leslie Lane.
Exceptions to the ETMP Development Standards for lots 1-3 (Fronting Tuolumne) ETMP Required
Standard
Lots 1-3 Fronting
Tuolumne
Minimum Lot Width 90’ 75’
Setbacks:
Interior Side
Porch 10’ 5’
Living Space 10’ 5’
Garage 10’ 5’
Exception to the ETMP Development Standards for all lots:
Setbacks: ETMP Required Proposed Standards
Resolution No. 2025-
Standard for all lots
Front:
Living Space (2nd
Story)
30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Corner Yard:
Porch 20’ 15’
Living Space (1st
Story)
25’ 20’
Living Space (2nd
Story)
30’ 25’
Garage 35’ 25’
Rear:
Living Space 30’ 10’
Development Standards for lots 14 through 21 (Along Waring Road) ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 40’ minimum *
*30% of a lot’s width to have a reduced rear setback of 30 feet for either an attached or detached accessory structure or patio. Structures within this area to be single story only.
Lot 22
ETMP Required Standard Proposed Planned
Development
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Living Space 45’ minimum 30’ minimum
9. House fences shall maintain the same setbacks established for the homes as indicated in the above table.
10.All mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project are hereby made conditions of approval for Rezone 2025-01 and Planned Development 285.
Section 3. 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 10th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Resolution No. 2025-
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
___________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
WITNESS:
Christina Cabada, City Clerk Trainee
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP TOP
TOP TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE
TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE TOE
TOE TOE
OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH OH Plot May 20, 2025 at 9:36 AM X:\CIVIL 3D\Civil 3D Projects\NC23280-Atherton Estates Subdivision\EXHIBITS\N. WARING ROAD STREET SECTIONS\SCENARIO #5\NC23280-NORTH WARING ROAD - SCENARIO #5.dwg OHG
City Council Staff Report
June 10, 2025
From: Sue Borrego, Interim City Manager
Prepared by: Jennifer Figueroa, Housing Program Manager Agendized by: Susan E. Borrego, Interim City Manager
1. ACTION RECOMMENDED:
Resolution: Approving the agreements between the City of Turlock and each of the public service agencies funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for fiscal year 2025-2026 in a total amount not to exceed $70,000 from Fund 255 “CDBGHousing”, and authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all related and necessary documents.
2. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE:
For fiscal year 2025-2026, the City of Turlock will receive funding for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program through an entitlement grant from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City utilizes this funding to address affordable housing, homelessness, and non-housing priority needs through the implementation of City services and programs, as well as forming partnerships with other governmental agencies and non-profit organizations.
Under the CDBG program, the City can allocate up to 15% of its annual allocation plus an additional 15% of its program income generated from previous years, to programs that provide services to low and moderate-income households. For fiscal year 2025-2026, it is anticipated that the City will receive a CDBG allocation of approximately $621,000 plus an estimated $100,000 in program income for an estimated grand total of $721,000. This would allow for a maximum of $108,150 to be used for public service activities. The recommended funding set aside for fiscal year 2025-2026 is $70,000.
Applications for the City of Turlock’s public service grants are accepted once a year. Grants are provided to fund eligible activities that meet HUD’s guidelines and the goals of the City’s five-year Consolidated Plan. CDBG Public Service Grants are targeted at new services, expansion of existing services, implementation of new innovative approaches, and serving new clients.
A Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was made available to non-profit agencies providing services to low- and moderate-income Turlock households, announcing that the application would become available starting November 6, 2024, with a submission deadline of December 16, 2024. A technical assistance workshop was held on December 3, 2024, by staff to assist those interested in applying. The Turlock City Council appointed the CDBG Selection Committee members on December 10, 2024, and seven (7) applicants presented their applications to the Committee on February 27, 2025. The applications offered a variety of services to assist families and individuals with emergency shelter, food assistance, youth street outreach, recreational scholarships for youth, and tenant/landlord services. The Selection Committee scored and established a proposed funding list (Attachment B).
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
Staff is requesting authorization to execute the seven (7) agreements with each of the recommended public service agencies for the recommended dollar amounts. Total recommended budget amount for fiscal Year 2025-2026 is $70,000.
3. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
As an entitlement jurisdiction, the City of Turlock receives CDBG funds annually to carry out activities benefiting low- and moderate-income persons. These agencies will assist the City of Turlock in meeting its Consolidated Plan goals.
4. FISCAL IMPACT / BUDGET AMENDMENT:
Proposed fiscal year 2025-2026 activities will be funded with the fiscal year 2025-2026 CDBG entitlement funds and previous years' program income. The funds will be allocated from various accounts within fund 255-41-485 for CDBG. The recommended amounts are as follows:
• United Samaritans Foundation for Emergency Food Box Program not to exceed $10,000;
• United Samaritans Foundation Senior Congregate Lunch not to exceed $10,000; • City of Turlock Public Works Recreation Division for Recreation for All Scholarship not to exceed $10,000;
• We Care Program-Turlock for Emergency Shelter not to exceed $10,000; • Center for Human Services for Youth Street Outreach/Navigation not to exceed $10,000;
• Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments (HAVEN) for Housing Assistance not to exceed $10,000;
• Project Sentinel for Fair Housing services not to exceed $10,000.
Funding will be allocated during the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 budget process. No general funds will be needed in Fiscal Year 2025-2026.
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend approval.
6. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Recommend approval.
7. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
This action approves agreements between the City of Turlock and service providers for funding public service grants. This action is not considered a project under CEQA.
8. ALTERNATIVES:
1. Council may choose to not approve the proposed funding recommendations.
However, this option is not recommended as the grants are proposed to be awarded
Agenda Staff Report
6/10/2025
to the agencies as selected by the appointed CDBG Selection Committee and are needed to assist the City of Turlock in meeting their Consolidated Plan goals.
9. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution for FY 2025-26 Public Service Grants
2. Attachment B Proposed Funding Table FY 2025-26 Public Service Grants
3. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - USF Food Box
4. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - USF Senior Lunches
5. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - City of Turlock
6. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - We Care
7. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - Center for Human Services
8. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - HAVEN
9. FY 2025-2026 Public Service Agreement - Project Sentinel
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TURLOCK
IN THE MATTER OF APPROVING THE }
AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY OF } RESOLUTION NO. 2025-
TURLOCK AND EACH OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE }
AGENCIES FUNDED THROUGH THE }
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT }
(CDBG) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 IN A }
TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $70,000 }
FROM FUND 255 “CDBG-HOUSING”, AND }
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR }
DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL RELATED AND }
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. }
}
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock receives federal grant funds from the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for affordable housing and related activities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock is an entitlement City under CDBG and will be the recipient of CDBG funds; and
WHEREAS, the City of Turlock can award a maximum of up to 15% of its annual allocation and prior years program income to public services; and WHEREAS, the City of Turlock addresses homelessness and non-housing priority needs through implementation of programs and partnerships with other governmental agencies and non-profit organizations; and WHEREAS, the recommended programs must meet an objective in the 2025- 2029 Consolidated Plan which are required to address community needs as identified in the Plan; and
WHEREAS, a total of seven (7) programs were selected by the City Council appointed CDBG Selection Committee to be funded in the 2025-2026 fiscal year; and WHEREAS, funding is recommended as follows:
• not to exceed $10,000 to United Samaritans Foundation for Emergency Food Box Program from Account 255-41-485-47215_009 “Public Service United Samaritans/Food Assist”;
• not to exceed $10,000 to United Samaritans Foundation for Senior Congregate Lunch from Account 255-41-485-47215_015 “Public Service United Samaritans/Senior Meals”;
• not to exceed $10,000 to City of Turlock Public Works Recreation Division for
Resolution No. 2025-
Recreation for All Scholarship from Account 255-41-485-47215_003 “Public Service City of Turlock-Recreation”;
• not to exceed $10,000 to We Care Program-Turlock for Emergency Shelter from Account 255-41-485-47215_010 “Public Service We Care ProgramTurlock”; • not to exceed $10,000 to Center for Human Services for Youth Street Outreach/Navigation from Account 255-41-485-47215_016 “Public Service Center for Human Services”; and
• not to exceed $10,000 to Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environments (HAVEN) for Housing Assistance from Account 255-41-485-47215_012 “Public Service Haven Women’s Center”;
• not to exceed $10,000 to Project Sentinel for Fair Housing services from Account 255-41-485-47216 “Fair Housing”; and
WHEREAS, a total of $70,000 will be allocated to assist the selected organizations; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Turlock does hereby adopt a resolution approving the agreements between the City of Turlock and each of the public service agencies funded through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for fiscal year 2025-2026 in a total amount not to exceed $70,000 from fund 255 “CDBG-Housing”, and authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute all related and necessary documents PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Turlock this 13th day of May, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
__________________________
Nichole Fiez, City Clerk,
City of Turlock, County of Stanislaus,
State of California
ATTACHMENT B
City of Turlock
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Proposed Funding for FY 2025-2026
# Organization and Project Name Funds
Requested
*Proposed
Funding
1 United Samaritans Foundation
Emergency Food Box $10,000 $10,000
2 United Samaritans Foundation
Senior Congregate Lunch $10,000 $10,000
3 City of Turlock Public Works, Recreation Division
Recreation for All Scholarship $10,000 $10,000
4 We Care Program - Turlock
We Care Emergency Shelter $10,000 $10,000
5 Center for Human Services
Youth Street Outreach/Navigation $10,000 $10,000
6 Healthy Alternatives to Violent Envrionments (HAVEN)
Housing Assistance $10,000 $10,000
Fair Housing Services Funds
Requested
*Proposed
Funding
1 Project Sentinel
Fair Housing $10,000 $10,000
Total $70,000 $ 70,000
*This is the proposed funding estimate for fiscal year 2025-2026 based on the presentation scoring. The funding is subject to change and dependent on the finalization of the program budgeting process, HUD’s allocation to the city, and the City Council approval process.