Document Modesto_doc_d9c3b876d5

2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report SCH# [PHONE REDACTED] EA/PW 2008-18 Prepared Under the Direction of: City of Modesto Public Works Department 1010 Tenth Street, Suite 4600 Modesto, CA 95353 Contact: Jack Bond 209/577-5200 Prepared by: ICF Jones & Stokes 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Contact: Terry Rivasplata 916/737-3000 With assistance from: Horizon Water and Environment, LLC. 1330 Broadway, Suite 424 Oakland, CA 94612 Contact: Michael Stevenson 510/986-1852 December 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- ICF Jones & Stokes. 2009. 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. December. (ICF J&S 00049.08.) Sacramento, CA. Prepared for the City of Modesto Public Works Department, Modesto, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report i December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Contents Page Tables v Figures vii Acronyms and Abbreviations ix Executive Summary ES-1 Introduction ES-1 Program Overview ES-1 Program Area ES-1 Program Background ES-2 Program Objectives and Need ES-3 Program Description ES-4 Public Involvement ES-12 Scoping Comment Period ES-12 Public and Agency Review of PEIR ES-12 Preparation of Final PEIR and Public Hearing ES-13 Areas of Known Controversy ES-13 Key Issues and Significant Impacts ES-13 Aesthetics ES-14 Direct Conversion of Important Farmland ES-15 Consistency with Air Quality Plans ES-15 Air Emissions ES-16 Nighttime Noise ES-17 Population Growth ES-17 Alternatives Considered ES-21 Alternative 1—No Program Alternative ES-21 Alternative 2—Reduced Intensity Alternative ES-22 Alternative 3—Alternate Sources of Water Supply ES-22 Comparison of Alternatives and the Environmentally Superior Alternative ES-22 Summary of Impacts and Levels of Significance ES-23 Chapter 1 Introduction Summary of This Document Scope of This Document Organization of This Document Impact Terminology ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ii December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 2 Program Description Introduction Program Area Background Existing Storage Tanks Existing Groundwater Wells Existing Distribution Pipelines Program Objectives and Need Proposed CIP Improvements CIP Facilities CIPs by Location Construction 2-13 Operations 2-19 Uses of this PEIR 2-19 Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis Introduction to the Analysis Significance of Environmental Impacts 3.1 Aesthetics 3.1-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.1-1 Environmental Setting 3.1-1 Regulatory Framework 3.1-4 Impact Analysis 3.1-7 3.2 Agricultural Resources 3.2-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.2-1 Environmental Setting 3.2-1 Regulatory Framework 3.2-2 Impact Analysis 3.2-5 3.3 Air Quality 3.3-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.3-1 Environmental Setting 3.3-1 Regulatory Framework 3.3-6 Impact Analysis 3.3-14 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4-1 Environmental Setting 3.4-1 Special-Status Species 3.4-10 Regulatory Setting 3.4-16 Impact Analysis 3.4-21 3.5 Cultural Resources 3.5-1 Environmental Setting 3.5-1 Regulatory Framework 3.5-3 Impact Analysis 3.5-11 3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 3.6-1 Environmental Setting 3.6-1 Regulatory Framework 3.6-5 Impact Analysis 3.6-8 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3.7-1 Environmental Setting 3.7-1 Regulatory Framework 3.7-2 Impact Analysis 3.7-7 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report iii December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 3.8-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.8-1 Environmental Setting 3.8-1 Regulatory Framework 3.8-5 Impact Analysis 3.8-16 3.9 Land Use and Planning 3.9-1 Environmental Setting 3.9-1 Regulatory Framework 3.9-3 Impact Analysis 3.9-11 3.10 Noise 3.10-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.10-1 Environmental Setting 3.10-1 Regulatory Framework 3.10-3 Impact Analysis 3.10-7 3.11 Population and Housing 3.11-1 Environmental Setting 3.11-1 Regulatory Framework 3.11-2 Impact Analysis 3.11-7 3.12 Public Services 3.12-1 Environmental Setting 3.12-1 Regulatory Framework 3.12-4 Impact Analysis 3.12-8 3.13 Recreation 3.13-1 Environmental Setting 3.13-1 Regulatory Framework 3.13-3 Impact Analysis 3.13-9 3.14 Traffic/Transportation 3.14-1 Background Information 3.14-1 Relevant Program Characteristics 3.14-1 Environmental Setting 3.14-3 Regulatory Framework 3.14-7 Impact Analysis 3.14-15 3.15 Utilities 3.15-1 Environmental Setting 3.15-1 Regulatory Framework 3.15-7 Impact Analysis 3.15-11 Chapter 4 Other CEQA Considerations Introduction Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Growth-Inducing Impact Analysis Cumulative Impacts Analysis Methods Used in this Analysis Cumulative Setting Cumulative Impacts Chapter 5 Alternatives Introduction Program Objectives ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report iv December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Significant Unavoidable Impacts of the Proposed Alternatives Considered Alternative 1—No Program Alternative Alternative 2—Reduced Intensity Alternative Alternative 3—Alternative Sources of Water Supply Alternatives Considered, but Dismissed from Further Consideration 5-14 Environmentally Superior Alternative 5-15 Chapter 6 References Cited Printed References Personal Communications Chapter 7 List of Preparers Lead Agency City of Modesto Public Works Department Draft PEIR Authors ICF Jones & Stokes Horizon Water and Environment, LLC Appendix A Notice of Preparation Appendix B Comments on the NOP ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report v December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Tables Page ES-1 Proposed Existing System CIP Improvements for the Contiguous Service Area ES-8 ES-2 Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option A ES-9 ES-3 Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option B ES-10 ES-4 Proposed Outlying Service Area Capital Improvement Projects follows ES-10 ES-5 Estimated Population Growth Facilitated by the Proposed Program ES-19 ES-6 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures follows ES-23 2-1 Existing Water Supply Facilities follows 2-2 2-2 Proposed Existing System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area 2-3 Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option A 2-10 2-4 Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option B 2-11 2-5 Proposed Outlying Service Area Capital Improvement Projects follows 2-12 2-6 Summary of Local, State, and Federal Discretionary Actions 2-20 3.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Measured at the 14th Street Monitoring Station in Modesto 3.3-5 3.3-2 State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards 3.3-8 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report vi December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.4-1 Special-Status Plants with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area and Vicinity follows 3.4-10 3.4-2 Special-Status Wildlife and Fish Species Identified as Having the Potential to Occur in the Program Area follows 3.4-12 3.10-1 County of Stanislaus Noise Element 3.10-3 3.10-2 Federal Transit Administration Suggested Construction Noise Criteria 3.10-6 3.10-3 Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels 3.10-8 3.10-4 Heavy Construction Equipment 3.10-10 3.11-1 Population Growth in the Program Area, 1970–2009 3.11-2 3.11-2 Estimated Population Growth Facilitated by the Proposed Program 3.11-9 3.15-1 Existing Water Supplies (acre feet per year) 3.15-4 3.15-2 2006 Water Demands and Projections (average day demands) 3.15-6 4-1 Planning Documents Considered for Cumulative Impact Analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report vii December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Figures All figures appear at the end of Chapter 2. 1 Project Location 2 Contiguous and Outlying Service Areas 3 City of Modesto Existing Facilities 4 Del Rio Existing and Proposed Facilities 5 Grayson Existing and Proposed Facilities 6 Hickman Existing and Proposed Facilities 7 Turlock Existing and Proposed Facilities 8 Waterford Existing and Proposed Facilities 9 Proposed Existing System Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area 10 Proposed Buildout Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area—Option A 11 Proposed Buildout Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area—Option B 12 Typical City Water Storage Tanks and Groundwater Wells ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report viii December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Acronyms and Abbreviations ACE Altamont Commuter Express ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation af acre-feet ARB California Air Resources Board ASR Aquifer Storage and Recovery ATC Authority to Construct B.P. before present BACT best available air pollution control technology BART Bay Area Rapid Transit Basin Plan Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins BAT best available technology that is economically achievable BCT best conventional pollutant control technology bgs below ground surface BLAST Bus Line Service of Turlock BMPs best management practices BNSF Burlington Northern and Santa Fe CAA Clean Air Act CAAQS California ambient air quality standards Cal/OSHA California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency Caltrans California Department of Transportation CASQA California Stormwater Quality Association CBC California Building Code CCIC Central California Information Center CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGS California Geological Survey CHP California Highway Patrol CIP capital improvement program City City of Modesto CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board California Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society CO carbon monoxide Construction General General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ix December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Permit Activity County Stanislaus County CRHR California Register of Historical Resources CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency CWA Clean Water Act cy cubic yards DART Dial-A-Ride Turlock dB Decibel dBA A-weighted decibel DBCP dibromochloropropane Delta Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta DFG California Department of Fish and Game DOC California Department of Conservation DOT U.S. Department of Transportation DPS distinct population segment DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control DWR Department of Water Resources EDB Ethylene dibromide EIR environmental impact report Engineer’s Report or proposed program City of Modesto’s proposed 2009 Water System Engineer’s Report EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act ESA Endangered Species Act Farmland Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance FHWA Federal Highway Administration FIRMs flood insurance rate maps FR Federal Register FTA Federal Transit Administration General Dewatering Permit General Order for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters gpd gallons per day HCP habitat conservation plan hp horsepower I-5 Interstate 5 IS/MND initial study/mitigated negative declaration LAFCo local agency formation commission Ldn Day/night sound level LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee Leq Equivalent sound level LOS level of service MAX Modesto Area Express MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MEIR master environmental impact report ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report x December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 million gallons per day MID Modesto Irrigation District MLD most likely descendent MPD Modesto Police Department mph miles per hour Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant NAAQS national ambient air quality standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NCCP natural communities conservation plan NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOI notice of intent NOP Notice of Preparation NOT notice of termination NOx oxides of nitrogen NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NSR New Source Review OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research PCE tetrachloroethylene PEIR program environmental impact report pga peak ground acceleration PM10 particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter ppm parts per million PPMP pollution prevention and monitoring program PRC Public Resources Code PTO Permit to Operate Rare Plant Plan Rare Plant Relocation, Management, and Protection Plan RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 ROG reactive organic gases Regional Surface Water Supply Project Regional Wwater Qquality Ccontrol Bboard SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCERD Stanislaus County Environmental Resources Department Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District SERC State Emergency Response Commission SHPO state historic preservation officer SJV San Joaquin Valley SJVAB San Joaquin Valley Air Basin SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act SO2 sulfur dioxide SOI sphere of influence ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report xi December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 SPCP spill prevention and control program SPRR Southern Pacific Railroad SR State Route SRA shaded river aquatic SRRF Stanislaus Resource Recovery Facility StaRT Stanislaus Regional Transit State State of California SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology SWANCC Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 99-1178, January 9, 2001 SWMP Stormwater Management Program Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan State Water Resources Control Board SWSP Surface Water Supply Project TACs toxic air contaminants TCE, trichloroethylene the County Stanislaus County TID Turlock Irrigation District TM Technical Memo total maximum daily loads TMP traffic management plan TRRP Tuolumne River Regional Park UPRR Union Pacific Railroad USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey VELB valley elderberry longhorn beetle WDRs waste discharge requirements WPCP Water Pollution Control Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Executive Summary Introduction The City of Modesto (City) has prepared the 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report that, in general, compares the City’s existing water supplies with projected water demands to determine if an overall system supply shortage will exist in the future. This includes an analysis of the water system’s storage, pumping, and pipelines needs, along with the system’s ability to meet the operational and design criteria under various demand conditions. In order to provide a reliable supply of domestic water throughout the service area, the recommended improvements needed to address the system deficiencies are described. This program of recommended improvements is referred to throughout this document as the Engineer’s Report, proposed program, or simply program. The City has prepared this draft program environmental impact report (PEIR) to provide the public, responsible agencies, and trustee agencies with information about the potential environmental effects of implementation of the proposed program. This PEIR was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (as amended) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 15000 et seq.) The City is the lead agency on this program. Program Overview Program Area The proposed program is located in the City of Modesto and several nearby locations in Stanislaus County, California. The study area encompasses two distinct customer location categories; the contiguous service area, and outlying service areas. The City’s contiguous service area is primarily defined by the current Sphere of Influence (SOI), Salida, North Ceres, and some unincorporated Stanislaus County “islands” within and adjacent to the SOI (Empire is within the SOI). The outlying service areas include Del Rio, Ceres (Walnut Manor), Grayson, Waterford, Hickman, and portions of Turlock. Together, the contiguous service area and outlying service areas constitute this PEIR’s “study area.” ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The outlying service areas include the unincorporated community of Del Rio, located approximately two miles north of the City’s SOI boundary; the unincorporated community of Grayson, located approximately 14 miles west of the City’s SOI boundary; the City of Waterford, located approximately five miles east of the City’s SOI boundaries; the unincorporated community of Hickman, which is located immediately south of Waterford, approximately five miles east of the City’s SOI boundary; and a portion of the City of Turlock, located approximately four miles southeast of the City’s SOI boundary. Program Background The City has been providing potable water service to its urban area since 1895 through the purchase and acquisition of several private water companies and as a result, has become the primary domestic water purveyor in Stanislaus County. In the early 1990s, the City, Modesto Irrigation District (MID), and the Del Este Water Company formed a partnership to use a portion of MID’s surface water rights for municipal uses. Completed in 1995, the resulting Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant in addition to storage and delivery facilities, provides 30 million gallon per day (mgd), on an annual average daily basis, or 33,600 acre-feet per year (af/yr). The delivers treated surface water to the City’s service area to combine with groundwater sources to meet the City’s water supply needs for those municipal customers within the City limits north of the Tuolumne River (southern boundary of MID’s service area), including the communities of Salida and Empire. For a number of years, the City and MID have been working together on the Phase Two Expansion, which is currently under construction (expected to be completed in early 2010) and will provide an additional capacity of 30 mgd for an annual average total of 60 mgd. The initial phase of the significantly reduced the City’s reliance on groundwater pumping and eliminated the groundwater overdraft condition. Water treatment, pumping, storage, and conveyance infrastructure is operated and maintained by the City’s Public Works Department, Water Operations Division. Potable water resources delivered by the City’s system to residential and commercial customers originate from two sources: treated surface water purchased from the MID, and groundwater pumped from many wells scattered throughout the contiguous service area and the outlying areas. The is owned and operated by MID and is located approximately 10 miles east of the city limits at the Modesto Reservoir. Outlying areas do not receive treated water from the and rely solely on groundwater resources. The key components of the City’s water system are storage tanks, groundwater wells, and a distribution pipeline network, as follows:  Storage Tanks. The contiguous service area contains eight operational at- grade storage tanks, each equipped with its own booster pump station. There are no treated water storage tanks in the outlying services areas of Del Rio, Hickman, Turlock, or Waterford. In Grayson, the City system includes one at-grade steel storage tank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Groundwater Wells. The contiguous service area contains 79 active groundwater wells. In conjunction with surface water from the these wells supply water from the groundwater basin as needed to help meet operational, emergency, and/or fire-flow demand. Wells also provide water to the areas south of the Tuolumne River, which is outside of MID’s service area and hence not served by the The outlying service area includes three groundwater wells in Del Rio, two in Hickman, and four in Turlock. In Grayson, the system includes two groundwater wells that pump directly to the storage tank (City Tank In Waterford, the City system includes six groundwater wells (one of which is out of service due to water quality issues).  Distribution Pipelines. The contiguous service area contains approximately 940 miles of underground pipeline, with pipes ranging in size from 2 to 24 inches in diameter. The Del Rio service area includes approximately 41,000 linear feet of City-owned distribution pipeline, ranging from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Grayson service area includes approximately 16,000 linear feet of City-owned pipeline, including pipes running between the two wells and the storage tank. Pipes located in the Grayson service area range from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Hickman service area includes approximately 17,000 linear feet of distribution pipeline, ranging from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Turlock service area includes approximately 23,000 linear feet of City-owned distribution pipeline, ranging in size from 4 to 8 inches in diameter. The Waterford service area includes approximately 130,000 linear feet of City-owned distribution pipeline, ranging from less than 4 to 12 inches in diameter. Program Objectives and Need The City periodically reevaluates its water service system through development of an Engineer’s Report, the last Engineer’s Report was completed in 2004. The 2010 Engineer’s Report has identified existing storage, pumping, and pipeline capacity deficiencies throughout the water system, which limit the City’s ability to meet standards for Maximum Day plus fire flow demands and Peak Hour demands in certain areas. In addition to these current deficiencies, the Engineer’s Report also identifies improvements needed to meet future increases in demand associated with projected growth within the contiguous and outlying service areas, as projected by the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),the Stanislaus County General Plan (Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development 2008), the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document (City of Ceres 1997), the City of Turlock General Plan (City of Turlock 2002), and the Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan (City of Waterford 2007). The portions of the cities of Ceres and Turlock served by the City of Modesto system are considered built out; thus, only existing demands were evaluated in the Engineer’s Report. The City of Waterford’s general plan update, completed in 2007, includes additional growth and water demand, but the City will not service new buildout areas identified in the 2007 general plan update. Thus, the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Engineer’s Report evaluates the existing water demand based on the growth identified in the City of Waterford’s 2002 general plan update. The primary objectives of the Engineer’s Report are to:  Update current and projected build-out water demands,  Update the water system’s hydraulic model,  Identify and justify the various capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers,  Develop cost estimates and prioritize the proposed improvements, and  Determine the cost allocations of the needed improvements between existing ratepayers and future users. Program Description The Engineer’s Report identifies a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), for system-wide implementation needed to deliver safe and reliable water, which will effectively meet water demand requirements under both existing and future developed conditions. The Program, as analyzed through this environmental review process, is the collection of CIP projects and programs proposed in the Engineer’s Report. Specifically, the following three primary improvement types, based on improvement frequency, are identified in the Engineer’s Report as being needed to meet the program’s objectives under existing and buildout conditions within the study area:  Major Project Improvements: These projects will occur once and are associated with large joint ventures with other agencies or cities City-Side Improvements related to the Regional Surface Water Supply Project  Project Improvements: These projects will occur once or very infrequently construction of a Corporation Yard).  Program Improvements: These program related projects will occur more periodically and over time updating the Water Master Plan). Most Major Project, Project, and Program improvements proposed in the Engineer’s Report primarily relate to storage tanks, groundwater wells, and pipelines, but also include recommendations for future planning efforts, such as updates to the City’s groundwater, urban water, or water supply management plans. These planning efforts are either exempt from CEQA or will require a separate CEQA evaluation. As such, these plans are not evaluated in this PEIR. The Major Project, Project, and Program improvements will either occur within the City’s contiguous or in the outlying areas, as described below. For some areas, optional or alternative improvement projects have been identified. These are also discussed in subsequent sections below. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 One of the end results of the Engineer’s Report is that it will be used as a basis for conducting an updated Rate and Capacity Charge Study that will provide an equitable rate and capacity charge structure for all customers. In general, an up- to-date Engineer’s Report is the critical supporting document needed to conduct an updated Water Rate and Capacity Charge Study so as to determine the revenue requirements needed to meet the City’s financial obligations for the water system. Specifically, an updated Water Rate and Capacity Charge Study is essential to ensure that rates and capacity charges accurately reflect key policy assumptions and that near-term rate and capacity charge adjustments are made to provide the funding necessary for continued operational services, capital improvements, reserves to meet bonding requirements, debt service coverage, and system maintenance. CIP Facilities The following is a brief description of the water infrastructure components (storage tanks and booster pump stations, groundwater wells, and pipelines) proposed to be installed or upgraded as part of the Proposed Program to alleviate existing deficiencies and accommodate water service demands accorded to future development within the contiguous and outlying service areas. The exact locations of some of these new facilities have yet to be finalized; however in some cases tentative sites have been identified. Individual facilities identified below would be designed and constructed on an as-needed basis and as funding becomes available. As final design and locations of Program components are identified, project-level CEQA review will be completed. Environmental review presented in this EIR is at a programmatic generalized) level and assumes conservative estimates of the sizes and locations of the proposed facilities. Storage Tanks New storage tanks are proposed at various locations within the contiguous and outlying service areas in order to improve storage reliability and accommodate future increases in demand on the City’s supply. Proposed water storage tanks would have an associated pump station and pipelines. The tanks would either be above ground steel tanks or partially buried concrete tanks. All aboveground tanks would be up to 35 feet high and have a diameter of up to 250 feet. Partially buried tanks would have a maximum exposed height of between 10 and 15 feet and a diameter of up to 250 feet. All new tanks will be outfitted with booster pump stations of various sizes and capabilities to provide adequate service. The Program also proposes to add back- up pumps to several existing facilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Groundwater Wells New wells are proposed in various locations within both the contiguous and outlying service areas. In addition to the new wells that are proposed, the Program would entail improvements to several existing wells, including installation of generators for backup power. Pipelines The Program entails installation of new pipelines throughout the contiguous and outlying service areas. A portion of the new pipelines would be installed in presently undeveloped areas as residential and commercial growth occurs within the study area. In other areas, new or replacement pipelines will be required to serve infill growth and existing customers. New pipelines would be sized to allow the system to meet the City’s adopted standards for Maximum Day plus fire flow demand and Peak Hour demand. The sizing of the pipelines would need to be verified by project-specific engineering as a part of their final design, and possibly adjusted from that identified in the Engineer’s Report. Pipelines would generally be constructed within the public right-of-way, following the alignment of existing or future planned streets and easements, wherever feasible. In addition to the Program’s new pipeline installation, many existing pipelines of smaller diameters would be upsized for increased flow, effective system looping, and peak-time delivery. The pipelines will have several features along each route. These features include valves, combination vacuum relief/air release valves, and corrosion protection and monitoring stations. Other CIP Projects In addition to the CIPs discussed above, the Engineer’s Report identifies the need for a new corporation yard, system-wide security enhancements, removal of a water tank, water quality studies, and soil remediation in general and at one specific site. New Corporation Yard The City has identified plans to construct a new corporation yard. This project includes property acquisition (approximately 8 acres), construction of a new building (approximately 10,000 square feet), and site development (parking, landscaping, lighting, security measures, etc). The site would also be used to store soil, concrete, and asphalt removed during construction of water projects for later reuse as part of the City’s recycling program. The location of the new corporation yard has not been finalized at this time. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Security Enhancements This program is required to meet state and federal requirements and implement the recommendations presented in the 2003 Water System Vulnerability Assessment. The City completed this assessment as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act of 2001 in order to assess the security of the water distribution system. Security enhancements may include installation of a fence, door, tank hatch, and motion alarms at water tank and groundwater well sites. Water Tank Removal An existing elevated water storage tank (Water Tank has been out of service for a number of years and is no longer seismically stable. A study of the tank concluded that seismically retrofitting the tank would not be economically feasible. Thus, the program includes demolishing this tank to protect public safety. Water Quality Studies The program includes a variety of system wide water quality studies and activities, including future wellhead treatment methods, groundwater blending, modifying well operations, locating problematic groundwater strata, installing monitoring wells, aquifer recharge and recovery wells, and actions to protect against deterioration of the groundwater supply and quality. Soil Remediation One specific site has been identified within this program, the soil contamination problem during the construction of the Kansas-Needham Overcrossing. Hydrocarbon soil contamination was discovered immediately north of the bridge. A program for remediation of this site has not been finalized at this time. CIPs by Location CIPs within the Contiguous Service Area The Engineer’s Report identifies CIP improvements that are recommended to improve the City’s capability of meeting existing water demands. The Existing System CIP Improvements are shown in Table ES-1. This list of improvements to the existing system is recommended under both Options A and B (see discussion below). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table ES-1. Proposed Existing System CIP Improvements for the Contiguous Service Area Type Existing System CIP Storage 6 MG North Tank and 18mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG West Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG Industrial Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station Backup Generators Pipelines Approximately 23 miles of pipeline upsized from 8 or 10 inch in diameter to 12-inch diameter pipelines to improve transmission, peak hour, and fire flow conveyance Other Improvements Installation of 14 Control Valves at MID Turnouts Full buildout of the City’s SOI is expected in the year 2038. Proposed system improvement projects to meet water demands in 2038 are referred to as Buildout System CIPs. In general, water distribution in the City is divided by the Tuolumne River. The area north of the Tuolumne River is referred to as North Modesto, and is within the service area of MID. The area south of the Tuolumne River is referred to as South Modesto, and is within the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) service area. In addition to the groundwater supplies, the City is currently considering whether to participate in the proposed Regional Surface Water Supply Project using water supplied by TID, to provide surface water to customers in South Modesto. The supplemental water supply from the to South Modesto would require additional facilities. Because the City has not determined at this time whether to participate in the the City’s Contiguous Service Area CIPs are proposed in two options: Option A (with and Option B (groundwater only). For each Option, Buildout CIPs have been identified. Option A This option assumes that the City would receive supplemental water supply from the The proposed Buildout System CIPs for Option A are shown in Table ES-2. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table ES-2. Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option A Type Buildout System CIP Storage Two 5.0 MG TID Terminal Tanks and 11.5 mgd Booster Pump Station located near the intersection of Whitmore Avenue and Morgan Avenue 5.0 MG Storage Tank (location TBD) and 10 mgd Booster Pump Station Groundwater Wells Shelter Cove Well: 1,000 gpm Tivoli Well: 1,500 gpm FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Grogan Well: 1,500 gpm Plastipak Well: 1,000 gpm Well 1,500 gpm Pipelines TID Transmission Pipeline Proposed Development Infrastructure South Modesto Interim System Improvements Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure 37 pipeline segments, 8 to 24 inches in diameter, ranging between 60 to 22,000 linear feet in length 43 pipeline segments, 12 to 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 600 to 35,000 linear feet in length Option B Option B assumes that supplemental supplies from the would not be included in the City’s water system. Proposed Buildout System facilities in Option B are listed in Table ES-3. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table ES-3. Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option B Type Buildout System CIP Storage 5.0 MG Storage Tank and 10 mgd Booster Pump Station Two 3.5 MG Storage Tanks and 11.5 mgd Booster Pump Station Groundwater Wells Tivoli Well: 1,500 gpm FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Shelter Cover Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Grogan Well: 1,500 gpm Plastipak Well: 1,000 gpm Well 1,500 gpm Wellhead Treatment at 9 locations Pipelines Tuolumne River Crossing New Transmission line from South Modesto Tank South Modesto System Improvements Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure Localized Pipeline Improvements 32 pipeline segments, 8 to 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 80 and 22,000 linear feet in length 46 pipeline segments, 12 or 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 150 on 35,000 linear feet in length CIPs within Outlying Service Areas As previously discussed, in 1995 the City acquired the former Del Este Water System, which included water service to the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, a portion of the Cities of Turlock and Ceres, and the City of Waterford. The City now manages, operates and maintains these five outlying water service areas (Ceres is part of the contiguous service area). A hydraulic evaluation was prepared for each of these service areas and is described in the Engineer’s Report. The hydraulic assessment evaluated three system components and the ability to serve current and buildout demands: groundwater pumping capacity; storage capacity; and distribution system needs. In some cases, two primary capital improvement options are presented for a community, along with the normally required on-going rehabilitation improvements. The options for each community’s CIPs are shown in Table ES-4 and discussed further below. Del Rio The Del Rio water system currently requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, replacement well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. The future Del Rio service area will include additional acreage that will expand the service area to the north, east, and southwest. According to the Del Rio Community Plan, “future planned development land use” (primarily residential) is proposed for the northwest and eastern portions of the service area, while development in the southwestern area will be residential. Full buildout of the service area will require additional pipelines and pumping capacity, as recommended, to provide adequate water service to meet the anticipated demand. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-4. Proposed Outlying Service Area Capital Improvement Projects Page 1 of 2 Outlying Area Proposed Infrastructure Improvements Pipelines Storage Tanks Groundwater Wells Other Del Rio Existing Requirements 4,710 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.23 MG storage tank with associated 1mgd booster pump station and backup generator New 1,000 gpm well with backup generator 1,000gpm replacement well and backup generator Build-out Requirements 15,000 linear feet of new pipeline Additional 1 mgd pumping capacity (2 mgd total) for the booster pump station at the new storage tank Grayson Existing Requirements 4,600 linear feet of upsized pipeline New 400 gpm well with backup generator 2-backup generators for existing well and booster pump Build-out Requirements Recommendations for existing demands (above) would satisfy build-out needs Hickman* Alternative A 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines New 0.40MG storage tank with 1.2mgd booster pump station and backup generator New 600 gpm well with backup generator 1- backup generator at existing well Alternative B 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines 5,800 linear feet of new pipeline connecting to the Waterford service area New 600gpm well with backup generator 1- backup generator at existing well ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-4. Continued Page 2 of 2 Outlying Area Proposed Infrastructure Improvements Pipelines Storage Tanks Groundwater Wells Other Turlock* Alternative A 10,400 linear feet of upsized pipeline 1 – replacement well 4- backup generators for existing wells New emergency intertie with City of Turlock Upsize 2 existing emergency interties with City of Turlock Alternative B 10,400 linear feet of upsized pipeline 6,500 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.54MG storage tank with 1.74 mgd booster pump station and backup generator 1 – replacement well 4- backup generators for existing wells New emergency intertie with City of Turlock Waterford Existing Requirements 13,510 linear feet of upsized pipeline 2,980 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.66MG storage tank with 2.0 mgd booster pump station and backup generator 4-backup generators for existing wells Build-out Requirements New 700gpm well with backup generator * = these service areas are considered to be at full build-out and additional improvements to the recommended existing capital improvements are not necessary. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Grayson The Grayson water system currently requires a new production well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. Currently, the Grayson service area is nearly built out with approximately 30 acres remaining to be developed. The capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the buildout demand. Hickman Two potential alternatives are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Hickman water system. Under Alternative 1, Hickman would remain as an independent water service area. This option requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, backup generators, and pipelines to adequately meet existing demands. Under Alternative 2, the Hickman service area would inter-connect with the Waterford water system. Instead of the storage tank described for Alternative 1, this option would require an additional pipeline to connect the Hickman service area to the Waterford system. The remaining water system improvements would be similar. The Hickman service area is essentially built out, with limited infill areas remaining for development. Although the remaining area of planned development land use totals approximately 18 acres, the majority of this area is existing road or railroad property. As such, the capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the buildout demand. Turlock Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 are the two potential options are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Turlock water system. The differences between these options are total cost and level of inter-agency cooperation provided by the City of Turlock. Alternative 1 assumes that the City of Turlock would provide the City with one additional emergency intertie connection point (to be located in the City’s Southern service area). This option requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well replacement or rehabilitation, backup generators, and pipelines to adequately meet existing demands. Under Alternative 2, the City of Turlock would provide a total of three full sized (8-inch diameter) emergency interties, one in each of the City’s water service areas. The upgrade of two existing emergency connection points and the installation of a new intertie eliminate the need for the City to construct the at-grade storage tank, the associated booster pump station, and pipeline delivery system. The remaining water system improvements would be similar. The Turlock service area is assumed to be fully built out. As such, no additional recommendations to the capital improvements identified above are necessary. Waterford The Waterford water system currently requires a new storage tank and booster pump station, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. The Waterford service area is nearly built out, and full build out of the portion of the current general plan served by the City is expected within 5 years. In order to provide adequate water service to meet the anticipated build- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 out demand, a new ground water well, additional storage tank and booster pump station, as well as additional pipelines are recommended. Public Involvement Process Scoping Comment Period In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15082[a], 15103, 15375), MID and the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed program on September 24, 2008 (see Appendix The NOP, in which the City was identified as lead agency for the proposed program, was circulated to the public; to local, state, and federal agencies; and to other interested parties. The purpose of the NOP was to inform responsible agencies and the public that the proposed program could have significant effects on the environment and to solicit their comments. Concerns raised in response to the NOP were considered during preparation of this draft PEIR (see Appendix Public and Agency Review of PEIR This document will be circulated to local, state, and federal agencies, and to interested organizations and individuals who may wish to review and comment on the report. Its publication marks the beginning of a 45-day public review period. Written comments or questions concerning this draft PEIR should be directed to the name and address listed below. Submittal of written comments via e-mail (Microsoft Word format) would be greatly appreciated. Jack Bond, Senior Civil Engineer City of Modesto, Public Works Department P.O. Box 642 Modesto, California 95353 (209) 577-5424 (209) 526-7352 (fax) e-mail: [EMAIL REDACTED] All documents mentioned herein or related to this program can be reviewed any City business day between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at the Public Works Department, located at the following address: City of Modesto, Public Works Department 1010 Tenth Street, Suite 4600 Modesto, CA 95353 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Preparation of Final PEIR and Public Hearing Written and oral comments received in response to the draft PEIR will be addressed in a Response to Comments addendum document which, together with the draft PEIR, will constitute the final PEIR. After review of the program and the draft PEIR, City staff will recommend to the City Council whether to approve or deny the program. City Council will then review the program, the final PEIR, staff recommendations, and public testimony and will decide whether to certify the PEIR and whether to approve or deny the program. If City Council approves the proposed program in spite of significant impacts identified by the PEIR that cannot be mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons for their actions. A Statement of Overriding Considerations must be included in the record of the program approval and mentioned in the Notice of Determination (14 CCR 15093[c]). Areas of Known Controversy Through issuance of a Notice of Preparation (NOP), responsible agencies, interested organizations, and individuals were provided the opportunity to submit both written and oral comments concerning the scope of this Draft PEIR, the alternatives to be considered, and issues of concern and controversy. Comments received are on file with the City of Modesto, California and are included in this document. All comments provided were considered during the development of the Draft PEIR and consideration of alternatives. Some of the issues raised could be considered controversial by some stakeholders. The issues are discussed below. Individuals may not agree that these issues are controversial or may think that other issues that are not discussed below are controversial. The intent of this discussion is not a comprehensive presentation of issues and concerns; the intent is to highlight the issues of apparent greatest concern raised in comment to date.  Utilities. Concern was raised that installation of proposed water transmission and storage facilities would conflict with existing electrical services. Concern was also raised that adequate emergency water storage is provided to customers in the service area.  Biological Resources. Concern was raised that appropriate measures be included in the program to avoid, lessen, or mitigate for potential impacts of the proposed program on endangered and/or threatened species or other species of concern. Key Issues and Significant Impacts This section discusses key issues of concern relative to the proposed program and the conclusions of this document regarding those issues, as well as any ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 significant impacts that were identified. This is not a comprehensive discussion of impacts of the proposed program, for which the reader is directed to Table ES-6, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, at the end of this chapter. Environmental factors potentially affected by the proposed program include:  aesthetics,  agricultural resources,  air quality,  biological resources,  cultural resources,  hydrology and water quality,  noise,  population/housing,  public services,  recreation,  traffic/transportation, and  utilities. Chapters 3 and 4 of this EIR document address each of the environmental factors and impacts of the proposed program. Specific issues determined in this EIR to have significant and unavoidable impacts relate to aesthetics, agricultural resources, and growth inducement, as summarized below. See Sections 3.1, “Aesthetics”; 3.2, “Agricultural Resources”; 3.3, “Air Quality”; 3.10, “Noise”; and 3.11, “Population and Housing” for a detailed discussion of these impacts. Aesthetics The Engineer’s Report proposes to construct an 8-acre corporation yard that includes a 10,000 square foot building and fencing surrounding the yard. The majority of the site would be used to store construction materials, such as pipes and piles of soil and gravel. The location of this facility has not yet been determined, and the exact dimensions of the building are unknown at this time. If this facility was located in an area surrounded by industrial use, it is likely that the facility would blend in and not significantly alter the visual character or quality of the area. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would result if the proposed corporation yard were to be placed in an industrial area. However, if the facility were placed in a location that is out of character with the surrounding area, such as a dominantly agricultural or residential area, significant alteration to the visual character or quality of public views to the area may result. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Mitigation has been identified to reduce this impact, but not to a less-than- significant level. Additional feasible mitigation measures to reduce the significance level of this impact cannot be identified until the program is designed and sited, and additional feasible mitigation may not exist. As such, the impact of the proposed corporation yard on aesthetic resources is considered significant and unavoidable. Direct Conversion of Important Farmland Proposed storage tanks, groundwater wells, and the corporation yard would be constructed in undeveloped areas, generally along the outer boundaries and within the SOI for each community. Construction of these facilities may result in the conversion of mapped important farmland, unless allowable under a Tier Three conditional use permit pursuant to Stanislaus County ordinance section 21.20.030. Such uses are considered “compatible uses” for purposes of the Williamson Act and would therefore be consistent with the Act. The storage tanks would constitute the primary land conversion for water storage. Although these undeveloped lands are identified for future commercial, residential, and mixed uses, the parcels currently may be used for agricultural activities. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) policies established under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (Government Code Section 56300 et seq.) and County LAFCO policies, County policies, and City policies would contribute to the orderly conversion of agricultural land as available developable land is occupied. However, the County’s and City’s general plan EIRs concluded that there would be significant and unavoidable impacts on agricultural resources from urbanization. The direct impacts of program implementation would be limited to the construction of storage tanks, groundwater wells, and the corporation yard along the outer boundaries of the study area. These changes would constitute a potential direct conversion of agricultural lands. Although implementation of mitigation involving contributions to an agricultural land trust would reduce the impacts of prime farmland conversion, it would not reduce the impacts below the significance threshold. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Consistency with Air Quality Plans A project is deemed inconsistent with air quality plans if it would result in population or employment growth that exceeds growth estimates included in the applicable air quality plan. Therefore, proposed projects need to be evaluated to determine whether they would generate population and employment growth, and, if so, whether that growth would exceed the growth rates included in the relevant air quality plans. The City of Modesto has anticipated and planned for population growth in its general plan (City of Modesto 2008). Likewise, Stanislaus County has also planned for growth and has adopted a general plan for future development, as have the other Cities in the service area. The City of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Modesto and the County have participated in the Air Quality planning process and supplied information to the SJVAPCD for use in the development of the Air Quality Attainment Plans for Ozone and PM10. The population and growth estimates used in the air quality planning process form the basis for the air quality modeling and the adoption of rules and regulations in the attainment plan. The purpose of Engineer’s Report is to improve the water supply system so that the projected population growth can be accommodated. The proposed improvements do not directly add new housing or substantial sources of employment to the region. However, as described in section 3.11, “Population and Housing,” the proposed improvements could induce growth in the area and result in population growth beyond what was projected by the general plans. Air Quality impacts associated with growth inducement include indirect emissions from vehicles and consumer product use as well as increased stationary source emissions. The Air Quality impacts associated with the induced growth are moderated by the policies of the general plans of the County and the relevant cities. The City’s general plan has extensive policies and goals to minimize air pollution emissions from new growth. The general plans mitigate for impacts through advanced planning and implementation of growth management strategies and the requirement for proposed development projects to implement air quality measures to reduce emissions. The proposed improvements to the water supply system would remove an obstacle to further urban development and population growth within the program area. This development would occur in accordance with the general plans, and therefore would not result in unplanned or disorderly growth. However, the program would potentially induce growth beyond what is currently projected in the applicable Air Quality Plans for the SJVAB, and the potential increase in emissions and air quality effects are considered significant. While the policies contained in the general plans would reduce the emissions of air pollution from new development, they would not eliminate growth, nor would they necessarily reduce emissions to a level of insignificance. Individual development projects would be required to comply with CEQA, which may result in further mitigation for growth and its effects; however, such mitigation cannot be known at this time. Additional mitigation is outside of the scope of the program. Consequently, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Air Emissions The program site is located in the SJVAB, where air quality conditions are regulated by SJVAPCD. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, there remains any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a non-attainment area. The SJVAB is in non-attainment for ozone and PM10. The SJVAPCD has not established significance criteria for construction emissions. However, because construction would result in emissions of ozone precursors (ROG and NOx) and PM10, and could result in the cumulative net increase in these pollutants, impacts of construction emissions could be ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 significant. Since construction would not be long-term, construction of the program would not contribute to the cumulative SJVAB’s long-term air pollution problems. Operation of the equipment at proposed improvements is not anticipated to result in an increase in ozone precursor (NOx) emissions above the SJVAPCD thresholds of 10 tons per year, as the majority of the equipment is powered by electric engines. Operation of emergency generators would result in a net increase in emissions of ROG, NOx, and PM10. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, the program results in any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a nonattainment area. Implementation of the proposed air quality Mitigation Measure will reduce emissions of PM-10 associated with construction. Emissions of PM-10, ROG, and NOx associated with operations will be reduced by the use of electric engines and emission control devices for back-up generators and mitigation measures. However, the operation of equipment will result in a cumulative net increase in PM10 and ozone precursors and greenhouse gas emissions; these impacts are considered Significant and Unavoidable. Nighttime Noise Construction noise that exceeds 65 dBA, occurring outside the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. daily on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday and on state or federal holidays, is considered to be significant. Because noise from construction could occur outside the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. daily on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and state or federal holidays, program- related noise from nighttime construction is considered to be significant. A mitigation measure limiting nighttime construction has been identified, and would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. However, there may be situations where such mitigation is not feasible. In these cases, this impact would be considered Significant and Unavoidable. Population Growth Growth inducement can be induced directly by building new homes or businesses, or creating new jobs), or indirectly through removal of obstacles to growth such as extension of infrastructure). This analysis considers both direct and indirect growth-inducing effects, and their secondary environmental impacts. The proposed program would have a limited potential for directly inducing growth. While construction of the facilities under the program would require workers, it is unlikely that it would generate a substantial number of new jobs that would measurably affect population growth in the program area. Once constructed, the facilities are not anticipated to require any new workers to maintain. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 However, expansion and upgrades to the water system to provide new service to currently undeveloped parcels within the communities of North Ceres, Turlock, and Waterford1 To provide an idea of the magnitude of population growth that would be facilitated by the proposed program, an estimate was prepared and is summarized in Table ES-5. This estimate was derived by using a land-use-based methodology within the study area. The number of new dwelling units was calculated based on the number of undeveloped acres, the development of which would be facilitated by the proposed program, and the zoning designation the number of units per acre) as published in corresponding general plans housing elements. Under the program, a total of 27,846 new dwelling units would be built in the contiguous service area and 1,529 new dwelling units would be built in the outlying service areas by 2038. , and the planned urbanizing areas of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, and Modesto (including the contiguous service area) would remove an obstacle to population growth. 1 The Engineer’s Report considered undeveloped parcels within Waterford based on growth projections included in Waterford’s 2002 general plan update. Future growth identified in Waterford’s 2006 general plan update would not be serviced under the City of Modesto’s service area and thus water demand for Waterford was based on buildout of 2002 growth projections. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table ES-5. Estimated Population Growth Facilitated by the Proposed Program Program Area Residential Land Use Type Dwelling Units/Acre Undeveloped Acres as of 2008 New Dwelling Units at Buildout (2038) New Growth (3 persons/ unit) Contiguous Service Area Residential 7.5 226 1,695 5,085 Village residential 5.1 5,081 25,913 77,739 Redevelopment planning district 14 0 0 0 Mixed use 14 17 238 714 Salida Community Plan 14 0 0 0 North Ceres* - 0 0 0 Total Growth in the Contiguous Service Area 83,538 Outlying Areas Ceres (Walnut Manor)* 5 0 0 0 Del Rio 4 236 944 2,868 Grayson 5 10 50 225 Hickman 4 15 60 338 Total Growth in Unincorporated County areas 3,431 Turlock (3 sites)* 5 0 0 0 Waterford 5 95 475 1,454 Total Growth in Outlying Areas 4,884 Total Growth in Service Area 88,422 * The City of Modesto only serves a portion of the total population of the cities of Ceres and Turlock. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-20 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 To determine the population growth that would result from buildout of undeveloped acres in the service area, the average number of 3 persons per dwelling unit, which is the average dwelling density for Stanislaus County, was used (California Department of Finance 2008). The estimated population growth based on the undeveloped acres and average dwelling density in the service area is shown in the right column of Table ES-5. No growth is projected to occur within the following service areas: portions of Ceres and Turlock, Salida, and Empire. The proposed program would facilitate population growth within the contiguous service area by 83,538 people and within the outlying service area by 4,884 people. The total increase in population within the entire service area is estimated to increase by 88,422 people in 2038. The current (2009) estimated population within the service area is 274,937. Therefore, the total population within the service area as facilitated by the proposed program would be 363,359 in 2038. As stated in the Urban Water Management Plan, the projected population within the service area in 2030 is 387,486 (City of Modesto 2008). Therefore, growth facilitated by the proposed program would not exceed projected, adopted population values. The proposed program would increase the population within unincorporated Stanislaus County by 3,431 people. Compared to the projected population for Stanislaus County, which is 587,600 persons by 2010, and considering that the total population of the County is currently 526,383 (2009), the estimated increase in population within unincorporated areas would not exceed projected growth in the county (Stanislaus County 2003; California Department of Finance 2009). Similarly, the proposed program would not result in unplanned growth in the City of Waterford. The population within Waterford would increase by 1,454 persons, equating to a total population of 10,270 in 2038. The projected growth in Waterford according to historic growth trends is 15,900 by 2030 (City of Waterford 2006). Growth facilitated by the proposed program would not exceed projected and adopted growth projections. New growth facilitated by the proposed program would result in associated physical environmental impacts. These secondary impacts of population growth are many and varied, but generally include increased traffic congestion, noise generation, worsening air quality, and a loss of biological resources and habitats. Growth-inducing impacts are moderated by the policies of the general plans of the County and the relevant cities. These policies ensure that development within the planned growth areas occurs as demand arises and services are available, and that future roads and utility extensions are sized appropriately to serve planned development. The general plans mitigate for impacts through advanced planning and implementation of growth management strategies, provision of public services and utilities, and protection of open space and habitat areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-21 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The proposed improvements to the water supply system would remove an obstacle to further urban development and population growth within the program area. This development would occur in accordance with the general plans, and therefore would not result in unplanned or disorderly growth. Despite this fact, the program remains growth-inducing, and the impacts of growth inducement, and its secondary environmental effects, are considered significant. While the policies contained in the general plans would reduce the secondary environmental effects of growth, they would not eliminate growth, nor would they necessarily reduce secondary environmental effects to a level of insignificance. Individual development projects would be required to comply with CEQA, which could result in further mitigation for growth and its effects; however, such mitigation cannot be known at this time. Additional mitigation is outside of the scope of the program. As such, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Alternatives Considered The purpose of the alternatives analysis in an EIR is to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the program that could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the program. Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the alternatives reduce or eliminate significant adverse environmental effects of the proposed program; such alternatives may be more costly or otherwise impede to some degree the attainment of the program’s objectives. The range of alternatives considered must include those that offer substantial environmental advantages over the proposed program and may be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner considering economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. The analysis evaluates the comparative merits of the alternatives (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[a]). The following alternatives have been evaluated for their feasibility and their ability to achieve most of the program objectives while avoiding, reducing, or minimizing significant impacts identified for the proposed program. These alternatives (with the exception of the No Program Alternative) were determined to be feasible or potentially feasible and would generally meet the program objectives. Alternative 1—No Program Alternative Under this alternative, no new water supply infrastructure would be constructed. Existing system deficiencies would continue to exist, and new development would be constrained by lack of water supply infrastructure. Where alternative sources of potable water are available, new development could still occur. This alternative would not meet the basic objective of the program, namely, to construct the capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-22 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Alternative 2—Reduced Intensity Alternative Under this alternative, only a portion of the identified water supply infrastructure improvements would be constructed. Some existing system deficiencies would continue to exist, while others could be remediated. Some new development would be facilitated by provision of infrastructure, while other development could be constrained in areas where water supply infrastructure would not be constructed. The specific facilities that would or would not be built under this alternative have not been identified, as the purpose of considering this alternative is to programmatically evaluate the impacts of a reduced approach to infrastructure development. Site-specific conditions related to the individual facilities would ultimately determine the extent of impacts under this alternative. This alternative would meet the basic objective of the program, namely, to construct the capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers. However, this objective would be met to a lesser extent than under the proposed program. Alternative 3—Alternate Sources of Water Supply Under this alternative, a variety of alternative sources of water supply and/or demand management measures would be implemented. This alternative would not ultimately alter the amount of water to be used; however, different capital facilities would be required to utilize this water throughout the City’s service area. Alternative sources of water supply under this alternative could include the following:  Additional Water Conservation and Revised Water Shortage Contingency Plan  Additional Sources of Potable Water  Development of Recycled Water Options  More Refined and Seasonally Tied Operational Yield Estimate  Additional in-lieu groundwater recharge and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Comparison of Alternatives and the Environmentally Superior Alternative Based on the assessment of environmental impacts for the alternatives described above, the environmentally superior alternative is the No Program Alternative, which would avoid the significant adverse impacts of the proposed program and various alternatives, in particular impacts to aesthetics, air quality, agricultural resources, noise, and growth inducement and its secondary effects. It bears noting that despite these benefits, the No Program alternative would result in ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Executive Summary 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ES-23 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 continuation of existing deficiencies related to the water supply system, and would potentially be inconsistent with general plans by failing to provide the infrastructure needed to support the growth envisioned in those plans. If the No Program Alternative is selected as the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA Guidelines require that an environmentally superior alternative among the other analyzed alternatives be identified. Alternative 2, the Reduced Intensity Alternative, is considered the environmentally superior alternative because it would reduce many of the significant adverse impacts associated with the proposed program, in particular impacts to aesthetics, air quality, agricultural resources, noise, and growth inducement and its secondary effects. Like the No Program Alternative, it would potentially result in the continuation of some system deficiencies and would fail to fully be consistent with existing general plans. Alternative 3 was not considered the environmentally superior alternative because, while it would reduce some impacts through use of alternative water supplies, it would be anticipated to have impacts that are, on the whole, similar to those of the proposed program due to the need for construction of necessary infrastructure. Summary of Impacts and Levels of Significance The impacts of the proposed program, proposed mitigation, and significance conclusions are discussed in detail in Chapters 3 and 4. Table ES-6 summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and levels of significance identified in this document. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Aesthetics Impact AES-1: Adverse Effects on a Scenic Vista No Impact None Necessary _ Impact AES-2: Damage to Scenic Resources along a Scenic Highway Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact AES-3: Temporary Degradation of Visual Character or Quality during Construction Activities Significant Mitigation Measure AES-1: Locate Staging Areas Away from Public Areas Mitigation Measure AES-2: Screen Staging and Construction Areas Less than Significant Impact AES-4: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed Facilities Significant Mitigation Measure AES-3: Design Fencing, Storage Tanks, and Booster Pump Station and Groundwater Well Buildings to Be Consistent with the Surrounding Setting Less than Significant Impact AES-5: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed New Corporation Yard Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact AES-6: New Sources of Light or Glare Less than Significant None Necessary Agricultural Resources Impact AG-1: Direct Conversion of Important Farmland Significant and Unavoidable Mitigation Measure AG-1: Compensate for a Loss of Farmland Impact AG-2: Conflicts with Williamson Act Contracts Less than Significant None Necessary Impact AG-3: Indirect Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Uses Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Air Quality Impact AIR-1: Conflicts with or Obstruction of Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact AIR-2: Violations of Any Air Quality Standard or Substantial Contribution to Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation during Construction of Proposed Improvements Significant Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Implement SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM10 Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Implement Enhanced Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM10 Less than Significant ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 2 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact AIR-3: Violations of Any Air Quality Standard or Substantial Contribution to an Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation during Operation of Proposed Improvements Significant Mitigation Measure AIR-3: Implement Control Measures for Operation Emissions of PM10 and for Ozone Precursors ROG and NOx Less than Significant Impact AIR-4: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant for which the Program Region is in Nonattainment under an Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air Quality Standard Including Releasing Emissions that Exceed Quantitative Thresholds for Ozone Precursors Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact AIR-5: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact AIR-6: Creation of Objectionable Odors Affecting a Substantial Number of People Less than Significant None Necessary _ Biological Resources Impact BIO-1: Program-Related Impacts on Plants Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Perform Focused Surveys for Special-Status Plant Species Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Avoid and Minimize Impacts on Special-Status Plant Species Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Compensate for Unavoidable Impacts on Special-Status Plant Species Less than Significant Impact BIO-2: Impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle and Its Elderberry Host Species Plant Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Agency Coordination and Consultation for Impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Avoid Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Habitat Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Transplant Elderberry Plants Less than Significant ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 3 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact BIO-3: Construction-Related Loss of Occupied Burrowing Owl Habitat Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-8: Avoid and Protect Burrowing Owls Mitigation Measure BIO-9: Compensate for Loss of Burrowing Owl Habitat Less than Significant Impact BIO-4: Construction-Related Loss of Swainson’s Hawk Foraging Habitat Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-10: Compensate for Loss of Swainson’s Hawk Foraging Habitat Less than Significant Impact BIO-5: Construction-Related Impacts on Nesting Swainson’s Hawks Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-11: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk Nests Less than Significant Impact BIO-6: Construction Disturbance of Bald Eagle, Tricolored Blackbird, and Other Migratory Birds, Including Raptors Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-12: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds Mitigation Measure BIO-13: Avoid and Minimize Impacts on Nesting Raptors and Other Migratory Birds Less than Significant Impact BIO-7: Construction Impacts on Vernal Pool Branchiopods Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-14: Avoid Habitat for Vernal Pool Branchiopods Mitigation Measure BIO-15: Conduct Protocol-Level Surveys for Vernal Pool Branchiopods Mitigation Measure BIO-16: Compensate for Impacts on Vernal Pool Branchiopods Less than Significant Impact BIO-8: Construction Impacts on California Tiger Salamander Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-17: Avoid Habitat for California Tiger Salamander Mitigation Measure BIO-18: Conduct Protocol-Level Surveys for California Tiger Salamander Mitigation Measure BIO-19: Compensate for Impacts on California Tiger Salamander Less than Significant Impact BIO-9: Construction-Related Impacts on Western Pond Turtles Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-20: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for and Minimize Impacts on Western Pond Turtles Less than Significant Impact BIO-10: Construction-Related Impacts on Roosting Bats Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact BIO-11: Construction-Related Impacts on Bat Foraging Habitat Less than Significant None Necessary _ ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 4 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact BIO-12: Construction-Related Impacts on Riparian Brush Rabbit and Riparian Woodrat Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-21: Avoid Habitat for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit Mitigation Measure BIO-22: Conduct Surveys for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit Mitigation Measure BIO-23: Consult with the USFWS to Conduct Monitoring for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit and Environmental Training for Construction Crews Impact BIO-13: Construction-Related Impacts on Fish Significant Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Comply with NPDES Permit Requirements Mitigation Measure HYD-2: Implement a Spill Prevention and Control Program Impact BIO-14: Loss of Shaded River Aquatic Cover and Riparian Habitat Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-24: Avoid or Minimize Disturbance to Waters, Wetlands, or Riparian Areas Mitigation Measure BIO-25: Mitigate for Permanent Disturbance to Sensitive Habitats Mitigation Measure BIO-26: Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats Mitigation Measure BIO-27: Preserve Habitat Values Impact BIO-15: Impacts on Sensitive Natural Communities Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-28: Preserve Native Trees Mitigation Measure BIO-29: Protect Riparian Corridors Mitigation Measure BIO-30: Use Native Species for Landscaping ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 5 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact BIO-16: Effects on Waters of the United States and Waters of the State Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-24: Avoid or Minimize Disturbance to Waters, Wetlands, or Riparian Areas Mitigation Measure BIO-25: Mitigate for Permanent Disturbance to Sensitive Habitats Mitigation Measure BIO-26: Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats Mitigation Measure BIO-28: Preserve Native Trees Less than Significant Impact BIO-17: Effects on Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nurseries Significant Mitigation Measure BIO-26: Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Comply with NPDES Permit Requirements Mitigation Measure HYD-2: Implement a Spill Prevention and Control Program Less than Significant Impact BIO-18: Inconsistency with Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources Significant See Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-27 Less than Significant Impact BIO-19: Inconsistency with the Provisions of an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan No Impact None Necessary _ Cultural Resources Impact CR-1: Impacts on Known Historic or Archaeological Resources Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact CR-2: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Archaeological Resources Significant Mitigation Measure CR-1: Implement Plan to Address Discovery of Unanticipated Buried Cultural Resources Less than Significant Impact CR-3: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Human Remains Significant Mitigation Measure CR-2: Implement Plan to Address the Discovery of Human Remains Less than Significant Impact CR-4: Impacts on Paleontological Resources Significant Mitigation Measure CR-3: Minimize Potential Adverse Impacts on Paleontological Resources Less than Significant ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 6 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources Impact GEO-1: Damage Due to Surface Rupture, Ground-Shaking, Liquefaction, Expansive Soils, or Landsliding Significant Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Conduct Project-Specific Geotechnical Investigation Prior to Construction Less than Significant Impact GEO-2: Soil Erosion or Loss of Topsoil Due to Program Construction or Operation Significant Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Comply with NPDES Permit Requirements Less than Significant Impact GEO-3: Loss of Mineral Resources Less than Significant None Necessary _ Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact HAZ-1: Creation of a Hazard to the Public or the Environment through the Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HAZ-2: Creation of a Hazard to the Public or the Environment through Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HAZ-3: Release of Emissions or Hazardous Materials near a School Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HAZ-4: Release of Hazardous Materials from an Existing Contaminated Site Significant Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prepare a Risk Assessment Prior to Construction Activity Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Control Contamination Resulting from Previously Unidentified Hazardous Waste Materials Less than Significant Impact HAZ-5: Result in Safety Hazards near a Public or Public-Use Airport Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HAZ-6: Exposure of People or Structures to Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death involving Wildland Fires No Impact None Necessary _ Impact HAZ-7: Impair or Interfere with Emergency Plans Less than Significant None Necessary _ Hydrology and Water Quality Impact HYD-1: Water Quality Impacts from Program Construction Significant Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Prepare and Implement a Drilling-Contingency (or “Frac-out”) Plan during Microtunneling Less than Significant ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 7 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact HYD-2: Changes in Groundwater Quantity Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HYD-3: Water Quality Impacts from Changes to Drainage Patterns Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HYD-4: Flooding Impacts from Changes to Drainage Patterns Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact HYD-5: Flood Hazards Significant Mitigation Measure HYD-2: Conduct Floodplain Studies Prior to Program Design Less than Significant Impact HYD-6: Dam Failure, Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow Hazards Less than Significant None Necessary _ Land Use and Planning Impact LAND-1: Physical Division of a Community Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact LAND-2: Conflict with Land Use Plans, Policies, or Regulations Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact LAND-3: Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans No Impact None Necessary _ Noise Impact NOISE-1: Exposure of Residences to Noise from Grading and Construction Activities Significant Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: Employ Noise- Reducing Construction Practices Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Limit Nighttime Construction Noise Significant and Unavoidable Impact NOISE-2: Exposure of Residences to Noise from the Operation of Engines at Proposed Improvements Such as Wells and Pump Stations Significant Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Employ Noise- Reducing Methods During Operations Less than Significant Impact NOISE-4: Exposure of Persons to, or Generation of, Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels Less than Significant None Necessary _ Population and Housing Impact POP-1: Potential to Displace a Substantial Number of Existing Housing Units or People No Impact None Necessary _ Impact POP-2: Potential to Induce Substantial Population Growth Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 8 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Public Services Impact PUB-1: Potential Disruption of, or Increased Demand for, Fire or Police Service Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact PUB-2: Potential Disruption of, or Increased Demand for, School Services or Other Public Facilities Less than Significant None Necessary _ Recreation Impact REC-1: Alteration of Existing Parks or Recreational Facilities No Impact None Necessary _ Impact REC-2: Requirement of Construction or Expansion of Recreational Facilities No Impact None Necessary _ Traffic/Transportation Impact TRA-1: Substantial Increase in Traffic Over Existing Levels or Exceedance of an Adopted LOS Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact TRA-2: Inadequate Emergency Access Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact TRA-3: Inadequate Parking Capacity Less than Significant None Necessary _ Utilities Impact UTL-1: Requirement of New or Expanded Water, Stormwater, or Wastewater Facilities Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact UTL-2: Insufficient Water Supplies to Serve the Program Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact UTL-3: Insufficient Landfill Capacity to Serve the Program Less than Significant None Necessary _ Cumulative Impacts Impact CUM-1: Conversion of Agriculture to Nonagricultural Uses Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact CUM-2: Construction-Related Emissions of PM10 and Ozone Precursors Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact CUM-3: Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Significant Mitigation Measure CUM-1: Greenhouse Gas Calculations and Emissions Reduction Measures Significant and Unavoidable ---PAGE BREAK--- Table ES-6. Continued Page 9 of 9 Impacts Significance before Mitigation Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Impact CUM-4: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant for which the Program Region is in Nonattainment under an Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air Quality Standard (Including Releasing Emissions that Exceed Quantitative Thresholds for Ozone Precursors) Significant None Available Significant and Unavoidable Impact CUM-5: Effects on Biological Resources Significant See Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-30 Less than Significant Impact CUM-6: Effects on Cultural Resources Significant See Mitigation Measures CR-1 through CR-3 Less than Significant Impact CUM-7: Program-Related Noise Emissions Significant See Mitigation Measures NOISE 1 through NOISE 3. Less than Significant Impact CUM-8: Disruption to Automobile Traffic Patterns Less than Significant None Necessary _ Impact CUM-9: Effects on Utilities and Service Systems Beneficial None Necessary _ Impact CUM-10: Effects on Water Supply No Impact None Necessary _ Impact CUM-11: Effects on Water Quality Significant See Mitigation Measures HYD-1 and HYD-2. Less than Significant ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 1-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 1 Introduction Summary of This Document This program environmental impact report (PEIR) analyzes the potential effects of the City of Modesto’s (City’s) proposed 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report (Engineer’s Report, or proposed program), as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] 21000 et seq.), and in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 15000 et seq.). The City, as the lead agency under CEQA, will consider the potential environmental impacts of the proposed capital improvement program (CIP) of infrastructure improvements when it considers whether to approve the proposed program. This PEIR is an informational document to be used in the local planning and decision-making process. The PEIR does not recommend approval or denial of the proposed program. Scope of This Document This PEIR describes the proposed program, the environmental setting (including existing conditions and the regulatory setting as necessary), and potential environmental impacts of the proposed program on the following resource topics:  aesthetics,  agricultural resources,  air quality,  biological resources,  cultural resources,  geology, soils, and mineral resources,  hazards and hazardous materials,  hydrology and water quality,  land use and planning,  noise, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Introduction 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 1-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  population and housing,  public services,  recreation,  transportation and traffic, and  utilities. Organization of This Document The content and format of this PEIR, described below, are designed to meet the requirements of CEQA.  Chapter 1, “Introduction,” identifies the purpose, scope, terminology, and organization of the PEIR.  Chapter 2, “Program Description,” identifies the location, background, and planning objectives of the proposed program, describes the proposed program in detail, identifies the permits and approvals required for the proposed program, and identifies public involvement procedures.  Chapter 3, “Environmental Analysis,” includes 15 subsections (3.1–3.15). Each subsection addresses a specific environmental issue water resources, air quality, and population and housing). Each describes the existing environmental setting as it relates to that topic, discusses environmental impacts associated with program-related construction and operation that relate to that topic, and identifies mitigation measures for each significant (or potentially significant) impact.  Chapter 4, “Other CEQA Considerations,” discusses several issues for which CEQA requires analysis, including cumulative impacts, significant irreversible changes, and the potential for the proposed program to induce urban growth and development.  Chapter 5, “Alternatives,” presents potential alternatives to the proposed program. The alternatives are analyzed at a restricted level of detail relative to the proposed program and are presented in order to identify options that could mitigate environmental impacts.  Chapter 6, “References Cited,” identifies all printed references and personal communications cited in this PEIR.  Chapter 7, “List of Preparers,” lists the individuals involved in preparing this PEIR and their responsibilities.  The appendices include comments received during the 30-day notice of preparation (NOP) review period and technical background reports and data. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Introduction 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 1-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact Terminology The following terminology is used in this PEIR to evaluate the level of significance of impacts that would result from the proposed program.  A finding of no impact is made when the analysis concludes that the proposed program would not affect the particular environmental issue.  An impact is considered less than significant if the analysis concludes that there would be no substantial adverse change in the environment and that no mitigation is needed.  An impact is considered less than significant with mitigation if the analysis concludes that there would be no substantial adverse change in the environment with the inclusion of the mitigation measure(s) described.  An impact is considered significant or potentially significant if the analysis concludes that there could be a substantial adverse effect on the environment.  An impact is considered significant and unavoidable if it would result in a substantial adverse change in the environment that cannot be avoided or mitigated to a less-than-significant level if the program is implemented.  A cumulative impact can result when a change in the environment results from the incremental impact of a program or project when added to other related past, present, or reasonably-foreseeable future projects. Significant cumulative impacts may result from individually minor but collectively significant projects. The PEIR also identifies particular mitigation measures that are intended to lessen program impacts. The State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15370) define mitigation as: avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action, minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment, reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action, and compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 2 Program Description Introduction The City of Modesto (City) has prepared the 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report that, in general, compares the City’s existing water supplies with projected water demands to determine if an overall system supply shortage will exist in the future. This includes an analysis of the water system’s storage, pumping, and pipelines needs, along with the system’s ability to meet the operational and design criteria under various demand conditions. In order to provide a reliable supply of domestic water throughout the service area, the recommended improvements needed to address the system deficiencies are described. This program of recommended improvements is referred to throughout this document as the Engineer’s Report, proposed program, or simply program. Program Area The proposed program is located in the City of Modesto and several nearby locations in Stanislaus County, California (Figure The study area encompasses two distinct customer location categories; the contiguous service area, and outlying service areas. The City’s contiguous service area is primarily defined by the current Sphere of Influence (SOI), Salida, North Ceres, and some unincorporated Stanislaus County “islands” within and adjacent to the SOI (Empire is within the SOI). The outlying service areas include Del Rio, Ceres (Walnut Manor), Grayson, Waterford, Hickman, and portions of Turlock. (Figure Together, the contiguous service area and outlying service areas constitute this PEIR’s “study area”. The outlying service areas include the unincorporated community of Del Rio, located approximately two miles north of the City’s SOI boundary; the unincorporated community of Grayson, located approximately 14 miles west of the City’s SOI boundary; the City of Waterford, located approximately five miles east of the City’s SOI boundaries; the unincorporated community of Hickman, which is located immediately south of Waterford, approximately five miles east of the City’s SOI boundary; and a portion of the City of Turlock, located approximately four miles southeast of the City’s SOI boundary. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Background The City has been providing potable water service to its urban area since 1895 through the purchase and acquisition of several private water companies and as a result, has become the primary domestic water purveyor in Stanislaus County. In the early 1990s, the City, Modesto Irrigation District (MID), and the Del Este Water Company formed a partnership to use a portion of MID’s surface water rights for municipal uses. Completed in 1995, the resulting Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant in addition to storage and delivery facilities, provides 30 million gallon per day (mgd), on an annual average daily basis, or 33,600 acre-feet per year (af/yr). The delivers treated surface water to the City’s service area to combine with groundwater sources to meet the City’s water supply needs for those municipal customers within the City limits north of the Tuolumne River (southern boundary of MID’s service area), including the communities of Salida and Empire. For a number of years, the City and MID have been working together on the Phase Two Expansion, which is currently under construction (expected to be completed in early 2010) and will provide an additional capacity of 30 mgd for an annual average total of 60 mgd. The initial phase of the significantly reduced the City’s reliance on groundwater pumping and eliminated the groundwater overdraft condition. Water treatment, pumping, storage, and conveyance infrastructure is operated and maintained by the City’s Public Works Department, Water Operations Division. Potable water resources delivered by the City’s system to residential and commercial customers originate from two sources: treated surface water purchased from the MID, and groundwater pumped from many wells scattered throughout the contiguous service area and the outlying areas. The is owned and operated by MID and is located approximately 10 miles east of the city limits at the Modesto Reservoir. Outlying areas do not receive treated water from the and rely solely on groundwater resources. The key components of the City’s water system are storage tanks, groundwater wells, and a distribution pipeline network. These facilities are described below. Table 2-1 summarizes the existing water system facilities in the study area. The existing City facilities are shown in Figure 3. Existing Storage Tanks The contiguous service area contains eight at-grade storage tanks, each equipped with its own booster pump station. Each booster pump station has two or more pumps, including at least one main pump and a standby pump, to ensure production efficiency in the event of heavy demand or power outages. Additionally, each booster pump station is equipped with a generator for backup power. There are no water storage tanks in the outlying service areas of Del Rio, Hickman, Turlock, or Waterford. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2.1. Existing Water Supply Facilities Page 1 of 5 Service Area Facility Type Characteristics North Modesto SOI Storage Tank Storage Capacity (MG) Total Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Status Terminal Reservoir 4 5 10 10 1.3 1.3 0.75 55,600 3,760 3,750 6,255 Yes Yes Yes Yes Active Active Active Out of Service South Modesto SOI 3 6 7 8 1.3 2.0 0.75 1.5 2,400 7,450 7,350 7,710 Yes Yes Yes Yes Active Active Active Active North Modesto SOI Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Status 001 002 004 006 007 008 010 011 014 016 017 018 021 022 024 025 032 033 034 950 1,500 950 950 950 775 400 600 1,500 1,800 1,450 750 1,500 1,000 1,500 1,500 800 1,800 1,250 No _ No Yes No _ No _ _ No No No No No No Yes No Yes _ Active Out of Service Active Active Active Out of Service Active Out of Service Out of Service Active Active Active Out of Service Out of Service Out of Service Active Active Active Out of Service ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2.1. Continued Page 2 of 5 Service Area Facility Type Characteristics 036 037 039 040 041 042 043 044 045 1,050 1,250 1,950 1,400 1,200 1,800 1,900 1,250 1,500 No _ Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Active Out of Service Active Active Active Active Active Out of Service Active 046 047 048 050 051 052 053 054 056 057 058 059 062 064 065 066 204 211 212 213 225 1,150 1,600 1,330 800 2,200 1,600 1,500 2,400 650 1,350 1,300 1,400 2,200 2,250 2,600 1,590 1,450 1,450 1,000 240 1,200 No No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes Active Active Active Active Active Active Out of Service Tank Fill Active Active Active Active Active Active Tank Fill Tank Fill Active Active Active Active Active ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2.1. Continued Page 3 of 5 Service Area Facility Type Characteristics 226 229 232 236 237 241 247 250 259 260 262 264 265 267 269 277 675 425 775 750 630 350 560 835 400 250 350 700 500 1,190 750 1,000 No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No Out of Service Active Active Out of Service Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active 278 279 281 283 285 288 290 291 292 293 294 296 297 298 800 800 480 800 1,000 650 633 500 850 825 1,325 900 1,300 1,200 No Yes No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Active Active Active Out of Service Out of Service Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active Active ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2.1. Continued Page 4 of 5 Service Area Facility Type Characteristics 299 300 307 308 310 312 313 450 700 1,050 850 1,320 1,040 1,020 Yes No No No Yes No Yes Active Active Active Active Active Active Active South Modesto SOI 19 29 30 38 49 55 100 214 216 217 223 284 287 301 600 1,058 1,000 1,163 795 1,500 650 400 550 400 340 750 825 500 No No No No Yes No No No No No Yes No No Yes Out of Service Active Active Active Out of Service Out of Service Active Out of Service Active Active Active Active Active Active 304 305 525 560 Yes Yes Out of Service Active Pipelines Total Length: 780 miles Del Rio Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Treatment System Status 271 282 289 200 1,000 800 No Yes Yes None GAC None Active Active Active ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2.1. Continued Page 5 of 5 Service Area Facility Type Characteristics Grayson Storage Tank Storage Capacity (MG) Total Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Status 9 0.22 900 Yes Active Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Treatment System Status 274 295 321 835 No Yes None GAC/IX Active Active Pipelines Total Length: 1,600 linear feet Hickman Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Treatment System Status 272 309 360 450 Yes No None GAC Active Active Pipelines Total Length: 17,000 linear feet Turlock Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Treatment System Status 255 256 275 306 600 250 515 N/A No No No No None None None None Active Active Active Active Pipelines Total Length: 23,000 linear feet Waterford Groundwater Well Pump Capacity (gpm) Backup Power Treatment System Status 242 244 245 286 302 303 500 450 500 875 850 500 No No No No Yes Yes None GAC None None None GAC Active Active Active Active Active Active Pipelines Total Length: 130,000 linear feet Notes: GAC=granulated activated carbon; IX=Ion Exchange; SOI=sphere of influence; gpm=gallons per minute; N/A=not applicable ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 In Grayson, the City system includes one at-grade storage tank, which receives and stores groundwater from the area’s two wells and whose booster pump station is equipped with two pumps and a backup generator. The location of this storage tank is shown in Figure 5. This tank was constructed in the early 1990s and has been well maintained. Existing Groundwater Wells The contiguous service area contains 79 active groundwater wells, as shown in Figure 4, with a total well capacity of 125 mgd. The wells themselves have production capacities ranging from 350 to 2,400 gpm. The base source of water supply within the contiguous service area is treated water from the The groundwater wells supply water from the groundwater basin as needed to help meet operational, emergency, and/or fire-flow demand. They also provide water supply to the areas south of the Tuolumne River, which are outside of MID’s service area and hence not served by the Groundwater wells are each equipped with pumps that discharge water into the distribution system as needed. Approximately thirty of the 79 active wells in the contiguous service area are equipped with generators for backup power.. Groundwater well locations in the outlying service areas are shown in Figures 4 through 8. In most of the outlying areas, groundwater wells pump directly into the distribution system because there are no storage tanks. The City system includes three groundwater wells in Del Rio, two in Hickman, and four in Turlock. In Grayson, the City system includes two groundwater wells that pump directly to the storage tank (Tank One of these wells is equipped with a generator for backup power. In Waterford, the City system includes six groundwater wells (one of which is out of service due to water quality issues). Existing Distribution Pipelines The contiguous service area contains approximately 940 miles of underground pipeline, with pipes ranging in size from 2 to 24 inches in diameter. The existing pipeline grid in the contiguous service area is shown in Figure 3. Pipelines located in the outlying service areas are shown in Figures 4 through 8. The Del Rio service area includes approximately 41,000 linear feet of City- owned distribution pipeline, ranging from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Grayson service area includes approximately 16,000 linear feet of City-owned pipeline, including pipes running between the two wells and the storage tank. Pipes located in the Grayson service area range from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Hickman service area includes approximately 17,000 linear feet of distribution pipeline, ranging from 4 to 10 inches in diameter. The Turlock service area includes approximately 23,000 linear feet of City-owned distribution pipeline, ranging in size from 4 to 8 inches in diameter. The Waterford service area includes approximately 130,000 linear feet of City-owned distribution pipeline, ranging from less than 4 to 12 inches in diameter. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Program Objectives and Need The City periodically reevaluates its water service system through development of an Engineer’s Report, the last Engineer’s Report was completed in 2004. The 2010 Engineer’s Report has identified existing storage, pumping, and pipeline capacity deficiencies throughout the water system, which limit the City’s ability to meet standards for Maximum Day plus fire flow demands and Peak Hour demands in certain areas. In addition to these current deficiencies, the Engineer’s Report also identifies improvements needed to meet future increases in demand associated with projected growth within the contiguous and outlying service areas, as projected by the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),the Stanislaus County General Plan (Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development 2008), the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document (City of Ceres 1997), the City of Turlock General Plan (City of Turlock 2002), and the Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan (City of Waterford 2007). The portions of the cities of Ceres and Turlock served by the City of Modesto system are considered built out; thus, only existing demands were evaluated in the Engineer’s Report. The City of Waterford’s general plan update, completed in 2007, includes additional growth and water demand, but the City will not service new buildout areas identified in the 2007 general plan update. Thus, the Engineer’s Report evaluates the existing water demand based on the growth identified in the City of Waterford’s 2002 general plan update. The Engineer’s Report was developed to:  update current and projected build-out water demands,  update the water system’s hydraulic model,  identify and justify the various capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers,  develop cost estimates and prioritize the proposed improvements, and  determine the cost allocations of the needed improvements between existing ratepayers and future users. The Engineer’s Report identifies a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for system-wide implementation needed to deliver safe and reliable water, which will effectively meet water demand requirements under both existing and future developed conditions. The Program, as analyzed through this environmental review process, is the collection of CIP projects and programs proposed in the Engineer’s Report. Specifically, the following three primary improvement types, based on improvement frequency, are identified in the Engineer’s Report as being needed to meet the program’s objectives under existing and buildout conditions within the study area:  Major Project Improvements: These projects will occur once and are associated with large joint ventures with other agencies or cities ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City-Side Improvements related to the Regional Surface Water Supply Project  Project Improvements: These projects will occur once or very infrequently construction of a Corporation Yard).  Program Improvements: These program related projects will occur more periodically and over time updating the Water Master Plan). Most Major Project, Project, and Program improvements proposed in the Engineer’s Report primarily relate to storage tanks, groundwater wells, and pipelines, but also include recommendations for future planning efforts, such as updates to the City’s groundwater, urban water, or water supply management plans. These planning efforts are either exempt from CEQA or will require a separate CEQA evaluation. As such, these plans are not evaluated in this PEIR. The Major Project, Project, and Program improvements will either occur within the City’s contiguous or outlying areas, as described below. For some areas, optional or alternative improvement projects have been identified. These are also discussed in subsequent sections below. One of the end results of the Engineer’s Report is that it will be used as a basis for conducting an updated Rate and Capacity Charge Study that will provide an equitable rate and capacity charge structure for all customers. In general, an up- to-date Engineer’s Report is the critical supporting document needed to conduct an updated Water Rate and Capacity Charge Study so as to determine the revenue requirements needed to meet the City’s financial obligations for the water system. Specifically, an updated Water Rate and Capacity Charge Study is essential to ensure that rates and capacity charges accurately reflect key policy assumptions and that near-tem rate and capacity charge adjustments are made to provide the funding necessary for continued operational services, capital improvements, reserves to meet bonding requirements, debt service coverage, and system maintenance. Proposed CIP Improvements CIP Facilities The following is a brief description of the water infrastructure components (storage tanks and booster pump stations, groundwater wells, and pipelines) proposed to be installed or upgraded as part of the Proposed Program to alleviate existing deficiencies and accommodate water service demands accorded to future development within the contiguous and outlying service areas. The exact locations of some of these new facilities have yet to be finalized; however in some cases tentative sites have been identified. Individual facilities identified below would be designed and constructed on an as-needed basis and as funding becomes available. As final design and locations of Program components are identified, project-level CEQA review will be completed. Environmental review presented in this EIR is at a programmatic ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 level and assumes conservative estimates of the sizes and locations of the proposed facilities. Storage Tanks New storage tanks are proposed at various locations within the contiguous and outlying service areas in order to improve storage reliability and accommodate future increases in demand on the City’s supply. Proposed water storage tanks would have an associated pump station and pipelines. The tanks would either be above ground steel tanks or partially buried concrete tanks. All aboveground tanks would be up to 35 feet high and have a diameter of up to 250 feet. Partially buried tanks would have a maximum exposed height of between 10 and 15 feet and a diameter of up to 250 feet. All new tanks will be outfitted with booster pump stations of various sizes and capabilities to provide adequate service. The Program also proposes to add back- up pumps to several existing facilities, as described above. Groundwater Wells New wells are proposed in various locations within both the contiguous and outlying service areas. In addition to the new wells that are proposed, the Program would entail improvements to several existing wells, including installation of generators for backup power. Pipelines The Program entails installation of new pipelines throughout the contiguous and outlying service areas. A portion of the new pipelines would be installed in presently undeveloped areas as residential and commercial growth occurs within the study area. In other areas, new or replacement pipelines will be required to serve infill growth and existing customers. New pipelines would be sized to allow the system to meet the City’s adopted standards for Maximum Day plus fire flow demand and Peak Hour demand. The sizing of the pipelines would need to be verified by project-specific engineering as a part of their final design, and possibly adjusted from that identified in the Engineer’s Report. Pipelines would generally be constructed within the public right-of-way, following the alignment of existing or future planned streets and easements, wherever feasible. In addition to the Program’s new pipeline installation, many existing pipelines of smaller diameters would be upsized for increased flow, effective system looping, and peak-time delivery. The pipelines will have several features along each route. These features include: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 1. Valves: The valves will be spaced to allow the system to be isolated for purposes of inspection and repair. The valves are installed (directly buried) as part of the pipeline facilities. 2. Combination Vacuum Relief/Air Release Valve: High points of the system require valves that allow air to leave the pipeline when the pipe is being filled or air to enter the pipeline when the pipe is being drained. The combination valves are typically mounted on top of the pipeline and have a manhole around the valve to allow access for maintenance. 3. Corrosion Protection and Monitoring Stations: The pipeline and ancillary features will be protected with some form of buried corrosion protection system. The system may include buried sacrificial anodes, current monitoring stations, and impressed current system. Other Features: The pipeline may also include access points for inspection, sampling points, and pipeline identification and may include the installation of “thrust blocks” buried concrete blocks and bends in the pipeline). Other CIP Projects In addition to the CIPs discussed above, the Engineer’s Report identifies the need for a new corporation yard, system-wide security enhancements, removal of a water tank, water quality studies, and soil remediation in general and at one specific site. New Corporation Yard The City has identified plans to construct a new corporation yard. This project includes property acquisition (approximately 8 acres), construction of a new building (approximately 10,000 square feet), and site development (parking, landscaping, lighting, security measures, etc). The site would also be used to store soil, concrete, and asphalt removed during construction of water projects for later reuse as part of the City’s recycling program. The location of the new corporation yard has not been finalized at this time. Security Enhancements This program is required to meet state and federal requirements and implement the recommendations presented in the 2003 Water System Vulnerability Assessment. The City completed this assessment as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act of 2001 in order to assess the security of the water distribution system. Security enhancements may include installation of a fence, door, tank hatch, and motion alarms at water tank and groundwater well sites. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Water Tank Removal An existing elevated water storage tank (Water Tank has been out of service for a number of years and is no longer seismically stable. A study of the tank concluded that seismically retrofitting the tank would not be economically feasible. Thus, the program includes demolishing this tank to protect public safety. Water Quality Studies The program includes a variety of system wide water quality studies and activities, including future wellhead treatment methods, groundwater blending, modifying well operations, locating problematic groundwater strata, installing monitoring wells, aquifer recharge and recovery wells, and actions to protect against deterioration of the groundwater supply and quality. Soil Remediation One specific site has been identified within this program, the soil contamination problem during the construction of the Kansas-Needham Overcrossing. Hydrocarbon soil contamination was discovered immediately north of the bridge. A program for remediation of this site has not been finalized at this time. CIPs by Location CIPs within the Contiguous Service Area To evaluate the City’s ability to serve current and buildout demands, three system components were assessed in a hydraulic evaluation by West Yost Associates: groundwater pumping capacity; storage capacity; and distribution system needs. In addition, water supply requirements under existing and buildout situations were evaluated. The Engineer’s Report identifies CIP improvements that are recommended to improve the City’s capability of meeting existing water demands. The Existing System CIPs are shown in Table 2-2 and Figure 9. This list of CIP improvements is recommended under both Options A and B (see discussion below). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 2-2. Proposed Existing System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area Type Existing System CIP Storage 6 MG North Tank and 18mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG West Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG Industrial Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station Backup Generators Pipelines Approximately 23 miles of pipeline upsized from 8 or 10 inch in diameter to 12-inch diameter pipelines to improve transmission, peak hour, and fire flow conveyance. Other Improvements Installation of 14 Control Valves at MID Turnouts Full buildout of the City’s SOI is expected in the year 2038. Proposed system improvement projects to meet water demands in 2038 are referred to as Buildout System CIPs. In general, water distribution in the City is divided by the Tuolumne River. The area north of the Tuolumne River is referred to as North Modesto, and is within the service area of MID. The area south of the Tuolumne River is referred to as South Modesto, and is within the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) service area. In addition to the groundwater supplies, the City is currently considering whether to participate in the proposed Regional Surface Water Supply Project using water supplied by TID, to provide surface water to customers in South Modesto. The supplemental water supply from the to South Modesto would require additional facilities. Because the City has not determined at this time whether to participate in the the City’s Contiguous Service Area CIPs are proposed in two options: Option A (with and Option B (groundwater only). For each Option, Buildout CIPs have been identified. Option A This option assumes that the City would receive supplemental water supply from the The proposed Buildout System CIPs for Option A are shown in Table 2-3. The approximate locations of these facilities are shown in Figure 10. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 2-3. Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option A Type Buildout System CIP Storage Two 5.0 MG TID Terminal Tanks and 11.5 mgd Booster Pump Station located near the intersection of Whitmore Avenue and Morgan Avenue 5.0 MG Storage Tank (location TBD) and 10 mgd Booster Pump Station Groundwater Wells Shelter Cove Well: 1,000 gpm Tivoli Well: 1,500 gpm FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Grogan Well: 1,500 gpm Plastipak Well: 1,000 gpm Well 1,500 gpm Pipelines TID Transmission Pipeline Proposed Development Infrastructure South Modesto Interim System Improvements Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure 37 pipeline segments, 8 to 24 inches in diameter, ranging between 60 to 22,000 linear feet in length 43 pipeline segments, 12 to 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 600 to 35,000 linear feet in length Option B Option B assumes that supplemental supplies from the would not be included in the City’s water system. Proposed Buildout System facilities in Option B are listed in Table 2-4. The approximate locations of these facilities are shown in Figure 11. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 2-4. Proposed Buildout System CIPs for the Contiguous Service Area—Option B Type Buildout System CIP Storage 5.0 MG Storage Tank and 10 mgd Booster Pump Station Two 3.5 MG Storage Tanks and 11.5 mgd Booster Pump Station Groundwater Wells Tivoli Well: 1,500 gpm FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Shelter Cover Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Grogan Well: 1,500 gpm Plastipak Well: 1,000 gpm Well 1,500 gpm Wellhead Treatment at 9 locations Pipelines Tuolumne River Crossing New Transmission line from South Modesto Tank South Modesto System Improvements Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure Localized Pipeline Improvements 32 pipeline segments, 8 to 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 80 and 22,000 linear feet in length 46 pipeline segments, 12 or 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 150 on 35,000 linear feet in length CIPs within Outlying Service Areas As previously discussed, in 1995 the City acquired the former Del Este Water System, which included water service to the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, a portion of the Cities of Turlock and Ceres, and the City of Waterford. The City now manages, operates and maintains these five outlying water service areas (Ceres is part of the contiguous service area). A hydraulic evaluation was prepared for each of these service areas and is described in the Engineer’s Report. The hydraulic assessment evaluated three system components and the ability to serve current and buildout demands: groundwater pumping capacity; storage capacity; and distribution system needs. In some cases, two primary capital improvement options are presented for a community, along with the normally required on-going rehabilitation improvements. The options for each community’s CIPs are shown in Table 2-5 and discussed further below. Del Rio The Del Rio water system currently requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, replacement well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. These proposed facilities are shown in Figure 4. The future Del Rio service area will include additional acreage that will expand the service area to the north, east, and southwest. According to the Del Rio Community Plan, “future planned development land use” (primarily residential) is proposed for the northwest and eastern portions of the service area, while development in the southwestern area will be residential. Full buildout of the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 service area will require additional pipelines and pumping capacity, as recommended, to provide adequate water service to meet the anticipated demand. Grayson The Grayson water system currently requires a new production well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. These facilities are shown in Figure 5. Currently, the Grayson service area is nearly built out with approximately 30 acres remaining to be developed. The capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the buildout demand. Hickman Two potential alternatives are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Hickman water system. Facilities proposed under both alternatives are shown in Figure 6. Under Alternative 1, Hickman would remain as an independent water service area. This option requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, backup generators, and pipelines to adequately meet existing demands. Under Alternative 2, the Hickman service area would inter-connect with the Waterford water system. Instead of the storage tank described for Alternative 1, this option would require an additional pipeline to connect the Hickman service area to the Waterford system. The remaining water system improvements would be similar. The Hickman service area is essentially built out, with limited infill areas remaining for development. Although the remaining area of planned development land use totals approximately 18 acres, the majority of this area is existing road or railroad property. As such, the capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the buildout demand. Turlock Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 are the two potential options are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Turlock water system. The differences between these options are total cost and level of inter-agency cooperation provided by the City of Turlock. Facilities proposed under both alternatives are shown in Figure 7. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2-5. Proposed Outlying Service Area Capital Improvement Projects Page 1 of 2 Outlying Area Proposed Infrastructure Improvements Pipelines Storage Tanks Groundwater Wells Other Del Rio Existing Requirements 4,710 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.23 MG storage tank with associated 1mgd booster pump station and backup generator New 1,000 gpm well with backup generator 1,000gpm replacement well and backup generator Build-out Requirements 15,000 linear feet of new pipeline Additional 1 mgd pumping capacity (2 mgd total) for the booster pump station at the new storage tank Grayson Existing Requirements 4,600 linear feet of upsized pipeline New 400 gpm well with backup generator 2-backup generators for existing well and booster pump Build-out Requirements Recommendations for existing demands (above) would satisfy build-out needs Hickman* Alternative A 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines New 0.40MG storage tank with 1.2mgd booster pump station and backup generator New 600 gpm well with backup generator 1- backup generator at existing well Alternative B 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines 5,800 linear feet of new pipeline connecting to the Waterford service area New 600gpm well with backup generator 1- backup generator at existing well ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2-5. Continued Page 2 of 2 Outlying Area Proposed Infrastructure Improvements Pipelines Storage Tanks Groundwater Wells Other Turlock* Alternative A 10,400 linear feet of upsized pipeline 1 – replacement well 4- backup generators for existing wells New emergency intertie with City of Turlock Upsize 2 existing emergency interties with City of Turlock Alternative B 10,400 linear feet of upsized pipeline 6,500 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.54MG storage tank with 1.74 mgd booster pump station and backup generator 1 – replacement well 4- backup generators for existing wells New emergency intertie with City of Turlock Waterford Existing Requirements 13,510 linear feet of upsized pipeline 2,980 linear feet of new pipeline New 0.66MG storage tank with 2.0 mgd booster pump station and backup generator 4-backup generators for existing wells Build-out Requirements New 700gpm well with backup generator * = these service areas are considered to be at full build-out and additional improvements to the recommended existing capital improvements are not necessary. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Alternative 1 assumes that the City of Turlock would provide the City with one additional emergency intertie connection point (to be located in the City’s Southern service area). This option requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well replacement or rehabilitation, backup generators, and pipelines to adequately meet existing demands. Under Alternative 2, the City of Turlock would provide a total of three full sized (8-inch diameter) emergency interties, one in each of the City’s water service areas. The upgrade of two existing emergency connection points and the installation of a new intertie eliminate the need for the City to construct the at- grade storage tank, the associated booster pump station, and pipeline delivery system. The remaining water system improvements would be similar. The Turlock service area is assumed to be fully built out. As such, no additional recommendations to the capital improvements identified above are necessary. Waterford The Waterford water system currently requires a new storage tank and booster pump station, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. These facilities are shown in Figure 8. The Waterford service area is nearly built out, and full build out of the portion of the current general plan served by the City is expected within 5 years. In order to provide adequate water service to meet the anticipated build-out demand, a new ground water well, additional storage tank and booster pump station, as well as additional pipelines are recommended. Construction The magnitude of the capital improvement costs associated with implementation of the water system improvement plan is significant. Thus, implementation would need to be performed in phases, as funding sources become available. It is anticipated that buildout of the water system improvements would occur over the next 25 or more years. The precise order of program phasing would depend on the sequencing of specific parcel development and the general patterns of the City’s future growth. Other than the development applications currently being processed by the City, the majority of the capital improvement projects identified in the Engineer’s Report cannot be prioritized with any degree of certainty at this time. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Construction Methods Water Storage Tanks Water storage using at-grade steel tanks would involve construction of the following.  Concrete pads and foundations for the tank, booster pump station, and generator for back-up power will consist of concrete or asphalt paving. .  Masonry block building to house booster pumps, process piping, and electrical equipment.  Above- and below-ground process piping.  Electrical and control systems housed in secure enclosures.  Standby generator for a backup power supply during a power outage.  The entire pump station and tank site would be fenced, gated, and locked. The pump station building would be designed architecturally blend in with other existing buildings in the area.  Storm drainage facilities would be installed to allow all-weather maintenance and vehicle access to the site. Proposes storm drainage systems include an on-site retention basin to capture any overflow from the storage tank or booster pumps.  All lighting would be internally directed to reduce light or glare.  Standby diesel generators would be installed in inside the booster pump station or in an acoustically designed and insulated structure outside the booster pump station.  Chain-link fencing is installed around the perimeter of the site for security purposes. Figure 12 illustrates a typical storage tank site with booster pump stations. Groundwater Wells Construction of new wells would involve construction of the following.  Drilling of the well.  Concrete pads and foundations for the well’s motor and pump and standby generator.  Masonry block building to house the well, related equipment, process piping, and electrical equipment.  Possibly a buried concrete blending vault.  Above- and belowground process piping and valving.  Electrical and control systems housed in secure enclosures. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Standby emergency generator for a backup power supply during a power outage.  The entire pump station and tank site would be fenced, gated, and locked. The well house building would be designed architecturally blend in with other existing buildings in the area.  Storm drainage facilities would be installed to allow all-weather maintenance and vehicle access to the site.  All lighting would be internally directed to reduce light or glare.  Standby diesel generators would be installed in acoustically designed and insulated structures.  Chain-link fencing is installed around the perimeter of the site for security purposes. Figure 12 illustrates the concrete pad, piping, tank, and facility layout on typical well sites using different treatment methods. Pipelines The installation of proposed water distribution pipelines would occur beneath existing and planned streets, and under developed and undeveloped land within the study area. The general process for pipeline installation would involve digging a trench, installing the pipe, and backfilling the trench (“cut and cover”). In existing streets, the cut-and-cover method would involve removing the asphalt, roadway base, and underlying soil; all materials would be replaced at the completion of the program. The depth and width of the trenches would vary depending upon the site slope and the size of the pipe and in consideration of other existing utility lines. Typical equipment used for pipeline installation includes excavators, cranes, dump trucks, backhoes, water trucks, compactors, and pavement equipment. Depending upon the pipeline alignment, construction crews may close one or more lane of traffic temporarily during pipe installation. In general, the maximum length of an open trench would be the distance necessary to accommodate the amount of pipe that can be laid in one day, typically 200 to 400 feet. Depending on the location and soil conditions, other construction methods may be employed. In areas where the cut-and-cover method is infeasible, such as where a pipeline would cross irrigation laterals, creeks and rivers, railroad tracks, or State Route (SR) 99, the City would use trenchless construction methods for pipe installation. Common trenchless methods include the jack-and-bore method and microtunneling. Both methods reduce disturbance to the ground surface and disruption to other facilities or surface features. The jack-and-bore method uses powerful hydraulic jacks to push pipe from a launch (bore) pit to a receiving pit, and the microtunneling technique uses a small tunneling machine. Slurry, typically bentonite (an inert clay), is used as a lubricant for tunneling and pipe installation for both methods. Construction crews would spend 3–4 weeks to ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 excavate the launch and receiving pits. The actual tunneling would take 3–5 days. Additionally, pipelines constructed across major waterways such as the Tuolumne River could be attached to an existing vehicle or pedestrian bridge. The water piping would be installed within a steel casing and completely contained within the bridge deck, with no visible changes to the outward appearance of the bridge. Constructing a pipeline within a bridge would require less effort to construct and minimal ground disturbance. Staging Areas Staging areas would be needed to store pipe, construction equipment, and other construction-related material. The precise locations of staging areas are not known at this time and would be determined just prior to construction. Staging areas would likely be established along the pipeline routes where space is available, such as vacant lots, parcels, or parking lots. In some cases, staging areas may be used for the duration of program component construction. In other cases, such as when pipeline construction moves along the route, the staging area would be moved to minimize hauling distances and avoid disrupting any one area for extended periods. Staging areas would not be located in sensitive-habitat areas. The City would reserve the authority to approve the locations of the staging areas as part of the contracts for construction of their respective facilities. Standard Construction Procedures The standard construction measures below would be implemented by the City to prevent potential impacts to water quality or transportation during construction of the program facilities. Water Quality Comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit Requirements To reduce or eliminate construction-related water quality effects, the City of Modesto will require the program contractors as a contract condition to comply with the requirements of the City’s Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP). In addition, before the onset of any construction activities, where the disturbed area is 1 acre or greater in size, the City also will require the program contractors to obtain coverage under the current NPDES Construction General Permit. As a performance standard, the SWMP and Construction General Permit require controls of pollutant discharges that use the best available technology that is economically achievable (BAT) and the best conventional pollutant control technology (BCT) to reduce pollutants, and any more stringent controls necessary to meet water quality standards. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 BMPs may consist of a wide variety of measures taken to reduce pollutants in stormwater and other nonpoint source runoff. Measures range from source control, such as reduced surface disturbance, to the treatment of polluted runoff, such as detention or retention basins. BMPs to be implemented as part of the SWMP and Construction General Permit may include the following measures.  Temporary erosion control measures (such as silt fences, staked straw bales/wattles, silt/sediment basins and traps, check dams, geofabric, sandbag dikes, and temporary revegetation or other ground cover) will be employed to control erosion so that it does not leave the construction site.  Drainage facilities in off-site areas will be protected from sediment using BMPs acceptable to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board  Grass or other vegetative cover will be established on the construction site as soon as possible after disturbance. At minimum, vegetative application will be completed by September 15 to allow plants to establish. No disturbed surfaces will be left without erosion control measures in place between October 15 and April 15. Where coverage under the Construction General Permit is required, the City will verify that a Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan has been developed before allowing construction to begin. The City will perform regular inspections of the construction area, to verify that the BMPs specified in the are properly implemented and maintained. The City will notify contractors immediately if there is a noncompliance issue and will require compliance with the Implement a Spill Prevention and Control Program As part of compliance with the NPDES requirements above, the City of Modesto will require contractors as a contract condition to develop and implement a spill prevention and control program (SPCP) to minimize the potential for, and effects from, spills of hazardous, toxic, or petroleum substances during construction activities for all contractors. The program will be completed before any construction activities begin. The City will review and approve the spill prevention and control program before the onset of construction activities. The City will routinely inspect the construction area to verify that the measures specified in the spill prevention and control program are properly implemented and maintained. The City will notify contractors immediately if there is a noncompliance issue and will require compliance. The federal reportable spill quantity for petroleum products, as defined in 40 CFR 110, is any oil spill that:  violates applicable water quality standards; ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  causes a film or sheen on, or discoloration of, the water surface or adjoining shoreline; or  causes a sludge or emulsion to be deposited beneath the surface of the water or adjoining shorelines. If a spill is reportable, the contractor’s superintendent will notify the City, and the City will take action to contact the appropriate safety and cleanup crews to ensure that the SPCP is followed. A written description of reportable releases must be submitted to the Central Valley and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). This submittal must contain a description of the release, including the type of material and an estimate of the amount spilled, the date of the release, an explanation of why the spill occurred, and a description of the steps taken to prevent and control future releases. The releases would be documented on a spill report form. If an appreciable spill has occurred, and results determine that program activities have adversely affected surface water or groundwater quality, a detailed analysis will be performed to the specifications of DTSC to identify the likely cause of contamination. This analysis will include recommendations for reducing or eliminating the source or mechanisms of contamination. Based on this analysis, the City or contractors will select and implement measures to control contamination, with a performance standard that surface and groundwater quality must be returned to baseline conditions. These measures will be subject to approval by the City. Transportation and Traffic Prepare and Implement a Traffic Control Plan The City will prepare a traffic control plan that will be implemented during construction activities. The provisions of the traffic control plan will be included in the contracts of any construction contractors hired to install program-related components. The traffic control plan will be enforced by City construction inspectors as part of the construction contract. The traffic control plan must include the following provisions of the City’s Standard Specifications.  Open all traffic lanes during peak hours, 7:30–8:30 a.m. and 4:30–5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.  Partial street closures are to be limited to between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. All construction traffic control will follow the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.  Full street closures will require a permit from the affected jurisdiction. Street closure permits will be conditioned to post all streets converging on the closure location with public warning signs of the pending closure. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Work within the right-of-way of any County road or within a city other than Modesto will be under encroachment permit from the County or the respective city, which may impose additional requirements. Operations Program operation primarily would include inspection and maintenance of the City-wide water system. The water system with the proposed improvements would be less labor-intensive in terms of monitoring as compared with existing conditions. The pump stations, storage tanks, and wells would be remotely controlled through an automated Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. No additional City employees would be needed for program operation. The City would inspect the water system on an annual basis to determine whether maintenance was needed. Maintenance activities of the storage tanks would include the periodic cleaning of the tank’s inside (with the use of a vacuum system) to maintain capacity and functioning. Maintenance activities of the wells would include various mechanical tests and meter calibration (with equipment specific to those activities). The City would inspect the pump stations on a regular basis (numerous times during the wet months and less frequently the remainder of the year) to ensure optimal performance. Maintenance of the pump stations and pipelines would be performed on an as-needed basis. Uses of this PEIR As indicated above, the PEIR is an informational document for decision-makers. CEQA requires that decision-makers review and consider the PEIR in their deliberations on this program. Agencies with subsequent permit review or approval authority over the program are summarized in Table 2-6, Summary of Local, State, and Federal Discretionary Actions. These are responsible agencies under CEQA and will use the PEIR as the environmental basis of their decisions. The PEIR can also be used to approve subsequent capital improvements. To obtain this approval, a Findings of Conformance would need to be obtained for a subsequent project to confirm that the environmental impact analysis in this PEIR could apply to a subsequent project. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Program Description 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 2-20 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 2-6. Summary of Local, State, and Federal Discretionary Actions Agency Permit/Review Required City of Modesto Lead agency—Program approval Modesto Irrigation District (MID) and Turlock Irrigation District (TID) Longitudinal Encroachment Agreement required if any facilities would encroach on MID or TID channels California Air Resources Board (ARB) Authority to construct Utility companies Drawing review/approvals (utility crossings) California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Incidental take permit, if state-listed species would be affected; Streambed Alteration Agreement, for facilities located in the stream zone California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Encroachment permit for facilities which would encroach upon a Caltrans right-of-way State Lands Commission Encroachment permit for facilities which would encroach upon public lands State Water Resources Control Board Notice of Intent (NOI) for General Construction Stormwater Discharge National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) Regional water quality control board Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the CWA, if Section 404 permit is required U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Permit under Section 404 of the CWA if jurisdictional waters or wetlands would be affected U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and NOAA Fisheries Approval of incidental take permit (under Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act [ESA]) if there is potential for effects on listed wildlife species; consultation under Section 7 of the federal ESA, if a USACE permit is required and there is potential for effects on listed species State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Possible compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), if a USACE permit is required and there is potential for effects on cultural resources ---PAGE BREAK--- STANISLAUS COUNTY 4 26 88 12 99 99 33 120 132 152 152 165 140 5 5 205 580 101 Waterford Del Rio Hickman Grayson Modesto Turlock Figure 1 Project Location CALIFORNIA Program Location Miles 20 10 5 0 Program Areas 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 2 Contiguous and Outlying Service Areas Riverdale Park Tract 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3 City of Modesto Existing Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 4 Del Rio Existing and Proposed Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 5 Grayson Existing and Proposed Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 6 Hickman Existing and Proposed Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 7 Turlock Existing and Proposed Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 8 Waterford Existing and Proposed Facilities 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 9 Proposed Existing System Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T TR01SOI DV-TV DV-KMC DV-NC DV-FV DV-KW DV-KBPE DV-MR DV-KBPS DV-WP DV-PR DV-PM DV-WG DV-KMC DV-KBPE DV-TV DV-FV DV-TV DV-WP DV-TV DV-NC DV-TV DV-KMC DV-KBPS DV-PM DV-KW DV-WP DV-WP DV-PM DV-FV DV-TV DV-TV DV-FV DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-KBPE DV-TV DV-PR DV-WP DV-TV DV-WG DV-KBPE DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-KMC DV-KBPS DV-TV DV-KMC DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-TV DV-WG SB11SOI SB13SOI SB21SOI SB14SOI SB20SOI SB16SOI SB03SOI SB08SOI SB09SOI SB07SOI SB15SOI SB06SOI SB10SOI SB17SOI SB05SOI SB04SOI DV-RD SB01SOI SB12SOI SB19SOI MID02WT01 DV-MH DV-PL SB08SOI SB03SOI SB13SOI SB01SOI SB11SOI SB06SOI SB08SOI SB10SOI SB21SOI DV-RD SB03SOI DV-RD SB07SOI SB08SOI SB03SOI SB03SOI SB11SOI SB01SOI SB07SOI SB20SOI SB21SOI SB21SOI SB01SOI SB13SOI SB21SOI SB08SOI SB20SOI SB03SOI SB03SOI SB16SOI SB20SOI SB07SOI SB07SOI SB08SOI SB21SOI SB03SOI SB17SOI SB07SOI SB03SOI SB07SOI SB20SOI SB13SOI SB21SOI SB03SOI SB21SOI SB11SOI SB08SOI SB20SOI SB20SOI SB01SOI SB10SOI SB21SOI SB20SOI SB12SOI SB03SOI SB07SOI SB07SOI SB06SOI SB03SOI SB20SOI SB13SOI SB12SOI TR06SOI FF19366 FF18472 FF19598 4IN-UPSIZE PH01 PH02 TR04SOI FF13686 TR05SOI FF10728 FF13452 TR07SOI FF10712 FF13602 FF10718 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE PH02 TR04SOI 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE PH02 TR05SOI TR07SOI 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE TR06SOI TR06SOI FF19598 4IN-UPSIZE Tank 7 Tank 8 Tank 6 Tank 4 Tank 3 Tank 5 Tank 10 West Tank North Tank Buildout Tank Industrial Tank MID Terminal Reservoir South Modesto Terminal Tank 065 061 064 063 FMC 066 062 055 038 019 305 287 284 223 216 214 100 049 236 053 050 044 024 021 008 313 312 310 308 307 304 301 300 299 298 297 296 294 293 292 291 290 288 285 283 281 279 278 277 269 267 265 264 262 260 259 250 247 241 237 232 229 226 225 212 211 204 059 058 057 056 052 051 048 047 046 045 043 042 041 039 040 037 036 034 033 032 030 025 022 018 017 016 014 010 007 006 004 003 002 001 Tivoli SOI 01 Plastipak Shelter Cove 217 054 029 Grogan FIGURE 7 City of Modesto RECOMMENDED BUILDOUT CONTIGUOUS SERVICE AREA SYSTEM CIP NOTES: LEGEND: 0 3,500 7,000 1,750 Scale in Feet Contiguous Service Area Boundary City Limits U T Existing Tank & Pump Station U T Proposed South Modesto Terminal Tank & Pump Station U T Recommended CIP Tank Existing Active Well Existing Inactive Well Existing Blending Well Proposed Near-term Well Proposed Buildout Well Recommended CIP Well Existing Pipeline Existing MID Transmission Pipeline Proposed Near-term Pipeline Proposed Buildout Pipeline Recommended Near-term CIP Pipeline Improvement Street - Inactive wells based on City's August 2009 Out of Service Well Report - Existing facilities include recommended Existing System CIP facilities detailed in Existing System Evaluation TM (Appendix D) - Near-term pipeline alignments based on information provided by City and developers Figure 10 Proposed Buildout Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area – Option A 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T U T [ Ú [ Ú [ Ú [ Ú TR04SOI TR05SOI 4IN-UPSIZE TR06SOI FF19366 FF18472 PH01 FF13452 FF19598 FF13686 PH02 FF10728 FF10712 FF13602 FF10718 4IN-UPSIZE PH02 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE 4IN-UPSIZE PH02 SM03SOI - SM07SOI SB11SOI SB13SOI SB14SOI SB16SOI SB09SOI SB07SOI SB03SOI SB15SOI SB10SOI SB20SOI SB17SOI SB05SOI SB08SOI TR01SOI SB04SOI SB06SOI SB01SOI SM01SOI DV-FV SB19SOI SB12SOI DV-NC MID02WT01 DV-MH SM02SOI TR07SOI DV-PL DV-KBPE DV-WP DV-KBPS DV-MR DV-PM DV-WG DV-KMC DV-PR SB21SOI DV-TV DV-KW DV-KMC SB07SOI SB21SOI SB01SOI SB03SOI DV-TV DV-TV DV-KBPE TR07SOI DV-TV DV-FV DV-TV SB21SOI DV-WP SB10SOI SB08SOI SB20SOI SB07SOI SB11SOI SB08SOI SB03SOI SB08SOI SB07SOI SB20SOI SB21SOI SB06SOI DV-WP DV-KBPS SB07SOI DV-TV DV-PR DV-KBPS SB07SOI SB07SOI DV-WP DV-TV SB03SOI SB21SOI SB06SOI DV-PM SB21SOI DV-KMC DV-TV SB20SOI DV-TV SB03SOI DV-TV SB21SOI SB07SOI DV-KW DV-KMC DV-TV DV-TV SB20SOI SB21SOI DV-NC DV-PM SB11SOI SB01SOI SB21SOI SB03SOI DV-KBPE SB20SOI SB10SOI SB08SOI SB01SOI DV-FV DV-WG DV-PM SB08SOI SB20SOI SB11SOI SB07SOI SB07SOI SB13SOI SB12SOI SB03SOI DV-TV SB20SOI SB07SOI SB03SOI SM02SOI SB16SOI DV-WG DV-TV DV-WP SB03SOI DV-KMC SB13SOI SB03SOI SB03SOI SB21SOI SB17SOI SB03SOI SB13SOI SB13SOI SB20SOI DV-WG DV-TV SB21SOI SB12SOI SB08SOI SB20SOI DV-TV PH01BO PH03BO Tank 7 Tank 8 Tank 6 Tank 4 Tank 3 Tank 5 Tank 10 West Tank North Tank Industrial Tank MID Terminal Tank 65 PL GW 61 64 63 TW SC 62 55 38 19 49 53 50 44 24 21 08 59 58 57 56 54 52 51 48 47 46 45 43 42 41 39 40 37 36 34 33 32 30 29 25 22 18 17 16 14 10 07 06 04 03 02 01 FMC 305 287 284 223 217 216 214 100 236 313 312 310 308 307 304 301 300 299 298 297 296 294 293 292 291 290 288 285 283 281 279 278 277 269 267 265 264 262 260 259 250 247 241 237 232 229 226 225 212 211 204 SOI 01 PH02BO 66 FIGURE 5 City of Modesto RECOMMENDED BUILDOUT CONTIGUOUS SERVICE AREA SYSTEM CIP NOTES: LEGEND: Contiguous Service Area City Limits Street U T Existing Tank & Pump Station U T Recommended Buildout Tank [ Ú Recommended Buildout Booster Pump Existing Active Well Existing Inactive Well Existing Blending Well Proposed Near-term Well Proposed Buildout Well Recommended Buildout Well Existing MID Transmission Main Existing Pipeline Proposed Near-term Pipeline Proposed Buildout Pipeline Recommended Buildout Pipeline 0 3,600 7,200 1,800 Scale in Feet - Inactive wells based on City's August 2009 Out of Service Well Report - MID supply is expected to increase to 60 MGD after the completion of Phase 2 - Existing facilities include recommended Existing System CIP facilities detailed in Existing System Evaluation TM (Appendix D) - Near-term pipeline alignments based on information provided by City and developers Figure 11 Proposed Buildout Facilities in the Contiguous Service Area – Option B 00049.08 (11-09) ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 12 Typical City Water Storage Tanks and Groundwater Wells 00049.08 (11-09) a) Water storage tank and booster pump stations. b) Water storage tank in the distance. c) Groundwater well station within a public park. Building houses monitoring equipment. d) Groundwater well station near a public school as seen from a road. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis Introduction to the Analysis Chapter 3 of this draft PEIR contains individual sections that describe the potential environmental impacts of the proposed program. Each topical section (sections 3.1 through 3.15) describes the existing setting and background information to help readers understand the conditions and resources that could be affected by the proposed program. In addition, each section includes a discussion of the criteria used in determining whether an effect of the program would be considered a “significant environmental impact.” Finally, each section recommends mitigation measures for significant potential impacts identified. Significance of Environmental Impacts According to CEQA, an environmental impact report (EIR) should define the thresholds of significance and explain the criteria used to determine whether impacts are above or below those thresholds. Significance criteria are identified for each environmental category to determine whether implementation of the program would result in a significant environmental impact when evaluated against the environmental setting baseline conditions. The significance criteria vary depending on the environmental category. In general, impacts can be either significant (above the threshold) or less than significant (below the threshold). This PEIR discloses whether, after applying pertinent regulations that would limit the impacts, the proposed program would result in significant or less-than- significant impacts. Mitigation measures are recommended for each significant impact, when feasible. Where the mitigation is sufficient to reduce an impact to below the level of significance, it will be described as less than significant with mitigation. If mitigation would not reduce an impact below the level of significance, then the impact will be identified as significant and unavoidable. If there are no feasible mitigation measures, the analysis will explain why that is the case. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.1 Aesthetics This section describes the visual character of the region, the visual resources in the study area, and the changes in the views of the program area that would result from program implementation. Applicable plans and policies relative to aesthetics are also discussed briefly. Finally, this chapter discusses the aesthetic impact of the proposed program, and prescribes mitigation measures where necessary to reduce adverse impacts. Relevant Program Characteristics This analysis of environmental effects of the proposed program on aesthetic resources considers temporary interruptions in the visual landscape due to construction activities and permanent above-ground features. Permanent above- ground features would include storage tanks, along with buildings housing booster pumps and groundwater wells that would be located at various and as-of- yet-undetermined sites within the study area. Additionally, potential aesthetic impacts of the proposed corporation yard are evaluated. Environmental Setting No system improvements are proposed within the communities of Empire or Salida; only improved connections to these service areas from the City are proposed. Thus, these portions of the contiguous service area are not discussed. Modesto Modesto is located within California’s Central Valley, a vast and generally flat area bounded by the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the east and the Coast Ranges to the west. The terrain’s flatness and openness afford expansive vistas across open land. Agricultural land and associated infrastructure give the City a scenic character that is rural in nature. Orchards, row crops, vineyards, cleared fields, hay bales, farm structures, farming and ranching equipment (such as tractors), and farmhouses are some of the features that lend to the rural and agricultural nature of the area. Islands of urban development bordering the agricultural areas provide contrast to this rural character. As often found in areas with both agricultural and urban characteristics, agricultural and urban areas in the Modesto region have abrupt boundaries, lacking transition and beginning where the other ends. The City’s visual quality is low-to-moderate in vividness, intactness, and unity because of the general lack of visual continuity and coherence. Like many Central Valley cities along SR 99 and the SPRR route that have a long history of agricultural and industrial activities, Modesto has an ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 antiquated-style main street at the city center, surrounded by old, established neighborhoods and mature trees and landscaping. Agriculture- and industry-based buildings, such as silos, warehouses, and factory buildings, remain visually prominent and contribute to the overall visual quality of the region. Recent development, including big-box and chain commercial shopping areas that are common to new development throughout the state, is common on the outskirts of Modesto. The Tuolumne River runs along the southern edge of Modesto; the Stanislaus River runs roughly parallel to the northern boundary of the Modesto urban area. Dry Creek, a tributary to the Tuolumne River, runs into the Tuolumne River from the northeast, in the southeast of Modesto. There are no designated scenic roadways in Modesto. Ceres Ceres is located adjacent to and south of Modesto. The city encompasses approximately 6.3 square miles. North Ceres, where proposed facilities would be constructed, is residential and industrial. The most prominent visual features in the area are State Route (SR) 99 and riparian vegetation along the Tuolumne River. Del Rio The community of Del Rio is located along the south bank of the Stanislaus River and encompasses approximately 1.5 square miles. Prominent visual features of the community include the surrounding agricultural operations, the Del Rio Country Club, and riparian vegetation along the Stanislaus River. Grayson The community of Grayson is located on the west bank of an old channel of the San Joaquin River. Grayson is a rural agricultural community that was once a port destination for transporting grains along the river. Prominent visual features of the community include the surrounding agricultural operations and riparian vegetation along the San Joaquin River. Hickman Visual qualities of the community of Hickman are defined by the surrounding rural agricultural landscape. The community is located approximately 1.5 miles ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 south of the Tuolumne River. The dominant features in the community are the local school and a dairy farm. Riverdale Park Riverdale Park is located along West Hatch Road, southwest of the City of Modesto and the Tuolumne River. The community is primarily a pocket of residential housing located between agriculture fields and the Tuolumne River. Riparian vegetation along the Tuolumne River and agricultural crops are the dominant visual features in this area. Turlock Turlock is a growing community that is characterized by residential, commercial, and industrial development, the SR 99 corridor, and California State University, Stanislaus. The City of Turlock’s Beautification Master Plan identifies the following scenic resources: the SR 99 corridor, Gateway Zones and Corridors (Golden State Boulevard, Christoffersen Parkway, Monte Vista Avenue, Fulkerth Road, West Main Street, East Avenue, Geer Road, and Lander Avenue), and Secondary Corridors along Taylor Road, West Tuolumne Road, Hawkeye Avenue, East Canal Drive, Olive Avenue, Berkeley Avenue, and North Walnut Road (City of Turlock 2003). The City of Modesto’s Turlock water service area is an independent water system made up of three small, separate service area islands (“Northern”, “Central” and “Southern,” as shown in Figure 7) located within the City of Turlock’s water system. The Northern service area is bounded by East Monte Vista Avenue to the north, James Lane to the east, Hedstrom Road to the south, and Geer Road to the west. The Central service area is bounded by Delbon Avenue to the north, Runyan Drive to the south, Colorado Avenue to the east, and North Olive Avenue to the west. The Southern service area is essentially a two service block area, connected via a pipeline along Brier Road. The entire Turlock service area contains approximately 99 acres, primarily residential, and is considered fully developed. Waterford Waterford is a small city located on the north side of the Tuolumne River. Its dominant feature is the Tuolumne River, which forms the city’s southern boundary. The overall visual and physical attributes of the river can be characterized as a riparian river corridor, native grasslands, and woodlands (including oaks, cottonwoods, and willows). This service area is primarily ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 residential with a small central downtown area, and is considered approximately 90-percent developed. The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan establishes the following viewscape corridors (City of Waterford Planning Department 2007):  Hickman Road Bridge, east and west across the Tuolumne River,  South Reinway Avenue, south, east, and west along the Tuolumne River,  Riverside Road, south along the Tuolumne River,  Skyline Boulevard, facing south toward the Tuolumne River, and  Tim Bell Road, along Dry Creek. The City of Modesto is responsible only for the service area inside the current City of Waterford’s limits, excluding the proposed River Pointe development, an annex of 1,610 acres of agricultural land surrounding the existing city limits. Regulatory Framework Federal Regulations Other than the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), which is discussed in the “Cultural Resources” section 3.5, there are no federal regulations pertaining to visual resources that would affect this program. Analysis of the proposed program’s existing conditions and aesthetic impacts is guided by the FHWA assessment methodology. State Regulations The California Scenic Highway Program was established in 1963 under Sections 260–263 of the Streets and Highways Code. The Scenic Highway Program includes a list of highways that are either designated or eligible for designation as scenic highways (California Department of Transportation 2008). In Stanislaus County, the only designated scenic highway is Interstate 5 also referred to as the West Side Freeway. This includes a 28-mile reach of I-5 from the Merced County line to the San Joaquin County line and parallels the Delta-Mendota Canal and the California Aqueduct. The proposed water system upgrades would be located approximately 5 miles away in Grayson, and the other outlying communities are located more than 20 miles away from this highway. The proposed upgrades would not visible from I-5. Thus, there would be no impact on the scenic characteristics of this state-designated scenic highway. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan’s Conservation/Open Space Element notes the scenic value of the county’s regional parks, including the Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP), but does not identify specific policies or regulations concerning the preservation of scenic views of aesthetic resources. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Chapter VII of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008), “Environmental Resources and Open Space,” establishes policies comprising the River Greenway Program, which are intended to guide development of parkland within the Dry Creek, Stanislaus River, and Tuolumne River Comprehensive Planning Districts. The pertinent policies from that program are listed below. Policy VII-B.7[a]. Visual corridors of the river will be protected and enhanced. Policy VII-B.7[b]. Visual corridors and access points on the riverfront will be recreated through development. Policy VII-B.7[q]. The scenic resources of Public Trust lands and resources shall be considered as protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be cited and designed to protect scenic views associated with Public Trust lands and resources. Additionally, the City’s inventory of Landmark Preservation Sites (listed in section V-8 of the General Plan MEIR [ICF Jones & Stokes 2008] and further discussed in the “Cultural Resources” section of this EIR) includes not only historic structures, but also several landmark trees. A joint powers authority composed of the City, the City of Ceres, and Stanislaus County (the County) adopted the TRRP master plan in December 2001 (EDAW 2001b). This plan is intended to shape development of active- and passive-use parkland along the river corridor, including its span through Modesto. The TRRP master plan environmental impact report (EDAW 2001a) refers to the Tuolumne River as “a significant natural landscape feature” that has unique trees and rock outcroppings. The plan further states: The visual experience of the river corridor includes areas that are of high visual quality, and other areas where the visual environment has been degraded by urban development. Along the river corridor, the area with the highest existing visual quality is the eastern-most portion of the park, which supports a majestic, mature oak woodland on the north bank. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Public visual access to the river, parks, and enhanced/restored riparian areas is and will be provided throughout the regional park. The TRRP master plan specifically designates several land-based “vista points” within proposed park development and enhancement areas, but the plan does not specify policies in relationship to these features. Based on the information available for the proposed program, no features are proposed that would be visible from these vista points. The TRRP master plan also identifies several “river overlooks” within the park-enhancement areas. Proposed WSIP features would not be located in proximity to these river overlooks. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies Ceres The City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document contains the following goals and policies related to aesthetics: 1.A.2. The City shall strive to maintain and enhance a unique community identity. To this end, where possible, the City shall maintain physical separation from nearby communities, and provide visual distinction where Ceres abuts Modesto. 1.A.5. The City shall seek to provide visual distinction between Ceres and Modesto where the two cities abut. To this end, the City shall use signs and landscaping at entrances along major corridors where the two communities meet. 1.A.7. The City shall seek to enhance the appearance of its major corridors as important structural elements in Ceres’ physical identity, and as a feature to improve Ceres’ image in attracting economic development. Del Rio The Del Rio Community Plan adopted by the County does not identify specific policies or regulations concerning the preservation of scenic views of aesthetic resources. Hickman The Community of Hickman Strategic Plan, adopted by the County, contains goals to beautify and maintain the “town core,” as well as maintain the agricultural feel of the community. There are no specific policies or regulations concerning the preservation of aesthetic resources. Grayson The County has not established any local plans or policies for the community of Grayson related to aesthetic resources. Turlock The Turlock General Plan notes the scenic value of the city’s historic characteristics, but does not identify specific policies or regulations concerning the preservation of scenic views of aesthetic resources. However, as mentioned ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 in the setting section above, the City of Turlock has adopted the Beautification Master Plan to foster the city’s identity and improve aesthetics through targeted planting and street designs. Waterford The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to aesthetics: Policy OS-A.2 Preserve and enhance the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek in their natural state throughout the planning area. Policy OS-A.3 Promote the protection and enhancement of designated scenic routes. Policy UD-10 Maintain and enhance the unique community appearance of Waterford. Impact Analysis This section describes the proposed program’s impacts on aesthetics, and provides mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less- than-significant level. The proposed program includes components that would be both above-ground and below-ground, as well as features that would be at-grade. Below-ground components include new pipelines. Above-ground components include storage tanks and pump stations. At-grade components include groundwater wells, which may be surrounded by chain-link fencing. Construction activity for both above-ground and below-ground components would be visible on a temporary basis. Below-ground features pipelines) would not be permanently visible and hence would not have permanent visual impacts. Above-ground and at-grade features, including storage tanks, buildings housing booster pump stations and groundwater wells, fencing, and the new corporation yard would be permanently visible, and their permanent impacts are analyzed below. Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, impacts are considered significant if a project has a “substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect.” Based on Appendix G criteria, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista,  substantially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, or  create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. Thresholds of Significance Adopted by the City of Modesto The City has adopted the above State CEQA Guidelines thresholds as well as the following additional thresholds of significance to analyze the impacts on viewsheds from and of river parks in the program area, including Dry Creek Park and the Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP). Impacts would be considered significant if they: a. substantially degrade views from riverside areas and parks, and b. substantially degrade views of riverside areas from public roadways and nearby properties. Methods and Assumptions The approach for this aesthetic impact assessment is based on the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) visual impact assessment system (Federal Highway Administration 1983) in combination with other established visual assessment systems. The program aesthetic impact assessment process involved identification of the following existing conditions:  relevant policies and concerns for protection of visual resources,  visual resources visual character and quality and important visual landmarks) of the region, the immediate action area, and the project sites,  important viewing locations roads) and the general visibility of the action area and site using descriptions and photographs, and  viewer groups and their sensitivity. A qualitative review of the proposed program’s visible features and their potential to alter the visual character of the region and local area, disturb an area’s valued visual elements, or conflict with policies established to maintain an area’s aesthetic character, was conducted. The degree of impact considered both the magnitude of change in the visual resource visual character and quality) and viewers’ responses to and concern for those changes. Because detail regarding the proposed program’s specific components is not yet available, the aesthetic impact assessment for this PEIR was conducted on a program general) basis. Mitigation measures are identified below to reduce any impacts to less-than-significant levels. Subsequent projects would require the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 incorporation of mitigation measures as necessary to reduce aesthetic impacts to less-than-significant based on the individual projects’ visible components. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact AES-1: Adverse Effects on a Scenic Vista (No Impact) Based on the program information available for the proposed infrastructure improvements, no features would be visible from vista points identified in County or city land use plans or the TRRP master plan. Therefore, no impact on these established scenic views is anticipated as a result of implementation of the proposed program. Impact AES-2: Damage to Scenic Resources along a Scenic Highway (Less than Significant) The proposed program facilities would not be located in proximity to a scenic highway. Furthermore, there would be no impact on scenic resources located along a scenic highway. The program does not propose demolition or modification of existing structures; based on the information available for the proposed program, there would be no work in proximity to any of the trees or properties listed in the City’s Landmark Preservation Sites inventory or to scenic resources identified by the outlying communities included in the study area. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed program would adversely affect any previously identified scenic resources. This impact is less than significant. Impact AES-3: Temporary Degradation of Visual Character or Quality during Construction Activities (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The construction of proposed program improvements would be visible to receptors from areas near the construction site. Visible construction operations, including heavy equipment operation, materials stockpiling, and earth exposure during trenching and grading, may be perceived by some as a visual nuisance and a degradation of an area’s visual character. Although such activity would be temporary, and the visual disturbance associated with individual project construction would cease after completion of the operations, disturbance has the potential to be significant for certain individual projects. Mitigation Measures AES-1 and AES-2 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure AES-1: Locate Staging Areas Away from Public Areas For projects with potential for significant visual disturbance, construction staging areas for equipment, personal vehicle parking, and material storage will be sited as far as possible from residences, major roadways, parks, and other public areas. The City contract specifications will require that staging areas be identified in the documents prepared by ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 construction contractors and subject to approval by the City. The City will not approve staging areas that are not sited as described above. Mitigation Measure AES-2: Screen Staging and Construction Areas For projects with potential for significant visual disturbance, construction contracts will specify that staging areas will be located where opportunities for screening with existing topography and vegetation will be maximized. Security fencing placed around staging and construction areas will include slats or other screening sufficient to hide the area from the passing public. Screens used for this purpose should be of an earth tone or other appropriate neutral color. Any night lighting will include baffles that direct lighting onto the staging area and minimize light spillage onto adjoining properties. Impact AES-4: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed Facilities (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The proposed program includes fencing, storage tanks, and buildings to house booster pump stations and groundwater wells that would be visible from surrounding areas, including residential and agricultural areas, public roadways, parks, and other public areas. Placement of these utilitarian features in agricultural areas would be noticeable but generally unobtrusive and would not significantly degrade the existing visual character of the area. Placement of these features in proximity to residential areas or within scenic corridors identified by city or community plans, however, would have the potential to degrade the surrounding area’s visual character and result in a significant impact. Implementation of design considerations stated in Mitigation Measures AES-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure AES-3: Design Fencing, Storage Tanks, and Booster Pump Station and Groundwater Well Buildings to Be Consistent with the Surrounding Setting Where wells, tanks, and pump stations are located in proximity to or are easily visible from residential areas or public roadways, the facility and fencing will be designed to be consistent with the surrounding setting, to the maximum extent feasible. If warranted, facility design will integrate such elements as color, materials, and pattern, as well as screening with landscape or other features to minimize the visual effect of the facility. Additionally, the facility may be setback from public view and tanks may be partially buried to minimize view obstructions. The City will submit plans for proposed above-ground facilities within the parkland identified in the City’s River Greenway Program, or within scenic corridors of outlying communities (such as the City of Waterford’s viewscape corridors), to the appropriate city or community planning department for approval of the adequacy of proposed visual enhancement measures. Colors will be unobtrusive earth tones, and paint will be matte or otherwise non-reflective. Where landscaping is used, the City will install ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Aesthetics 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.1-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 an automatic irrigation system to ensure that sufficient water is supplied to support the landscaping. Any night lighting will include baffles that direct lighting onto the facility and minimize light spillage onto adjoining properties. Impact AES-5: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed New Corporation Yard (Significant and Unavoidable) The Engineer’s Report proposes to construct an 8-acre corporation yard that includes a 10,000-square-foot building and fencing surrounding the yard. The majority of the site would be used to store construction materials, such as pipes and piles of soil and gravel. The location of this facility has not yet been determined, and the exact dimensions of the building are unknown at this time. If this facility were located in an area surrounded by industrial or agricultural use, it is likely that the facility would blend in and would not significantly alter the visual character or quality of the area. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would result if the proposed corporation yard were to be placed in an industrial or agricultural area. However, if the facility were placed in a location in which it was out of character with the surrounding area, such as a dominantly residential area, significant alteration of the visual character or quality of public views of the area may result. Because the location and characteristics of the proposed corporation yard are unknown, and the potential for significant visual alteration is high because of the large size of the proposed facility, a significant visual impact would result. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-3 would reduce this impact, but not to a less-than-significant level. Additional feasible mitigation measures to reduce the significance level of this impact cannot be identified until the program is designed and sited, and feasible mitigation beyond Mitigation Measure AES-3 may not exist. As such, the impact of the proposed corporation yard on aesthetic resources is considered significant and unavoidable. Impact AES-6: New Sources of Light or Glare (Less than Significant) Lighting may be necessary near storage tanks, buildings for booster pump stations and groundwater wells, and the proposed corporation yard for maintenance and security purposes. Lighting would be consistent with existing accepted light levels in the vicinity and would be the minimum necessary for the operation and security of the facilities and the safety of personnel, thereby avoiding significant glare or spillover lighting effects. Proposed lighting near the facilities would be inwardly-directed and would not be a significant source of light. Above-ground features would be painted with non-reflective paint, and the proposed program would not include any features that would create daytime glare. Therefore, this impact is less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.2 Agricultural Resources The environmental setting and impact analysis for agricultural resources was developed through a review of the following documents:  the Agricultural Element of the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  the MEIR for the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (ICF-Jones & Stokes 2008),  planning documents from outlying communities,  Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, Important Farmland Data Availability: Stanislaus County 2000–2004 (California Department of Conservation 2007a), and  Williamson Act Program: Stanislaus County Williamson Act Lands 2006 (California Department of Conservation 2007b). Relevant Program Characteristics This analysis of environmental effects of the proposed program primarily considers potential conflicts with agricultural resources due to construction of permanent above-ground features. These include storage tanks, along with buildings housing booster pumps and groundwater wells that will be located at various and as-yet undetermined sites within the study area. Additionally, potential impacts of the proposed corporation yard are evaluated. Environmental Setting Agriculture is a leading industry in Stanislaus County. The county’s flat topography, good-to-excellent soil quality, favorable climate, and availability of water favor agricultural production. In addition, the region possesses low-cost power and a good transportation system. Such conditions allow the production of orchard and vine crops, including almonds, walnuts, grapes, and peaches (Jones & Stokes 2008). As of 2004, approximately 376,000 acres of important farmland and 374,500 acres of grazing lands have been identified in Stanislaus County (California Department of Conservation [DOC] 2007a). Important farmland includes 256,500 acres of Prime Farmland; 29,800 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance; 63,300 acres of Unique Farmland; and 26,500 acres of Farmland of Local Importance. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The same conditions that are essential to agriculture—topography, climate, water supply, and a transportation system—are also attractive to urban development. The City’s contiguous service area (Modesto, North Ceres, Empire, and Salida) and the outlying service areas (Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, Turlock, and Waterford) affected by the proposed program include areas of important farmland and surrounded by active agricultural operations. In particular, the California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program has mapped the areas bordering the contiguous service area and outlying communities of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, Modesto, Turlock, and Waterford as Prime Farmland. Land within each of these communities is primarily mapped as Urban and Built-Up Land (California Department of Conservation 2007). Approximately 10,500 acres of important farmland in Stanislaus County were converted to non-agricultural uses from 2000 to 2004. During that time, the County gained 5,833 acres of urban and built-up uses, an increase of 11%, resulting in a total of 61,200 acres by 2004 (California Department of Conservation 2007a). Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan contains the following applicable policies: Policy 1.11 Require buffers between proposed non-agricultural uses and agricultural operations. Policy 1.12 Establish setbacks from agricultural areas to minimize adverse impacts of adjacent uses on agriculture. Policy 2.3 Encourage higher density development and infilling in urban areas to reduce development pressures on agricultural lands. Policy 2.9 Cooperate with cities in managing development in urban transition areas in recognition that unincorporated land within spheres of influence will ultimately be urbanized. Stanislaus County has adopted setback buffer guidelines to protect agricultural lands and defray conflicts between agricultural and non-agricultural land uses. These guidelines apply to lands within the mapped general agriculture zoning district (Zoning District A-2) and adjacent to the A-2 zoning district for unincorporated portions of the county. Nonagricultural uses located within a Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) adopted Sphere of Influence (SOI) for an incorporated city shall be subject to these guidelines if the program site is located within 300 feet of any production agriculture operation or the outer boundary of the SOI. These guidelines would apply to development of non- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 agricultural uses along the boundaries of the City of Modesto, the City of Turlock, the City of Waterford, and communities of Del Rio, Empire, Grayson, Hickman, Riverdale Park, and Salida where adjacent agricultural land uses exist. As stated in the County’s Buffer Setback Guidelines: Buffer Design Standards for New Non-Agricultural Uses All projects shall incorporate a minimum 150-foot wide buffer. All buffers shall incorporate a solid wall and vegetative screen consistent with the following standards: Fencing: A 6-foot high solid wall of uniform construction shall be installed along any portion of a buffer where the project site and the adjoining agricultural operation share a common parcel line. Vegetative Screen: (minimum standards) Two staggered rows of trees and shrubs characterized by evergreen foliage extending from the base of the plant to the crown. Fast growing plants with a shortlife span shall be discouraged. Trees and shrubs should be vigorous, drought tolerant and at least 6-feet in height at the time of installation. Plants shall have 50% to 70% porosity approximately 50% to 75% of the plant is air space). Plant height shall vary in order to capture drift within 4-feet of ground application. A mature height of 15-feet or more shall be required for each tree. To ensure adequate coverage, two staggered rows shall be located 5-feet apart and consist of minimum 5 gallon plants at least 6-feet tall planted 10-feet on center. Alternative spacing between rows may be authorized to accommodate the needs of specific plant species. Permitted uses within a buffer area shall include: public roadways, utilities, drainage facilities, landscaping, parking lots and similar low human intensity uses. Walking and bike trails shall be allowed within buffers provided they are designed without rest areas. Landscaping shall be designed to exclude turf areas which could induce activities and add to overall maintenance costs and water usage. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies The City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan includes the following applicable policies: Baseline Developed Area: Policy VII-D.3: If a subsequent project is within the Baseline Developed Area or Redevelopment Area as identified on the General Plan Growth Strategy Diagram (Figure II-1), the project shall be considered to have minimal effect on the conversion of agricultural lands, and no mitigation for that impact is required. Planned Urbanizing Area: Policy VII-D.4[b] The City shall support the continuation of agricultural uses on land designated for urban uses until urban development is imminent. Policy VII-D.4[d] Where necessary to promote planned City growth, the City shall encourage the development of those agricultural lands that are already compromised by adjacent urban development or contain property required for the extension of infrastructure or other public facilities, before considering urban development on agricultural lands that are not subject to such urban pressures. Policy VII-D.4[e] For any subsequent project that is adjacent to an existing agricultural use, the project proponent may incorporate measures to reduce the potential for conflicts with the agricultural use. Potential measures to be implemented may include the following: 1. Include a buffer zone of sufficient width between the proposed residences and the agricultural use; 2. Restrict the intensity of residential uses adjacent to agricultural lands; and 3. Inform residents about the possible exposure to agricultural chemicals. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres The City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document includes the following applicable policies: 6.A.3 The City shall ensure that new development and public works projects do not encourage expansion of urban uses outside the Planning Area into areas designated for Agriculture on the land use diagram. 6.A.4. The City shall require development adjacent to designated agricultural areas to minimize conflicts with adjacent agricultural uses. City of Turlock The Turlock General Plan includes the following applicable policies: 2.8-d Relieve pressures to convert valuable agricultural lands to urban uses by encouraging infill development. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 2.8-e Seek Stanislaus County cooperation in designating unincorporated land for uses compatible with adjacent City lands. City of Waterford The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan includes the following applicable policies: Policy OS-B-1: Protect agricultural areas outside the City’s urban growth area from urban impacts. Policy OS-B-2: Relieve pressures on converting areas containing large concentrations of “Prime” agricultural soils to urban uses by providing adequate urban development land within the Waterford City Urban Growth Area. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),  conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,  conflict with a Williamson Act contract, or  indirectly result in the conversion of Farmland to a nonagricultural use. Methods and Assumptions Because detail regarding the proposed program’s specific components is not yet available, the agricultural resource impact assessment for this PEIR was conducted on a programmatic general) basis. Mitigation measures are identified below to reduce any impacts to less-than-significant levels. Subsequent projects will require the incorporation of mitigation measures as necessary to reduce impacts to less-than-significant. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact AG-1: Direct Conversion of Important Farmland (Significant and Unavoidable) As described above, the Department of Conservation has mapped the program areas as Urban, while the outer boundaries of each are mapped as Prime Farmland. Pipelines associated with the proposed program would be installed ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 underground in existing ROWs or planned roadway and easement alignments. There would be no conversion of Farmland of Statewide Importance due to installation of pipelines. Proposed storage tanks, groundwater wells, and the corporation yard would be constructed in undeveloped areas, generally along the outer boundaries and within the SOI for each community. Construction of these facilities may result in the conversion of mapped important farmland unless allowable under a Tier Three conditional use permit pursuant to Stanislaus County ordinance section 21.20.030. The proposed facilities are for public utilities and are considered “compatible uses” for purposes of the Williamson Act and would therefore be consistent with the Act. The storage tanks would constitute the primary land conversion for water storage. Although these undeveloped lands are identified for future commercial, residential, and mixed uses, the parcels currently may be used for agricultural activities. The Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) policies established under the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act (Government Code Section 56300 et seq.) and County LAFCO policies, County policies, and City policies would contribute to the orderly conversion of agricultural land as available developable land is occupied. However, the County’s and City’s general plan EIRs concluded that there would be significant and unavoidable impacts on agricultural resources from urbanization. The direct impacts of program implementation would be limited to the construction of storage tanks, groundwater wells, and the corporation yard along the outer boundaries of the study area. These changes would constitute a potential direct conversion of agricultural lands. Although implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1 would reduce the impacts of Prime Farmland conversion, it would not reduce the impacts below the significance threshold. This impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure AG-1: Compensate for a Loss of Farmland The California Farmland Conservancy Program is established under Public Resources Code Section 10200-10277 to promote the long-term preservation of agricultural lands in California though the use of agricultural conservation easements. In addition to funding provided for agricultural easement acquisition, Conservancy grant funds are available for projects that develop policy or planning oriented to agricultural land protection, and for improvements to land already under an agricultural conservation easement erosion control, riparian area improvements, etc.). The program is authorized to accept donations from private entities if the Department of Conservation is the designated beneficiary of the donation and it uses the funds for purposes of the program in a county specified by the donor (Public Resources Code Section 10231.5). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The loss of farmland associated with the proposed program could be partially mitigated through contribution to the Farmland Conservancy Fund, or to an equivalent program for funding farmland preservation in Stanislaus County, as a condition precedent to the issuance of necessary program approvals. The amount of such a contribution would allow the conservation of one acre of farmland in Stanislaus County for each acre of farmland converted by the proposed program. It would also reflect the then-current value of an agricultural easement on comparable prime agricultural land of equal size to the acreage of the farmland lost under the proposed program, and a 10% increment for program administration under the Farmland Conservancy Program, or an equivalent program for funding farmland preservation projects in Stanislaus County. The valuation of such an easement would be determined by the City in consultation with the California Department of Conservation. Where current information on such valuation is not available, the City would need to obtain an appraisal of the valuation of an agricultural easement on comparable agricultural land in the program vicinity to inform the City’s determination as to valuation. Contribution to the California Farmland Conservancy, or an equivalent program, to fund farmland preservation projects in Stanislaus County would serve to compensate for the loss of farmland that directly results from the proposed program. However, preservation of Prime Farmland through agricultural easements on other Prime Farmland parcels would not mitigate the direct loss of Prime Farmland resulting from the program to a less-than-significant level. Restoration and/or recovery of Prime Farmland from existing urban uses to offset the loss of Prime Farmland would mitigate the loss caused by the proposed program. However, such a measure would be unreasonably costly and inefficient and would, therefore, be infeasible. Impact AG-2: Conflicts with Williamson Act Contracts (Less than Significant) Multiple current Williamson Act contracts for Prime Farmland are located within the study area (California Department of Conservation 2007b). Several of these contracts, however, have been designated for nonrenewal. Construction of the proposed storage tanks, groundwater wells, and corporation yard would potentially affect land currently zoned for agricultural use or under a Williamson Act contract unless allowable under a Tier Three conditional use permit pursuant to Stanislaus County ordinance section 21.20.030. For sites located on Williamson Act land within Stanislaus County, the facilities shall only be installed in accordance with a Tier Three conditional use permit from the County. The LAFCO policies, County policies, and City policies would contribute to the orderly conversion of agricultural land as available developable land is occupied within the City’s service area. Implementation of these policies, namely the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Agricultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.2-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 County’s right-to-farm ordinance and agricultural conversion criteria, would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. No further mitigation is required. Siting of proposed facilities (storage tanks, groundwater wells, corporation yard) adjacent to A-2 agriculture zones or within 300 feet of the SOI boundary of an incorporated city would potentially conflict with Stanislaus County’s Buffer and Setback Guidelines. However, the proposed facilities are utilities that would be considered a “permitted use” within the 150 foot buffer around agricultural uses. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-3, which requires that permanent above-ground facilities blend into the surrounding setting and be designed with screening from public view, there would be a less-than-significant impact on existing zoning. Impact AG-3: Indirect Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Uses (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed program would facilitate urban development within the program area, which could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. This impact is discussed in more detail in section 3.11, Population and Housing. Mitigation for specific development proposals that involve conversion of agricultural land, such as Mitigation Measure AG-1, would compensate for this impact; however, it would not avoid the conversion and reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. In addition, the specifics regarding future development that may result in agricultural conversion are not known at this time, and implementation of this mitigation measure for such development is not considered feasible within the scope of the proposed program. Impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.3 Air Quality The study area encompasses the City of Modesto and its contiguous service area, the communities of Ceres, Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, portions of the City of Turlock, and the City of Waterford, as discussed in Chapter 2, “Project Description.” Relevant Program Characteristics A number of the proposed improvements would require the construction of facilities and infrastructure that would result in construction emissions. Emissions from construction can vary considerably depending on the specific activities taking place, the level of activity, the soil conditions, and the weather. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) emphasizes the implementation of control measures that it has determined to be effective and comprehensive, rather than a detailed quantification of construction emissions. Emissions from operations at proposed improvements would result from the use of engines and pumps at wells and pump stations and from the use of backup generators. The quantity of emissions is dependent on the frequency and duration of operation, the size and type of equipment, and the type of fuel uses. Vehicle traffic related to facility maintenance and employee trips would also result in emissions. However, as described in the transportation chapter, very few vehicle trips are directly associated with this program and emissions would be negligible. Environmental Setting This section describes the existing air quality conditions in the program area and evaluates the potential impacts on air quality that would result from construction and operation of the improvement proposed in the engineers report. The program area is located in the San Joaquin Air Basin. This section provides information to support the evaluation of the proposed improvements’ potential to cause or contribute to violations of state and federal ambient air quality standards and to result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants (TACs). Ambient air quality is affected by the climate, topography, and the type and amount of pollutants emitted. The proposed location for the program is subject to a combination of topographical and climatic factors that result in high potential for regional and local accumulation of pollutants. The following discussion describes climatic and topographic characteristics of the SJVAB, relevant air quality standards, and existing air quality conditions within the basin. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Climate and Meteorology The program area is located in Stanislaus County, which is part of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). The SJVAB, which is approximately 250 miles long and averages 35 miles wide, is the second largest air basin in the state. The SJVAB is bounded by the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta in the north, the Sierra Nevada mountains in the east (8,000 to 14,000 feet in elevation), the Coast Ranges in the west (averaging 3,000 feet in elevation), and the Tehachapi mountains in the south (6,000 to 8,000 feet in elevation). The SJVAB is flat with a slight downward gradient to the northwest. The valley opens to the sea at the Carquinez Straits, where the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay. The San Joaquin Valley (SJV), thus, could be considered a “bowl” open only to the north. The SJVAB has an inland Mediterranean climate averaging over 260 sunny days per year. The valley floor experiences warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. Summer high temperatures often exceed 100° F, averaging in the low 90s in the northern valley and high 90s in the south. In the entire SJVAB, high daily temperature readings in summer average 95° F. Over the last 30 years, the SJVAB averaged 106 days a year 90° F or hotter, and 40 days a year 100° F or hotter. The daily summer temperature variation can be as high as 30° F. In winter, as the cyclonic storm track moves southward, the storm systems moving in from the Pacific Ocean bring a maritime influence to the SJVAB. The high mountains to the east prevent the cold, continental air masses of the interior from influencing the valley. Winters are mild and humid. Temperatures below freezing are unusual. Average high temperatures in the winter are in the 50s, but temperatures can decrease to the 30s and 40s on days with persistent fog and low cloudiness. The average daily low temperature is 45° F. The predominant annual wind direction in the program area is from the north through west–northwest. These winds mainly occur through spring, summer, and fall. In winter, the winds tend to be either from the northwest or from the southeast, depending on storms. Persistent fog forms as a result of low wind speeds and stable thermal conditions during winter or nighttime. Higher winds during daylight hours and during spring, summer, and fall allow the region-wide transport of pollutants throughout the valley. Although marine air generally flows into the basin from the San Joaquin River Delta, the region’s topographic features restrict air movement through and out of the basin. The Coastal Range hinders wind access into the SJVAB from the west, the Tehachapis prevent southerly passage of air flow, and the Sierra Nevada range is a significant barrier to the east. These topographic features result in weak air flow, which becomes blocked vertically by high barometric pressure over the SJVAB. As a result, the SJVAB is highly susceptible to pollutant accumulation over time. Most of the surrounding mountains are taller than the normal height of summer inversion layers (1,500–3,000 feet). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Existing Conditions The federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards for seven criteria pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), PM10, PM2.5, and lead. Ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 are generally considered regional pollutants because they or their precursors affect air quality on a regional scale. Pollutants such as CO, NO2, SO2, and lead are considered local pollutants that tend to accumulate in the air locally. PM10 and PM2.5 are considered both localized and regional pollutants. In the study area, PM10, PM2.5, and ozone are of particular concern. The State of California (State) has classified the SJVAB as being in severe nonattainment for ozone and in nonattainment for PM10. The SJVAPCD has adopted an air quality improvement plan that addresses NOx and ROGs, both of which are ozone precursors and contribute to the secondary formation of PM10 and PM2.5. The plan specifies that regional air quality standards for ozone and PM10 concentrations can be met through the use of additional source controls and trip-reduction strategies. It also establishes emissions budgets for transportation and stationary sources. Those budgets, developed through air quality modeling, reveal how much air pollution can occur in an area before national ambient air quality standards are violated. Ozone Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is formed by a photochemical reaction in the atmosphere. Ozone precursors, which include ROGs and NOx, react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. Because photochemical reaction rates depend on the intensity of ultraviolet light and air temperature, ozone is primarily a summer air pollution problem. The ozone precursors—ROGs and NOx—are emitted by stationary combustion engines and mobile sources, such as construction equipment. A large source of ROGs in the region is oil and gas production in the lower San Joaquin Valley. Ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections. It can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. It is a severe eye, nose, and throat irritant. Ozone also attacks rubber, textiles, plants, and other materials, and can cause extensive cell damage and leaf discoloration in plants. Carbon Monoxide CO is essentially inert to plants and materials but can have significant effects on human health. CO is a public health concern because it combines readily with hemoglobin, reducing the amount of oxygen transported in the bloodstream. Effects on humans range from slight headaches to nausea to death. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Motor vehicles are the dominant source of CO emissions in most areas. High CO levels develop primarily during winter when periods of light winds combine with the formation of ground-level temperature inversions (typically from the evening through early morning). These conditions result in reduced dispersion of vehicle emissions. Motor vehicles also exhibit increased CO emission rates at low air temperatures. PM10 and PM2.5 Health concerns associated with suspended particulate matter focus on those particles small enough to reach the lungs when inhaled. Particulates can damage human health and retard plant growth. Particulates also reduce visibility, soil buildings and other materials, and corrode materials. PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are generated by a wide variety of sources, including agricultural activities, industrial emissions, dust suspended by vehicle traffic and construction equipment, and secondary aerosols formed by reactions in the atmosphere. In contrast to other air basins in California, the air quality in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) is not dominated by a single large, urban source, but by a number of moderately-sized urban areas spread along the valley’s main axis. Although only 10% of California’s population lives in the San Joaquin Valley, pollution sources in the region account for about 14% of the total statewide criteria pollutant emissions. With the exception of PM10, emission levels in the SJVAB have been decreasing since 1990. This is primarily due to improved controls on motor vehicle emissions, which are the primary source of CO and NOx. Particulate matter emissions are primarily from road dust, agricultural operations, residential fuel combustion, and waste burning. The existing air quality conditions in Stanislaus County can be characterized by data collected at the 14th Street monitoring station in Modesto. Air quality monitoring data from this station are summarized in Table 3.3-1. These data represent air quality monitoring data for the last 3 years for which complete data are available (2004–2006). Based on data from this station, Table 3.3-1 shows the number of days Stanislaus County exceeded the state and federal standards for ozone, CO, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and PM10 between 2004 and 2006. As indicated in Table 3.3-1, the station has experienced 14 violations of the federal 8-hour ozone standard, no violations of federal and state CO standards, and one violation of the state PM10 standard during the last 3 years for which complete data are available. Table 3.3-1 also indicates that the state 24-hour PM10 standard was violated approximately 1% of the time during the monitoring period. The national standard for PM2.5 was exceeded once in 2005 and 2006. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 3.3-1. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Measured at the 14th Street Monitoring Station in Modesto Pollutant Standards 2004 2005 2006 Ozonea Maximum 8-hour concentration (ppm) .084 .094 .097 Number of days standard exceededb NAAQS 1-hour (>0.12 ppm) 0 0 0 NAAQS 8-hour (>0.08 ppm) 0 6 8 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maximum 8-hour concentration (ppm) 2.98 2.89 3.73 Maximum 1-hour concentration (ppm) – – – Number of days standard exceededb NAAQS 8-hour (>9.0 ppm) 0 0 0 CAAQS 8-hour (>9.0 ppm) 0 0 0 NAAQS 1-hour (>35 ppm) – – – CAAQS 1-hour (>20 ppm) – – – Particulate Matter (PM10)c Nationald maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 80.0 93.0 96.0 Nationald second-highest 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 65.0 81.0 73.0 Statee maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 79.0 97.0 102.0 Statee second-highest 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 69.0 84.0 76.0 National annual average concentration (µg/m3) 29.1 29.1 31.7 State annual average concentration (µg/m3)f 29.9 29.7 31.9 Number of days standard exceededb NAAQS 24-hour (>150 µg/m3)g 0 0 0 CAAQS 24-hour (>50 µg/m3)g 36.0 51.4 46.3 Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Nationalc maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 53.0 80.0 71.0 Nationalc second-highest 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 48.0 61.0 54.0 Statee maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 67.3 89.2 72.8 Statee second-highest 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 58.5 79.1 64.9 National annual average concentration (µg/m3) 13.6 13.9 14.8 State annual average concentration (µg/m3)f 13.6 14.5 15.9 Number of days standard exceededb NAAQS 24-hour (>150 µg/m3)g 0 1 1 Sources: California Air Resources Board 2006. Notes: CAAQS = California ambient air quality standards. NAAQS = national ambient air quality standards. – = insufficient data available to determine the value. ppm = parts per million. µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. a The California 1-hour ozone standard was revoked on December 22, 2006. b An exceedance is not necessarily a violation. c Measurements usually are collected every 6 days. d National statistics are based on standard conditions data. In addition, national statistics are based on samplers using federal reference or equivalent methods. e State statistics are based on local conditions data, except in the South Coast Air Basin, for which statistics are based on standard conditions data. In addition, State statistics are based on California approved samplers. f State criteria for ensuring that data are sufficiently complete for calculating valid annual averages are more stringent than the national criteria. g Mathematical estimate of how many days’ concentrations would have been measured as higher than the level of the standard had each day been monitored. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Regulatory Framework The SJVAPCD has jurisdiction for air quality issues throughout the eight-county SJVAB, which includes Modesto and Stanislaus County. The SJVAPCD administers air quality regulations developed at the federal, state, and local levels. Air quality regulations applicable to the program are described below. Federal Regulations The primary legislation that governs federal air quality regulations is the Clean Air Act (CAA). The CAA delegates primary responsibility for ensuring clean air to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA develops rules and regulations to preserve and improve air quality and delegates specific responsibilities to state and local agencies. The EPA has established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants. Criteria pollutants include CO, NO2, SO2, ozone, PM10, and lead. If an area does not meet the federal NAAQS, federal clean air planning requirements specify that states must develop and adopt State Implementation Plans (SIPs), which are air quality plans that show how air quality standards will be attained. In California, the EPA has delegated the authority to prepare SIPs to the Air Resources Board (ARB), which, in turn, has delegated that authority to individual air districts. The program is located within a federal nonattainment area for ozone and PM10. The SJVAPCD has adopted an SIP that addresses PM10, ozone, and the ozone precursors (NOx and ROGs). The SIP specifies that regional air quality standards for ozone and PM10 concentrations can be met through additional source controls and through trip reduction strategies. The SIP also establishes emissions budgets for transportation and stationary sources. These budgets, developed through air quality modeling, reveal how much air pollution can be in an area before there is a violation of the NAAQS. State Regulations The ARB, which is part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), develops air quality regulations at the state level. The state regulations mirror federal regulations by establishing industry-specific pollution controls for criteria, toxic, and nuisance pollutants. California also requires areas to develop plans and strategies for attaining state ambient air quality standards as set forth in the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988. The ARB is also responsible for developing motor vehicle emission standards for California vehicles. In August 1998, ARB identified particulate emissions from ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM) as toxic air contaminants. In September 2000, ARB approved a comprehensive diesel risk-reduction plan to reduce emissions from both new and existing diesel-fueled engines and vehicles. The goal of the plan is to reduce diesel PM10 emissions and the associated health risk by 75% in 2010 and by 85% by 2020. The plan identifies 14 measures that ARB will implement over the next several years. To the extent that the ARB measures are enacted before any phase of construction, the proposed program would be required to comply with applicable diesel control measures. The SJVAPCD coordinates the efforts to comply with these standards for eight counties in the Central Valley, from San Joaquin County in the north to Kern County in the south. The SJVAPCD’s jurisdiction includes Stanislaus County. Table 3.3-2 identifies the ambient national and state air quality standards for these pollutants. The potential health effects of certain of these criteria pollutants are discussed under the impacts analysis, below. TACs are a category of air pollutants regulated separately from criteria pollutants. The TACs are suspected or known to cause cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, or death. There are no established ambient air quality standards for TACs. Instead, they are managed on a case-by-case basis depending on the quantity and type of emissions and proximity to potential receptors. Their effects tend to be localized and directly attributable to certain sources. Air Quality Planning and Attainment The ARB is responsible for the oversight of air quality management in the state. The ARB’s responsibilities include establishing emissions standards and regulations for certain mobile sources autos and light-duty trucks) and overseeing the efforts of local air quality management districts. The SJVAPCD is responsible for demonstrating that attainment of the ambient air quality standards is either achieved or will be achieved through proper regional planning in the SJVAB. The SJVAPCD directly regulates stationary emission sources through its permit authority, and indirectly manages emissions from mobile sources through coordination with regional municipalities and transportation planning agencies. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 3.3-2. State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards1 Federal Standards2 Concentration3 Method4 Primary3, 5 Secondary3, 6 Method7 Ozone 1 hour 0.09 ppm (180 μg/m3) Ultraviolet photometry – Same as primary standard Ultraviolet photometry 8 hours 0.070 ppm (137 μg/m3) 0.08 ppm (157 μg/m3)8 PM10 24 hours 50 μg/m3 Gravimetric or beta attenuation 150 μg/m3 Same as primary standard Inertial separation and gravimetric analysis Annual arithmetic mean 20 μg/m3 50 μg/m3 PM2.5 24 hours No separate state standard 65 μg/m3 Same as primary standard Inertial separation and gravimetric analysis Annual arithmetic mean 12 μg/m3 Gravimetric or beta attenuation 15 μg/m3 CO 8 hours 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) Non-dispersive infrared photometry (NDIR) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) None Non-dispersive infrared photometry (NDIR) 1 hours 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) 8 hours (Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) – – – NO2 Annual arithmetic mean – Gas phase chemiluminescence 0.053 ppm (100 μg/m3) Same as primary standard Gas phase chemi- luminescence 1 hour 0.25 ppm (470 μg/m3) – SO2 Annual arithmetic mean – Ultraviolet fluorescence 0.030 ppm (80 μg/m3) – Spectro- photometry (pararo-saniline method) 24 hours 0.04 ppm (105 μg/m3) 0.14 ppm (365 μg/m3) – 3 hours – – 0.5 ppm (1,300 μg/m3) 1 hours 0.25 ppm (655 μg/m3) – – Lead9 30-day average 1.5 μg/m3 Atomic absorption – – – Calendar quarter – 1.5 μg/m3 Same as primary standard High volume sampler and atomic absorption Visibility reducing particles 8 hours Extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer—visibility of 10 miles or more (0.07–30 miles or more for Lake Tahoe) due to particles when relative humidity is less than 70% Method: beta attenuation and transmittance through filter tape No federal standards Sulfates 24 hours 25 μg/m3 Ion chromatography Hydrogen sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm (42 μg/m3) Ultraviolet fluorescence Vinyl chloride9 24 hours 0.01 ppm (26 μg/m3) Gas chromatography ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Source: ARB 2006. Notes: ppm = parts per million. µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter 1 California standards for ozone, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in 17 California Code of Regulations 70200. 2 National standards (other than ozone, particulate matter, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The ozone standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 μg/m3 is equal to or less than 1. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98% of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the U.S. EPA for further clarification and current federal policies. 3 Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Equivalent units given in parentheses are based upon a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr. Most measurements of air quality are to be corrected to a reference temperature of 25°C and a reference pressure of 760 torr; ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume, or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas. 4 Any equivalent procedure that can be shown to the satisfaction of the ARB to give equivalent results at or near the level of the air quality standard may be used. 5 National Primary Standards: the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public health. 6 National Secondary Standards: the levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant. 7 Reference method as described by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). An “equivalent method” of measurement may be used but must have a “consistent relationship to the reference method” and must be approved by the EPA. 8 New federal 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 standards were promulgated by the EPA on July 18, 1997. Contact the EPA for further clarification and current federal policies. 9 The ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as toxic air contaminants with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actions allow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants. California also has standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility- reducing particulates; there are no corresponding federal criteria pollutant standards for these pollutants. Under federal law, certain TACs are called hazardous air pollutants. Because the SJVAB has ongoing violations of the NAAQS and CAAQS for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, the region is designated as a nonattainment area for these criteria pollutants. These pollutants therefore are the most relevant to air quality planning and regulation in the SJVAB. The SJVAPCD manages these pollutants through a long-term attainment planning process. This process forecasts emissions and future concentrations depending on changes in source activity, regulatory programs, and meteorological conditions. The air quality plans for demonstrating attainment for ozone and PM10 are evolving documents that are updated approximately every 3 years to reflect the changing population, economic, land use, and transportation conditions in the San Joaquin Valley. The current rules for PM10 emissions are included in Regulation VIII. The local transportation planning agencies (in this area, the Stanislaus County Organization of Governments) and the ARB provide the information needed to predict future on-road mobile source emissions. Programs for motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (smog check), fuel reformulation, encouragement of transit use, and the stringent control of stationary sources all are triggered by the nonattainment status of the area. If violations of ambient air quality standards in the region persist beyond the attainment dates predicted by SJVAPCD plans, federal ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 transportation funds can be withheld, adversely affecting future transportation projects in the region. The region needs to meet the federal 1-hour ozone standard by 2010, the 8-hour ozone standard before 2013, and the PM10 standards by 2010 (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2003). The ARB has requested that the deadline for compliance with these requirements be extended, although the EPA has not yet acted upon this request. Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts In addition to the SJVAPCD’s attainment plans, the SJVAPCD has also prepared the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts to ensure uniformity and consistency of air quality analysis and mitigation throughout the San Joaquin Valley (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002). Sensitive Receptors Land uses such as schools, children’s day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes are considered to be more sensitive than the general public to poor air quality because the population groups found at these have increased susceptibility to respiratory distress. Persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise also have increased sensitivity to poor air quality. Residential areas are also considered more sensitive to air quality conditions, compared with commercial and industrial areas, because children generally spend longer periods of time there. Elements of the program, including pipeline installation, well drilling, and pump stations, would occur near numerous sensitive receptors, including residential homes. Local Regulations Air Quality Plans Both California and the Federal government require nonattainment areas, such as the SJVAB, to reduce air pollution to healthful levels. The CCAA of 1988 and amendments to the federal CAA in 1990 required stricter air pollution control efforts than before. For example, the State of California must submit plans to the Federal government showing how nonattainment areas in California will meet Federal air quality standards by specific deadlines. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2007 Ozone Plan With the SJVAPCD 2007 Ozone Plan, mobile and stationary sources will become subject to new and more stringent regulatory requirements. As this plan is implemented, over 50 percent of the San Joaquin Valley’s population will see attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in 2015, with over 90 percent reaching attainment in 2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2008 PM2.5 Plan The EPA set the first PM2.5 NAAQS in 1997 at 15 µg/m3 for the annual standard and 65 µg/m3 for the daily standard. The SJV attains the 65 µg/m3 daily standard based on 2004-2006 data, so the 2008 PM2.5 Plan focuses on attaining the annual standard. The San Joaquin Valley (SJV)’s annual average is approximately 27 percent over the annual standard. In 2006, the EPA strengthened the daily standard by lowering it to 35 µg/m3. The 2008 PM2.5 Plan will demonstrate how the SJV will attain the annual standard and will also address the new daily standard. The plan will build on the emission reduction strategy adopted in the 2007 Ozone Plan, which focuses on reducing NOx, SO2, and PM2.5. New controls that will be included in the PM2.5 plan include more stringent restrictions on residential wood burning and space heating; more stringent limits on PM2.5, SO2, and NOx emissions from industrial sources; measures to reduce emissions from prescribed and agricultural burning; and more effective work practices to control PM2.5 in fugitive dust. This plan is due to the EPA in 2008 (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2008). Air Quality Rules Facilities with equipment that may emit air pollution or are used for controlling air pollution are subject to SJVAPCD permit requirements. Two types of permits are granted: Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO). An ATC is obtained before installing a new emissions unit. A PTO is issued after all construction is completed and the unit is ready for operation. Engines and pumps at the wells and pumping stations, along with backup generators, will be required to obtain an ATC and PTO from the SJVAPCD. As part of the application process, the application will be reviewed to ensure that it adheres to the standards set out by the SJVAPCD, including health risk analysis. The following data, specifications, plans, and drawings must be submitted with each application for ATC or PTO:  Equipment Location Drawing or Plot Plan  Equipment Description – For each emissions unit, state the make, model, size, type, and serial number of the entire emissions unit or of its major components. Provide information on all individual pieces of equipment comprising each emissions unit. List all electric motor horsepower ratings associated with all equipment.  Description of Operation – Include detailed written descriptions of all operations to be carried out in the proposed process, especially those operations that may result in the emission of air contaminants. Supply all data concerning the nature, volumes, particle sizes, weights, and concentrations of all types of air contaminants that may be discharged at each stage in the process. Describe the operation of air pollution control equipment in sufficient detail to allow the District to determine if the process can be expected to consistently operate at the required control efficiencies.  Expected Emission of Air Contaminants – Submit calculated estimates of the emission of all air contaminants from the proposed equipment, including a ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 reference to the source of emission factors. If applicable, include any test data that was collected and analyzed by independent laboratories and used to support the calculations.  Operating Schedule – Specify the maximum and the average number of hours per day, days per week, and weeks per year that the emission unit(s) will be operated.  Process Weight – Detail the type and the total weight of each material consumed or processed by each emission unit on the basis of pounds per hour, or some other mass per unit time that most accurately provides a mechanism to quantify maximum emissions. The ATC and the PTO may list conditions that limit the process weight to the quantity specified in the application.  Fuels and Burners Used – Provide the following information:  Gaseous Fuels – Type, source, heating value, sulfur content (both total and as H2S), the amount of excess combustion air utilized, and cubic feet per hour.  Liquid Fuels – Type, source, heating value, sulfur content, nitrogen content, API gravity (degrees), preheat temperature, the temperature at which the SSU viscosity is 150, the type of atomization (steam, air, or mechanical), the amount of excess combustion air utilized, and gallons per hour.  Solid Fuels – Type, source, heating value, sulfur content, nitrogen content, ash content, the amount of excess combustion air utilized, and consumption rate in pounds per hour. For all burners, indicate the make, model, size (MMBTU/Hr.), type, number of burners, and the capacity range of each burner from the minimum to the maximum rate of heat input.  Process and Instrumentation Flow Diagram  Equipment Drawings – Provide scaled and dimensioned drawings, including elevations, as required to clearly illustrate the design and operation of the emissions unit(s) and the pollution control devices. Include manufacturers catalog descriptions whenever available. The SJVAPCD has a related New Source Review (NSR) rule. This rule provides a mechanism for the SJVAPCD to issue permits to new and expanding emissions sources while ensuring that the permits meet federal and state air quality standards. New units that result in certain calculated emissions increases are required to use best available air pollution control technology (BACT) to meet standards. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies The City recognizes that its actions can be coordinated to aid the SJVAPCD in the effort of attaining ambient air quality standards. The air quality policies of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (October 2008), analyzed in the Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Modesto Urban Area General (March 2008), apply within the plan area, which includes the program locations. The relevant air quality policies include the following. Policy VII-H.2[b] . The City of Modesto and project proponents shall implement measures to reduce vehicle use and associated emissions related to existing and future land use development in the City of Modesto. Potential measures to be implemented may include those measures listed in Table 2-3 in the Final Master Environmental Impact Report. Policy VII-H.2[c] . The City of Modesto shall implement measures to reduce emissions associated with energy use by residences and businesses. Potential measures to be implemented may include those measures listed in Table 2-3 in the Final Master Environmental Impact Report. Policy VII-H.2[g] . The City of Modesto shall implement measures to reduce emissions associated with future development through the CEQA review process. Table 2-5 in the MEIR describes those measures to be implemented, as well as additional measures that may be implemented at the discretion of the City. Policy VII-H.2[h] . To be consistent with the SJVAPCD's Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans, the City of Modesto should consult with the SJVAPCD during CEQA review for discretionary projects with the potential for causing adverse air quality impacts. Policy VII-H.2[l] . The City of Modesto should encourage new air pollution sources such as, but not limited to, industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities to be located an adequate distance (based on pollutant dispersion characteristics, site orientation, prevailing winds, etc.) from residential areas and other sensitive receptors. Policy VII-H.2[m]. The City of Modesto should implement measures to reduce the temporary, yet potentially significant, local air quality impacts from construction activities. Potential measures to be implemented may include those measures listed in Table 2-6 in the Final Master Environmental Impact Report. Policy VII-H.2[n] . The City of Modesto shall require residential development projects and projects categorized as sensitive receptors (hospitals, schools, convalescent homes, etc.) to be located an adequate distance from existing and potential sources of toxic and/or odorous emissions such as freeways, major arterials, industrial sites, refuse transfer or disposal sites and hazardous material 1ocations. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance Thresholds of significance for air quality impacts have been established for this assessment based on the CEQA Environmental Checklist found in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and the SJVAPCD Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines provides guidance for the determination of significance for a proposed project. A proposed project would result in a significant impact on air quality if it would:  Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.  Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.  Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the program region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).  Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.  Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The State CEQA Guidelines further state that the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the determinations from Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thresholds of significance for the SJVAPCD are based on those established by the SJVAPCD in 1998 and revised in 2002. The program would cause a significant adverse air quality impact if any of the following conditions were present.  The program would fail to comply with the SJVAPCD’s mitigation measures for particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM10) during construction. The SJVAPCD has determined that compliance with its Regulation VIII and the implementation of other control measures presented in its Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts will constitute sufficient mitigation to reduce PM10 impacts to a level considered less than significant.  The program would cause emissions of air pollutants that would cause or substantially contribute to either localized or regional violations of the ambient air quality standards. Program emissions of more than 10 tons per year of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) or reactive organic gases (ROG) would substantially contribute to existing violations of ozone standards. Ten tons per year equals 54.8 pounds per day. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  The program would cause localized carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations that exceed the California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS) of 9 parts per million (ppm) averaged over 8 hours or 20 ppm averaged over 1 hour.  The program would cause odor problems that result in more than one confirmed complaint per year, averaged over a 3-year period, or three unconfirmed complaints per year averaged over a 3-year period.  The program would expose sensitive receptors or the general public to substantial levels of TACs. The SJVAPCD’s threshold of significance is whether the program would exceed: an increased cancer risk for the person with maximum exposure potential by 10 in 1 million, or ground- level concentrations of noncarcinogenic TACs resulting in a non-cancer hazard index greater than 1 for the person with maximum exposure. The program would not comply with the SJVAPCD’s Regulation VIII regarding particulate matter emissions from construction activities. If development of program improvements would individually cause a significant air quality impact from program operations, then the cumulative impacts of the program would be considered significant. Methods and Assumptions Construction Impact Assessment Methods The SJVAPCD does not require construction emissions estimates. Instead, it requires implementation of effective and comprehensive control measures (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002). PM10 emitted during construction activities varies greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, and weather conditions. Despite this variability in emissions, experience has shown that several feasible control measures can be reasonably implemented to reduce PM10 emissions during construction. The SJVAPCD has determined that compliance with its Regulation VIII, including implementation of all feasible control measures specified in its GAMAQI (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002), constitutes sufficient mitigation to minimize adverse air quality effects. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact AIR-1: Conflicts with or Obstruction of Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan (Significant and Unavoidable) A program is deemed inconsistent with air quality plans if it would result in population or employment growth that exceeds growth estimates included in the applicable air quality plan. Therefore, proposed programs need to be evaluated ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 to determine whether they would generate population and employment growth and, if so, whether that growth would exceed the growth rates included in the relevant air quality plans. The City of Modesto has anticipated and planned for population growth in its general plan (City of Modesto 2008). Likewise, Stanislaus County has also planned for growth and has adopted a general plan for future development, as have the other Cities in the service area. The City of Modesto and the County have participated in the Air Quality planning process and supplied information to the SJVAPCD for use in the development of the Air Quality Attainment Plans for Ozone and PM10. The population and growth estimates used in the air quality planning process form the basis for the air quality modeling and the adoption of rules and regulations in the attainment plan. The purpose of Engineer’s Report is to improve the water supply system so that the projected population growth can be accommodated. The proposed improvements do not directly add new housing or substantial sources of employment to the region. However, as described in section 3.11, “Population and Housing,” the proposed improvements would accommodate growth in the area that is consistent with and not in excess of what was projected by the general plans. Air Quality impacts associated with growth inducement include indirect emissions from vehicles and consumer product use, as well as increased stationary source emissions. The Air Quality impacts associated with the induced growth are moderated by the policies of the general plans of the County and the relevant cities. The City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan has extensive policies and goals to minimize air pollution emissions from new growth. The general plans mitigate for impacts through advanced planning and implementation of growth management strategies, and the requirement for proposed development projects to implement air quality measures to reduce emissions. The proposed improvements to the water supply system would remove an obstacle to further urban development and population growth within the program area. This development would occur in accordance with the general plans, and therefore would not result in unplanned or disorderly growth. However, the program would potentially induce growth beyond what is currently projected in the applicable Air Quality Plans for the SJVAB, and the potential increase in emissions and air quality effects are considered significant. While the policies contained in the general plans would reduce the emissions of air pollution from new development, they would not eliminate growth, nor would they necessarily reduce emissions to a level of insignificance. Individual development projects would be required to comply with CEQA, which may result in further mitigation for growth and its effects; however, such mitigation cannot be known at this time. Additional mitigation is outside of the scope of the program. Consequently, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact AIR-2: Violations of Any Air Quality Standard or Substantial Contribution to Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation during Construction of Proposed Improvements (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The SJVAPCD considers PM10 emissions to be the greatest pollutant of concern when assessing construction-related air quality impacts. The SJVAPCD has determined that compliance with its Regulation VIII and the implementation of all feasible control measures specified in its Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2002), constitute sufficient mitigation to reduce construction-related PM10 emissions to less-than-significant levels and to minimize adverse air quality effects. These mitigation measures are listed below under Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR- 2. All construction projects must abide by Regulation VIII. Consequently, this air quality analysis assumes that the City and its contractors will comply with Regulation VIII and that such compliance will be sufficient to eliminate any potentially significant air quality effects generated by construction activities. The implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. In addition, the SJVAPCD recommends the measures listed below to reduce exhaust pollutant emissions from heavy construction equipment to less-than-significant levels:  Water exposed surfaces three times daily.  Cover soil stockpiles with a tarp.  Water unpaved haul roads three times daily.  Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas.  Replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly.  Use aqueous diesel fuel in diesel equipment.  Use diesel particulate filters on diesel equipment.  Use cooled exhaust gas recirculation on diesel equipment. The SJVAPCD does not consider cancer risk from diesel-fueled construction equipment to be an issue. The assessment of cancer risk is typically based on a 70-year exposure period. Construction activities are sporadic and short-term, and once construction activities have ceased, the emissions have ceased as well. Because the exposure period to construction diesel exhaust would be well below the 70-year exposure period, construction of the proposed program is not anticipated to result in an elevated cancer risk. This impact is considered less- than-significant after implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2. Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Implement SJVAPCD Regulation VIII Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM10 The following controls are required to be implemented by the City or its contractor at all construction sites. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  All disturbed areas, including storage piles, that are not being actively used for construction purposes will be effectively stabilized to avoid dust emissions through application of water, a chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or by covering these areas with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.  All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads will be effectively stabilized to avoid dust emissions using water or a chemical stabilizer/suppressant.  All land-clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land-leveling, grading, cut-and-fill, and demolition activities will be effectively controlled to avoid fugitive dust emissions through the application of water during work or by presoaking.  When materials are transported off-site, all material will be covered or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container will be maintained.  All operations will limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. The use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)  Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles will be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions using sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.  Within urban areas, trackout will be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.  Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day will prevent carryout and trackout. Mitigation Measure AIR-2: Implement Enhanced Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM10 The following measures will be implemented by the City or its contractor at construction sites when required to mitigate significant PM10 impacts (note, these measures are to be implemented in addition to Regulation VIII requirements). 1. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. 2. Install sandbags or other erosion-control measures to prevent silt runoff. The following measures are strongly encouraged at construction sites that are large in area, are located near sensitive receptors, or that warrant additional emissions reductions for any other reason. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 1. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site. 2. Install wind breaks at windward sides of construction areas. 3. Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 miles per hour (mph). 4. Limit the area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time. 5. Regardless of the wind speed, an owner/operator must comply with Regulation VIII’s 20% opacity limitation. Impact AIR-3: Violations of Any Air Quality Standard or Substantial Contribution to An Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation during Operation of Proposed Improvements (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The sources of ROG, NOx, and CO due to the operation of the proposed improvements include: operation of engines and pumps at wells and pumping stations, the occasional use of backup generators, and vehicle traffic related to facility maintenance. No analysis has been completed to quantify the ROG, NOx, and CO emissions from the proposed improvement, as specific information on the size and type of equipment and the duration of use is required for quantification. This analysis will be required during the ATC application process and prior to issuance of a PTO. The majority of the pumps are expected to use electric power, and combustion engines are only anticipated for backup power. Therefore, emissions are anticipated to be low for daily operations. With the use of electric engines or the use of appropriate control technology for combustion emissions, program emissions are unlikely to exceed the SJVAPCD threshold. A program-specific air quality analysis is required to determine the emissions associated with all proposed equipment. The air quality analysis shall be conducted prior to the construction of program improvements. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-3 would reduce the impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measure AIR-3: Implement Control Measures for Operation Emissions of PM10 and for Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOx) In compliance with SJVAPCD rules, the City or its contractor shall install equipment with Best Available Control Technology, as indicated in a site-specific air quality analysis to reduce emissions below the SJVAPCD significance threshold. This measure will be implemented at all new or modified water system sites when required to mitigate significant PM10 and ozone impacts, as determined by a site-specific air quality analysis from the operation of proposed equipment. Impact AIR-4: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant for which the Program Region is in Nonattainment under an Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air Quality Standard (Including ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-20 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Releasing Emissions that Exceed Quantitative Thresholds for Ozone Precursors) (Significant and Unavoidable) The program site is located in the SJVAB, where air quality conditions are regulated by SJVAPCD. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, there remains any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a non-attainment area. The SJVAB is in non-attainment for ozone and PM10. The SJVAPCD has not established significance criteria for construction emissions. However, because construction would result in emissions of ozone precursors (ROG and NOx), and PM10, and could result in the cumulative net increase in these pollutants, impacts of construction emissions could be significant. Since construction would not be long-term, construction of the program would not contribute to the cumulative SJVAB’s long-term air pollution problems. Operation of the equipment at proposed improvements is not anticipated to result in an increase in ozone precursor (NOx) emissions above the SJVAPCD thresholds of 10 tons per year, as the majority of the equipment is powered by electric engines. Operation of emergency generators would result in a net increase in emissions of ROG, NOx and PM10. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, the program results in any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a nonattainment area. Implementation of the proposed air quality Mitigation Measure will reduce emissions of PM10 associated with construction. Emissions of PM10, ROG, and NOx associated with operations will be reduced by the use of electric engines and emission control devices for back-up generators and mitigation measures. However, the operation of equipment will result in a cumulative net increase in emissions and this impact is considered Significant and Unavoidable. Impact AIR-5: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations (Less than Significant) During construction activities for the proposed improvements, construction emissions have the potential to affect sensitive receptors located at and near the program site. These sensitive receptors include single-family residential units and schools around proposed improvement sites. Therefore, nuisances associated with fugitive dust and construction activity emissions would affect adjacent residences. The control measures identified under Mitigation Measures AIR-1 and AIR-2 will ensure that impacts on sensitive receptors are less-than- significant. Impact AIR-6: Creation of Objectionable Odors Affecting a Substantial Number of People (Less than Significant) The SJVAPCD guide requires that sensitive receptors be located an adequate distance from existing and potential toxic air pollutant emissions and noxious ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Air Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.3-21 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 odors. However, water pipelines, wells, and pump stations are not considered an odor source. Therefore, the proposed program is not anticipated to generate objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The odor impact would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.4 Biological Resources The environmental setting and impact analysis for biological resources was developed through a review of the following documents and information sources:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the Del Rio Community Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  the MEIR for the City’s general plan (Jones & Stokes 2008),  the Turlock General Plan,  the Waterford Community Plan,  a records search of the California Natural Diversity Database for Stanislaus County (California Natural Diversity Database 2008),  a records search of the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS’s) online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California for Stanislaus County (California Native Plant Society 2008),  a list of endangered and threatened species that may occur in or be affected by projects in Stanislaus County obtained from the USFWS web site (2008),  published and unpublished reports,  aerial photographs of the program area, and  ICF Jones & Stokes file information. Environmental Setting Existing Conditions The study area includes the communities of Del Rio, Empire, Grayson, Hickman, and Salida, and the Cities of Ceres, Modesto, Turlock, and Waterford in Stanislaus County. Most of the study area occurs within current or planned urbanized portions of these communities. The portions that are not yet urbanized contain a variety of natural communities (habitats), which are described below. The following descriptions of natural communities occurring in the study area were obtained from the 2008 MEIR for the City of Modesto’s general plan (Jones & Stokes 2008) and the City of Modesto Wastewater Master Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (Turnstone Consulting 2007). The descriptions include the communities within the study area where each community is likely to occur. Also, each community is described briefly. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Cities and Communities The study area is located within California’s Central Valley, a vast and primarily flat area bounded by the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the east and the Coast Ranges to the west. The entire study area occurs in Stanislaus County, located east of San Francisco and south of Sacramento. Modesto The City of Modesto is located in central Stanislaus County. The city is highly developed. It is located along the Tuolumne River, Dry Creek, and open concrete-lined irrigation channels, which flow through the developed area of the city. With the exception of the riparian areas along the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek, there are not many natural communities within the City limits. The outskirts of the City remain agricultural. Ceres The City of Ceres is located adjacent to and south of the City of Modesto. The city encompasses approximately 6.3 square miles. The Tuolumne River abuts the northern boundary of the city. North Ceres, where proposed facilities would be constructed, is predominantly developed with residential and industrial uses. Del Rio The small community of Del Rio is located along the south bank of the Stanislaus River. It is composed of a developed area surrounding a large golf course and country club in the center of the community. The Stanislaus River winds around the north and west sides of the community, and agricultural lands and activities surround the city on its south and east sides. Empire The community of Empire is located immediately east of the City of Modesto, south of Dry Creek and north of the Tuolumne River. The community occupies 1.6 square miles, the majority of which is developed. Agricultural lands surround the city on all sides. Grayson The Town of Grayson is located on the west bank of an old channel of the San Joaquin River. Grayson is a rural agricultural community that was once a port destination for transport of grains along the river. The city is almost entirely ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 developed; however, a large riparian area exists on its east side along the river. Additionally, agricultural lands surround the city on the north, west, and south sides. Hickman The Community of Hickman is located approximately 1.5 miles south of the Tuolumne River. It is defined by the surrounding rural agricultural landscape, some of which occurs within the community limits. The limits of the community include agricultural lands and some grasslands, as well as urban developed areas. Salida The community of Salida is located northwest of the City of Modesto, along Highway 99 and south of Ripon. The community encompasses 5.2 square miles, the majority of which is developed and does not include many natural communities. Turlock The City of Turlock is located along Highway 99. It is primarily an urban developed area and does not include many natural communities within its city limits in the study area. Waterford The City of Waterford is located along the north bank of the Tuolumne River. It includes some riparian areas, grassland, and agricultural lands within the study area. Natural Communities The study area, while predominately urban and developed, consists of nine habitat and land-cover types, including valley foothill riparian, riverine, freshwater wetland and vernal pool, grassland, pasture, cropland, orchard- vineyard, and urban areas. Valley Foothill Riparian Valley foothill riparian habitat occurs adjacent to rivers and perennial and intermittent streams. Riparian habitat in the study area is found in the following areas: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  along the Tuolumne River in Modesto, Ceres, and Waterford,  along Dry Creek in Modesto,  along the Stanislaus River in Del Rio, and  along an old channel of the San Joaquin River in Grayson. Riparian areas are helpful in maintaining the stability of stream banks and the configuration of streams. Vegetation in this habitat is also beneficial to water quality, since polluting nutrients are absorbed before reaching open water. Common riparian plants include the following native species: willow (Salix sp.), valley oak (Quercus lobata), box elder (Acer negundo), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis var. californicus), Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), wild grape (Vitis californicu.), and California blackberry (Rubus ursinus). Additionally, many riparian areas are invaded by the non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). Stands of elderberry shrubs with an understory of annual grasses and forbs are typically found in riparian vegetation throughout the Sacramento and northern San Joaquin Valleys, at least as far south as Merced County. Elderberry shrubs are the host plant for the federally-threatened valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB; Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), which is described below under “Special-Status Wildlife Species.” The importance of riparian areas to wildlife is related primarily to vegetation structure and the presence of water. Riparian habitat provides abundant food, water, escape, nesting, and thermal cover for mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates, while also serving as migration and dispersal corridors for these animals (Stanley et al. 1991 and Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988 in Jones & Stokes 2003). Many invertebrates that are important food sources for other animals live entirely in or near riparian habitats. Some amphibians are dependent on these habitats for breeding. Riparian areas provide important refuge areas and winter habitat for migratory bird species in the Pacific Flyway. The leaf litter and fallen branches in riparian habitats provide cover for amphibians such as western toad (Bufo boreas) and Pacific tree frog (Hyla regilla). Several lizards are also common in these areas, including western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) and Gilbert’s skink (Eumeces gilberti). Snakes that may be found in riparian habitats include the racer (Coluber constrictor), Pacific gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer catenifer), and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis). Riparian habitats provide breeding and foraging areas for a wide range of avian species. Woodpeckers, such as Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii) and northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), excavate nest holes in trees. Abandoned nest holes are used by other birds, such as ash-throated flycatcher (Myiarchus cinerascens) and western screech owl (Otus kennicottii). Other avian species typical of riparian areas in the region include yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), and Bewick’s wren (Thryomanes bewickii). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Small mammals occurring in riparian habitats may include the ornate shrew (Sorex ornatus), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), and brush mouse (Peromyscus boylei). Predators such as the long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) are likely to be attracted to the wooded riparian habitats because of the abundance of prey. Because riparian areas are considered to be of significant inherent value for wildlife, the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) requires mitigation for any net loss of riparian habitats resulting from development or habitat alteration. Riverine/Open Water The open water areas of rivers in the study area are considered waters of the United States by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as well as waters of the State by the Regional Water Quality Control Board These rivers and the communities in which they occur are listed in the Valley Foothill Riparian section above. Many of the wildlife species listed above for riparian habitats also occur in riverine habitat. Open water areas in the study area provide resting habitat and escape cover for many species of waterfowl. Some bird species, such as gulls and terns, hunt over open water. Birds such as herons and belted kingfishers forage in open water habitat, primarily along the water’s edge. Many species of insectivorous birds, including swallows, swifts, and flycatchers, catch their prey over open water. Mammals such as river otters (Lutra canadensis) and long- tailed weasels hunt in riverine habitat for fish, invertebrates, amphibians, and birds. Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) and beaver (Castor canadensis) are also commonly found in this habitat. The Tuolumne River and associated waterways support many species of freshwater and anadromous fish. Freshwater species are fish species that spend their entire life cycle within freshwater portions of free-flowing rivers, tidally- influenced delta sloughs and channels, and reservoirs, lakes, and ponds. Introduced freshwater species greatly outnumber native species in the Tuolumne River and associated waterways. Largemouth and smallmouth bass, catfish, sunfish, and forage fish species threadfin shad) are abundant and occur in most aquatic habitats. Relative to the rivers, however, the abundance and diversity of species in the irrigation ditches is likely low because of the absence of structural complexity provided by more diverse channel form and riparian and aquatic vegetation. In addition, warm water temperature and low dissolved oxygen during the late summer and early fall, and periodic dewatering of irrigation channels, likely affect the distribution and abundance of many species. Anadromous species are marine species that return to their natal freshwater habitats to spawn. The amount of time individuals spend as adults in the ocean or as juveniles in freshwater various from species to species. For example, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 juvenile steelhead spend from 1 to 2 years in freshwater before emigrating to the ocean as smolts, whereas juvenile Chinook salmon spend several months to less than 1 year in freshwater before emigrating to the ocean as smolts. With the exception of striped bass and American shad, all of the anadromous species found in the Tuolumne River are native. However, all of these anadromous species (both native and non-native) spawn in the rivers of the Central Valley. A more detailed discussion of Chinook salmon, steelhead, Sacramento splittail, river lamprey, hardhead, and San Joaquin roach is included under “Special-Status Fish” below. Wetland and Vernal Pool Wetlands are vegetated habitats that are inundated with water with enough frequency to support plant species adapted to wet conditions. Within the study area, this includes areas that are transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems marshes and the fringes of ponds, streams, and rivers) as well as frequently flooded areas within terrestrial systems seasonally wet meadows). Vernal pools are considered a subset of seasonal freshwater wetlands. Vernal pools are shallow, ephemeral bodies of water that occupy depressions in grasslands, pastures, and woodlands. Usually these areas have some kind of hard subsurface layer compacted clay soil) that resists the flow of water; therefore, they fill with water during winter rains and subsequently dry up during the spring and early summer. Specialized species have evolved in vernal pools and are endemic to them; as a result, many vernal pool species are quite rare. Because a large percentage of the vernal pools in the County (and in California overall) have been converted to agricultural or urban uses, most of these rare vernal pool species are also threatened. Wetlands in the study area could occur adjacent to or within the channel of the four rivers listed in the valley foothill riparian section above. Vernal pools would be most likely to occur in pastures and grassland in the study area in the communities of Waterford or Hickman and, less likely, within the limits of the City of Modesto. Wetlands are among the most productive habitats in California (and in the world) and include a diverse array of plant and wildlife. Dominant plant species in most freshwater wetlands in the study area are bulrushes (Scirpus spp., Schoenoplectus spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), and rushes (Juncus spp.). Other common species include duckweeds (Lemna spp.), smartweeds (Polygonum spp.), spikerushes (Eleocharis spp.), and flatsedges (Cyperus spp.) A number of special-status plant species occur in vernal pools are discussed below under “Special-Status Plants.” Wetlands are important to numerous amphibians, wading birds, waterfowl, and shorebirds. Common wildlife known to occur in wetland habitats include ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 bullfrogs (Rana catesbeieana), great egrets (Ardea alba), snowy egrets (Egretta thula), soras (Porzana carolina), American coots (Fulica americana), marsh wrens (Cistothorus palustris), song sparrows (Melospiza melodia), and red- winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Grassland Grassland habitat is made up of a mixture of annual and perennial grasses, herbs, and wildflowers. For the most part, however, grassland plant communities are dominated by nonnative annual grasses and only have small pockets of native species, such as perennial bunch grasses. Existing grasslands within the study area are sometimes associated with native oak savannahs. A primary impact on grassland communities has been the practice of continuous unplanned grazing, which results in the overgrazing of plants and ultimately their decline and loss. Grasslands would be most likely to occur in the study area in the communities of Waterford or Hickman. These savannah/grasslands provide food and cover for shrews, rodents, rabbits, birds, and reptiles. Many of these wildlife species are prey for snakes, raptors, and carnivores common to grassland communities. While such predators use this habitat for foraging, waterfowl may forage in vernal pools within the grassland habitat. Pasture Pastures often occur in association with agricultural habitats, and may be found adjacent to riparian and grassland habitats. The vegetation is a mix of perennial grasses and legumes that provide 100% canopy closure. The vegetation mix varies according to management practices, such as seed mixture, fertilization, soil type, irrigation, weed control, the type of livestock, stocking rates, and grazing duration. Pasture would be most likely to occur in the study area in the communities of Waterford and Hickman, and might be found on the limits of the community of Grayson. Irrigated pastures in Stanislaus County are typically dominated by annual and perennial nonnative grasses and forbs commonly grown for forage, including Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), Italian ryegrass (Lolium Harding grass (Phalaris aquatics), white clover (Trifolium repens), and white sweetclover (Melilotus alba). Lower-lying areas that are seasonally saturated for long periods of time may support water- loving plant species typically found in freshwater wetlands, including annual bluegrass (Poa annua), water primrose (Ludwigia peploides), hyssop loosestrife hyssopijolium), toad rush (Juncus bufonius), and species of flatsedge ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 (Cyperus sp.). The unlined irrigation ditches that often provide water to flood- irrigate pastures may also support plant growth. Pastures are used by a variety of wildlife. Ground-nesting birds such as waterfowl and pheasants nest in pastures if adequate vegetation is present at the onset of the nesting season. Some of the highest pheasant counts have been recorded in irrigated pastures in Stanislaus County (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988). Flood irrigation of pastures provides feeding and roosting sites for many wetland-associated birds, such as shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl, and raptors. Deer may graze pastures, provided there is adequate cover in close proximity to foraging areas. Cropland Croplands occur in association with orchard-vineyard, pasture, grassland, and riparian habitat types. Most crops tend to be annuals and are managed in a rotation system. Croplands would be most likely to occur within the study area in the communities of Hickman, Del Rio, Grayson and small areas of the City of Modesto. Croplands have been established on the state’s most fertile soils, which historically supported an abundance of wildlife. Croplands have greatly reduced the wildlife richness and diversity in the state. However, many species of rodents and birds have adapted to agriculture and are considered pests to crops. Other wildlife, such as waterfowl and sandhill cranes, use waste grains after harvest and are not considered pests. Bats, which prey primarily on insects, and raptors (including Swainson’s hawks), which feed on rodents, are considered beneficial to croplands. Crop patterns and cultural practices that include clean farming, double cropping, and chemical control can be detrimental to wildlife (Robinson 1990 and Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988 in Jones & Stokes 2003). Orchard-Vineyard Orchard-vineyard habitats are generally associated with other agricultural types previously mentioned. They are frequently associated with riparian areas and grasslands. Like cropland, these areas have been planted on deep fertile soils, which once supported diverse natural habitats. Orchard-vineyard habitats would be most likely to occur within the study area in portions of the City of Modesto and in the communities of Hickman, Del Rio, and Grayson Orchards in the program area are mostly constituted of almonds (Prunus dulcis) and English walnuts (Juglans regia). These orchards support scattered patches of ruderal plant species, including ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. gussoneanum), black mustard (Brassica nigra), cheeseweed (Malva pawiflora) and Mexican sprangletop (Leptochloa uninervia). These plant species grow below the tree canopy and along the access roads around the perimeters of the orchards. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Like croplands, orchards and vineyards support some species of birds and mammals that have adapted to agriculture. Deer and rabbits may browse on the trees or vines, and squirrels and numerous birds feed on fruits and nuts. Common wildlife that feed on almonds and walnuts are the northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), western scrub jay, American crow (Corvus yellow-billed magpie, Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), and California ground squirrel. Mourning doves (Zenaida macroura) use orchards for cover and nesting sites. Common reptiles, such as the side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), are known to persist under these conditions. Evergreen orchards provide refuge for wildlife during inclement weather, or act as shade during scorching San Joaquin Valley summer days. Water used for irrigation also can be used by various wildlife species. Generally, burrowing animals, such as California ground squirrels and gophers (Thomomys bottae), are discouraged in orchards and vineyards because of damage they may cause to crops and irrigation systems. Urban Area Urban areas are host to a variety of plants, many or most of which are planted landscape species that are not native to the region. Most of these vegetated areas are maintained in a static condition in some way by human activities. Urban areas are present in each community and city within the study area. Extensive planting of nonnative vegetation in urban areas can reduce the diversity of wildlife species within a region. Three urban categories relevant to wildlife are distinguished by Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988, in Jones & Stokes 2003): downtown, urban residential, and suburbia. The downtown is usually at the center, followed by concentric zones of urban residential and suburbs. There tends to be a progression outward of decreasing development and increasing vegetative cover. In the downtown area, biodiversity tends to be low, with house mice (Mus musculus), rats (Rattus sp.), rock doves (Columba livia), house sparrows, and European starlings composing most of the species. The urban residential zone is characterized by a more varied mosaic of vegetation, which provides habitat for western scrub jays, mockingbirds (Mimus polyglottos), house finches, Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), raccoons (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis). Suburban areas with mature vegetation closely approximate a somewhat natural environment, and a proportionately greater number of native species occur. Various species of small passerine birds occur in this area, along with California quail (Callipepla californica), deer (Odocoileus hemionus), black-tailed jackrabbits (Lepus californicus), striped skunk, coyote (Canis latrans), gopher snake, and western fence lizard. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Special-Status Species For the purposes of this PEIR, special-status species are defined as:  species listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 17.12 for listed plants, 50 CFR 17.11 for listed animals, and various notices in the Federal Register [FR] for proposed species),  species that are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered under the ESA (71 FR 53755, September 12, 2006),  species that are listed or proposed for listing by the State of California as threatened or endangered under the CESA (14 CCR 670.5),  plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (California Fish and Game Code, Section 1900 et seq.),  plants considered by CNPS to be “rare, threatened, or endangered in California,”  species that meet the definitions of rare or endangered under the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15380,  animals fully protected in California (California Fish and Game Code, Section 3511 [birds], 4700 [mammals], and 5050 [reptiles and amphibians]), and  animals that are California species of special concern, as identified in the DFG’s special animals list (California Department of Fish and Game 2006). Tables 3.4-1 and 3.4-2 identify the special-status plant, wildlife and fish species that could occur in the program area. These tables are based on a review of the (2008) and CNPS Online Inventory (2008) for Stanislaus County and the USFWS list for federal endangered and threatened species that occur in or may be affected by projects in Stanislaus County (USFWS 2008). Species’ legal status, geographic distribution, habitat requirements, and known and potential occurrence in the study area are included in the tables. Special-Status Plants Sixty-three special-status plant species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the study area (Table 3.4-1). Of these 63 special-status plants, 35 were determined to have the potential to occur in the study area itself, based on species range information, known occurrences, and the presence of suitable habitat in the study area. The remaining 28 species were eliminated from consideration because of lack of suitable habitat and/or because the study area is outside the range for the species. All of the special-status plant species with potential to occur in the study area are either vernal pool or grassland species. Most of the grassland species are also associated with mesic (wet) habitats. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Special-Status Plants with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area and Vicinity Page 1 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Sharsmith’s onion Allium sharsmithiae Alameda, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Bulbiferous herb found in chaparral and cismontane woodland in rock serpentine soils from 400–1,200 meters; blooming period is March through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Alkali milk-vetch Astragalus tener var. tener Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced, Monterey, Napa, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Joaquin, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in alkaline soils of valley and foothill grasslands in adobe clay and vernal pools from 1–60 meters; blooming period is March through June Grassland and vernal pool habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Heartscale Atriplex cordulata Alameda, Butte, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in saline or alkaline soils in chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, and valley and foothill grasslands from 1–375 meters Grassland and wetland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Brittlescale Atriplex depressa Alameda, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in alkaline clay soils in chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools below 320 meters; blooming period is May through October Grassland and wetland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Lesser saltscale Atriplex minuscula Butte, Fresno, Kern, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tulare Counties Annual herb found in sandy, alkaline soils in chenopod scrub, playas, and valley and foothill grasslands from 15–200 meters; blooming period is May through October Grassland and wetland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Vernal pool smallscale Atriplex persistens Glenn, Madera, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus, and Tulare Counties Annual herb found in alkaline vernal pools from 10–115 meters; blooming period is June through October Vernal pool habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Big tarplant Blepharizonia plumosa San Francisco Bay Area, with occurrences in Alameda, Contra Costa, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Solano Counties Annual herb occurring in valley and foothill grassland from 30–505 meters in elevation; blooming period is July through October Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 2 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Round-leaved filaree California Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kings, Kern, Lake, Lassen, Los Angeles, Merced, Monterey, Napa, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Benit, Santa Clara, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tehama, Ventura, and Yolo Counties; Santa Cruz Islands; Baja California; and Oregon Annual herb occurring in clay soils in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grasslands from 15–1,200 meters; blooming period is from March through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Hoover’s calycadenia Calycadenia hooveri Calaveras, Madera, Merced, Mariposa, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in rocky soils in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grasslands from 65–300 meters in elevation; blooming period is July through September Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Chaparral harebell Campanula exigua Alameda, Contra Costa, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in rocky usually serpentinite soils in chaparral from 275– 1,250 meters in elevation; blooming period is May through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Sharsmith’s harebell Campanula sharsmithiae Santa Clara and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in rocky, serpentinite soils in chaparral from 490– 855 meters; blooming period is April through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Succulent owl’s clover Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta T/E/1B.2 Fresno, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus Counties Hemiparasitic annual herb occurring in vernal pools from 50–750 meters in elevation; blooming period is April through May Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Lemmon’s jewelflower Caulanthus coulteri var. lemmonii Alameda, Fresno, Kings, Kern, Merced, Monterey, Santa Barbara, San Benito, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Stanislaus, and Ventura Counties Annual herb occurring in pinyon and juniper woodland and valley and foothill grassland from 80–1,220 meters; blooming period is March through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Hoover’s spurge Chamaesyce hooveri T/–/1B.2 Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Merced, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Tulare Counties Annual herb found in vernal pools from 25–250 meters in elevation; blooming period is from July through September, uncommonly extends to October Vernal pool habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 3 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Mt. Hamilton thistle Cirsium fontinale var. campylon Alameda, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Perennial herb occurring in serpentinite seeps in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands from 100–890 meters; blooming period is April (uncommonly as early as February) through October The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Beaked clarkia Clarkia rostrata Merced, Mariposa, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties Annual herb found in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grassland from 60– 500 meters in elevation; blooming period is April through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Small-flowered morning- glory Convolvulus simulans Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Benito, San Clemente Island, Santa Catalina Island, Santa Cruz Island, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, and Stanislaus Counties, and Baja California Annual herb occurring in clay, serpentinite seeps in chaparral openings, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland from 30– 700 meters; blooming period is from March through July Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Mt. Hamilton Coreopsis Coreopsis hamiltonii Alameda, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in Cismontane woodland from 550–1,300 meters in elevation; blooming period is from March through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Hoover’s hooveri Contra Costa, Kern, Madera, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in inland dunes and sandy soils in valley and foothill grassland from 9–150 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Mariposa mariposae Calaveras, Mariposa, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties Annual herb occurring in serpentinite, rocky chaparral from 200–650 meters; blooming period is from April through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Hospital Canyon larkspur Delphinium californicum ssp. interius Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus Counties Perennial herb occurring in chaparral openings and in cismontane woodland in mesic soils from 230–1,095 meters; blooming period is from April through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 4 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Dwarf downingia Downingia pusilla Fresno, Merced, Napa, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Yuba Counties and in South America Annual herb occurring in mesic valley and foothill grasslands and vernal pools below 445 meters; blooming period is from March through May Grassland and vernal pool habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Delta button-celery Eryngium racemosum –/E/1B.1 Calaveras, Contra Costa, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus Counties Annual/perennial herb occurring in vernally mesic clay depressions in riparian scrub from 3–30 meters in elevation; blooming period is from June through September Riparian habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Spiny-sepaled button- celery Eryngium spinosepalum Eastern San Joaquin Valley and Sierra Nevada foothills, Calaveras, Fresno, Madera, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Tuolumne Counties Annual or perennial herb found in valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools from 80-255 meters; blooming period is April through May Vernal pool habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Diamond-petaled California poppy rhombipetala Alameda, Contra Costa, Colusa, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in alkaline, clay soils in valley and foothill grasslands below 975 meters in elevation; blooming period is from March through April Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Talus fritillary Fritillaria falcata Alameda, Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Bulbiferous herb occurring in serpentinite, often talus soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and lower montane coniferous forest from 300–1,525 meters in elevation. Blooming period is from March through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Napa western flax Hesperolinon serpentinum Alameda, Lake, Napa, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in serpentinite chaparral from 50–800 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through July The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Knotted rush Juncus nodosus Inyo, San Bernardino, Stanislaus, and Tulare Counties, and elsewhere Rhizomatous herb occurring in mesic meadows and seeps and along margins of marshes and swamps from 30–1,980 meters in elevation; blooming period is from July through September Wetland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 5 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Legenere Legenere limosa Alameda, Lake, Napa, Placer, Sacramento, Santa Clara, Shasta, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Yuba Counties Annual herb occurring in vernal pools from 1–880 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through June Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Mt. Hamilton lomatium Lomatium observatorium Santa Clara and Stanislaus Counties Perennial herb occurring in cismontane woodland from 1,219–1,330 meters in elevation. Known from fewer than five occurrences; blooming period is from March through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Red-flowered lotus Lotus rubriflorus Colusa, Stanislaus, and Tehama Counties Annual herb occurring in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grasslands from 200–425 meters in elevation. Known from only four disjunct occurrences. Blooming period is from April through June Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Showy madia Madia radiata Scattered populations in the interior foothills of the south Coast Ranges: Contra Costa, Fresno, Kings, Kern, Monterey, Santa Barbara, San Benito, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grasslands from 25–900 meters; blooming period is from March through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Hall’s bush mallow Malacothamnus hallii Contra Costa, Mendocino, Merced, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Stanislaus Counties Evergreen shrub occurring in chaparral and Coastal scrub from 10–760 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through September (uncommonly till October) The Program Area does not contain suitable habitat for this species Merced monardella Monardella leucocephala Merced and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in sandy, mesic valley and foothill grasslands from 35–100 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through August Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Colusa grass Neostapfia colusana T/E/1B.1 Colusa, Glenn, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties Annual herb occurring in large vernal pools with adobe soils from 5–200 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through August Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 6 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area San Joaquin Orcutt grass Orcuttia inaequalis T/E/1B.1 Fresno, Madera, Merced, Solano, Stanislaus, and Tulare Counties Annual herb occurring in vernal pools from 10–755 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through September Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Hairy Orcutt grass Orcuttia pilosa E/E/1B.1 Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tehama Counties Annual herb occurring in vernal pools from 55–200 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through September Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Mt. Diablo phacelia Phacelia phacelioides Contra Costa, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in rocky soils in chaparral and cismontane woodland from 500–1,370 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Hooked popcorn-flower uncinatus Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Luis Obispo, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in chaparral in sandy soils, Cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands from 300–760 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Hartweg’s golden sunburst Pseudobahia bahiifolia E/E/1B.1 El Dorado, Fresno, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Yuba Counties Annual shrub occurring in clay soils, often acidic, in cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grassland from 15–150 in elevation; blooming period is from March through April Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Green’s tuctoria Tuctoria greenei E/R/1B.1 Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Madera, Merced, Shasta, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Tulare Counties Annual herb occurring in vernal pools from 30–1,070 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through July, uncommonly extending to September Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Brewer’s clarkia Clarkia breweri Alameda, Fresno, Merced, Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub, often occurring in serpentinite soils, from 215–1,000 meters in elevation; blooming period is from April through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Santa Clara thornmint Acanthomintha lanceolata Alameda, Fresno, Merced, Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, Stanislaus Counties Annual herb occurring in rocky soils in chaparral (often serpentinite soils), cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub from 80–1,200 meters in elevation; blooming period is from March through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 7 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area California androsace Androsace elongata ssp. acuta Alameda, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Los Angeles, Merced, San Bernardino, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Diego, Siskiyou, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Stanislaus, and Tehama Counties and Baja California and Oregon Annual herb occurring in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grasslands from 150– 1,200 meters in elevation; blooming period is from March through June Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Crownscale Atriplex coronata var.coronata Southern Sacramento Valley, San Joaquin Valley, eastern Inner South Coast Ranges Annual herb found in alkaline soils in chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland and vernal pools below 590 meters; blooming period is March through October Grassland and wetland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Sierra bolandra Bolandra californica Alpine, Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Mariposa, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties Perennial herb occurring in mesic, rocky lower montane coniferous forest and upper montane coniferous forest from 975–2,450 meters in elevation; blooming period is from June through July The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Oakland star-tulip Calochortus umbellatus Alameda, Contra Costa, Lake, Marin, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo, and Stanislaus Counties Bulbiferous herb often in serpentinite soils in broad-leafed upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest, and valley and foothill grasslands from 100–700 meters in elevation; blooming period is from March through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Serpentine collomia Collomia diversifolia Contra Costa, Colusa, Glenn, Lake, Mendocino, Napa, Shasta, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties Annual herb occurring in serpentinite, rocky or gravelly soils in chaparral and cismontane woodland from 300–600 meters in elevation; blooming period is from May through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Gypsum-loving larkspur Delphinium gypsophilum ssp. gypsophilum Inner South Coast Ranges, San Joaquin Valley, Tehachapi Mountains, southern Sierra Nevada foothills Annual herb found in chenopod scrub, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland from 100–825 meters; blooming period is from February through May The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 8 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Bay buckwheat Eriogonum umbellatum var. bahiiforme Alameda, Contra Costa, Colusa, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, San Benito, Santa Clara, Siskiyou, San Joaquin, Stanislaus Perennial herb found in cismontane woodland and lower montane coniferous forest on rocky, often serpentinite substrate from 700-2200 meters; blooming period is from July through September The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Jepson’s woolly sunflower jepsonii Alameda, Contra Costa, Kern, San Benito, Santa Clara, Stanislaus, and Ventura Counties Perennial herb found in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, sometimes serpentinite, on dry, rocky slopes from 200-1025 meters; blooming period is from April through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Stinkbells Fritillaria agrestis Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Mendocino, Monterey, Mariposa, Placer, Sacramento, Santa Barbara, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties Bulbiferous herb found in chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, on clay, sometimes serpentinite substrate from 10-1555 meters; blooming period is from March through May Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Serpentine bluecup Githopsis pulchella ssp. serpentinicola Amador, El Dorado, Mariposa, Stanislaus, Tuolumne Annual herb found in cismontane woodland on serpentinite or Ione soils; blooming period is from May through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Hogwallow starfish Hesperevax caulescens Alameda, Amador, Butte, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Merced, Napa, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in valley and foothill grassland in mesic clay soils from 0-505 meters; blooming period is from March through June Grassland habitats in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species Foothill jepsonia Jepsonia heterandra Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Mariposa, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties Perennial herb found in cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest on rocky, metamorphic substrate from 50– 500 meters; blooming period is from August through December The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Ferris’s goldfields Lasthenia ferrisiae Alameda, Butte, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Kings, Kern, Merced, Monterey, San Benito, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare, Ventura, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in vernal pools on alkaline, clay-based soils, from 20-700 meters; blooming period is from February through May Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 9 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Serpentine leptosiphon Leptosiphon ambiguus Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced, San Benito, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Stanislaus Annual herb found in cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland on serpentinite soils from120–1130 meters; blooming period is from May through July The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Spring lessingia Lessingia tenuis Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura Counties Annual herb found in lower montane coniferous forest from 300-2150 meters; blooming period is from May through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Sylvan microseris Microseris sylvatica Occurs in Alameda, Amador, Butte, Contra Costa, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Lassen, Los Angeles Merced, Napa, Nevada, Placer, San Benito, Santa Clara*, Solano, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tuolumne, Tulare, and Yolo Counties Perennial herb found in chaparral, Great Basin scrub, pinyon and juniper woodland, oak woodland, and valley and foothill grassland on serpentinite from 45-1500 meters; blooming period is from March through June. The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Sierra monardella Monardella candicans Amador, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Kern, Madera, Mariposa, Nevada, Placer, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare, and Tuolumne Counties Annual herb found in chaparral, woodland, low coniferous forest, sandy or gravelly soils from 150-800 meters; blooming period is from April through July The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species California adder’s-tongue Ophioglossum californicum Northern and central Sierra Nevada foothills, central and southern coast, Amador, Butte, Merced, Monterey, Mariposa, Orange, San Bernardino*, San Diego, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Counties, Baja California Perennial rhizomatous herb found in vernal pools margins and in moist areas in grassland and chaparral from 60-525 meters; blooming period is from January through June The Program Area is outside of the elevation range and does not provide suitable habitat for this species Michael’s rein orchid (Purple-flowered piperia) Piperia michaelii Sierra Nevada Foothills, coastal mountains, San Francisco Bay Area Perennial herb found in coastal bluff scrub, closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and lower montane coniferous forest from 3- 915 meters; blooming period is from April through August. The Program Area does not provide suitable habitat for this species ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-1. Continued Page 10 of 10 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Potential to Occur in the Proposed Program Area Delta woolly-marbles Psilocarphus brevissimus var. multiflorus Deltaic central valley and San Francisco bay area, Alameda, Napa, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, Solano, Stanislaus, and Yolo Counties Annual herb found in vernal pools from 10- 500 meters; blooming period is May through June Vernal pools in the Program Area could provide suitable habitat for this species a Status definitions: Federal E = listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. T = listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. SC = species for which USFWS has sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded. − = no listing. State E = listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. T = listed as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. R = rare. − = no listing. California Native Plant Society (CNPS) 1B = List 1B species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2 = List 2 species: rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. 3 = List 3 species: plants about which more information is needed to determine their status. 4 = List 4 species: plants with limited distribution (Watch List) Threat Code Extensions 1 = seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened-high degree and immediacy of threat). 2 = fairly endangered in California (20–80% occurrences threatened). 3 = not very endangered in California. b Under petition for federal listing under the ESA. Species under petition are required to be actively considered by USFWS for elevation to proposed endangered or threatened status. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Special-status plant species that occur in vernal pools in Stanislaus County and could occur in the study area include alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener), heartscale (Atriplex cordulata), vernal pool smalescale (Atriplex persistens), crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. coronata), brittlescale (Atriplex depressa), succulent owl’s clover (Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta), Hoover’s spurge (Chamaesyce hooveri), dwarf Downingia (Downingia pusilla), delta button-celery, legenere (Legenere limosa), Colusa grass (Neostapfia colusana), San Joaquin Orcutt grass (Orcuttia inaequalis), hairy Orcutt (Orcuttia pilosa), and Greene’s tuctoria (Tuctoria greenei). Special-status plant species associated with grassland habitats include lesser saltscale (Atriplex minuscule), big tarplant (Blepharizonia plumose), Hoover’s calycadenia (Calycadenia hooveri), Lemmon’s jewelflower (Caulanthus coulteri var. lemmonii), Mt. Hamilton thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. campylon), beaked clarkia (Clarkia rostrata), small-flowered morning glory (Convolvulus simulans), Hoover’s hoover), round-leaved filaree (Erodium diamond-petaled California poppy rhombipetala), red-flowered lotus (Lotus rubriflorus), showy madia (Madia radiate), Merced Monardella (Monardella leucocephala), hooked popcorn-flower uncinatus), Hartweg’s golden sunburst (Pseudobahia bahiifolia), California androsace (Androsace elongata ssp. Acuta), and Oakland star-tulip (Calochortus umbellatus). Merced monardella (Monardella leucocephala) is believed to be extinct in the state but must still be considered during environmental review of an area. Special-Status Wildlife Forty-five special-status wildlife species were initially identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the study area (Table 3.4-2). Of these, eighteen species are known to occur in or near the study area; the study area may contain suitable habitat for an additional 24 species (Table 3.4-2). Three species: Suisun song sparrow (Melospiza melodia maxillaries), California red-legged frog, and foothill yellow-legged frog, would not occur in the study area because it is outside of the species’ known ranges. In addition to special-status wildlife, nesting migratory birds (including raptors) could occur in the study area and are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and DFG code section 3503 and 3503.5. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Western Bat Working Group Priority Species The Western Bat Working Group held a workshop in 1998 and subsequently published a regional priority matrix for western bat species (Western Bat Working Group 1998). The matrix is intended to provide states, provinces, federal land management agencies, and interested organizations and individuals with a better understanding of the overall status of a given bat species throughout its western North American range. Subsequently, the importance of a single region or multiple regions to the viability and conservation of each species becomes more apparent. The matrix also provides a means for prioritizing and focusing on population monitoring, research, conservation actions, and the efficient use of the limited funding and resources currently devoted to bats. The Western Bat Working Group’s matrix indicates that there are two additional bat species with the potential to occur on the program sites, including the hoary bat and Yuma myotis bat (Table 3.4-2). These bats have been classified as Low (Yuma myotis) and Moderate Priority (Hoary bat). The three remaining bat species with potential to occur on the program sites are all species of special concern and are also included in the High Priority group. On the regional priority matrix, the Low Priority designation indicates that, while there may be localized concerns, the overall status of the bat species is believed to be secured. The Moderate Priority designation indicates a level of concern that should warrant closer evaluation, more research, and conservation actions for both the species and possible threats. The High-Priority designation is based on the available information regarding distribution, status, ecology, and known threats. This designation should result in these species being considered the highest priority for funding, as well as planning and conservation actions. These species are considered imperiled or are at high risk of imperilment. Special-Status Fish Six special-status fish species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the study area (Table 3.4-2). Two species: green sturgeon and delta smelt, do not occur in the study area itself because it is outside of the current range for these species (Moyle 2002: 110 and 227). The only species currently listed under the ESA that occurs, or may occur, in the study area is steelhead. In addition, the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Rivers are designated as critical habitat for steelhead. State species of special concern and federal species of concern include Sacramento splittail, river lamprey, hardhead, and San Joaquin roach (a subspecies of California roach). Fall-/late fall-run Chinook salmon are a federal species of concern, and are discussed here because of their economic and recreational importance. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Special-Status Wildlife and Fish Species Identified as Having the Potential to Occur in the Program Area Page 1 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Invertebrates Conservancy fairy shrimp Branchinecta conservation E, CH/– Disjunct occurrences in Stanislaus, Solano, Yolo, Merced, Tehama, Ventura, Butte, and Glenn Counties Large, deep vernal pools in annual grasslands Known to occur in Stanislaus County at Mapes Ranch 2008) Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta T, CH/– Central Valley, central and south Coast Ranges from Tehama County to Santa Barbara County; isolated populations also in Riverside County Common in vernal pools and seasonal wetlands; also found in sandstone rock outcrop pools Recorded occurrences throughout Stanislaus County in the vicinity of the program area 2008) Valley elderberry longhorn beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus Riparian and oak woodland habitats below 3,000 feet throughout the Central Valley and surrounding foothills Riparian and oak savanna habitats with elderberry shrubs, which are the host plant Recorded occurrences throughout Stanislaus County in the vicinity of the program area 2008) Vernal pool tadpole shrimp Lepidurus packardi E, CH/– Shasta County south to Merced County Large vernal pools and ephemeral stock ponds Recorded occurrences in the county 2008) Fish Green sturgeon Acipenser medirostris T/SSC In California, they are known to spawn in The Klamath, Trinity, and Sacramento Rivers, and possibly the Feather and lower San Joaquin Rivers. They occur along the coast of California as far south as Monterey Bay. Spend most of their life in the ocean environment, but spawn and spend their juvenile life stage in freshwater. Spawning takes place in deep (≥10 feet), fast water of larger rivers. Preferred spawning substrate is likely large cobble, but it can range from clean sand to bedrock. No recorded occurrences in or near the program area 2008). Nearby rivers are out of the known spawning habitat for this species. Delta smelt Hypomesus transpacificus T/T Found only from the Suisun Bay upstream through the Delta in Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo Counties. Species occurs primarily in areas of mixing fresh and salt water and can thus tolerate a wide salinity range. Spawn upstream of mixing zone in fresh or brackish water in river channels and tidally influenced backwater sloughs. No recorded occurrences in or near the program area 2008). Nearby rivers are out of the known habitat for this species. Hardhead Mylopharodon conocephalus –/SSC Tributary streams in the San Joaquin drainage; large tributary streams in the Sacramento River and the main stem Resides in low to mid-elevation streams and prefers clear, deep pools and runs with slow velocities; also occurs in reservoirs Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River (Ford and Brown 1991) ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 2 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area River lamprey Lampetra ayresi –/SSC Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Napa Rivers; tributaries of San Francisco Bay (Moyle 2002; Moyle et al. 1995) Adults live in the ocean and migrate into fresh water to spawn Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River (Moyle 2002) San Joaquin roach Lavinia symmetricus ssp. 1 –/SSC Tributary streams in the San Joaquin drainage; large tributary streams in the Sacramento River and the main stem Resides in low to mid-elevation streams and prefers clear, deep pools and runs with slow velocities; also occurs in reservoirs Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River (Moyle et al. 1995) Central Valley fall-/late- fall-run Chinook salmon SC/SSC Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and tributary Central Valley rivers Occurs in well-oxygenated, cool, riverine habitat with water temperatures from 8.0 to 12.5°C. Habitat types are riffles, runs, and pools (Moyle 2002) Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River Central Valley steelhead mykiss T, CH/– Sacramento River and tributary Central Valley rivers Occurs in well-oxygenated, cool, riverine habitat with water temperatures from 7.8 to 18°C (Moyle 2002); habitat types are riffles, runs, and pools Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River (McEwan 2001); Tuolumne and San Joaquin Rivers designated as critical habitat Sacramento splittail macrolepidotus –/SSC Occurs throughout the year in low- salinity waters and freshwater areas of the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, Yolo Bypass, Suisun Marsh, Napa River, and Petaluma River (Moyle 2002) Spawning takes place among submerged and flooded vegetation in sloughs and the lower reaches of rivers Recorded occurrences in the Tuolumne River (Moyle 2002) Amphibians California tiger salamander californiense T/SSC Central Valley, including Sierra Nevada foothills, up to approximately 1,000 feet, and coastal region from Butte County south to northeastern San Luis Obispo County Small ponds, lakes, or vernal pools in grasslands and oak woodlands for larvae; rodent burrows, rock crevices, or fallen logs for cover for adults and for summer dormancy Recorded occurrences within the program area; documented sightings of California tiger salamander near the Stanislaus River northwest of Modesto 2008) California red-legged frog Rana aurora draytonii T/SSC Found along the coast and coastal mountain ranges of California from Marin County to San Diego County and in the Sierra Nevada from Tehama County to Fresno County Permanent and semipermanent aquatic habitats, such as creeks and coldwater ponds, with emergent and submergent vegetation and riparian species along the edges; may estivate in rodent burrows or cracks during dry periods No recorded occurrences within the program area USFWS considers the species extirpated from the Central Valley (USFWS 2002) ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 3 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii –/SSC Occurs in the Klamath, Cascade, north Coast, south Coast, Transverse, and Sierra Nevada Ranges up to approximately 6,000 feet Creeks or rivers in woodland, forest, mixed chaparral, and wet meadow habitats with rock and gravel substrate and low overhanging vegetation along the edge; usually found near riffles with rocks and sunny banks nearby No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); program area is outside of species known range Western spadefoot Spea hammondii –/SSC Sierra Nevada foothills, Central Valley, Coast Ranges, coastal counties in southern California Shallow streams with riffles and seasonal wetlands, such as vernal pools or stock ponds, in annual grasslands and oak woodlands No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); stock ponds, vernal pools, and other seasonal/permanent wetlands in the program area provide suitable habitat for western spadefoot Reptiles Western pond turtle Actinemys marmorata –/SSC Occurs from the Oregon border of Del Norte and Siskiyou Counties south along the coast to San Francisco Bay, inland through the Sacramento Valley, and on the western slope of Sierra Nevada Occupies ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation canals with muddy or rocky bottoms and breeds in upland habitat within 1,300 feet of aquatic habitat. Recorded occurrences within the program area 2008) Coast (California) horned lizard coronatum frontale –/SSC Sacramento Valley, including foothills, south to southern California; Coast Ranges south of Sonoma County; below 4,000 feet in northern California Grasslands, brushlands, woodlands, and open coniferous forest with sandy or loose soil; requires abundant ant colonies for foraging No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); but may occur in arid grasslands within the program area. Giant garter snake Thamnophis gigas T/T Central Valley from the vicinity of Burrel in Fresno County, north to near Chico in Butte County; has been extirpated from areas south of Fresno Sloughs, canals, low gradient streams and freshwater marsh habitats where there is a prey base of small fish and amphibians; also found in irrigation ditches and rice fields; requires grassy banks and emergent vegetation for basking and areas of high ground protected from flooding during winter No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); riverine habitats, wetland areas containing marshes or sloughs, and agricultural areas containing irrigation ditches in the program area provide suitable habitat for giant garter snake ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 4 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area San Joaquin whipsnake Masticophis flagellum ruddocki –/SSC From Colusa county in the Sacramento Valley southward to the grapevine in the San Joaquin Valley and westward into the inner coast ranges. An isolated population occurs at Sutter Buttes. Known elevational range from 20 to 900 meters Occurs in open, dry, vegetative associations with little or no tree cover. It occurs in valley grassland and saltbush scrub associations. Often occurs in association with mammal burrows No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); however may occur in dry grasslands within the program area. Birds Cooper’s hawk Accipiter cooperii –/SSC Throughout California except high altitudes in the Sierra Nevada; winters in the Central Valley, southeastern desert regions, and plains east of the Cascade Range Nests in a wide variety of habitat types, from riparian woodlands and digger pine- oak woodlands through mixed conifer forests No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); may occur in riparian habitats in the program area. Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus –/SSC Permanent resident in the Sierra Nevada, Cascade, Klamath, and north Coast Ranges at mid elevations and along the coast in Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Monterey Counties; winters over the rest of the state except at very high elevations Dense canopy ponderosa pine or mixed- conifer forest and riparian habitats No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); may occur in riparian habitats in the program area. Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor –/SSC Permanent resident in the Central Valley from Butte County to Kern County; breeds at scattered coastal locations from Marin County south to San Diego County and at scattered locations in Lake, Sonoma, and Solano Counties; rare nester in Siskiyou, Modoc, and Lassen Counties Nests in dense colonies in emergent marsh vegetation, such as tules and cattails, or upland sites with blackberries, nettles, thistles, and grain fields; Forages in grasslands, irrigated pasture, and grain fields. Probably requires water at or near the nesting colony Recorded nesting colonies within the program area 2008); wetland and riparian habitats in the program area with dense tule, cattail, blackberries, or other suitable vegetation provide suitable nesting habitat for tricolored blackbird; irrigated pasture, field crops, grasslands, and margins of ponds could also be used for foraging ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 5 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Golden eagle Aquila –/SSC, FP Foothills and mountains throughout California; uncommon nonbreeding visitor to lowlands such as the Central Valley Cliffs and escarpments of tall trees for nesting; annual grasslands, chaparral, and oak woodlands with plentiful medium and large sized mammals for prey No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); the program area does not contain suitable nesting habitat for golden eagle; grasslands in the program area provide suitable foraging habitat for golden eagle Great blue heron Ardea herodias Occurs throughout California, in shallow estuaries and fresh and saline emergent wetlands. Less common along riverine and rocky marine shores, in croplands, pastures, and in mountains above foothills. Occur along fresh and emergent wetlands where they forage primarily for fish but are also known to eat small rodents, amphibians, snakes, lizards, crustaceans, and occasionally small birds. Nest in colonies in tops of secluded large snags or live trees, usually among the tallest available. There is a recorded rookery along the east side of the San Joaquin River, just west of the City of Modesto sewage disposal ponds, approximately 8 miles west of the City of Modesto 2008). Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia –/SSC Lowlands throughout California, including the Central Valley, northeastern plateau, southeastern deserts, and coastal areas; rare along south coast Level, open, dry, heavily grazed or low stature grassland pasture, some croplands, along canals and irrigation ditches, or desert vegetation with available burrows. Several recorded occurrences within the program area; one record east of the junction of the Tuolumne and San Joaquin Rivers (California Natural Diversity Database 2008); grassland, pasture, and some croplands in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for burrowing owl Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni Lower Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, the Klamath Basin, and Butte Valley; highest nesting densities occur near Davis and Woodland, Yolo County Nests in oaks or cottonwoods in or near riparian habitats; forages in grasslands, irrigated pastures, and grain fields Known nest within the program area 2008); riparian areas in the program area provide suitable nesting habitat and grasslands, irrigated pastures, and (row and field) croplands in the program area provide suitable foraging for Swainson’s hawk ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 6 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis –/SSC Does not nest in California; winter visitor along the coast from Sonoma County to San Diego County, east- ward to the Sierra Nevada foothills and south-eastern deserts, the Inyo- White Mountains, the plains east of the Cascade Range, and Siskiyou County Open terrain in plains and foothills where ground squirrels and other prey are available No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); does not nest in California; grasslands, wetlands, and irrigated pastures in the program area provide suitable foraging habitat Mountain plover Charadrius montanus –/SSC Does not breed in California; in winter, found in the Central Valley south of Yuba County, along the coast in parts of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and San Diego Counties; parts of Imperial, Riverside, Kern, and Los Angeles Counties Occupies open plains or rolling hills with short grasses or very sparse vegetation; nearby bodies of water are not needed; may use newly plowed or sprouting grainfields. Species was documented wintering near Turlock lake but no occurrences within the program area 2008); open grasslands and plowed fields within the study area would provide suitable winter habitat for this species. Northern harrier Circus cyaneus –/SSC Occurs throughout lowland California; has been recorded in fall at high elevations Grasslands, meadows, marshes, and seasonal and agricultural wetlands No recorded occurrences within program area 2008); grasslands, wetlands, irrigated pasture, and possibly field crops in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for northern harrier Western yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Nests along the upper Sacramento, lower Feather, south fork of the Kern, Amargosa, Santa Ana, and Colorado Rivers Wide, dense riparian forests with a thick understory of willows for nesting; sites with a dominant cottonwood overstory are preferred for foraging; may avoid valley-oak riparian habitats where scrub jays are abundant The last known occurrence was in 1973 at the mouth of the Stanislaus River 2008); riparian habitats in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for western yellow- billed cuckoo Snowy egret Egretta thula Species is widespread in California along shores of coastal estuaries, fresh and saline emergent wetlands, ponds, slow-moving rivers, irrigation ditches, and wet fields. Roosts in dense, emergent vegetation and in trees near water. Forages in shallow water along shores of wetlands or aquatic habitats. Feeds on small fish, crustaceans, and large insects. Nests in colonies in dense marshes, trees, and sometimes at ground level in estuarine marshes. There is a recorded rookery along the east side of the San Joaquin River, just west of the City of Modesto sewage disposal ponds, approximately 8 miles west of the City of Modesto 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 7 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus –/FP Lowland areas west of Sierra Nevada from the head of the Sacramento Valley south, including coastal valleys and foothills to western San Diego County at the Mexico border Low foothills or valley areas with valley or live oaks, riparian areas, and marshes near open grasslands for foraging No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); riparian areas in the program area provide suitable nesting habitat and grasslands, wetlands, irrigated pastures, and croplands in the program area provide suitable foraging for white-tailed kite California horned lark Eremophila alpestris actia –/SSC Found throughout much of the state, less common in mountainous areas of the north coast and in coniferous or chaparral habitats Common to abundant resident in a variety of open habitats, usually where large trees and shrubs are absent; grasslands and deserts to dwarf shrub habitats above tree line No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); grasslands and irrigated pastures in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus –/SSC Permanent resident in the south Coast, Transverse, Peninsular, and northern Cascade Ranges, the southeastern deserts, Inyo-White Mountains, foothills surrounding the Central Valley, and in the Sierra Nevada in Modoc, Lassen, and Plumas Counties. Winters in the Central Valley, along the coast from Santa Barbara County to San Diego County, and in Marin, Sonoma, Humboldt, Del Norte, and Inyo Counties Nests on cliffs or escarpments, usually overlooking dry, open terrain or uplands No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); nesting habitat does not occur in the program area; grasslands within the program area provide suitable foraging habitat only. American peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum Permanent resident along the north and south Coast Ranges; may summer in the Cascade and Klamath Ranges and through the Sierra Nevada to Madera County; winters in the Central Valley south through the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges and the plains east of the Cascade Range Nests and roosts on protected ledges of high cliffs, usually adjacent to lakes, rivers, or marshes that support large prey populations No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); nesting habitat does not occur in the program area; rivers and marshes in the program area provide suitable foraging habitat only ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 8 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Greater sandhill crane Grus canadensis tabida Breeds in Siskiyou, Modoc, Lassen, Plumas, and Sierra Counties; winters in the Central Valley, southern Imperial County, Lake Havasu National Wildlife Refuge, and the Colorado River Indian Reserve Summers in open terrain near shallow lakes or freshwater marshes. Winters in plains and valleys near bodies of fresh water No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); does not breed in Stanislaus County; pastures, croplands, and marshes in the program area provide suitable foraging habitat for greater sandhill crane Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus D/E, FP Nests in Siskiyou, Modoc, Trinity, Shasta, Lassen, Plumas, Butte, Tehama, Lake, and Mendocino Counties and in the Lake Tahoe Basin; reintroduced into central coast; winter range includes the rest of California, except the southeastern deserts, very high altitudes in the Sierra Nevada, and east of the Sierra Nevada south of Mono County In western North America, nests and roosts in coniferous forests within 1 mile of lakes, reservoirs, streams, or the ocean Known nest sites are located along Stanislaus River adjacent to the program area; additional known nest sites are located along Dry Creek and the San Joaquin River in the vicinity of the program area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008); riparian habitats in the plan vicinity of lakes, reservoirs, or streams could provide suitable nesting habitat in the program area Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens –/SSC Nests locally in coastal mountains and Sierra Nevada foothills, east of the Cascades in northern California, along the Colorado river, and very locally inland in southern California Nests in dense riparian habitats dominated by willows, alders, Oregon ash, tall weeds, blackberry vines, and grapevines No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); riparian areas in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for yellow-breasted chat Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus –/SSC Resident and winter visitor in lowlands and foothills throughout California; rare on coastal slope north of Mendocino County, occurring only in winter Prefers open habitats with scattered shrubs, trees, posts, fences, utility lines, or other perches No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); grasslands and pastures in the program area provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat for loggerhead shrike Suisun song sparrow Melospiza melodia maxillaris –/SSC Restricted to the extreme western edge of the Delta, between the cities of Vallejo and Pittsburg near Suisun Bay Brackish and tidal marshes supporting cattails, tules, various sedges, and pickleweed Historic occurrences from the early 1900’s in the program area 2008); program area is outside of the current known range of the species. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 9 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Mammals Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus –/SSC, WBWG: High priority Most often found in low and middle elevation areas (<6000 ft) throughout California Found in a variety of habitats from scattered desert scrub, grassland, shrub land, woodland, and forests from sea level through mixed conifer. Associated with oak woodland, ponderosa pine, mixed conifer. Roosts in rock outcrops, mines, caves, tree hollows, buildings, and bridges No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); urban areas containing old buildings, riparian areas with rock crevices, caves, and hollow trees, and old mine sites could provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area Townsend’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii –/SSC, WBWG: High priority Coastal regions from Del Norte County south to Santa Barbara County Roosts in caves, tunnels, mines, and dark attics of abandoned buildings; very sensitive to disturbances and may abandon a roost after one on-site visit No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); riparian areas containing caves, old mine sites, and urban areas with bridges, buildings, and other suitable human-made structures could provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area Western mastiff bat Eumops perotis californicus –/SSC, WBWG: High priority Occurs along the western Sierra primarily at low to mid elevations and widely distributed throughout the southern coast ranges; recent surveys have detected the species north to the Oregon border Found in a wide variety of habitats from desert scrub to montane conifer; roosts and breeds in deep, narrow rock crevices, but may also use crevices in trees, buildings, and tunnels No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); urban areas containing old buildings or bridges and riparian areas with rock and tree crevices provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris notivagans WBWG: Medium Priority Occurs in coastal and montane forests from the Oregon border south along the coast to San Francisco Bay, and along the Sierra Nevada and Great Basin region to Inyo County. Also occurs in southern California from Ventura and San Bernardino Counties south to Mexico. May be found throughout California during spring and fall migrations. Roosts in hollow trees, snags, buildings, rock crevices, caves, and under bark. Females may form nursery colonies or occur as solitary individuals in dense foliage or hollow trees. Forage above forest streams, ponds, and open brushy areas. No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); urban areas containing old buildings or bridges and riparian areas with rock and tree crevices provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 10 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area Western red bat Lasiurus blossevillii –/SSC, WBWG: High priority Scattered throughout much of California at lower elevations Found primarily in riparian and wooded habitats. Occurs at least seasonally in urban areas. Day roosts in trees within the foliage. Found in fruit orchards and sycamore riparian habitats in the central valley No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); riparian woodlands provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area. Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus WBWG: Medium priority Found scattered throughout California from sea level to 13,200 feet elevation. Tree-associated species; found primarily in forested habitats. Roosts in trees, within foliage, 9-36 ft above the ground, both in coniferous and deciduous trees. May also roost in caves, beneath ledges, in woodpecker holes and in squirrel’s nests. Recorded occurrences in the vicinity of Turlock 2008); tree cavities, ledges, and caves provide potential roosting habitat in the program area. Yuma myotis Myotis yumanensis WBWG: Low- medium priority Common and widespread throughout most of California except the Colorado and Mojave deserts Found in a wide variety of habitats from sea level to 11,000 ft., but uncommon above 8,000 ft. Optimal habitat is open forests and woodlands near water bodies No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); forests and woodlands provide suitable roosting habitat in the program area. Riparian (San Joaquin Valley) woodrat Neotoma fuscipes riparia E/SSC, FP Historical distribution along the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Rivers, and Caswell State Park in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Merced Counties; presently limited to San Joaquin County at Caswell State Park and a possible second population near Vernalis Riparian habitats with dense shrub cover, willow thickets, and an oak overstory Recorded occurrence within the program area 2008); historic occurrence from 1932 near Vernalis, presently limited to San Joaquin County at Caswell State Park; well developed riparian habitats in the program area may provide suitable habitat Riparian brush rabbit Sylvilagus bachmani riparius E/E Limited to San Joaquin County at Caswell State Park near the confluence of the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers and Paradise Cut area on Union Pacific right-of-way lands Native valley riparian habitats with large clumps of dense shrubs, low-growing vines, and some tall shrubs and trees Recorded occurrences within the program area historic occurrence from 1932 near Vernalis, the only known population is found on the lower part of the Stanislaus River in Caswell State Park (Williams 1986); well developed riparian habitats in the program area may provide suitable habitat ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3.4-2. Continued Page 11 of 11 Common and Scientific Name Statusa Federal/State/Other Distribution Preferred Habitats Known and Potential Occurrence in the Program Area American badger Taxidea taxus –/SSC In California, badgers occur throughout the state except in humid coastal forests of northwestern California in Del Norte and Humboldt Counties. Badgers occur in a wide variety of open, arid habitats but are most commonly associated with grasslands, savannas, mountain meadows, and open areas of desert scrub; the principal habitat requirements for the species appear to be sufficient food (burrowing rodents), friable soils, and relatively open, uncultivated ground No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); open grasslands and pastures with sufficient prey species provide suitable habitat in the program area San Joaquin kit fox Vulpes macrotis mutica E/T Principally occurs in the San Joaquin Valley and adjacent open foothills to the west; recent records from 17 counties extending from Kern County north to Contra Costa County Saltbush scrub, grassland, oak, savanna, and freshwater scrub No recorded occurrences within the program area 2008); grasslands and pastures in the program area provide suitable denning and foraging habitat for San Joaquin kit fox; croplands may also be used by kit fox for foraging a Status definitions: Federal E = listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. T = listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. CH = critical habitat. SC = species of concern. − = no listing. D = federally delisted. State E = listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. T = listed as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. SSC = species of special concern in California. FP = fully protected under the California Fish and Game Code. − = no listing. WBWG = Western Bat Working Group (http://www.wbwg.org/spp_matrix.html). High priority = species are imperiled or at high risk of imperilment. Moderate priority = This designation indicates a level of concern that should warrant closer evaluation, more research, and conservation actions of both the species and possible threats. A lack of meaningful information is a major obstacle in adequately assessing these species' status and should be considered a threat. Low priority = While there may be localized concerns, the overall status of the species is believed to be secure. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Status of Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act Steelhead have experienced declines in abundance in the past several decades as a result of natural and human-related factors. Major factors that have contributed to the declines include blockages of steelhead from suitable spawning and rearing habitat above dams, deleterious water temperature, rapid flow fluctuations of dams, entrainment in unscreened and poorly screened diversions, previous hatchery practices, and harvest. The Central Valley steelhead distinct population segment (DPS) was federally-listed as a threatened species on March 19, 1998 (63 FR 13347–13371); the final rule became effective on January 2, 2006. The Central Valley steelhead DPS includes all naturally-spawned populations of steelhead in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries. Critical habitat for steelhead was designated on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52488-52627). Critical habitat includes the river water, river bottom, and adjacent riparian zone. Like steelhead, fall-run Chinook salmon have experienced declines in abundance relative to historic conditions. Central Valley fall-/late fall–run Chinook salmon are a California species of special concern; they were classified as a species of concern under the federal ESA on April 15, 2004 (69 FR 19975). Fish Species’ Life Histories Species’ life histories are described below for special-status species that occur within the study area. In general, migratory species are present seasonally Chinook salmon), and resident species are present year-round. Because juvenile steelhead rear for 1 or more years in freshwater before migrating to the ocean, juvenile steelhead are present year-round where suitable habitat exists. Chinook Salmon Central Valley fall-run and late-fall-run Chinook salmon are important commercially and recreationally. The fall-run Chinook salmon is currently the largest run of Chinook salmon in the San Joaquin River system. The Central Valley fall-/late fall-run Chinook salmon ESU is designated as a California species of special concern and a species of concern under the federal ESA. Adult Chinook salmon leave the ocean and migrate upstream to the Sacramento River, the San Joaquin River, and their tributaries to spawn. Adult fall-run Chinook salmon use the San Joaquin and Tuolumne Rivers for migration, spawning, and rearing. In general, adults leave the ocean and migrate up Central Valley rivers from October through early January. Spawning occurs generally from late October to January, with fry emergence typically beginning in late December and January. Fall-run Chinook salmon emigrate as post-emergent fry, juveniles, and smolts during February through May. Adult and juvenile Chinook salmon of runs other than fall-run winter-, spring-, and late-fall-run) occur only in the Sacramento River drainage and would not be expected to occur in the San Joaquin or Tuolumne Rivers. Generally, Chinook salmon require cool, clean ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 water with gravels relatively free of sand and silt for successful spawning and rearing. Steelhead The Central Valley steelhead is listed as threatened under the ESA. Steelhead, an anadromous variant of rainbow trout, is closely related to Pacific salmon. The species was once abundant in California coastal and Central Valley drainages. However, population numbers have declined significantly in recent years, especially in the tributaries of the Sacramento River. Steelhead typically migrate to marine waters after spending 1 year or more in freshwater. In the marine environment, they typically mature for 1 to 3 years before returning to their natal stream to spawn as 3- or 4-year-olds. Unlike other Pacific salmon, steelhead are capable of spawning more than once before they die. The steelhead spawning season typically stretches from December through April. After several months, fry emerge from the gravel and begin to feed. Juveniles rear in freshwater from 1 to 4 years (usually 2 years) and then migrate to the ocean as smolts. Smolt migration occurs from November to May, and peak months for emigration in most years appear to be March and April. Steelhead are typically found in cool, clear, and fast-flowing permanent streams and rivers where riffles predominate over pools, and where aquatic insects and cover, in the form of undercut banks and riparian vegetation, are abundant (Moyle 2002:276). Large rainbow trout with characteristics consistent with a migratory life history pattern anadromy) have been observed in the Tuolumne River in recent years (McEwan 2001:15). Declines in steelhead abundance in recent decades prompted the NMFS in 1998 to list Central Valley steelhead as a threatened species under the federal ESA. Critical habitat was designated for the species in 2005 and includes the San Joaquin and Tuolumne Rivers. Sacramento Splittail Sacramento splittail was removed from the list of threatened species in 2003 (68 FR 183, September 22, 2003, 55139), and is currently classified as a species of concern by the USFWS and a California species of special concern by the DFG. The species may be experiencing a decline, and faces threats from habitat loss and nonnative species. Splittail were historically distributed throughout rivers and lakes of the Central Valley. Currently, splittail are largely found only in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta), Suisun Bay, Suisun Marsh, Napa River, Petaluma River, and other portions of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003:2). Splittail are a large, long-lived cyprinid (minnow family) fish primarily found in freshwater; however, they are tolerant of moderate salinities (10–18 parts per thousand) (Moyle et al. 1995:165; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003:1). Typical habitats often include lower gradient sections of rivers and sloughs where shallow, low-salinity habitats are available (Moyle et al. 1995:165). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Following an upstream migration from brackish to freshwater (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003:1), spawning occurs primarily in the lower reaches of rivers and in sloughs from February through April (Moyle et al. 1995:164). Splittail spawn on vegetation in temporarily-flooded upland and riparian areas (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003:2). Consequently, they are often found in flooded areas and in habitats subject to flooding during the breeding season (Moyle et al. 1995:165). Larvae remain in shallow vegetated areas near the spawning site until they move to deeper offshore habitats as they mature (Moyle et al. 1995:164). This dependence on flooded areas for spawning may explain why splittail abundance is often marked by strong year-classes associated with years of high outflow. Sacramento splittail spawned successfully in the lower reaches of the Tuolumne River in the vicinity of Modesto in the 1980s and 1990s, 7 miles (11 kilometers) upstream from the river’s confluence with the San Joaquin River (Moyle 2002). Although Moyle (2002) considers the San Joaquin and Tuolumne Rivers to be outside the current range of the Sacramento splittail, the occurrence of spawning adults in the Tuolumne River suggests that suitable spawning habitat may be present in the study area, at least in some years. River Lamprey River lamprey is a California species of special concern. River lamprey are relatively small (averaging 6.7 inches long) and highly predaceous (Moyle 2002). They are anadromous, and will attack fish in both freshwater and saltwater (Moyle 2002). A great deal of what is known about river lamprey is from information on populations in British Columbia. There, adults migrate from the Pacific Ocean into rivers and streams in September, and spawn in winter. Adults will excavate saucer-shaped depressions in sand or gravel riffles, where eggs are deposited. After spawning, the adults perish. Juvenile river lampreys, called ammocoetes, remain in backwaters for several years, where they feed on algae and microorganisms (Moyle et al. 1989). The metamorphosis from juvenile to adult begins in July, and is complete by the following April. From May through July, following completion of metamorphosis, river lamprey aggregate in the Delta before entering the ocean. River lampreys are distributed in streams and rivers along the eastern Pacific Ocean from Juneau, Alaska, to the San Francisco Bay. They may occur in greatest abundance in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River systems, although they are not commonly observed in large numbers (Moyle et al. 1989). Hardhead Hardhead, a California species of special concern, occur mostly in large, undisturbed, low- to mid-elevation rivers and streams (Moyle 2002). They are widely distributed throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin River systems. Hardhead sexually mature following their second year. Based on observations of May and June upstream migrations of adults into smaller tributary streams, they ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 presumably begin spawning in spring. Spawning activity has not been documented, but reproductive behavior may involve mass spawning in upstream gravel bed riffles (Moyle et al. 1989). San Joaquin Roach California roach (Lavinia symmetricus spp.), a California species of special concern, are found from the Pit River and tributaries to Goose Lake in Oregon, south to the Cuyama River in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties (Moyle 2002). The San Joaquin roach subspecies is found in the Sacramento and San Joaquin drainages, except the Pit River, as well as tributaries to the San Francisco Bay. California roach are generally found in small, warm intermittent streams, and dense populations are frequently found in isolated pools (Moyle 2002; Moyle et al. 1982). They are most abundant in mid-elevation streams in the Sierra foothills and in the lower reaches of some coastal streams (Moyle 2002). Roach are tolerant of relatively high temperatures (30–35°C) and low oxygen levels 2 ppm) (Taylor et al. 1982). However, they are habitat generalists, also being found in cold, well-aerated clear “trout” streams (Taylor et al. 1982); in human- modified habitats (Moyle 1976; Moyle and Daniels 1982); and in the main channels of rivers, such as the Russian and Tuolumne. Reproduction occurs from March to June, but may be extended through late July (Moyle 1976). Murphy (1943) states that spawning is determined by water temperature, which must be approximately 16°C (60°F) for spawning to be initiated. During the spawning season, schools of fish move into shallow areas with moderate flow and gravel/rubble substrate (Moyle 1976). Regulatory Setting Federal Regulations Endangered Species Act The federal ESA of 1973 and subsequent amendments provide for the conservation of endangered and threatened species, and the ecosystems on which they depend. The USFWS (with jurisdiction over plants, wildlife, and resident fish) and the NMFS (with jurisdiction over anadromous fish and marine fish and mammals) oversee the ESA. Section 7 of the ESA mandates that all federal agencies consult with the USFWS and NMFS if they determine that a proposed project may affect a listed species or its habitat. The purpose of consultation with the USFWS and NMFS is to ensure that the federal agencies’ actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species, or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat for listed species. Section 7 requirements do not apply to nonfederal actions. Federal permits may be required for the proposed program, and the program may therefore be subject ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 to Section 7 of the ESA. If no federal permits or federal funding is involved and there are federally-listed species that could be affected by the proposed program, it would instead be subject to Section 10 of the ESA (see below). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the take of any fish or wildlife species listed as endangered, including the destruction of habitat that prevents the species’ recovery. Take is defined as the action of or attempt to: hunt, harm, harass pursue, shoot, wound, capture, kill, trap, or collect a species. Section 9 prohibitions also apply to threatened species, unless a special rule has been defined with regard to take at the time of listing. Under Section 9 of the ESA, the take prohibition applies only to wildlife and fish species. However, Section 9 does prohibit the unlawful removal and reduction to possession, or malicious damage or destruction of, any endangered plant from federal land. Section 9 prohibits acts to remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy an endangered plant species in nonfederal areas in knowing violation of any state law, or in the course of criminal trespass. Candidate species and species that are proposed or under petition for listing receive no protection under Section 9. Section 10 of the ESA requires the issuance of an incidental take permit before any public or private action may be taken that would potentially harm, harass, injure, kill, capture, collect, or otherwise hurt take) any individual of an endangered or threatened species. The permit requires the preparation and implementation of an HCP, incidental to implementation of the program, which would offset the take of individuals that may occur by providing for the overall preservation of the affected species through specific mitigation measures. Migratory Bird Treaty Act The MBTA protects migratory bird species from take. Take, under the MBTA, is defined as the action of, or an attempt to: pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, or kill (50 CFR 10.12). The definition includes “intentional” take (take that is the purpose of the activity in question) and “unintentional” take (take that results from, but is not the purpose of, the activity in question). Clean Water Act Section 404 The USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency regulate the placement of fill into waters of the United States under Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404, and are regulated by the USACE. Waters of the United States include “navigable” waters of the United States, interstate waters, all other waters where the use or degradation or destruction of the waters could affect interstate or foreign commerce, tributaries to any of these waters, and wetlands that meet any of these criteria or that are adjacent to any of these waters or their tributaries. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (33 CFR 328.3; 40 CFR 230.3). However, a Supreme Court ruling, Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 99-1178 (January 9, 2001) (SWANCC) addressed the issue of whether certain wetlands are subject to federal jurisdiction under Section 404. In the SWANCC decision, the Supreme Court ruled that, for nonnavigable, isolated, intrastate wetlands, providing habitat for migratory birds was insufficient as the sole basis for assertion of federal jurisdiction under the CWA. This ruling removed a part of the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States” under which many small isolated wetlands have been afforded CWA protection. Other criteria for establishing jurisdiction under the CWA remain unaffected by the SWANCC case, including having a connection with interstate commerce, or being adjacent or tributary to other waters of the United States (33 CFR 328.3[a]). A second Supreme Court ruling, Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 547 U.S. (2006), further addressed the issue of whether certain types of waters are subject to federal jurisdiction under Section 404. Because the Supreme Court ruling did not have a majority, the USACE guidance concludes that regulatory jurisdiction exists if either of the court’s pluralities is satisfied. While this creates some confusion, recent guidance from the USACE identifies three categories of waters: certain types of waters over which it “will assert jurisdiction” (traditional navigable waters, wetlands adjacent to such waters, relatively permanent non-navigable tributaries of such waters, and wetlands directly abutting such tributaries); other types of waters it will consider case by case to determine whether they have a “significant nexus” with a traditional navigable water; and other “features” over which it “generally will not assert jurisdiction,” such as gullies, erosional features, and ditches excavated in and draining uplands. Project proponents must obtain a permit from the USACE for all discharges of fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed project. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 The Rivers and Harbors Act prohibits the obstruction or alteration of any navigable water of the United States. It requires authorization from the USACE for any excavation or deposition of materials into these waters or for any work that could affect the course, location, condition, or capacity of rivers or harbors. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 State Regulations California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (California Fish and Game Code Section 2050 et seq.) establishes state policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. The CESA mandates that state agencies should not approve projects that jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. There are no state agency consultation procedures under the CESA. For projects that would affect a species that is federally- and state-listed, compliance with the ESA satisfies the CESA if the DFG determines that the federal incidental take authorization is consistent with the CESA under California Fish and Game Code Section 2080.1. For projects that would result in take of a species that is only state-listed, project proponents must apply for a take permit under Section 2081(b). California Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq. Under these sections of the California Fish and Game Code, agencies are required to notify the DFG before the implementation of any project that would divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow, bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake. Preliminary notification and project review generally occur during the environmental process. When an existing fish or wildlife resource may be substantially adversely affected, the DFG is required to propose reasonable changes to the project to protect the resources. These modifications are formalized in a Streambed Alteration Agreement, which becomes part of the plans, specifications, and bid documents for the project. Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan The Stanislaus County General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element encourages the protection and preservation of natural and scenic areas throughout the county by maintaining the natural environment in areas dedicated as parks and open space. This ensures compatibility between natural areas and development, conserves water resources, preserves vegetation to protect waterways from bank erosion and siltation, and protects fish and wildlife species of the county. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-20 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Policies The “Environmental Resources and Open Space” section of the City’s general plan provides four measures related to sensitive wildlife and plant habitat. The following elements are relevant to the implementation of the proposed program. 2. Policies in the Baseline Developed Area Policy VII-E.2[a]. For proposed development consistent with the General Plan on lands within the Baseline Developed Area and Redevelopment Plan Area, exclusive of lands within the Dry Creek and Tuolumne River Comprehensive Planning Districts, no further biological study is warranted unless specific information concerning the known or potential presence of significant biological resources is identified in future updates of the California Natural Diversity Database, or through formal or informal input received from resource agencies or other qualified sources. 3. Policies in the Planned Urbanizing Area Policy VII-E.3[a]. For all lands within the Planned Urbanizing Area, site specific surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine whether any sensitive natural communities or species are present within the proposed development area. These studies shall particularly focus on proposed development within any lands included within a potential biological resource study area, as delineated on Figure 7-1 in the Final Master Environmental Impact Report (Riparian Corridor Diagram). Prior to considering development applications, the City shall coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding listed species and potential for environmental impacts. The City shall employ the measures recommended by the USFWS to avoid an incidental take.... Surveys should be conducted at the appropriate season to best determine the likelihood of occurrence and should employ accepted methodologies as determined by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The significant results of such surveys should be recorded onto the City’s existing biological resources map for future planning purposes. Policy VII-E.3[b]. All areas occupied or potentially occupied by special-status species shall be avoided and preserved, where feasible. Areas that can be avoided shall be protected by fencing, signage, or establishment of buffer zones appropriate to the species and/or habitat involved. Generally, a minimum 100- foot buffer of undeveloped land is necessary. This buffer area should be improved through sustainable habitat restoration. The protected habitat shall be required to be managed so as to contribute to the long-term conservation of the species and ecosystems on which they depend. Where state and/or federally-listed species are determined to be present, consultation shall be carried out with the CDFG and/or USFWS in accordance with the California and/or federal Endangered Species Acts to determine mitigation measures to avoid and minimize impacts to those species. If other special-status species are determined to be present and cannot be avoided, then species-specific mitigation measures shall be implemented to minimize impacts ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-21 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 on those species through informal consultation with CDFG and/or USFWS. The mitigation measures and other recommendations of these agencies shall be incorporated into the development plan. Where a Community Plan is prepared, these shall become policies of the plan. Policy VII-E.3[c]. Additional measures to protect sensitive habitats may be implemented. Potential measures to be implemented may include measures listed in Table 7-1 in the Final Master Environmental Impact Report. City of Turlock General Plan Policies The Turlock General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element, section 6.5 states that no special-status species are known to occur within the planning area. This element also contains the following policies related to biological resources: Guiding Policy 6.5a – Make efforts to enhance the diversity of Turlock’s flora and fauna. Implementing Policy 6.5-d – Consider establishment of special environmental review procedures, such as site reconnaissance and certification by a biologist, as part of the project development application process. if new information to support existence of Rare, Endangered, or Threatened species becomes available. City of Waterford General Plan Policies The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan Open Space and Conservation chapter contains the following Goals and Policies related to biological resources: OS-A-1. Identify and preserve wildlife habitats that support rare, endangered or threatened species. OS-A-2. Preserve and enhance Tuolomne Rivers and Dry Creek in their natural states throughout the planning area. City of Waterford Tree Ordinance The City of Waterford tree ordinance specifies that tree work within public areas, including tree removal, performed by a public utility will be permitted by the city manager (Ord. 79-16 1979). Impact Analysis The proposed program, as analyzed in this section, is the program of infrastructure improvements proposed in the Engineer’s Report. Specifically, the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-22 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 following four primary types of improvements are identified in the Engineer’s Report:  storage tanks,  groundwater wells,  pumps and pump stations, and  pipelines. This section describes the proposed program’s impacts on biological resources. First, it describes the methods used to determine the proposed program’s impacts, and lists the thresholds used to conclude whether an impact would be significant. Second, it discusses individual construction (temporary, short-term) impacts. Third, it discusses operational (permanent, long-term) impacts associated with each component of the proposed program, and the program as a whole. Mitigation measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for significant impacts immediately follow each impact discussion, as necessary. Criteria for Determining Significance According to the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would:  have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by DFG or USFWS,  have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the DFG or USFWS,  have a substantial adverse effect on federally-protected wetlands, as defined by CWA Section 404 (including marsh, vernal pool, and coastal wetlands) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means,  interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites,  conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, or  conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan (HCP), natural communities conservation plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Special-status plant and wildlife species are known to occur in the study area, and could be affected by projects proposed in areas containing suitable habitat for special-status species. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-23 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Potential impacts on special-status species with moderate-to-high potential to occur in the study area are described below. Methods and Assumptions Methodology This impact analysis is based on conceptual design information provided in Chapter 2. To the extent possible, the mitigation measures described for potential impacts on sensitive biological resources were developed through coordination with resource agencies. Additional compensatory mitigation for impacts on waters of the United States may also be identified as conditions of project permits the CWA Section 404 permit from the Corps), and would be implemented as part of the program, as applicable. Impact Assumptions Construction and future operation-related activities associated with the proposed program could result in temporary or permanent impacts on biological resources. In assessing the magnitude of possible effects, the following assumptions were made regarding project-related impacts on biological resources.  Special-status plant and wildlife species are known to occur in the study area and could be affected by projects proposed in areas containing suitable habitat for special-status species.  Construction of the program facilities would result in the disturbance of common natural communities non-native grassland, irrigated pasture, and agricultural fields). The loss or disturbance of these communities is not considered significant from a botanical perspective; therefore, botanical- related impacts on these communities are not discussed in this section.  All staging areas, spoils locations, and access roads would be located in disturbed areas that do not contain sensitive biological resources. Impact Mechanisms Biological resources could be directly or indirectly affected during construction activities associated with the proposed program. Impacts on biological resources fall into the three categories: temporary, short-term, and long-term.  A temporary impact would occur only during construction or subsequent restoration.  A short-term impact would last from the time construction ceases for up to 3 years after construction or subsequent restoration. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-24 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  A long-term impact would last longer than 3 years after construction or subsequent restoration, and typically would be associated with construction and future maintenance activities. In some cases, a long-term impact could be considered a permanent impact. The following types of activities could cause impacts on biological resources:  trenching activities during pipeline installation,  temporary stockpiling and sidecasting of soil, construction materials, or other construction wastes,  soil compaction, dust, and water runoff from the construction site,  increased short-term construction-related noise and road mortality (from equipment), and  degradation of water quality in adjacent wetlands and waterways that results from construction runoff containing sediment or petroleum products. These impact mechanisms were used to assess program-related impacts on biological resources in the study area. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact BIO-1: Program-Related Impacts on Plants (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The proposed program could affect special-status plants directly within grassland or vernal pool habitats. If program activities occur in these areas, impacts could include removing individuals or indirectly modifying habitat. The most specific habitat modification that would affect special-status plants in the study area would be the modification of hydrology-supporting wetlands and vernal pools. Impacts on special-status plants would be considered a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Perform Focused Surveys for Special- Status Plant Species Prior to implementation of program activities at a site with grasslands, wetlands, or vernal pools, a qualified botanist will perform floristic surveys for special-status plant species. Floristic surveys will occur during the appropriate blooming period(s) for all special-status plant species with the potential to occur in the study area and at the specific site, as determined by the botanist. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-25 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Avoid and Minimize Impacts on Special-Status Plant Species If special-status plant species are present, the program proponent will implement the following measures to avoid or minimize impacts on special-status plant species:  The program will be redesigned or modified to avoid direct and indirect impacts on special-status plant species, if feasible.  Any special-status plant species occurrences near a program site will be protected by environmentally-sensitive area fencing (orange construction barrier fencing) installed around special-status plant species populations. The environmentally-sensitive area fencing will be installed at least 200 feet from the edge of the population where feasible, and where not feasible, the buffer will be large enough to adequately protect populations from program activities. Where special-status plant populations are located in wetlands, silt fencing also will be installed. The location of the fencing will be marked in the field with stakes and flagging, and shown on the construction drawings. The construction specifications will contain clear language that prohibits construction-related activities, vehicle operation, material and equipment storage, and other surface- disturbing activities within the fenced environmentally-sensitive area. Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Compensate for Unavoidable Impacts on Special-Status Plant Species If avoidance is not feasible, the program proponent will consult with either the DFG or USFWS, or both, depending upon which has jurisdiction, to determine whether transplantation of special-status plant species is feasible. If the agencies concur that it is a feasible mitigation measure, the botanist will develop and implement a Rare Plant Relocation, Management, and Protection Plan (Rare Plant Plan) in coordination with the appropriate agencies. The Rare Plant Plan will include the following components: relocation methods that will minimize the potential loss of plants from relocation, management plans and success criteria by which the mitigation can be measured for success, and regular monitoring to ensure that the plants are successfully transplanted. Success criteria shall require that at least 75% of the plants survive. The Rare Plant Plan will include specific, measurable triggers for adaptive management actions that will be necessary to ensure survival. The Rare Plant Plan will specify annual monitoring of the mitigation site for at least five years after planting, and will assess factors such as population size and density, recruitment, and individual plant health and vigor. Monitoring will also assess whether the mitigation requires adaptive management actions, such as collection and sowing of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-26 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 additional seed, tillage/disturbance within existing populations to induce establishment, installation of container plants, and control of exotic invasive vegetation (such as yellow star thistle) to ensure successful plant establishment and survival. The site will be evaluated at the end of the 5-year monitoring period to determine whether the mitigation has met the success criteria identified in the Rare Plant Plan. If success criteria are not met at that time, then mitigation activities and monitoring will continue until success criteria are met. As part of the Rare Plant Plan, the program proponent, in conjunction with a qualified restoration ecologist and/or botanist and the consulting agency, if any, will identify a suitable on- or off-site location for mitigation, and appropriate methods for seed collection, propagation, relocation, maintenance, and monitoring. Mitigation sites will be located within the range of the affected plant and contain suitable habitat sites. For annual plant species, the seed crop from the individuals to be lost will be collected and then sown on appropriate habitat located on the mitigation site. The individuals will not be removed until seeds have been collected. For perennial plant species, both the seed and the plants themselves will be salvaged and relocated to the mitigation site. The individuals will not be removed until seeds have been collected. Seed from the populations that will be affected may be collected and propagated at a native plant nursery prior to planting in order to increase the potential for establishment and survival. Impact BIO-2: Impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The VELB, a federally-threatened species, may occur if elderberry shrubs with stems 1 inch in diameter or greater at ground level occur in the program area. records for this species occur within the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Significant impacts on the VELB may result from the direct removal of shrubs or soil disturbance within the USFWS’s recommended 100-foot-wide buffer during construction-related activities, including grading and clearing. If Mitigation Measure BIO-4 is implemented in the appropriate locations, and Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7 are implemented where habitat is found, impacts on the VELB would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle and Its Elderberry Host Species Plant Following USFWS protocols, the program sites and a 100-foot-wide buffer surrounding such sites will be surveyed and mapped by a qualified biologist for the presence of the VELB and its elderberry host species plant (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999). Mitigation is not required for plants with no stems measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level. The survey will be considered valid for a period of 2 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-27 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 If plants larger than these are identified in the survey, Mitigation Measures BIO-5 and BIO-6 will be implemented. Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Agency Coordination and Consultation for Impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle The USFWS has issued a programmatic formal consultation, pursuant to Section 7 of the ESA, regarding actions that the USACE may take on projects with limited impacts on the VELB or its elderberry host plant (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996). The geographic scope of this programmatic consultation is the area within the jurisdiction of the Sacramento Field Office of the USFWS, which covers the Central Valley, including Modesto and the surrounding area. The purpose of the programmatic document is to expedite consultations on proposed projects with relatively small impacts on the VELB. If a project meets the conditions outlined in the programmatic document, or if the USFWS determines that a project will have similar impacts to those described below, the project may be appended to the programmatic document. All projects implemented under the programmatic consultation must meet the following four criteria or be determined by the USFWS to have impacts similar in nature.  No designated critical habitat will be affected.  Fewer than 25 elderberry plants will be affected.  Fewer than 200 elderberry stems measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter exist at ground level in the action area.  Less than 250 linear feet of undeveloped watercourse exist in the action area. Implementation of some features of the proposed program may affect USACE jurisdictional habitat. Therefore, construction along the banks of the Tuolumne River or other riparian areas where the appropriately- sized elderberry habitat is found would require USACE approval and necessary permits. If any of the construction projects implementing the proposed Engineer’s Report meet all four of the above criteria, they may be appended to the programmatic document. However, early consultation with the USACE and USFWS is recommended to determine adequate procedure, as implementation of a construction project will require a formal wetland delineation and determination by the USACE, as well as modification and/or mitigation measures. It will also require agency approval. The USFWS’s conservation guidelines establish avoidance or replacement mitigation that would be appropriate for impacts on the elderberry shrub in the study area. The City will implement either or both Mitigation Measures BIO-6 and BIO-7 if appropriate in locations where construction would affect the VELB habitat. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-28 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Avoid Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Habitat The City will avoid and protect VELB habitat whenever possible. If suitable habitat for the VELB occurs in the study area, these areas shall be designated as avoidance areas that will be protected from disturbance during construction. Any VELB habitat that cannot be avoided should be considered affected, and appropriate mitigation shall be implemented, as described under Mitigation Measure BIO-4. Core avoidance areas include all areas within 20 feet of the dripline of any elderberry plant with a stem measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level. Such core areas should not be disturbed during construction. Buffer avoidance areas include all the areas within 100 feet of any elderberry plant with a stem measuring 1.0 inch or greater at ground level. If complete avoidance within a 100-foot buffer cannot be provided, the USFWS must be consulted before any disturbances within the buffer area are considered. In addition, the USFWS must be provided with a map identifying the avoidance areas and written details describing the avoidance and protective measures. Protective measures include those listed below.  Temporary construction fencing will be constructed to provide a minimum setback of at least 20 feet from the dripline of each potential host elderberry plant.  A tailgate education program on the VELB will be given to each construction worker and all personnel working within the project area to avoid adverse effects on the beetle.  Signs every 50 feet along the edge of the fence will be placed along the exclusion fence to help identify the area as a protected area for the VELB, for the duration of construction.  Restoration and maintenance activities should be implemented if activities occur within the 100-foot buffer zone. Restoration and maintenance activities include those listed below.  Any damage done to the buffer area (area within 100 feet of elderberry plants) during construction must be restored. Erosion control must be provided, and appropriate native plants should be used for revegetation.  Buffer areas must continue to be protected after construction. Measures such as fencing, signs, weeding, and trash removal are usually appropriate.  No insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, or other chemicals that might harm the beetle or its host plant should be used in the buffer areas, or within 100 feet of any elderberry plant with one or more stems measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-29 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  The applicant must provide a written description of how the buffer areas are to be restored, protected, and maintained after construction is completed.  Mowing of grasses/ground cover may occur from July through April to reduce fire hazard. No mowing should occur within 5 feet of elderberry plant stems. Mowing must be done in a manner that avoids damaging plants stripping away bark through the careless use of mowing/trimming equipment). Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Transplant Elderberry Plants If elderberry shrubs cannot be avoided, elderberry plants with one or more stems measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level should be transplanted to a mitigation area. The following guidelines will be followed.  A qualified biologist will monitor the program and mitigation sites for the duration of the transplanting to ensure no unauthorized take or loss of individuals occurs.  Elderberry plants will be transplanted after shrubs have lost their leaves and are dormant, usually from November through the first 2 weeks of February.  Transplanting will be conducted according to standard procedures set forth by the USFWS, which include planting additional seedlings or cuttings at various ratios for plants removed for translocating.  A mitigation area set aside for translocated plants will provide habitat for the beetle in perpetuity. The mitigation area should provide at least 1,800 square feet for each transplanted elderberry shrub and follow USFWS guidelines for other associated native plants to be planted within the area. This mitigation area will be weeded by mechanical means (no herbicides) once a year.  The mitigation area will be monitored for the general condition of the mitigation area, the condition of the elderberry plants, and the associated native plants for a period of 10 consecutive years, with surveys and reports every year. It may also be monitored for 15 years, with surveys and reports on years 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 15. Reports will be provided to the USFWS. Impact BIO-3: Construction-Related Loss of Occupied Burrowing Owl Habitat (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Although there are no records for burrowing owls in the program area, there are recorded occurrences within 10 miles of the program area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Additionally, suitable breeding and foraging habitat are present throughout the program area in grasslands and pasturelands. If burrowing owls are present within a project construction zone, or adjacent to such an area, construction during the breeding season could result in the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-30 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 incidental loss of eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. The loss, directly or indirectly through nest abandonment or reproductive suppression, of occupied burrowing owl habitat (habitat known to have been occupied by owls during the nesting season within the past 3 years) or reductions in the number of this rare species within Stanislaus County would constitute a significant impact. Furthermore, raptors, including owls and their nests, are protected under both federal and state laws and regulations, including the MBTA and DFG Section 3503.5. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-8 and BIO-9 would reduce the potential for significant impacts to less-than-significant levels. Mitigation Measure BIO-8: Avoid and Protect Burrowing Owls For those project sites containing suitable habitat, and in conformance with federal and state regulations regarding the protection of raptors, a preconstruction survey for burrowing owls will be completed within a 250-foot buffer around the project site, in conformance with DFG guidelines, and prior to the start of construction. If no burrowing owls are located during these surveys, no additional action would be warranted. However, if breeding or resident owls are located on or immediately adjacent to the site, the following measures will be implemented.  No burrowing owls will be evicted from burrows during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31). Eviction outside the nesting season may be permitted pending evaluation of eviction plans and receipt of formal written approval from the DFG authorizing the eviction.  A 250-foot buffer, within which no new activity would be permissible, would be maintained between project activities and nesting burrowing owls. This protected area would remain in effect until August 31 or at the DFG’s discretion (based upon monitoring evidence), until the young owls are foraging independently.  If accidental take (disturbance, injury, or death of owls) occurs, the DFG would be notified immediately. Mitigation Measure BIO-9: Compensate for Loss of Burrowing Owl Habitat If a preconstruction survey finds that burrowing owls occupy the project site, and avoiding construction in occupied areas is not feasible, then habitat compensation on off-site mitigation lands will be implemented. Habitat management lands comprising existing burrowing owl foraging and breeding habitat will be acquired and preserved. An area of 6.5 acres (the amount of land found to be necessary to sustain a pair or an individual owl) will be secured for each pair of owls or for an individual, in the case of an odd number of birds. As part of an agreement with the DFG, the City will secure the performance of its mitigation duties by providing the DFG with security in the form of funds that would: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-31 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  allow for the acquisition and preservation of 6.5 acres of habitat management lands.  provide initial protection and enhancement activities on the habitat management lands, potentially including such measures as fencing, trash cleanup, artificial burrow creation, grazing or mowing, and any habitat restoration deemed necessary by DFG,  establish an endowment for the long-term management of the habitat management lands, and  reimburse the DFG for reasonable expenses incurred as a result of the approval and implementation of this agreement. Impact BIO-4: Construction-Related Loss of Swainson’s Hawk Foraging Habitat (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Swainson’s hawks are known to nest in the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Irrigated pasture and croplands in the study area provide essential foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawk. Individual project- related construction could result in the loss of foraging habitat, resulting in a significant adverse effect on this state-designated threatened species through habitat modification. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-10 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-10: Compensate for Loss of Swainson’s Hawk Foraging Habitat If project facilities are constructed on lands identified as potential foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawks, then the loss will be mitigated by providing off-site habitat management lands, as described in the DFG protocol for the mitigation of impacts on Swainson’s hawks in the Central Valley (California Department of Fish and Game 1994). The final acreage of off-site management lands to be provided would depend on the distance between the project area and the nearest active nest site, as stated in DFG (1994). Prior to the grading of any site with potential foraging habitat, protocol-level surveys will be conducted to determine the nearest active nest. Based on these surveys, the City will compensate for losses, as guided by the DFG (1994), which states the following. Projects within one mile of an active nest tree shall provide:  One acre of Habitat Management land (at least 10% of the Habitat Management land requirements shall be met by fee title acquisition or a conservation easement allowing for the active management of the habitat, with the remaining 90% of the Habitat Management lands protected by a conservation easement [acceptable to the DFG] on agricultural lands or other suitable habitats that provide foraging habitat for Swainson’s Hawk) for each acre of development authorized (1:1 ratio); or ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-32 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  One-half acre of Habitat Management land (all of the Habitat Management land requirements shall be met by fee title acquisition or a conservation easement [acceptable to the DFG] which allows for the active management of the habitat for prey production on the Habitat Management lands) for each acre of development authorized (0.5:1 ratio). Projects within 5 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 1 mile from the nest tree shall provide 0.75 acres of Habitat Management land for each acre of urban development authorized (0.75:1 ratio). All Habitat Management lands protected under this requirement may be protected through fee title acquisition or conservation easement on agricultural lands or other suitable habitats that provide foraging habitat for Swainson’s Hawks. Projects within 10 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 5 miles from an active nest tree shall provide 0.5 acres of Habitat Management land for each acre of urban development authorized (0.5:1 ratio). All Habitat Management lands protected under this requirement may be protected through fee title acquisition or conservation easement (acceptable to the DFG) on agricultural lands or other suitable habitats that provide foraging habitat for Swainson’s Hawks. Management Authorization holders/project sponsors shall provide for the long- term management of the Habitat Management lands by funding a management endowment (the interest on which shall be used for managing the Habitat Management lands) at the rate of $400 per Habitat Management acre (adjusted annually for inflation and varying interest rates). Impact BIO-5: Construction-Related Impacts on Nesting Swainson’s Hawks (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Removing a tree with an active Swainson’s hawk nest, and other construction activities occurring within 1 mile of an active nest, could result in sufficient disturbance to cause Swainson’s hawk breeding pairs to abandon their nest or otherwise harm eggs or nestlings. Swainson’s hawks are a state-listed threatened species. Disturbance that causes Swainson’s hawks to abandon their nest or results in the loss of reproductive effort would constitute a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-11 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-11: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk Nests In order to ensure that nesting Swainson’s hawks will not be disturbed by construction activities, a qualified ornithologist will conduct preconstruction surveys of the project site and adjacent areas within 1 mile of the project site in developing areas where Engineer’s Report facilities are constructed, or within 1 mile of undeveloped properties that could have trees with active nests. Survey Period I occurs from January 1 to March 20; Period II, from March 20 to April 5; Period III, from April 5 to April 20; Period IV, from April 21 to June 10 (surveys are not recommended during this period because identification is difficult, as the adults tend to remain within the nest for longer periods of time); and ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-33 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Period V, from June 10 to July 30. No fewer than three surveys will be completed in at least each of the two survey periods immediately prior to project initiation. If a nest site is found, consultation with the DFG is required to ensure project initiation will not result in nest disturbance. Impact BIO-6: Construction Disturbance of Bald Eagle, Tricolored Blackbird, and Other Migratory Birds, Including Raptors (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Nest records for special-status birds, including the bald eagle, tricolored blackbird, and herons and egrets, exist in the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Many other migratory birds, including raptors, are known, or are expected, to nest in the study area and nearby vicinity and could nest in areas planned for proposed projects. Raptors kites, hawks, and owls) and other migratory birds and their nests are protected under both California Fish and Game Code Section 3503 (active bird nests) and the MBTA. Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise could lead to nest abandonment. Loss of raptor and other migratory birds’ eggs or nests, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment, would constitute a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-12 and BIO-13 would reduce this impact to a less- than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-12: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds For projects proposed in the Engineer’s Report that would be located in areas with habitat for nesting birds within 500 feet, construction will be avoided during the nesting season (generally between February 1 and August 31), where practical. If construction activities cannot be avoided during the nesting season, a preconstruction survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine whether there are active nests on the site. The survey should be conducted no more than 30 days prior to construction. If the biologist determines that the area surveyed does not contain any active nests, then construction activities can commence without any further mitigation. If nests are found, Mitigation Measure BIO-13 will be implemented. Mitigation Measure BIO-13: Avoid and Minimize Impacts on Nesting Raptors and Other Migratory Birds To avoid disturbing any active migratory bird nests, construction activities will be conducted during the non-breeding season for these species (generally between September 1 and January 31). If active migratory bird nests are present on or adjacent to a project site and construction must occur during the breeding season, construction will not occur within 500 feet of an active nest until the young have ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-34 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist, or until the project applicant receives written authorization from the DFG to proceed. Impact BIO-7: Construction Impacts on Vernal Pool Branchiopods (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The vernal pool fairy shrimp is a federally-listed threatened species, and vernal pool tadpole shrimp and conservancy fairy shrimp are federally-listed endangered species. There are known occurrences of vernal pool fairy shrimp in the study area, and known occurrences of vernal pool tadpole shrimp and conservancy fairy shrimp within the County (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Seasonal wetlands and vernal pools within the study area may provide habitat for some or all of these species. Construction of proposed facilities in these locations could result in mortality of these invertebrate species, or destruction of their habitat. Because these species and their habitat have declined substantially throughout their range, leading to their being listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA (59 FR 48136), this impact is considered significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-14: Avoid Habitat for Vernal Pool Branchiopods Prior to implementation of proposed projects in areas that could contain habitat for vernal pool branchiopods, the City will retain a qualified biologist to conduct surveys to determine whether vernal pools or seasonal wetlands will be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities. If potential habitat for special-status invertebrate species is found, the program proponent will avoid any habitats that may support special-status species by establishing a buffer zone for each resource. The sizes of buffer zones shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS. Where avoidance is not feasible, Mitigation Measures BIO-15 and BIO-16 will be implemented. Additionally, Mitigation Measures BIO-24 (Avoid or Minimize Disturbance to Wetlands) and BIO-26 (Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats), as discussed below, may minimize impacts on vernal pool branchiopods. Mitigation Measure BIO-15: Conduct Protocol-Level Surveys for Vernal Pool Branchiopods If it is not feasible to avoid vernal pool crustacean habitat (both directly and indirectly), a qualified biologist with a 10(a)(1)(A) permit for vernal pool branchiopods will complete protocol-level surveys to determine whether vernal pool branchiopods are present in the identified suitable habitat. If a listed species is found, Mitigation Measure BIO-16 will be required. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-35 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Alternately, the program proponent may choose to assume that relevant water bodies are occupied by listed vernal pool branchiopods. Mitigation Measure BIO-16: Compensate for Impacts on Vernal Pool Branchiopods If protocol surveys determine that the proposed program would have direct or indirect impacts on vernal pool branchiopods, the program proponent will compensate for these impacts by preserving additional habitat for these species using USFWS-approved compensation ratios, as described below. The program proponent will preserve suitable habitat at a ratio to be determined during consultation with USFWS, typically at 3:1 (3 acres preserved for every 1 acre of habitat directly or indirectly affected). Preservation credits must be acquired from a USFWS-approved mitigation bank or conservation area. This mitigation may involve:  purchasing vernal pool preservation or creation credits at an existing mitigation bank if approved by the USFWS, or  paying sufficient funds into a USFWS-approved species fund to support habitat preservation and restoration for these species. Final compensation requirements and mitigation ratios for the program will be determined through consultation with the USFWS. The exact cost to purchase preservation credits for program-related impacts will be determined at the time of purchase. Mitigation credits will be purchased, or a conservation area and management plan will be established, prior to any ground-disturbing activities, including grading, in the program area. Impact BIO-8: Construction Impacts on California Tiger Salamander (Less than Significant with Mitigation) California tiger salamander is a federally-threatened species. There are known occurrences of California tiger salamander in the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Seasonal wetlands, vernal pools, and ponds in grasslands within the plan area provide habitat for these species. Construction of program facilities could result in the direct loss of these habitats. If this species is present in a program area, construction could result in the loss of individuals, which would constitute a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-17: Avoid Habitat for California Tiger Salamander The program proponent will retain a qualified biologist to conduct surveys to determine whether potential habitat for California tiger ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-36 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 salamander will be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities. If potential habitat is found, the program proponent will avoid the habitat by establishing a buffer zone for each resource. The sizes of buffer zones should be determined in consultation with the USFWS and DFG. Where avoidance is not feasible, Mitigation Measures BIO-18 and BIO-19 will be implemented. Mitigation Measures BIO-24 (Avoid or Minimize Disturbance to Wetlands) and BIO-26 (Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats), as discussed below, may minimize impacts on California tiger salamander also. Mitigation Measure BIO-18: Conduct Protocol-Level Surveys for California Tiger Salamander If it is not possible to avoid California tiger salamander habitat, a qualified biologist with authorization from the USFWS and DFG will complete protocol-level surveys in accordance with the Interim Guidance on Site Assessment and Field Surveys for Determining Presence or a Negative Finding of the California Tiger Salamander (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game 2003) to determine whether California tiger salamanders are present in the identified suitable habitat. If presence is determined, Mitigation Measure BIO-19 will be required. Alternately, the program proponent may choose to assume that the relevant water bodies are occupied by California tiger salamander. Mitigation Measure BIO-19: Compensate for Impacts on California Tiger Salamander If California tiger salamander presence is determined or assumed, consultation with the USFWS will be required. The general mitigation guidelines associated with Section 7 consultation for California tiger salamander are as follows, and will be used as the ratios for mitigation of any impacts under the Engineer’s Report. Permanent effects on aquatic and upland habitat will be compensated at a ratio of 3:1. Temporary effects on aquatic and upland habitat will be compensated at a ratio of 1.1:1. This mitigation may involve one of these options:  purchasing mitigation credits at an existing mitigation bank, or  paying sufficient funds into a USFWS-approved species fund to support habitat preservation and restoration for this species. Final compensation requirements and mitigation ratios for impacts associated with the proposed program will be determined through consultation with the USFWS. The exact cost to purchase preservation credits for program-related impacts will be determined at the time of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-37 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 purchase. Mitigation credits will be purchased prior to any ground- disturbing activities, including grading, in the study area. Impact BIO-9: Construction-Related Impacts on Western Pond Turtles (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The western pond turtle is a state species of special concern. records for this species indicate that they may occur in the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Construction-related activities along agricultural ditches, ponds, and riparian areas located in the study area and vicinity could result in mortality of western pond turtles, or destruction of their habitat. Declines in populations of western pond turtles throughout the species’ range have been documented (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Loss of individuals within the study area could diminish the local population and reduce reproductive potential, which could contribute to the further decline of this species. The loss of upland nesting sites or eggs also would decrease the local population. For these reasons, this is considered a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-20: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for and Minimize Impacts on Western Pond Turtles Preconstruction surveys for western pond turtles in suitable aquatic and upland habitat will be conducted by a qualified biologist 2 weeks before and 24 hours before the start of construction activities in streams, irrigation canals, and sloughs where suitable habitat exists. If a turtle is located within the construction area, the turtle will be relocated out of this area (with authorization from the DFG), and exclusion fence will be installed to prevent the movement of turtles back into the construction area. Additionally, the following minimization measures will be implemented.  The project proponent will minimize grading and construction activities along the banks of streams, irrigation canals, and sloughs and within 1,000 feet of these areas between October 15 and April 15 in order to reduce potential mortality to hibernating turtles.  If a turtle becomes trapped during construction activities within the waterway, the turtle will be removed from the work area and placed from the project site.  The construction area will be clearly defined, using orange barrier fencing, in order to minimize disturbance to riparian vegetation and western pond turtle habitat.  If nesting areas for western pond turtles are identified in the study area during preconstruction surveys, a buffer of 300 feet will be established between the nesting site and the construction area. Buffers will be indicated by temporary fencing if construction begins ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-38 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 before the nesting period ends (egg laying to emergence of hatchlings normally extends from April to November). Impact BIO-10: Construction-Related Impacts on Roosting Bats (Less than Significant) Special-status bats, including the hoary bat and Townsend’s big-eared bat, are known to occur in the study area vicinity, and numerous other non-special-status bat species also are known to occur in the study area vicinity. Proposed projects are not expected to remove bat roosting habitat, and therefore are unlikely to affect bat roosts. Impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary for roosting bats. Impact BIO-11: Construction-Related Impacts on Bat Foraging Habitat (Less than Significant) Proposed projects may remove irrigated pasture and agricultural land, which provide bat foraging habitat, but the removal of such habitat would not result in significant impacts on bat species. Because impacts would be temporary, and suitable foraging habitat for bats is available in the surrounding areas, impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary for the loss of bat foraging habitat. Impact BIO-12: Construction-Related Impacts on Riparian Brush Rabbit and Riparian Woodrat (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Riparian woodrat is a federally-endangered and state-fully-protected species of concern, and riparian brush rabbit is a federally- and state-listed endangered species. records for these species occur within the study area (California Natural Diversity Database 2008). Presently, the distribution of these species is limited to San Joaquin County at Caswell State Park. Well-developed riparian habitats in the study area may provide suitable habitat for these species. Impacts on occupied habitat or individuals would be considered significant, and would require formal consultation with the USFWS, as described below. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-21: Avoid Habitat for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit For proposed projects that could affect well-developed riparian habitat, the City will retain a qualified biologist to conduct surveys to determine whether potential habitat for riparian woodrat and riparian brush rabbit will be directly or indirectly affected by construction activities. If potential habitat is found, the project proponent will avoid the habitat by establishing a buffer zone for each resource. The size of the buffer zones will be determined in consultation with the USFWS and DFG. Where avoidance is not feasible, Mitigation Measures BIO-22 and BIO-23 will ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-39 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 be implemented. Mitigation Measures BIO-26 (Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats) and BIO- 29 (Protect Riparian Corridors), as discussed below, may minimize impacts on riparian woodrat and riparian brush rabbit. Mitigation Measure BIO-22: Conduct Surveys for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit If the potential habitat area cannot be avoided, surveys for these species will be conducted by a qualified biologist in compliance with survey methods for riparian brush rabbit (also applicable to riparian woodrat) (Williams and Kelly 1993), or any more recently published USFWS revised survey protocols. These surveys require a special 10(a)(1)(A) permit for the individuals undertaking the surveys. Surveys should be conducted within 30 days before any ground-disturbing activities. If either species is found, Mitigation Measure BIO-23 will be implemented to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-23: Consult with the USFWS to Conduct Monitoring for Riparian Woodrat and Riparian Brush Rabbit/ Environmental Training for Construction Crews If riparian woodrat or riparian brush rabbit are found during surveys conducted under Mitigation Measure BIO-22 and the proposed project would remove occupied habitat or potentially directly or indirectly affect either of these species, formal consultation with USFWS will be initiated. At a minimum, the following protection measures would be implemented.  Potential habitat area will be fenced off with silt fencing or an equivalent barrier, with the exception of the vehicle and pedestrian bridge construction areas, to prevent rabbits and woodrats from accessing work areas. Riparian habitat outside of all construction areas should be avoided to the greatest extent practical.  All construction personnel will participate in a USFWS-approved worker environmental awareness program. A qualified biologist approved by the USFWS will inform all construction personnel about the biology and habitat of riparian brush rabbit and riparian woodrat. Proof of this instruction will be submitted to the USFWS. Impact BIO-13: Construction-Related Impacts on Fish (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The construction of program-related facilities would result in ground-disturbing activities that could potentially cause soil erosion, subsequently resulting in sediment transport and delivery to streams. In addition, accidental spills of toxic chemicals could occur while operating or storing construction equipment. These impacts could be more likely where construction activities would occur directly within a water body. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-40 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Increases in sedimentation and turbidity have been shown to adversely affect fish physiology, behavior, and habitat. The effects of turbidity on fish include gill trauma, avoidance of habitat, changes in forage ability, increased predation risk, and reduced territoriality. The deposition of excessive fine sediment on the stream bottom could eliminate habitat for aquatic insects (a food source for fish); reduce density, biomass, numbers, and diversity of aquatic insects and aquatic vegetation; and reduce the quality of spawning habitat for fish. Although it is unlikely, refueling, operating, and storing construction equipment could result in accidental spills of toxic chemicals, such as concrete, sealants, petroleum products (fuel, oil, and hydraulic fluid), and paint, into waterways. Pollutants sediment and toxic chemicals) entering waterways could cause reduced growth of, or mortality to, egg, larval, juvenile, and adult life stages of fish, including the federally-threatened steelhead. Conformance with the NPDES Construction General Permit and the City’s municipal stormwater permit—and development and implementation of a spill prevention and control program as required by City standards and Mitigation Measures HYD-1 and HYD-2, as described in section 3.8, “Hydrology and Water Quality”—would reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. Per these mitigation measures, construction-site best management practices (BMPs) governing the operation and storage of construction equipment would be implemented to minimize or avoid the potential for accidental spills of toxic chemicals. These BMPs would also be implemented for construction activities occurring in drainage channels and ditches that do not directly support steelhead or other fish species, but that convey runoff to habitats where the species or their habitat may be present. Applicable BMPs include isolation of in- water work areas from flowing water, and limiting construction to the dry season and to periods that avoid sensitive fish life stages. The details of these measures would also be submitted to the DFG with the application for a Streambed Alteration Agreement, pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, before construction begins. Impact BIO-14: Loss of Shaded River Aquatic Cover and Riparian Habitat (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The construction of program facilities, including the installation of pipelines, could also result in the removal of riparian vegetation. This includes vegetation that is a component of shaded river aquatic (SRA) cover. SRA cover is defined as the near-shore aquatic area occurring at the interface between a river or stream and adjacent woody riparian habitat. The removal of riparian vegetation would expose soils, making them susceptible to erosion, potentially leading to increases in turbidity and sedimentation. Riparian vegetation also directly influences the quality of fish habitat, especially for salmonids. Riparian vegetation provides cover, food (in the form of insect drop), in-stream habitat complexity, stream-bank stability, shade, and an insulating canopy that moderates water temperatures in both summer and winter. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-41 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Riparian vegetation also provides a filter that reduces the transport of fine sediment to the stream, and the roots provide stream-bank stability and cover for rearing fish. The removal of riparian vegetation and SRA cover could reduce the rearing capacity of streams and increase the susceptibility of fish, including juvenile salmonids, to predators from the loss of cover. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-24 through BIO-27 would reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-24: Avoid or Minimize Disturbance to Waters, Wetlands, or Riparian Areas Prior to construction, waters and wetlands areas will be delineated by a qualified biologist in accordance with the delineation standards of the USACE. Riparian areas will also be delineated and mapped by a qualified biologist. Projects will be designed to avoid disturbance to waters, wetlands, and riparian areas, including vernal pools and riparian communities along rivers and streams. Avoidance of these areas will include siting structures a minimum of 100 feet from the outermost edge of the wetland or water. Waters, wetlands, and riparian areas near the program sites will be protected by appropriate environmentally-sensitive area fencing. This will consist of orange construction barrier fencing or silt fencing for all wetlands and waters. The fencing will be installed at least 200 feet from the edge of the sensitive area where feasible, and where not feasible, the buffer will be large enough to adequately protect the sensitive area from project activities. The location of the fencing will be marked in the field with stakes and flagging, and shown on the construction drawings. The construction specifications will contain clear language that prohibits construction-related activities, vehicle operation, material and equipment storage, and other surface-disturbing activities within the fenced environmentally-sensitive area. If complete avoidance is not possible, then disturbance will be minimized to the maximum extent possible, and restoration of any temporarily-disturbed area will occur after project work is complete. New vegetation will consist of similar native species to those removed. Activities within or near wetlands (and waters of the U.S.) will occur under and comply with permits from the USACE and other relevant agencies DFG). Any permanent disturbance to Sensitive habitats would be addressed through implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-25. Mitigation Measure BIO-25: Mitigate for Permanent Disturbance to Sensitive Habitats Where wetlands or other sensitive habitats cannot be avoided or restored on-site, replacement habitat at a nearby off-site location will be provided ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-42 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 in accordance with the requirements of the applicable federal or state agency. The replacement habitat will be equivalent to the nature of the habitat lost, and will be provided at a ratio suitable to ensure that, at a minimum, there is no net loss of habitat acreage or value. The replacement habitat will be set aside in perpetuity for habitat use. At a minimum, a ratio of 3 replacement acres for every 1 acre of high-quality riparian or wetland habitat lost will be provided, consistent with typical USFWS and DFG requirements. Mitigation Measure BIO-26: Confine Project Design and Construction to Minimize Impacts on Sensitive Habitats Work in or near streams, wetlands, and vernal pools will be confined to the dry season between May 1 and October 1. Road widths at stream or wetland crossings will be minimized, and roads will be constructed at right angles to reduce adverse impacts on riparian corridors. Mitigation Measure BIO-27: Preserve Habitat Values To the extent feasible, within the identified riparian corridors, environmentally-sensitive habitat areas will be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses consistent with these values will be allowed nature education and research, fishing, and habitat enhancement and protection). Impact BIO-15: Impacts on Sensitive Natural Communities (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Sensitive natural communities that occur in the study area include riparian communities along rivers and drainages and wetlands. Wetland habitats include vernal pools and possibly wetlands adjacent to rivers and drainages in the study area. These habitats could be affected by construction in the study area. The implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-24 through BIO-30 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-28: Preserve Native Trees Preserve existing and mature native trees to the extent feasible, except when such trees are diseased or otherwise constitute a hazard to persons or property. During construction, all activities and storage of equipment will occur outside the drip lines of any trees to be preserved. Any native trees over 2 inches in diameter at breast-height (DBH) that are removed by project activities will be replaced at a replacement ratio of at least1:1. The exact replacement ratio will be determined in coordination with local tree ordinance requirements, if any exist. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-43 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Mitigation Measure BIO-29: Protect Riparian Corridors To the extent feasible, all areas within identified riparian corridors will be maintained in a natural state or limited to recreation and open space uses. Recreation will be limited to passive forms of recreation, with any facilities constructed to not be intrusive to wildlife or sensitive species. Mitigation Measure BIO-30: Use Native Species for Landscaping New landscaping within or immediately adjacent to the identified riparian corridors will employ native species ecologically consistent with natural riparian habitats. Impact BIO-16: Effects on Waters of the United States and Waters of the State (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Rivers, streams, drainages, and some wetlands (such as marshes, bogs, and ponds) within the study area would likely be subject to Section 404 jurisdiction. Additionally, all of these waters, plus isolated waters and wetlands such as vernal pools, would be subject to jurisdiction by the State. The Proposed Program could affect waters of the United States and federally protected wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the CWA; however, the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-24 through BIO-26 and BIO-28 (discussed above) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Impact BIO-17: Effects on Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nurseries (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Migratory wildlife corridors and native wildlife nursery sites occur in the study area. Activities under the proposed Engineer’s Report, including construction of pipelines and storage tanks, could affect wildlife migration by impeding or otherwise disrupting migratory corridors, and could affect native wildlife nursery sites through the disturbance or destruction of nests or nesting habitat. The implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-30 would reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. Project actions that occur in or near streams or rivers during the adult or juvenile migration season may reduce conditions necessary for migration. Although adult salmonids are adapted to high concentrations of suspended sediment that occur during normal storm and runoff events, adults have been reported to cease migration or avoid their natal streams under extremely turbid conditions. High concentrations of suspended sediment and turbidity also can cause delays in the arrival of adults to spawning areas. Chronic exposure by juveniles to high levels of suspended sediment can cause physiological stress and reduce feeding, growth, and survival, and may cause juveniles to migrate prematurely. Noise, vibrations, artificial light, and other physical disturbances can harass fish, disrupt or delay normal activities, or cause injury or mortality. Implementing Mitigation Measure BIO-26 and HYD-1 and HYD-2 (see Section 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality) would reduce this impact to a less-than- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Biological Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.4-44 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 significant level. Limiting construction in or near streams to the summer dry season would avoid or minimize the potential for these impacts to occur. Impact BIO-18: Inconsistency with Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-27 would ensure that the proposed program would be consistent with all local ordinances and policies protecting biological resources; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Impact BIO-19: Inconsistency with the Provisions of an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan (No Impact) The proposed program would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP because the proposed program does not occur within an area covered by any of these types of plans. Therefore, there would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.5 Cultural Resources This section examines the proposed program’s potential effects on cultural resources. The study area for cultural resources includes the cities and communities of Ceres, Modesto, Del Rio, Empire, Waterford, Hickman, Salida, Turlock, and Grayson. Environmental Setting Cultural resources, including prehistoric archeological resources and historic architectural resources, are known to exist throughout the study area. Furthermore, archaeological resources (both prehistoric and historic) that have not been discovered yet may exist beneath the ground but have no surface indicators within the study area. The following discussion presents a brief overview of the existing environmental conditions within the study area pertaining to known resource areas. Historical Resources Historical resources generally include historic structures and archaeological deposits relating to the historic occupation of an area. In the study area, historic cultural resources are found primarily within the built-up, urban areas. Many structures located within the cities in the study area have been placed on various preservation lists because they provide valuable information about periods of social, economic, and physical development of the cities, reflecting their private, civic, and commercial histories and characters. Additional historic resources, such as trash deposits or remnants of razed structures, exist below the ground. These buried resources are often rich in artifacts that reveal information about early residents, which provides social and cultural data that in turn inform the area’s history and character. Though they may deal with an area’s historic period they may be associated with a time possessing a written record), buried resources often are addressed as archaeological resources. A number of historic structures and buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or listed as California Points of Historical Interest or California State Historical Landmarks, are located in the study area. Specifically, in Modesto there are six known historic structures/properties. In addition, the City’s Landmark Preservation Sites listing, detailed in Section V-8 of the master environmental impact report (MEIR) for the 2008 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan, lists 58 structures, properties, and landmark trees designated as being of historic ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 interest by the City’s Landmark Preservation Commission and Redevelopment Agency. The historic sites in Modesto are concentrated, with a few exceptions, in the downtown area. In Turlock, there are six known historic resources, and Ceres and Waterford each have one known historic resource. All listed properties are considered historic resources pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5. There are no previously-documented historic resources in the communities of Del Rio, Hickman, Empire, Salida, or Grayson. Archaeological Resources Archaeological resources include material remains that indicate the presence and activities of human inhabitants, or past visitors to the area, who may not have left a written record of their presence. Such resources may relate to Native Americans, European settlers, and permanent residents of later years. Historic archaeological material trash scatters and remnants of razed structures) are also informative and commonly-occurring resources. Archaeological resources may qualify as historic resources or unique archaeological resources under CEQA, as defined in 14 CCR 15064.5. Native American–related material remains include artifacts that were made, used, or altered by people, such as lithic (stone) matter, groundstone, discarded artifacts, and human remains. Some of these artifacts are often found in midden deposits—a rich, organic, dark brown soil that contains charcoal, ash, and food waste. Midden deposits give evidence of human activity and generally reflect the use of an area over a long period of time. Use of an area by Native Americans also can be seen in lithic scatters and food-processing sites, such as bedrock mortar sites or areas with mortars and pestles. Burial grounds or cemeteries are often associated with long-term habitation. Existing information on prehistoric cultural resources in the Modesto planning area is considered limited because of previous development that has occurred in potential resource areas, and the limited amount of archaeological investigation undertaken in the area. Additionally, past and ongoing agricultural operations may have compromised the integrity of artifacts or sites. Several archaeological resources sites have been recorded within the study area. Four sites recorded at the Central California Information Center (CCIC) in Turlock comprise habitation sites, burials, and artifact concentrations and are located near the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers, Dry Creek, and terraces about those waterways. Previous studies recorded within the city’s urban, built-up area have been limited. Although specific information available on archaeological resources within the study area is limited, the general pattern of resource presence may be estimated, and may identify areas where resources are more likely to be present. Using this knowledge, the City has identified archaeological resource zones within its planning area, which indicate land that is deemed more sensitive to the presence of archaeological resources. Figure V-8-2 of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan MEIR informs City policy requiring varied levels of archaeological ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 investigation for projects undertaken within the plan’s jurisdiction, as discussed below. Paleontological Resources and Unique Geology The study area is known to contain paleontological resources. Modesto is underlain by the Modesto Formation. In the San Joaquin Valley, the Modesto Formation forms ancient alluvial fans of the San Joaquin River. The age of this formation has been placed at approximately 12,000 to 42,000 years before present by Marchand and Allwardt (1981), and from 9,000 to 73,000 years B.P. by Atwater (1982). The upper portions of the formation are composed primarily of unconsolidated, unweathered, coarse sand and sandy silt. The lower portion of the Modesto Formation is composed of consolidated, weathered, well-sorted silt and fine sand, silty sand, and sandy silt. The thickness of the Modesto Formation may be up to 400 feet below the ground surface (Page and Balding 1973). Remains of land mammals have been found in the study area at various localities in alluvial deposits referable to the Modesto Formation. Jefferson (1991a, 1991b) compiled a database of California late Pleistocene vertebrate fossils from published records, technical reports, unpublished manuscripts, information from colleagues, and an inspection of museum paleontological collections at more than 40 public and private institutions. The database lists a number of sites in Stanislaus County that have yielded Rancholabrean vertebrate fossils that could be referable to the Modesto Formation, including a mammoth specimen from the Modesto Sanitary Landfill, Modesto. Regulatory Framework Federal Regulations Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that projects receiving federal money or approval by federal agencies must take into account the effects of the undertaking on historic properties—cultural resources that are listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP—and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to comment on these actions. The NHPA also requires that federal agency heads, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to resources listed on or eligible for listing on the NRHP. The agencies are then required to consult with the state historic preservation officer (SHPO) on the findings. Under federal regulations, a project has an effect on a historic property when the undertaking could alter the characteristics that may qualify the property for inclusion on the NRHP. Alterations include changing the property’s location, setting, or use. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 State Regulations CEQA requires that public or private projects undertaken, financed, or approved by public agencies assess the effects of the project on historic resources. These resources may include buildings, sites, structures, objects, or districts, each of which may have historic, architectural, archeological, cultural, or scientific significance. CEQA requires that if a project results in an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource, then alternative plans or mitigation measures must be considered. According to CEQA, a substantial adverse change in the significance of a resource means the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings, such that the significance of a historic resource would be materially impaired. This includes physical changes to the resource that alter those characteristics that convey its historical significance and qualify it for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), or on a local register or survey that meets the requirements of Public Resources Code (PRC) Sections 5020.1(k) and 5024.1(g). The CRHR serves as an authoritative guide to historic resources that are to be considered for impacts in conjunction with CEQA; any resource that is listed or eligible for listing is to be considered. A lead agency, therefore, must determine not only whether the resource is CRHR-listed, but also whether it is eligible for such listing. Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element calls for the preservation of “Qualified Historical Buildings,” as defined by the state building code. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies The City’s landmark preservation ordinance establishes the recognition, preservation, enhancement, and use of structures, natural features, sites, and areas within Modesto that have historic, architectural, archaeological, structural engineering, or aesthetic significance. The eligibility of a site is determined after public hearings (by recommendation of the Modesto Landmark Preservation Commission), and after a final determination by the Modesto City Council. Chapter VII of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan, “Environmental Resources and Open Space,” sets forth specific requirements for historical and archaeological investigation when a project is undertaken. These general plan ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 policies are the same for projects undertaken within the City’s Redevelopment Area, Baseline Developed Area, and Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy VII-F.2[a]. The City of Modesto shall implement regulations that identify important historic resources, and preserve the important aspects of those resources. The City could encourage adaptive reuse of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) eligible or potentially eligible buildings, including historically sensitive restoration, as a means of preserving eligible structures. Restoration and renovation of buildings should be performed in accordance with the “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties” and the State Historic Building Code. The standards serve as guidelines for rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, retaining, and preserving the historic character of a property. Policy VII-F.2[b]. The City shall ensure that zoning provisions for structures of historical significance are sufficiently flexible to ensure that parking or other structures requirements of the Zoning Ordinance allow the historic structures to remain viable in the future. Policy VII-F.2[c]. The modification of historic structures and places can be mitigated through the application of existing regulations and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), an interim procedure whereby the City evaluates proposals to modify historic structure and develops a program to reduce the impacts on an individual basis. Projects that require federal funding or permits will be addressed through Section 106 compliance in consultation with the SHPO. If the project appears to have impacts on eligible or potentially eligible structures, the project proponent will resolve adverse effects through consultation with the SHPO. Demolition of significant (eligible) buildings and removing landmarks from the Modesto inventory cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level and will require CEQA review. Policy VII-F.2[d]. When structures or areas of historical significance more than 50 years old are proposed for demolition or alteration, or where construction is proposed within 100 feet of that structure, the applicant shall submit data to the City regarding the structure’s history or locations prepared by a qualified architectural historian. The City shall evaluate the historical significance of the proposal and require measures be implemented to preserve all structures and places it deems historically significant. Policy VII-F.2[e]. As an ongoing measure, the City of Modesto shall maintain professional standard inventories of historic resources, with the findings of those inventories concurred by the SHPO and kept on file with the State Office of Historic Preservation. The records will provide a preliminary assessment of eligibility at the initial study stage to indicate whether CEQA regulations would apply in the case of a project application or whether the resource has previously been determined ineligible. When no previous survey has been conducted, buildings and structures more than 50 years old must be evaluated by a professional historian or architectural historian prior to project approval to determine whether the resource is a historically significant resource, for purposes of CEQA. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 When CEQA regulations are applied, the character-defining elements of resources that will be affected should be identified by a qualified architectural historian, qualified City staff member, or other professional qualified under Secretary of Interior Standards to review such projects. It is these elements that are a crucial part of the ability of the resource to convey its historic significance. Projects that would alter character-defining elements would cause a compromise in historic integrity and would constitute a significant impact. Projects that follow Secretary of Interior Standards, in consultation with SHPO, can be considered mitigated to a level of less than significant. The modification of historic structures and places can be mitigated through the application of existing regulations and consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer, an interim procedure whereby the City evaluates proposals to modify historic structures and develops a program to reduce the impacts on an individual basis. Policy VII-F.2[f]. For all proposed development within an archaeological resource study area a combination of archival research, particularly through the Central California Information Center at Turlock, and preliminary surface field reconnaissance as well as consultations with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and those individuals and organizations identified by the NAHC shall be employed to identify any areas that may have been used by Native Americans. Areas containing prehistoric deposits shall be recorded and mapped. Only in those areas where proposed development might affect the resources will an evaluation of their significance be necessary. Policy VII-F.2[g]. Prior to the adoption or amendment of the City of Modesto’s General Plan, the City shall conduct consultations with the NAHC and those individuals and organizations identified by the NAHC for the purpose of preserving specified places, features, and objects that are located within the City’s jurisdiction in compliance with SB 18 of 2005. Policy VII-F.2[h]. If land designated or proposed to be designated for development within the City of Modesto contains a sacred or traditional place, the City shall conduct consultations with the Native American Heritage Commission and the appropriate Native American groups and individuals for the purpose of determining the level of confidentiality required to protect the cultural place and for the purpose of developing treatment with appropriate dignity of the cultural place in any corresponding management plan. Avoid and preserve sacred sites whenever feasible. Policy VII-F.2[i]. Any project subject to CEQA that involves substantial earth- disturbing activities, where excavation/construction would occur outside of areas where previous development has occurred, or where excavation/construction would occur at depths greater than existing foundations, roads, and/or trenches in the immediate vicinity, shall require evaluation of the site by a qualified archaeologist retained by the project applicant, which would include at minimum a records search, a Phase I pedestrian survey, and preparation of an archaeological report containing the results of this cultural resources inventory identification effort for submittal to the Central California Information Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy VII-F.2[j]. If Phase II archaeological evaluations are recommended, a report of all such surveys and excavations with recommendations shall be completed prior to project approval. Policy VII-F.2[k]. Any project subject to CEQA that involves substantial earth- disturbing activities shall require consultation by the applicant for the purposes of determining archaeological and cultural resources impacts and creating appropriate mitigation to address such impacts. Policy VII-F.2[l]. Any project that involves earth-disturbing activities within previously undisturbed soils in an area determined to be archaeologically or culturally sensitive by the City of Modesto through consultation with the project applicant and a qualified archaeologist shall be subject to archaeological and Native American monitoring during all ground-disturbing activities. Policy VII-F.2[m]. Any project that involves earth-disturbing activities within previously undisturbed soils in an area determined to be archaeologically or culturally sensitive by the City of Modesto through consultation with the project applicant and a qualified archaeologist and the Native Americans will be required to have the following mitigation measures, at a minimum: If prehistoric archaeological remains are discovered during the project construction (inadvertent discoveries), all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to investigate the find, and make recommendations as to treatment and mitigation. In the event of the discovery of a burial, human bone, or suspected human bone all excavation or grading in the vicinity of the find shall halt immediately and the area of the find shall be protected and the project applicant immediately shall notify the County Coroner of the find and comply with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, including California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, if applicable. If human remains are identified, the project sponsor will also retain a Native American monitor. A qualified archaeological monitor will be present and will have the authority to stop and redirect grading activities, in consultation with the Native Americans and their designated monitors, to evaluate the significance of any Native American archaeological resources discovered on the property. Native American monitors from the appropriate Native American Tribes, as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be allowed to monitor all groundbreaking activities, including all archaeological testing and data recovery excavations that are likely to affect Native American resources, as determined by a qualified archaeologist. The project proponent will be responsible for compensating Native American monitors. If human remains are discovered, the NAHC will assign a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The landowner agrees to relinquish ownership of all Native American human remains and associated burial artifacts that are found within the project area, to the appropriate Native American MLD, as assigned by the NAHC, for proper treatment and disposition. The MLD will decide whether or not standard archaeological analysis will be allowed on human remains and associated artifacts from burials. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy VII-F.2[n]. The City of Modesto shall promote historical awareness through provision of educational opportunities for residents of all ages. In addition, the City has adopted procedures for mitigating impacts to cultural resources, as listed below. These policies will reduce the project’s impacts to a less-than-significant level except when a significant historic building would be demolished. Policy VII-F.2[o]. Whenever possible, the City shall avoid disturbing or damaging archaeological resources. Preservation in place to maintain the relationship between the artifacts and the archaeological context is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites. Preservation may be accomplished by: Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites; Incorporating sites within parks, green space, or other open space; Covering the sites with a layer of chemically stable soil; Deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement. When in-place mitigation is not feasible, data recovery through excavation may be necessary. A data recovery plan, which makes provisions for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information about the site, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies must be deposited with the Central California Information Center in Turlock, California. Special rules apply to any archaeological sites known to contain human remains (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5; Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)). Data recovery shall not be required if the lead agency determines that testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the necessary data, provided that the data have already been documented in another EIR and are available for review at the California Historical Resource Regional Information Center (Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)). Policy VII-F.2[p]. Prior to excavation and construction, the prime construction contractor and any subcontractors shall be cautioned on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying cultural resources or removing artifacts, human remains, bottles, or other cultural materials from the project area. Policy VII-F.2[q]. The project sponsor shall identify a qualified archaeologist prior to any demolition, excavation, or construction. The City will approve the project sponsor’s selection of a qualified archaeologist. The archaeologist would have the authority to temporarily halt excavation and construction activities in the immediate vicinity (ten-meter radius) of a find if significant or potentially significant cultural resources are exposed and/or adversely affected by construction operations. Policy VII-F.2[r]. Reasonable time shall be allowed for the qualified archaeologist to notify the proper authorities for a more detailed inspection and ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 examination of the exposed cultural resources. During this time, excavation and construction would not be allowed in the immediate vicinity of the find; however, those activities could continue in other areas of the project site. Policy VII-F.2[s]. If any find is determined to be significant by the qualified archaeologist, representatives of the construction contractor and the City, the qualified archaeologist, and a representative of the Native American community (if the discovery is an aboriginal burial) would meet to determine the appropriate course of action. Policy VII-F.2[t]. All cultural materials recovered as part of a monitoring program would be subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and a report prepared according to current professional standards. Paleontological Policies – Baseline Developed Area and Planned Urbanized Area Policy VII-C.2[a]. To minimize potential adverse impacts to unique, scientifically important paleontological resources, project applicant(s) shall be required to do the following: Prior to grading or excavation activities in locations where there has not been previous development or where construction would occur at depths below existing foundations, roads, or trenches, construction personnel involved with earth-moving activities must immediately stop all earth-moving activities if bones or any other fossil materials are discovered. In that event, the City’s Community and Economic Development Department must be notified of the discovery and a qualified paleontologist must be contacted. If paleontological resources are discovered during earth-moving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work in the vicinity of the find, and the City Planning Department shall be notified. A qualified paleontologist shall evaluate the resource and prepare a proposed mitigation plan in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines. The proposed mitigation plan may include a field survey of additional construction areas, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum storage coordination for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations determined by the lead agency to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume at the site where the paleontological resources were discovered. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres Policies in the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document (1997) seek to develop a systematic and comprehensive historic preservation program to ensure that Ceres’ historically and architecturally significant resources are preserved, as well as to identify and preserve any archaeological resources that may be disturbed by development activities. Goal 5.B ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 To preserve and maintain sites, structures and landscapes that serve as significant, visible reminders of the city’s social, architectural and agricultural history. Policies 5.B.2 The City shall encourage the preservation, maintenance, and adaptive reuse of existing historic buildings in the Redevelopment Areas and other areas of the Planning Area in order to prevent demolition and disrepair. 5.B.3 The City shall encourage the preservation of buildings of local historic importance in the Downtown and surrounding areas. Goal 5.C To protect Ceres’s Native American heritage. Policies 5.C.1 The City shall refer development proposals that may adversely affect archaeological sites to the California Archaeological Inventory at California State University, Stanislaus. 5.C.2. The City shall not knowingly approve any public or private project that may adversely affect an archaeological site without first consulting the California Archaeological Inventory, conducting a site evaluation as may be indicated, and attempting to mitigate any adverse impacts according to the recommendations of a qualified archaeologist. City Implementation of this policy shall be guided by Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. City of Turlock In 1989, the City of Turlock conducted a survey to assess its historic and archaeological resources. Evaluations were based on surface evidence that was based on a records check, map and aerial photograph assessment, and pedestrian field reconnaissance. No significant historic or archaeological resources were found. The Turlock General Plan (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002) contains the policies listed below. Guiding Policy 6.8-a Protect significant archaeological resources in the Planning Area that may be identified during construction. Implementing Policy 6.8-b Should archaeological or human remains be discovered during construction, work shall be immediately halted within 50 meters of the find until it can be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist. If it is determined to be historically or culturally significant, appropriate mitigation measures to protect and preserve the resource shall be formulated and implemented. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Other Standards Paleontological Standards The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), a national scientific organization of professional vertebrate paleontologists, has established standard guidelines that outline acceptable professional practices for the conduct of paleontological resource assessments and surveys, monitoring and mitigation, data and fossil recovery, sampling procedures, specimen preparation, analysis, and curation (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995). Most practicing professional paleontologists in the nation adhere to the SVP assessment, mitigation, and monitoring requirements, as specifically stated in its standard guidelines. In its standard guidelines for the assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts on paleontological resources, the SVP (1995) established three categories of sensitivity for paleontological resources: high, low, and undetermined. Areas where fossils have been previously found are considered to have a high sensitivity and a high potential to produce fossils. In areas of high sensitivity that are likely to yield unique paleontological resources, full-time monitoring is typically recommended during any project-related ground disturbance. Areas that are not sedimentary in origin and that have not been known to produce fossils in the past typically are considered to have low sensitivity, and monitoring is usually not necessary during project construction. Areas that have not had any previous paleontological resource surveys or fossil finds are considered to be of undetermined sensitivity until surveys and mapping are performed to determine their sensitivity. After reconnaissance surveys, observation of exposed cuts, and possibly subsurface testing, a qualified paleontologist can determine whether the area should be categorized as having high or low sensitivity. As per the significance criteria of the SVP (1995), all vertebrate fossils are generally categorized as being of potentially significant scientific value. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines,  cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5,  directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature, or  disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Methods and Assumptions Records searches and site surveys were not conducted for the study area because such searches and surveys are more appropriately conducted immediately prior to implementing a particular program-related component. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact CR-1: Impacts on Known Historic or Archaeological Resources (Less than Significant) The proposed program would occur partially within Modesto’s incorporated limits and partially outside its incorporated limits, within the jurisdiction of the County but within the City’s sphere of influence (SOI). Program-related activities would also take place within the cities of Ceres, Turlock, and Waterford. The County and the other cities do not maintain policies or requirements related to cultural resources that are more restrictive or otherwise incompatible with those of the City of Modesto. All subsequent projects, including those in Del Rio, Empire, Grayson, Hickman, and Salida, would implement existing City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan policies related to the investigation and mitigation of historical and archaeological impacts, as necessary. The proposed program does not propose demolition or modification of existing structures. Based on the program information available, the proposed program does not appear to propose work in proximity to any of the historic resources listed in the cities of Ceres, Modesto, Turlock, or Waterford. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed program would adversely affect known, listed historic resources, and the Engineer’s Report evaluated in this PEIR would have a less- than-significant impact on historic resources. All site-specific projects proposed as part of the proposed program would be required to adhere to federal (if applicable), state, and local policies pertaining to the survey and impact analysis of historic resources. Accordingly, if subsequent projects propose to demolish or modify existing structures, or if they propose work within 100 feet of structures, those structures would need to be evaluated for their significance and for any project-related impacts and mitigation. Adherence to City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Section VII-F policies 2-c, 2-d, 2-e, 2-f, 2-h, 2-i, 2-j, and 2-k (presented above) would ensure that subsequent projects would avoid significant impacts on historic resources, and that any unforeseen significant impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. It also should be noted that if subsequent projects were to use federal funds and proposed the demolition or modification of existing structures, such projects would be subject to historic property review and consultation with the SHPO under Section 106 of the NHPA. Any impacts identified during that review ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 would be mitigated fully by site-specific measures developed in consultation with the SHPO. Impact CR-2: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Archaeological Resources (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Individual projects implemented pursuant to the proposed program would entail extensive excavation work to install certain components. Project grading and earthmoving activities could disturb previously undiscovered archaeological deposits or buried historic resources. Proposed pipelines, storage tanks, and groundwater wells to be located within riverbeds and otherwise adjacent to natural channels are particularly susceptible to encountering Native American artifacts. The City has adopted guidelines to aid project compliance with requirements for archaeological resources analysis, and subsequent projects would be required to adhere to these guidelines. Projects proposing earthwork within archaeological resource study areas must adhere to general plan Section VII-F Policies 2-f and 2-h (presented above), which requires preconstruction archaeological investigations on the site and implementation of avoidance measures, if necessary. Projects proposing earthwork outside of archaeological resource study areas must adhere to Policies2-i and 2-j (also presented above), which require that a qualified archaeologist evaluate the site by conducting at minimum a records search, a Phase I pedestrian survey, and preparation of an archaeological report containing the results of this cultural resources inventory identification effort for submittal to the Central California Information Center. All subsequent projects must adhere to City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Section VII-F Policies 2-k, 2-l, and 2-m (presented above), which outline mitigation procedures that would prevent impacts on the unearthed resources and require on-site activity to cease until an archaeological site investigation is performed, in the event that resources are uncovered during construction. Construction specifications for individual projects must stipulate the relevant procedures that are to be followed in the event that cultural resources are encountered during the construction process. Adherence to existing City policies regarding archaeological investigation, construction requirements, and proper mitigation for any resources discovered on the site, as well as to Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, below, would ensure that specific projects implemented subsequent to the proposed program would result in less-than- significant impacts on archaeological resources that meet CEQA’s definition of historic resources or unique archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CR-1: Implement Plan to Address Discovery of Unanticipated Buried Cultural Resources If buried cultural resources (such as chipped stone or groundstone, historic debris, or building foundations) are inadvertently discovered during ground-disturbing activities, work will stop in that area and within ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 a 100-foot radius of the find, and a “no work” zone will be established that uses appropriate flagging to delineate the boundary of this zone. The City will retain the services of a qualified archaeological consultant who will visit the discovery site as soon as practicable. The archaeological consultant will perform minor hand excavation to describe the archaeological resources present, and will assess the amount of disturbance. The archaeologist will then assess whether the discovery retains sufficient integrity, is an archaeological resource, and is of potential scientific/historic/cultural significance, according to NRHP and CRHR guidelines. The consulting archaeologist will, at a minimum, provide the City with a written and digital photographic documentation of all observed materials. Based on the assessment, the City will identify the CEQA and NHPA Section 106 cultural-resources compliance procedures to be implemented. If the find appears to not meet the NRHP or CRHR criteria of significance, work can continue while being monitored by the consulting archaeologist. If the archaeologist determines that the resources are significant, avoidance of additional impacts is preferred. However, if avoidance is not possible, the consulting archaeologist will prepare and submit a treatment plan to the City. Following federal and state guidelines and professional standards, the treatment plan (or data-recovery plan) will provide detailed research design and methodology for test excavations and archival research to identify and evaluate the resources. The treatment plan will provide for at least the activities listed below.  Conduct test excavations and archival research to determine resource significance. When avoidance is infeasible, the treatment plan will outline how evaluations of potentially significant archaeological resources will be conducted, including archival research and test excavation, and evaluation methods necessary to determine eligibility for listing in the CRHP.  Data recovery excavations of significant archaeological resources that cannot be avoided. If, following identification and evaluation efforts, archaeological sites and historic resources are determined to meet the criteria for inclusion in the CRHR, and avoidance or redesign of the project is not feasible, then research and fieldwork to recover and analyze the data contained in that site will be conducted. This work may involve additional archival and historical research, excavation, presentation of the results in a technical report, curation of the recovered artifacts and accompanying data, and analysis of the artifacts, features, and other data discovered. Native American consultation will continue throughout data recovery efforts. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact CR-3: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Human Remains (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Based on the program information for the proposed infrastructure improvements, the proposed program does not appear to propose earthwork in proximity to any known cemeteries or Native American burial grounds. However, projects implemented as part of the proposed program have the potential to disturb previously undiscovered human remains. All of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan policies identified above for Impact CR-2 also pertain to the discovery of human remains. In addition to the general plan requirements, subsequent projects would also be required to adhere to California Health and Safety Code 7050.5, which requires the cessation of further excavation and disturbance in the event of a human- remains discovery, and coordination with the County coroner and (if applicable) the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) regarding further action. Adherence to the relevant general plan policies and the California Health and Safety Code, as well as Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, will ensure that subsequent projects’ impacts on human remains will be less than significant. Mitigation Measure CR-2: Implement Plan to Address the Discovery of Human Remains If remains of Native American origin are discovered during program- related construction, it will be necessary to comply with state laws concerning the disposition of Native American burials, which fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC. If any human remains are discovered or recognized in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there will be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County coroner has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required. However, if the remains are of Native American origin:  within 24 hours of notification of the discovery, the NAHC will contact a Native American most likely descendent (MLD) to make a recommendation regarding appropriate treatment of human remains,  the most likely descendants of the deceased Native Americans have made a recommendation to the landowner or person responsible for the excavation work for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC 5097.98, or  the NAHC has been unable to identify a descendant, or the descendant failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified.  According to the California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 and the disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). Section 7050.5 requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours. Impact CR-4: Impacts on Paleontological Resources (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The study area is underlain by the Modesto Formation, which is considered a paleontologically-sensitive rock unit under the SVP guidelines (1995), as discussed earlier in this section. Records of vertebrate fossil localities throughout the San Joaquin Valley and all sediments referable to the Modesto Formation suggest there is a potential for uncovering additional similar fossil remains during construction-related earthmoving activities, as part of implementation of the proposed program. Though the large majority of the study area has been developed, and any fossil remains have previously been removed, there are parcels within the study area that have not yet been developed, and the proposed program would require excavation activities in undisturbed sediments below existing development. As such, the potential for damage to unique, scientifically important fossils during construction-related activities at project sites is considered a potentially significant impact. For projects located within the Baseline Developed and the Planned Urbanized areas identified in the City’s General Plan, Policy VII-C.2a would apply. However, for projects located outside of these areas, implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure CR-3: Minimize Potential Adverse Impacts on Paleontological Resources To minimize potential adverse impacts on unique, scientifically- important paleontological resources, the City or its contractors will do the following.  Before the start of grading or excavation activities in locations where there has not been previous development or where construction would occur at depths below existing foundations, roads, or trenches, construction personnel involved with earthmoving activities will be informed of the possibility of encountering fossils, the appearance and types of fossils likely to be seen during construction activities, and proper notification procedures, should fossils be encountered. This worker training will be prepared and presented by a qualified paleontologist or, alternatively, may be presented by a qualified archaeologist at the same time as any recommended cultural resources-awareness training.  If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities, the construction crew will immediately cease work in the vicinity of the find, and the City Planning Division will be notified. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Cultural Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.5-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 A qualified paleontologist will evaluate the resource and prepare a proposed mitigation plan in accordance with SVP guidelines (1996). The proposed mitigation plan will include, at a minimum, a field survey of additional construction areas, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum storage coordination for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings. Recommendations determined by the lead agency to be necessary and feasible will be implemented before construction activities can resume at the site where the paleontological resources were discovered. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources The environmental setting and impact analysis for geology, soils, and mineral resources was developed through a review of the following documents:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the Del Rio Community Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  the MEIR for the City’s general plan (Jones & Stokes 2003),  the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document,  the City of Turlock General Plan, and  the City of Waterford General Plan. Environmental Setting Overview The study area is situated at the northern end of the San Joaquin Valley, a deep, structurally-controlled trough that is surrounded on the west by the Coast Ranges, on the east by the Sierra Nevada, and on the south by the San Emigdio and Tehachapi Mountains. The San Joaquin Valley is underlain by a complexly-layered sequence of sedimentary deposits, which reaches an estimated thickness of 11,000 feet in the area of Modesto (Page 1986). Under the eastern and central portions of the valley, the base of the sequence likely rests on Mesozoic rock allied to the plutons of the Sierra Nevada; to the west, basement rocks are believed to be mafic and ultramafic rocks of Jurassic age. These basement rocks are immediately overlain by marine and continental (nonmarine) sedimentary rocks of Cretaceous and Tertiary age, consisting mainly of sandstone, sand, siltstone, and shale, which in turn are overlain by Quaternary (Pleistocene and Holocene) alluvial and fluvial deposits of sand, gravel, silt, and clay (Bartow 1991). Geologic materials exposed in the Program area range from pre-Cretaceous rocks to recent alluvium (Burow et al. 2004). Soils The federal Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has mapped 30 different soil associations in the eight physiographic provinces in the County. In the eastern portion of Stanislaus County (east of I-5), where the Program area is ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 located, there are six physiographic provinces and 16 soil associations (Waterford 2006). The physiographic provinces in this area are recent alluvial floodplains, basin lands, young alluvial fans, moderately old fans, low alluvial terraces, and high alluvial terraces. The soil associations within each of the six physiographic provinces are described briefly below (Waterford 2006). Recent Alluvial Floodplains Soils in this physiographic province are members of the Columbia-Grangeville- Temple and Honcut-Wyman associations. These soils are very young because of the repeated deposition of alluvium. Slopes are generally level. These soils are deep and range from very well-drained and productive to poorly-drained and saline-alkaline. Erosion hazard is estimated to be low. Basin Lands Soils in this physiographic province are members of the Camarillo-Orestimba, Waukena- Fresno, and Capay associations. Slopes are generally level. These soils are generally alluvial in origin and are poorly drained because of their high clay content. Some of these soils would be considered expansive under the Uniform Building Code. Erosion hazard is estimated to be low. Young Alluvial Fans Soils in this physiographic province are members of the Hanford-Tujunga, Vernalis- Salado-El Solyo, Hilmar-Delhi, Dinuba-Hanford, Myers-Stomar, and Modesto-Chualar associations. Slopes are generally level. These soils are generally found adjacent to the floodplains and basin lands on both sides of the San Joaquin River. Erosion hazard is estimated to be low. Moderately Old Fans, and Low Alluvial Terraces Soils in these physiographic provinces are members of the Azcharis-Positas, San Joaquin- Madera, and Madera associations. Slopes are generally level with some variability in the rolling hills. These soils are generally older than the soils of the young alluvial fans, resulting in rock-like hardness at shallow depths east of the San Joaquin River. Erosion hazard is estimated to be low-to-moderate. Expansive Soils Certain clay minerals within some soils swell when they become wet and shrink when they dry; swelling and shrinking are expansive soil properties. Expansive ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 soils can affect the integrity of structures and cause downslope creep. Portions of the study area may have soils with a potential for expansion, as noted above. Mineral Resources The study area is not reported to have abundant mineral resources. Sand and gravel deposits in the beds of rivers and major streams are the primary mineral resources in Stanislaus County, and varying locations may contain areas classified as MRZ-2a or MRZ-2b under the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act—that is, areas where significant mineral deposits have been determined to exist. There were five active sand and gravel operations and one specialty sand mining operation in Modesto in 1997, according to the latest survey information from the California Department of Conservation (DOC) (California Department of Conservation 1999). However, no areas classified as MRZ-2a or 2b exist within the Modesto planning area (Jones and Stokes 2008). The Tuolumne River channel, as it passes through the City of Waterford, contains mineral resource areas classified as MRZ 2b. Though no active mining operations are located within the City of Waterford’s planning area, Sites 12 (Hickman Pit) and 13 (Waterford Site) are located in the general vicinity and are active sand and gravel mining operations (Waterford 2006). Due to the geologic structure of the area, significant mineral resources are not known to exist, nor are likely to to exist, within the City of Waterford’s planning area (Waterford 2006). Landslides and Erosion The regional slope in the vicinity of the study area is on the order of 0.001 vertical feet of change per foot of horizontal distance (0.1% slope). Local slopes may approach 8% in areas where former sand dunes are located. Because the Modesto urban area is generally level, it is not subject to landslides. However, according to the Waterford general plan, bluff areas along the north bank of the Tuolumne River exhibit a high degree of instability, as do some of the bluffs along the south bank of the river. All areas along the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek channels should be considered subject to landslide activity as part of the natural landform process, and could become very unstable during the wet season and particularly during the winter months in an earthquake event (Waterford 2008). Wind or rain may cause erosion when soils are exposed during construction activities and when fields are left fallow. However, because the Modesto urban area is generally flat, erosion caused by rain is minimal. Erosion may occur along streams or rivers during storm events, causing significant runoff if the banks are not stabilized. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Stream bank erosion occurs where a waterway undercuts its levee or bank. Consequently, this phenomenon is restricted to areas immediately adjacent to the Stanislaus River, Tuolumne River, and Dry Creek. Stream bank erosion is not a significant problem because of the control of discharge in the upper reaches of the rivers, stabilization of banks, and restrictions on construction in their vicinity (City of Modesto 2008). Seismic Hazards There are no known active faults (faults that have had surface displacement within the last 11,000 years) in the Program area (Hart and Bryant 1997). Regional faults recognized as active by the State of California and zoned pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act include the Calaveras fault and the San Andreas fault, which lie 50 miles and 60 miles west of Modesto, respectively; the Hayward fault, located approximately 50 miles northwest of Modesto; and the Nacimento fault, located approximately 100 miles southwest of Modesto. The only active fault reported in Stanislaus County is the Tesla-Ortigalita fault, which is located approximately 20 miles west of Modesto (see the Modesto General Plan MEIR, Figure V-17-1, Faults Located within Stanislaus County). The Bear Mountain and Melones faults occur in the eastern portion of Stanislaus County; however, neither fault has had displacement within the last 150 million years (Stanislaus County 1987). Though there is no record of any recent seismic activity originating within the county, numerous earthquakes occur each year on regional faults lying west of the study area, including the San Andreas, Calaveras, Hayward, and Nacimento faults. Based on information furnished by the Department of Mines and Geology (now the California Geological Survey [CGS]) and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, these quakes are capable of producing groundshaking to an intensity of VI or VII on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale of 1931 (Stanislaus County 1987). Liquefaction is a process by which soils and sediments lose shear strength and fail during episodes of intense seismic ground shaking. The susceptibility of a given soil or sediment to liquefaction is primarily a function of local groundwater conditions and certain soil and sediment properties, such as particle size distribution and bulk density. Water-saturated fine sands and silts located within 50 feet of the surface are typically considered to be the most susceptible to liquefaction. Unsaturated, well-consolidated soils and sediments that consist of coarser or finer materials are generally less susceptible to liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction to occur in a given area is a function of a soil’s susceptibility to liquefaction and ground shaking potential its proximity to active faults). The potential for liquefaction to occur in the study area has not yet been evaluated directly by the State of California (California Department of Conservation 2008). However, the City of Modesto’s Wastewater Master Plan EIR describes the depth to groundwater as ranging from approximately 40 to 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 feet below ground surface (bgs). Therefore, given the depth of groundwater and the density of material beneath the groundwater, the potential for liquefaction or other seismically-induced ground failure in the study area is relatively low. Ground Shaking Within the study area, the CGS estimates ground shaking to be between 10%– 20% and 20%-30% g (unit of gravity) peak ground acceleration (pga). This is considered low with respect to hazards due to ground-shaking. Regulatory Framework State Regulations The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act establishes special study zones in areas known to contain active faults. Development in these zones is restricted unless a detailed fault investigation indicates that the risk is acceptable. The primary purpose of the act is to prohibit structures intended for human occupancy from being located across an active fault, and to mitigate the potential hazard from fault surface rupture or fault creep. Because the Program does not include structures for human occupancy, the Act does not apply. The state has adopted the California Building Code (CBC), which establishes construction standards intended to minimize loss of life in earthquakes (Title 24, California Code of Regulations). State regulations require that each city and county similarly adopt the CBC, and any amendments adopted by the state. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA, PRC 2761, et seq.) requires local governments to consider the impacts of new development on the availability of mineral resources. The CGS has mapped mineral resources across California to assist agencies in preserving access to those minerals. Under SMARA, whenever the State Geologist has identified minerals of statewide or regional significance within a jurisdiction, the city or county must establish mineral resource management policies in its general plan. These policies are to emphasize the conservation and development of identified mineral deposits. Where a jurisdiction has not adopted general plan policies, the lead agency must prepare a statement describing its reasons for permitting a proposed use that would threaten the potential to extract minerals. In addition, a surface mine operator may request that a city or county amend its general plan to accommodate the continuation of a mine and plan for future land uses in its vicinity. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The areas outside of Modesto, Ceres, Turlock, and Waterford spheres of influence are under Stanislaus County jurisdiction. As such, the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman adhere to the County’s general plan policies. The County’s general plan has the following applicable policies. Urban development shall be discouraged in areas with growth-limiting factors such as high water table or poor soil percolation, and prohibited in geological fault and hazard areas, flood plains, riparian areas, and airport-hazard areas unless measures to mitigate the problems are included as part of the application. [Land Use Element, Policy Reserve, as open space, lands subject to natural disaster in order to minimize loss of life and property of residents of Stanislaus County. [Conservation and Open Space Element, Goal Discourage development on lands subject to flooding, landslide, faulting or any natural disaster to minimize loss of life. [Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy 16.] The County shall emphasize the conservation and development of lands having significant deposits of extractive mineral resources by not permitting uses that threaten the potential to extract the minerals. [Conservation and Open Space Element, Policy 27.] Prevent the loss of life and reduce property damage as a result of natural disasters. [Safety Element, Goal Development should not be allowed in areas that are particularly susceptible to seismic hazard. [Safety Element, Policy The County will continue to enforce state-mandated structural Health and Safety Codes, including but not limited to the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Housing Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform Plumbing Code, the National Electric Code, and Title 24. Community of Del Rio Policies In addition to those listed for the County, the Del Rio Community Plan provides the following policy related to geology and soils: Goal 6 - Significant natural resources in the community shall be preserved. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies The City’s general plan provides the following policies related to landslide and seismic safety. Baseline Developed Area and Planned Urbanizing Area Policy VI-B.2[a]. The City shall continue to use building codes as the primary tool for reducing seismic risk in structures. The 2007 Uniform Building Code, which has been adopted by Modesto, Stanislaus County, and other cities in the County, is intended to ensure that buildings resist major earthquakes of the intensity or severity of the strongest experience in California, without collapse, but with some structural as well as nonstructural damage. In most structures, it is expected that structural damage could be limited to repairable damage, even in a major earthquake. Policy VI-B.2[b]. The City shall require all new buildings in the City to be built under the seismic requirements of the 2007 Uniform Building Code (or subsequent editions). Policy VI-B.2[c]. The City shall continue to explore measures to induce building owners to upgrade and retrofit structures to render them seismically safe. Policy VI-B.2[d]. The City shall enforce provisions of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Policy VI-E.1[a]. Any construction which occurs as a result of the Urban Area General Plan must conform with the current UBC regulations, which address seismic safety of new structures and slope requirements. As appropriate, the City will require a geotechnical analysis prior to tentative map review in order to ascertain site-specific subsurface information necessary to estimate foundation conditions. These geotechnical studies should reference and make use of the most recent regional geologic maps available from the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology. Policy VI-E.2[a]. Fluvial erosion during construction shall be controlled by a construction erosion control program which shall be filed with the City Engineering & Transportation Department and kept current throughout any site development phase. Policy VI-E.2[b]. The erosion control program shall include “best management practices” as appropriate, given the specific circumstances of the site and/or project. Table 9-2 in the Master Environmental Impact Report presents examples of best management practices. Policy VI-E.2[c]. Sediment control basins to capture eroded sediments and contain them on the project sites shall be designed to take into consideration appropriate criteria as outlined in Table 9-3 in the Master Environmental Impact Report. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres Policies The city’s general plan provides the following policies applicable to the proposed program. 7.A.3 the City shall require new structures and alterations to existing structures comply with the current edition of the Uniform Building Code. 7.A.6 The City shall avoid siting of structures across soil materials of substantially different expansive properties. City of Turlock Policies The city’s general plan provides the following policies applicable to the proposed program. 9.2-a. Continue to use building codes as the primary tool for reducing seismic risk in structures. 9.2-b Continue to require all new buildings in the City to be built under the seismic requirements of the latest updated Uniform Building Code. City of Waterford Policies The city’s general plan provides the following policies related to landslide and seismic safety. S-2.1 Reduce the potential danger from earthquake and seismic-related activity from existing buildings where necessary. 2.1.c Pursue uniform infrastructure, building, and land use requirements and policies regarding disaster avoidance within the City's urban boundaries. S-2.2 Encourage the improvement of all public facilities and infrastructure such as natural gas, fuel, sewer, water, and electrical lines and equipment with up-to-date seismic safety features. 2.2.b Require adequate storage facilities to insure an adequate supply of water in the event of seismic activity. An evaluation of the seismic safety of the water system should be completed as part of any update of the City’s Water Master Plan. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would cause: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Exposure of people, structures, or infrastructure to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, damage, injury, or death involving:  surface 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,  strong seismic groundshaking,  liquefaction and other related types of seismically induced ground failure,  expansive soils, or  landslides.  Substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil due to program operation or construction.  Loss of availability of a known mineral resource or mineral resource recovery site. Methods and Assumptions Because the exact locations of the facilities proposed in the Engineer’s Report have not been identified, a qualitative and programmatic impact assessment was conducted. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact GEO-1: Damage Due to Surface Rupture, Ground-Shaking, Liquefaction, Expansive Soils, or Landsliding (Less than Significant with Mitigation) No active faults are known to exist immediately near the study area. The proposed program has no components or features that would increase the exposure of people to fault rupture hazards. Therefore, impacts related to surface rupture are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. As mentioned above, ground-shaking hazard in the proposed program area is low. The proposed program does not include any structures that would be inhabited by people, though occasional use would occur because of maintenance activities. As such, the proposed program does not include any features that would increase the exposure of people to ground-shaking hazards. Therefore, impacts related to ground shaking are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Because of the varying potential for liquefaction in the study area, the potential for underground structures, such as pipelines and groundwater wells—as well as ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.6-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 above-ground structures—to be exposed to liquefaction hazards is considered potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce this to a less-than-significant level. Similarly, construction of proposed facilities could occur on expansive soils; however, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would identify any areas with expansive soils and recommend appropriate design measures to reduce impacts below significance thresholds. As described in the “Environmental Setting” section above, there is low potential for landslides to occur within the majority of the study area. The proposed program does not include any features that would increase the exposure of people to landslide hazards. Therefore, impacts related to landslides are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Conduct Project-Specific Geotechnical Investigation Prior to Construction During project design, project-specific geotechnical investigations and reports will be prepared by registered engineers to detect site conditions that could result in liquefaction, construction on expansive soils, or other potential hazards and to identify appropriate design requirements that would prevent damage to structures. Site-specific geological data and recommendations by a registered engineer will be incorporated into project design, thereby reducing any impacts due to liquefaction. Impact GEO-2: Soil Erosion or Loss of Topsoil Due to Program Construction or Operation (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Grading, excavation, removal of vegetation cover, and loading activities associated with construction activities could temporarily increase erosion and sedimentation. Construction activities also could result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that could adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at the construction sites and staging areas. However, as described in section 3.8, “Hydrology and Water Quality,” the City would implement Mitigation Measure HYD-1 to minimize the potential for erosion and sedimentation from construction activities. In addition, applicable City general plan policies (provided above and in section 3.8) that address erosion control would be followed by construction contractors and monitored by the City. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1. Impact GEO-3: Loss of Mineral Resources (Less than Significant) Though some sand and gravel operations exist in the study area, the infrastructure proposed would have no effect on the availability of these resources. This impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following section evaluates the effects of the proposed program related to releases of hazardous materials during the construction and operation of the proposed facilities. This section describes the regulatory framework and local policies regarding releases of hazardous materials, including requirements for storage and handling of hazardous materials. Potential public health and safety impacts that would result from implementation of the proposed program are described below under “Impact Discussion.” The environmental setting and impact analysis for hazards and hazardous materials were developed through a review of the following documents:  The Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008), and  planning documents from outlying communities. Environmental Setting The program area includes existing urbanized portions of communities of North Ceres, Del Rio, Empire, Grayson, Hickman, Modesto, Salida, Turlock, and Waterford, in Stanislaus County. This urbanized area includes commercial uses along SR 99, the Southern Pacific Railroad corridor, major arterial roadways, industrial uses, the Modesto City-County Airport, and mixed residential neighborhoods. No wildlands exist within the study area. Known contaminated sites within the City of Modesto are identified in Section 16 of the City’s general plan MEIR. Historical uses of the each of the communities where water system upgrades are proposed include extensive agriculture. Soil and groundwater in areas previously used for agriculture could contain a variety of contaminants, including pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, semi-volatile organic compounds, and VOCs. Installation of the proposed pipelines, wells, and pump stations would potentially encounter these contaminants. Potable water from surface and groundwater sources is conveyed through the existing system operated by the City of Modesto. The water is treated so that it meets federal and state drinking water standards prior to being released to the distribution system. To prevent corrosion of pipes and maintain disinfection levels throughout the system, the pH of the water is adjusted to be basic, and there is a residual of disinfectants (commonly a chloramine residual) detectable in the water. Additionally, a small concentration of fluoride is required to be maintained in the water for health reasons. However, these trace chemicals do not pose a threat to people or wildlife. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Regulatory Framework The use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials are regulated by local, state, and federal laws and regulations. The EPA is the federal agency that administers hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulations. The California EPA (Cal/EPA) is one of the State agencies with jurisdiction over hazards; it includes the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The Stanislaus County Environmental Resources Department (SCERD), in conjunction with other regulating departments, has jurisdiction on a local level. A description of each agency’s jurisdiction and involvement in managing hazardous materials and wastes is provided below. Federal Regulations U.S. Environmental Protection Agency The EPA is responsible for the enforcement and implementation of federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. The federal regulations are primarily codified in 40 CFR. The legislation is outlined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The EPA provides oversight for the storage and use of hazardous materials. The EPA implements the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). Also known as Title III of the SARA, the EPCRA was enacted by Congress as the national legislation on community safety. This law was designated to help local communities protect public health, safety, and the environment from chemical hazards. To implement the EPCRA, Congress required each state to appoint a State Emergency Response Commission (SERC). The SERCs were required to divide their states into emergency planning districts and to name a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) for each district. LEPCs typically consist of representatives from a wide variety of groups, including firefighters, health officials, government and media representatives, community groups, industrial facilities, and emergency managers. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 State Regulations Department of Toxic Substances Control In California, the DTSC of Cal/EPA is authorized by the U.S. EPA to enforce and implement federal hazardous materials laws and regulations. California regulations pertaining to hazardous materials equal or exceed federal regulations. Most state hazardous materials regulations are contained in 22 CCR. The DTSC implements RCRA regulations regarding the storage and use of hazardous materials. Hazardous Waste Control Act The Hazardous Waste Control Act created the state hazardous waste management program, which is similar to, but more stringent than, the federal RCRA program. The act is implemented by regulations contained in 26 CCR, which describes the following required aspects for the proper management of hazardous waste: identification and classification, generation and transport, treatment standards, operation of facilities and staff training, closure of facilities and liability requirements, and design and permitting of recycling, treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. These regulations list more than 800 materials that may be hazardous and establish criteria for identifying, packaging, and disposing of them. Under this act and 26 CCR, a generator of hazardous waste must complete a manifest that accompanies the waste from the generator to the transporter to the ultimate disposal location. Copies of the manifest must be filed with the DTSC. Emergency Services Act Under the Emergency Services Act, the state has developed an emergency response plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local agencies. Rapid response to incidents involving hazardous materials or hazardous waste is an important part of the plan, which is administered by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. The office coordinates the responses of other agencies, including the EPA, the California Highway Patrol, the air quality management districts, and county disaster response offices. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Local Regulations Stanislaus County Environmental Resources Department The SCERD is the primary agency for the local enforcement of state and federal laws controlling hazardous materials management. The SCERD is a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), the local agency responsible for coordination of the hazardous waste generator program, underground and aboveground storage tank management, and emergency planning under the EPCRA. The SCERD also administers the Hazardous Materials Business Plan program. Worker Health and Safety Worker health and safety is regulated at the federal level by the Department of Labor. Worker health and safety in California is regulated by the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). California standards for workers dealing with hazardous materials (including hazardous wastes) are contained in 8 CCR and include practices for all industries (General Industry Safety Orders). Cal/OSHA conducts on-site evaluations and issues notices of violation to enforce necessary improvements to health and safety practices. Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Safety Element of the County’s general plan (Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development 2008) contains the following policy and implementation measures that are relevant to hazardous materials identification and hazardous wastes. Policy Thirteen The Department of Environmental Resources shall continue to coordinate efforts to identify locations of hazardous materials and prepare and implement plans for management of spilled hazardous materials as required. Implementation Measures 1. The County will continue to provide planning efforts to locate and minimize the effects of hazardous materials through the County's adopted emergency plan. 2. The County has prepared a Hazardous Waste Management Plan which is the guideline for managing hazardous waste in this County. The goals, objectives, conclusions, recommendations and implementation measures of that plan are hereby incorporated as a part of the Safety Element, along with any modifications which may result from state review of the Hazardous Waste Management Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3. The Area Plan for Emergency Response to Hazardous Substance Release, required by the California Health and Safety Code, will be incorporated as part of the Safety Element when that plan is adopted. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Section V Community Services of the City’s general plan (City of Modesto 2008) contains the following hazardous materials management policies regarding hazardous materials storage and use. Policy V-M.2[a]. The City shall comply with all existing federal and state laws which regulate the generation, transportation, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. Policy V-M.2[b]. The City of Modesto should require that businesses and industries using hazardous material provide mitigation measures commensurate with the hazards they bring to the community, in accordance with the applicable Articles and Sections of the most current adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Code. Policy V-M.2[c]. In the event that site inspection or construction activities uncover chemical contamination, underground storage tanks, abandoned drums, or other hazardous materials or wastes at a parcel, the inspection report preparer shall so notify the City. The City shall notify the County Health Services Department. Under the direction of these agencies, a site remediation plan shall be prepared by the project applicant. The plan would: specify measures to be taken to protect workers and the public from exposure to the potential site hazards and certify that the proposed remediation measures would clean up the wastes, dispose the wastes, and protect public health in accordance with federal, state and local requirements. Permitting or work in the areas of potential hazard shall not proceed until the site remediation plan is on file with the City. If a parcel is found to be contaminated to a level that prohibits the proposed use, the potential for reduction of the hazard should be evaluated. Site remediation is theoretically capable of removing hazards to levels sufficiently low to allow any use at the site. In practice, both the technical feasibility of the remediation and its cost (financial feasibility) should be evaluated in order to determine the overall feasibility of locating a specific use on a specific site. In some cases, it may require restriction to industrial use or a use that involves complete paving and covering of the parcel. In accordance with OSHA requirements, any activity performed at a contaminated site shall be preceded by preparation of a separate health and safety plan (prepared by the project applicant and filed with the City) for the protection of workers and the public. All reports, plans, and other documentation shall be added to the administrative record. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy V-M.2[d]. For each specific project that would generate hazardous waste, the City shall require as a condition of building permit and/or business license approval that the project sponsor prepare a hazardous material transportation program. The transportation program shall identify the location of the new facility or use and designate either specific routes to be used for transport of hazardous materials and wastes to and from the facility, or specific routes to be avoided during transport of hazardous materials and wastes to and from the facility. Routes would be selected to minimize proximity to sensitive receptors to the greatest practical degree. Passage through residential neighborhoods should be minimized, and parking of waste haulers on residential streets should be prohibited. The City Fire Department shall review and approve the applicant’s hazardous materials transportation program or, working with the applicant, modify it to the satisfaction of both parties. Policy V-M.2[e]. Prior to issuance of all building permits, the City shall identify the site in relation to all CERCLIS sites and to known or suspected uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites. All projects within 2,000 feet of these facilities (generally depicted on Figure 16-1 of the Master Environmental Impact Report) shall conduct hazardous materials studies as necessary to identify the type and extent of contamination, if any, and the extent of risk to human health and public safety. If necessary, a remedial action program would be developed and implemented as in the policy described with Policy V-M.2[c]. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies The City of Turlock has not established specific policies that address hazards or hazardous materials. City of Ceres 7.F.1 The City shall ensure that the use and disposal of hazardous materials in the city complies with local, state, and federal safety standards. 7.F.4 The City shall review all proposed development projects that manufacture, use, or transport hazardous materials for compliance with the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. 7.F.5 The City, in conjunction with the County, shall strictly regulate storage of hazardous materials and waste. 7.F.6 The City shall require secondary containment and periodic examination for storage of large quantities of toxic materials. 7.F.16 The City, with the assistance of the County, shall develop and maintain complete and accurate information on the types, quantities, sources, and management of all hazardous wastes generated in Ceres to aid in management planning and emergency response. 7.F.17 The City, with the assistance of the County, shall provide for safe and efficient hazardous waste emergency response and contaminated site cleanup. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan Policy S-2.2 Encourage the improvement of all public facilities and infrastructure such as natural gas, fuel, sewer, water, and electrical lines and equipment with up-to-date seismic safety features. Implementing Action 2.2.b Require adequate storage facilities to insure an adequate supply of water in the event of seismic activity. An evaluation of the seismic safety of the water system should be completed as part of any update of the City’s Water Master Plan. Policy S-6.1 Prevent injuries and environmental contamination due to the uncontrolled release of hazardous materials. Implementing Actions: 6.1.a Support Stanislaus County in carrying out and enforcing the Stanislaus County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. 6.1.b Continue to update and enforce local ordinances regulating the permitted use and storage of hazardous gases, liquids, and solids. 6.1.c Continue to make sure underground storage tanks containing hazardous materials are properly installed, used, and removed. 6.1.d Provide continuing training for hazardous materials enforcement and response personnel. Policy S-6.2 Ensure that hazardous materials are cleaned up before a property is developed or redeveloped. Implementing Actions: 6.2.a Request an assessment of the past use of hazardous materials and soils analysis on proposed development sites. 6.2.b Continue to work with the State Department of Health Services and Stanislaus County in developing cleanup programs for known hazardous waste sites within the Waterford planning area. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to the Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  create a hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment,  emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school,  be located on a site that is listed as hazardous by the California Environmental Protection Agency, and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment,  result in safety hazards near a public or public-use airport,  expose people or structures to risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, or  impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Methods and Assumptions Because detail of the proposed program’s specific components are not yet available, this impact assessment was conducted on a qualitative and programmatic general) basis. Mitigation measures are identified below to reduce any impacts to less-than-significant levels. Subsequent projects will require the incorporation of mitigation measures as necessary to reduce impacts to less than significant. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact HAZ-1: Creation of a Hazard to the Public or the Environment through the Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials (Less than Significant) The proposed program includes upgrades to the existing water conveyance system within the City’s contiguous service area and the outlying communities of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, Turlock, and Waterford. Potable water is not considered to be hazardous material; the water is safe for human consumption and thus accidental releases of potable water would not harm the environment. The potable water conveyance system does not rely on the use of petroleum- consuming equipment. The electrically-powered booster pumps and groundwater wells would not involve use of hazardous materials. However, proposed diesel backup generators for the booster pumps and groundwater wells would require use and storage of diesel fuel. As such, the proposed program would require the long-term storage, disposal, or transport of diesel fuel, which could threaten public health and the environment if accidentally spilled. Compliance with existing Stanislaus County and City of Modesto hazardous management plans, as described in the setting section above, would ensure that this impact is less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact HAZ-2: Creation of a Hazard to the Public or the Environment through Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials (Less than Significant) The construction of the proposed facilities would require the use of heavy equipment, including excavators, backhoes, bulldozers, scrapers, and generators. Hazardous materials used by this equipment, such as oils, grease, or fuels, could spill during the construction activities. It is likely that these hazardous materials and vehicles would be stored by the contractor(s) at program sites for the duration of construction activities. The accidental release of hazardous materials could impact soil and groundwater quality, or could result in adverse health effects to construction workers, the public, or the environment. All use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities would be performed in accordance with local, state, and federal hazardous materials regulations (see also Section 3.8, “Hydrology and Water Quality”). This would include the creation of a hazardous materials transportation plan or waste program as needed on a site-by-site basis. Compliance with these regulations would ensure that this impact is less than significant. Impact HAZ-3: Release of Emissions or Hazardous Materials near a School (Less than Significant) The temporary use of hazardous materials during construction of proposed facilities could occur within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school site. As discussed above, construction activity may potentially result in accidental releases of hazardous materials. However, compliance with all local, state, and federal regulations concerning hazardous materials would result in less-than-significant impacts. Once operational, these facilities would not result in additional hazard emissions or the use of hazardous materials near students or school facilities. Storage of onsite hazardous materials, such as diesel fuel, would require secondary containment to prevent leaks or spills, as required by federal and state regulations. This impact is less than significant. Impact HAZ-4: Release of Hazardous Materials from an Existing Contaminated Site (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Construction of the proposed program would include disturbance and excavation of soils within existing roadways and undeveloped areas for installation of storage tanks, pipelines, groundwater wells, and a corporation yard. Because the locations of these facilities have not been finalized, it is not known whether areas of known hazardous material contamination exist within specific program sites. In rural areas, soils previously or currently used for agriculture may have been subject to the application of pesticides and herbicides that potentially contain toxic materials. As such, contaminated soils may be present at program sites. Disturbance of contaminated soils during construction activities could present a health risk to construction workers, and thus could require special health and safety measures or soil management procedures during excavation and disposal activities. In addition, reuse of contaminated soil excavated from program sites and transported to landfills or farms could pose a public safety hazard. This ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 impact is potentially significant. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 on a site-by-site basis would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prepare a Risk Assessment Prior to Construction Activity Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the City or its contractor will prepare a risk assessment and establish procedures to address the identification, excavation, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with ASTM Standard 1527-05, “Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process” and the EPA “All Appropriate Inquiries” standards and practices (40 CFR 312). An environmental database search of regulatory-listed hazardous materials sites contained in local, regional, state, and federal databases for the program site and within a 0.5-mile radius of the site will be performed by a qualified professional as part of this assessment. If contaminated soil or groundwater is encountered, the City will notify the appropriate local environmental management agencies and local fire departments. The City will ensure that any identified environmental site conditions that may represent a risk to public health and safety will be remediated in accordance with federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations. All recommendations in the risk assessment will be implemented by the City and all its representatives, including contractors and earthwork construction workers, such that people are not exposed to adverse conditions on the program site as a result of discovering existing sources of contamination. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Control Contamination Resulting from Previously Unidentified Hazardous Waste Materials Prior to the onset of construction, all construction workers will be trained in the identification of potentially contaminated soil and water, including the characteristics of potential contamination, such as discolored soil, oils or sheens on water, and unusual odors. In the event that hazardous materials are encountered during construction, all construction activities in the area of the discovery will stop, and the City or its contractors will conduct hazardous materials investigations to identify the nature and extent of contamination and evaluate potential impacts on program construction. If necessary, the City or its contractors will implement remediation measures consistent with all applicable local, state, and federal codes and regulations. Construction will not resume until remediation is complete. If waste disposal is necessary, the City will ensure that all hazardous materials removed during construction are handled and disposed of by a licensed waste-disposal contractor and are transported by a licensed hauler to an appropriately-licensed and permitted disposal or recycling facility, in accordance with local, state, and federal requirements. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.7-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact HAZ-5: Result in Safety Hazards near a Public or Public-Use Airport (Less than Significant) Under the proposed program, facilities may be constructed within the Modesto City-County Airport or the Turlock Municipal Airport land use plan areas. However, these facilities would not pose any risks to aviation. Impacts are considered less than significant. Impact HAZ-6: Exposure of People or Structures to Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death involving Wildland Fires (No Impact) The prevalent land uses in the program area are rural agricultural and developed. There are no wildlands in the program area, and, as such, implementation of the proposed program would have no impact on wildfires. Impact HAZ-7: Impair or Interfere with Emergency Plans (Less than Significant) The majority of the proposed facilities would be located underground or within public right-of-way. As such, when fully constructed, the proposed program would have no impact on the implementation of, or physical interference with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. However, the construction of various water system improvements could occur within existing streets, and may require temporary lane closures. Temporary roadway closures or traffic delays could impede emergency response vehicles; however, as discussed in section 3.14, “Transportation/Traffic,” a traffic management plan (TMP) would be prepared on a site-by-site basis. As part of the TMP, the appropriate fire and police departments would receive proper notification prior to temporary road closures. This would ensure that any impacts on emergency protection services during construction would be less than significant. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality The environmental setting and impact analysis for hydrology and water quality resources were developed through a review of the following documents:  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  the master environmental impact report (MEIR) for the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (Jones & Stokes 2008),  the City of Turlock and City of Waterford general plans,  The City of Modesto/Modesto Irrigation District Joint Urban Water Management Plan 2005 Update (RMC 2007),  Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan for the Modesto Sub- basin, Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (Bookman-Edmonston 2005),  Turlock Groundwater Basin Draft Groundwater Management Plan (Turlock Groundwater Basin Association 2008), and  Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Central Valley Region, Sacramento River, and San Joaquin River Basins (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 1998). Please see Section 3.15, “Utilities,” for the discussion of water supply impacts. Relevant Program Characteristics This analysis of environmental effects of the proposed program primarily considers potential impacts on hydrology and water quality due to construction of proposed facilities, including storage tanks, buildings housing booster pumps and groundwater wells, and pipelines, located at various and undetermined sites within the study area. Additionally, potential impacts of the proposed corporation yard are evaluated. Environmental Setting Climate The climate in the study area is characterized as dry-summer subtropical (often referred to as Mediterranean), with cool, wet winters and relatively warm, dry summers. The mean annual rainfall in the vicinity of the program site, for the period between 1931 and 2005, is approximately 12.4 inches, with the majority of rainfall between October and May (Western Regional Climate Center 2004). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The lowest rainfall year on record is 1913, with only 4.3 inches of rainfall, while the highest was 26.0 inches in 1983 (City of Modesto 2000). Streams and Watercourses The study area is located within the San Joaquin Valley, a relatively flat, structural, and topographic trough. The primary source of surface water flows in the San Joaquin Valley is rainfall and snowmelt runoff from the Sierra Nevada range to the east. The secondary source of surface water flow is local rainfall and runoff from the Coast Ranges to the west. In general, runoff flows from the Sierra Nevada toward the west across alluvial fans and the valley floor in streams and rivers, including the Kings, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers. These westward-flowing rivers join with the San Joaquin River on the west side of the valley, where the combined flows travel northwest toward the Delta and San Francisco Bay. Tuolumne River, Dry Creek, and the Stanislaus River are the dominant hydrologic features in the vicinity of the service area. Dry Creek, which is a major tributary to the Tuolumne River, flows through southern Modesto and joins the Tuolumne River near State Route (SR) 99. The Tuolumne River drains a 1,800-square-mile watershed, and Dry Creek drains an area of about 190 square miles. The Stanislaus River, located north of the community of Del Rio, is one of the largest tributaries of the San Joaquin River. The New Melones Dam controls flows on the river. The topography of the program area is generally flat, with gently sloping lands from east to west toward the San Joaquin River approximately 10 miles west of the Modesto city limits. The Modesto Irrigation District (MID) operates several drainages, such as irrigation laterals, that traverse the study area. The irrigation laterals are open, and were built in the early part of the 20th century and lined with concrete approximately 50 years later. They divert water from the Tuolumne River (and a series of reservoirs) to distribute it to irrigated farmlands. To a limited extent, these laterals receive irrigation return flows (mostly into the Cavil Drain in the area northeast of Modesto) and receive urban stormwater runoff. Flooding and Drainage Because of the Central Valley’s climate and geography, flooding is a frequent and natural event in the valley. The San Joaquin River basin has been subject to floods that result from both rainfall that occurs during the late fall and winter months, and unseasonable and rapid melting of the winter snowpack during the spring and early summer months. Major floods in the Central Valley within the past 20 years (1983, 1986, 1995, and 1997) have caused significant damage (State of California Reclamation Board and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2002). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Flooding also can occur as a result of catastrophic dam failure and the release of waters contained in upstream reservoirs. The study area could be affected if one or more of the several dams in the vicinity were to fail catastrophically. Although a very low-probability event, catastrophic structural dam failure can be caused by earthquake or overflow. According to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (City of Modesto 2004b), failure of one or more of the following dams could affect the study area (California Department of Water Resources 1988).  The La Grange Dam, located in the eastern comer of Stanislaus County, is situated on the Tuolumne River just above the town of LaGrange and is operated by the MID and the Turlock Irrigation District (TID). It has a capacity of 500 acre-feet (af).  Don Pedro Dam is located in Tuolumne County on the upper Tuolumne River and is operated jointly by the MID and TID. It has a capacity of 2,030,000 af.  The New Melones Dam, located in both Tuolumne and Calaveras Counties, is located on the Stanislaus River and is operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. It has a capacity of 2,420,000 af.  The New Exchequer Dam (which retains Lake McClure) is situated on the Merced River and is operated by the Merced Irrigation District in Mariposa County. It has a capacity of 1,032,000 af.  Friant Dam, impounding Millerton Lake, is located on the San Joaquin River in both Fresno and Madera Counties and is operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. It has a capacity of 520,500 af.  Pine Flat Dam is located on the Kings River in Fresno County and is owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. It has a capacity of 1,000,000 af. The La Grange, Don Pedro, and New Exchequer dams are under the jurisdiction of the State of California, Division of Safety of Dams. The New Melones, Friant, and Pine Flat Dams are under the jurisdiction of the federal government (the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, respectively). Existing dams under state and federal jurisdiction are periodically inspected to ensure that they are adequately maintained, and to direct the owner to correct any identified deficiencies. Regular inspections and required maintenance of the dams substantially reduce the potential for catastrophic failure. Groundwater The study area is located within an area underlain by the San Joaquin Valley groundwater basin. Specifically, the study area is located above three sub-basins: the Modesto, Turlock, and Delta-Mendota sub-basins, as follows:  Modesto sub-basin—Empire, Del Rio, North Modesto, Salida, and Waterford,  Turlock sub-basin—Ceres, Hickman, South Modesto, and Turlock, and ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Delta-Mendota sub-basin—Community of Grayson. The sediments in the vicinity of the City are generally poorly sorted and derived from continental and marine sedimentary rocks (with some volcanic rocks) of the Coast Ranges. Groundwater occurs in the geologic materials underlying the site in discrete water-bearing zones or “aquifers.” The uppermost zone (from the ground surface to a depth of about 150 feet) is composed of a heterogeneous mixture of gravel, sand, silt, and clay (Page 1986). The Modesto sub-basin lies between the Stanislaus River to the north and the Tuolumne River to the south, and between the San Joaquin River on the west and basement rock of the Sierra Nevada foothills on the east. The surface area of the sub-basin is 247,000 acres (Bookman-Edmonston 2005). The Turlock sub-basin lies on the eastern side of the San Joaquin Valley, and encompasses portions of both Stanislaus and Merced counties. This sub-basin lies between the Tuolumne River to the north and the Merced River to the south, and is bounded on the west by the San Joaquin River and on the east by basement rock of the Sierra Nevada foothills. The northern, western, and southern boundaries are shared with the Modesto, Delta-Mendota, and Merced Groundwater Sub-basins (Turlock Groundwater Basin Association 2008). Groundwater flow in the study area is generally to the west and southwest toward the San Joaquin River. However, studies indicate that near the San Joaquin River, the dominant groundwater gradient shifts from horizontal to vertically upward (U.S. Geological Survey 1991; DJH Engineering 2002). This upward gradient results in discharge of deeper groundwater (which tends to contain higher concentrations of total dissolved solids than shallow groundwater) to surface water flow in the river. In terms of groundwater quality, groundwater in the study area tends to have higher concentrations of inorganic minerals than surface water supplies, as a result of the interaction with soil and rock structures. Chemical quality varies in different areas because of differing hydrogeologic properties of the source aquifers. There are areas within Stanislaus County where groundwater is unsuitable for domestic and agricultural uses. High-salinity groundwater is known to occur near the San Joaquin River, and is believed to be upwelling of saltwater from deep aquifer materials of marine origin (Black and Veatch et al. 1995; City of Modesto 1997). In addition, there are areas of shallow groundwater that have high nitrate levels, which are generally indicative of leaching from overlying land-use activities (such as septic leachate or agricultural fertilizers). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Water Quality Within the study area, the following river segments are identified as impaired according to the 2006 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2006):  The Grayson Drain at the outfall for sediment toxicity,  San Joaquin River from Merced River to Tuolumne River for DDT, group A pesticides, mercury, unknown toxicity,  Lower Stanislaus River for diazinon, group A pesticides, mercury, unknown toxicity, and  Lower Tuolumne River (from the Don Pedro Reservoir to the confluence with the San Joaquin River) for diazinon, group A pesticides, and unknown toxicity. A TMDL has been adopted for diazinon and chlorpyrifos runoff in the Lower San Joaquin River (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2005). The proposed program would not involve contributions of these contaminants, and would thus not affect implementation of the TMDL. Development of total maximum daily loads for other pollutants, as discussed in the “Regulatory Setting” section below, is identified as a low priority for the Central Valley Nitrate is a concern for drinking water supplies because of potentially adverse health effects in humans. Iron and manganese are elevated in some areas, and are associated mainly with aesthetic qualities of the water. Levels of boron, arsenic, and radionuclides are currently within acceptable regulatory limits. Pesticide contamination is primarily the result of widespread historic use of the agricultural soil fumigant dibromochloropropane (DBCP), primarily in orchards and vineyards where it was used. Ethylene dibromide (EDB) is also a pesticide of concern in some groundwater areas. There are also localized areas within the county that have contamination from the organic compounds trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), and carbon tetrachloride that are used in dyes, dry-cleaning industries, and as degreasers. Regulatory Framework Following is a comprehensive list of major federal, state, County, and City policies in effect that apply to the program area. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Federal Regulations Clean Water Act The CWA is the primary federal law that protects the quality of the nation’s surface waters, including lakes, rivers, and coastal wetlands. It operates on the principle that all discharges into the nation’s waters are unlawful unless specifically authorized by a permit; permit review is the CWA’s primary regulatory tool. The following paragraphs provide additional details on specific sections of the CWA that could apply to program activities, including construction and effluent discharge. The State Water Resources Control Board is the state agency with primary responsibility for the implementation of state- and federally-established regulations relating to water resource issues. Typically, regulatory requirements are implemented by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards that the has established throughout the state. The Central Valley is the agency responsible for regulating discharges to waterways in the program area. Impaired Water Bodies and In accordance with Section 303(d) of the CWA, state governments must present the U.S. EPA with a list of “impaired water bodies,” defined as those waters that do not meet established water quality standards. The law requires the development of actions, known as to improve the quality of impaired water bodies. The TMDL is the quantity of a pollutant that can be safely assimilated by a water body while maintaining its designated beneficial uses and not violating water quality standards. The listing of a water body as impaired does not necessarily suggest that the water body cannot support the beneficial uses; rather, the intent is to identify the water body as requiring future development of a TMDL to maintain water quality and reduce the potential for future water quality degradation. NPDES permits (discussed below) for water discharges must take into account the pollutant from which a water body is listed as impaired. Specific requirements for the permits would be stated in the TMDL for that pollutant. Local impairments have been identified under “Water Quality,” above. Permits for Fill Placement in Waters and Wetlands CWA Section 404 regulates the discharge of dredged and fill materials into “waters of the United States,” which include oceans, bays, rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. Program proponents must obtain a permit from the USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed activity. Before any actions are carried out that may result in discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States, a delineation of jurisdictional waters of the United States must be completed, following USACE protocols to determine whether the study area encompasses wetlands or other waters of the United States that qualify for CWA protection. See section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” for further details of this process. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Water Quality Certification Under CWA Section 401, applicants for a federal license or permit to conduct activities that may result in the discharge of a pollutant into waters of the United States must obtain certification from the state in which the discharge would originate, or, if appropriate, from the interstate water pollution control agency with jurisdiction over affected waters at the point where the discharge would originate. Therefore, all projects that have a federal component and that may affect the quality of the state’s waters (including projects that require federal agency approval, such as the issuance of a Section 404 permit) also must comply with CWA Section 401. Section 401 certification or waiver is under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Permits for Surface Water Discharge CWA Section 402 regulates discharges to surface waters through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, administered by the EPA. In California, the is authorized by the EPA to oversee the NPDES program through its (see the related discussion under “Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act” below). The NPDES program provides for both general permits (those that cover a number of similar or related activities) and individual permits. Discharges from construction, dewatering, and municipal activities are regulated under the NPDES program, as described below. Discharged from construction and operation of the proposed program facilities would be required to comply with these requirements, as appropriate. Construction Activities Construction-related stormwater discharges to waters of the United States are regulated under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) (California State Water Resources Control Board 2001). Projects disturbing more than 1 acre of land during construction are required to file a notice of intent (NOI) with the in order to be covered by the Construction General Permit before the onset of construction. The Construction General Permit requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that must be completed before construction begins. Implementation of the begins with the commencement of construction and continues through the completion of the project. On completion of the project, the applicant must submit a notice of termination (NOT) to the to indicate that construction is completed. The must include a site map and a description of proposed construction activities, along with a demonstration of compliance with relevant local ordinances and regulations, and an overview of BMPs that will be implemented to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction-related pollutants that could contaminate nearby water resources. Permittees are further required to conduct annual monitoring and reporting to ensure that BMPs are correctly implemented and effective in controlling the discharge of stormwater-related pollutants. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Dewatering Activities While small amounts of construction-related dewatering are covered under the Construction General Permit, the Central Valley has adopted a General Order for Dewatering and Other Low Threat Discharges to Surface Waters (General Dewatering Permit). This permit applies to various categories of dewatering activities, and would likely apply to the proposed program area if construction required dewatering in greater quantities than that allowed by the Construction General Permit, and discharged the effluent to surface waters. The General Dewatering Permit contains waste discharge limitations and prohibitions similar to those in the Construction General Permit. To obtain coverage, the applicant must submit an NOI and a pollution prevention and monitoring program (PPMP). The PPMP must include a description of the discharge location, discharge characteristics, primary pollutants, receiving water, treatment systems, spill prevention plans, and other measures necessary to comply with discharge limits. A representative sampling and analysis program must be prepared as part of the PPMP and implemented by the applicant, along with record-keeping and quarterly reporting requirements, during dewatering activities. For dewatering activities that are not covered by the General Dewatering Permit, an individual NPDES permit and waste discharge requirements (WDRs) must be obtained from the Municipal Activities In compliance with the CWA, the City of Modesto and the City of Turlock have obtained municipal NPDES permits from the Central Valley for the management of stormwater discharges. The municipal permits require that the cities develop, administer, and implement a Stormwater Management Program (SWMP). Stormwater discharges in the cities of Ceres and Waterford are not currently regulated under municipal NPDES program. Recent changes to the permit held by the City of Modesto are detailed in Order No. R5-2003-0132 (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2003). Compliance with the NPDES permit is mandated by state and federal statutes and regulations. The City of Modesto must comply with all provisions of the permit, including ensuring that new development and redevelopment mitigate water quality impacts on stormwater runoff during both construction and operation periods of projects. As part of the SWMP (City of Modesto 2003b), the City has implemented a New Development Management Program with the intention of minimizing runoff pollution typically associated with land development. In January 2001, the program published the Guidance Manual for New Development Stormwater Quality Control Measures (City of Modesto 2001). The manual presents extensive discussion and recommendations for “best management practices” to be incorporated into new development design and post-development monitoring for the protection of water quality. The City of Turlock submitted the NPDES Phase II Storm Water Management Plan (City of Turlock 2003b) to the in 2003. The plan describes storm water management for the City of Turlock, best management practices for the six ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 minimum control measures as outlined by the NPDES permit, USEPA’s requirements and guidelines for the minimum measures, and the City’s efforts and actions to comply with all the requirements. Federal Flood Insurance Program Alarmed by increasing costs of disaster relief, Congress passed the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973. The intent of these acts was to reduce the need for large, publicly-funded flood control structures and disaster relief by restricting development on floodplains. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations limiting development in floodplains. A key requirement is the adoption of a local floodplain management ordinance restricting development within the mapped floodplain. FEMA issues flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) for communities participating in the NFIP. These maps delineate flood hazard zones in the community. The locations of FEMA-designated floodplains in the study area are included in the discussion of physical setting above. Levee standards are often included in building design requirements. Areas of concern often include embankment protection, embankment and foundation stability, settlement, and maintenance plans and criteria. State Regulations Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act Overview The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code Section 13000 et seq.), passed in 1969, articulates with the federal CWA (see “Clean Water Act” above) and provides the basis for water quality regulation within California. The act requires that waste discharge requirements (WDRs) are obtained prior to any discharge of waste (liquid, solid, or otherwise) to land or surface waters that may impair a beneficial use of surface or groundwater of the state. WDRs are issued by the and these requirements are typically integrated with the NPDES permitting process. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act established the and divided the state into nine regions, each overseen by an The is the primary state agency responsible for protecting the quality of the state’s surface and groundwater supplies, but much of its daily implementation authority is delegated to the nine which are responsible for implementing CWA Sections 401, 402, and 303(d). In general, the manages both water rights and the statewide regulation of water quality, while the focus ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 exclusively on water quality within their regions. The study area is under jurisdiction of the Central Valley Beneficial Uses and Water Quality Objectives The Central Valley is responsible for the protection of beneficial uses of water resources within the Central Valley region. Beneficial uses are those desired resources, services, and qualities of the aquatic system that are supported by achieving and protecting high water quality. The Central Valley uses planning, permitting, and enforcement authorities to meet this responsibility, and has adopted the fourth edition of the Basin Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan) (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 1998) to implement plans, policies, and provisions for water quality management. Beneficial uses are described in the Basin Plan and are designated for major surface waters and their tributaries, as well as groundwater. In addition to the identification of beneficial uses, the Basin Plan contains water quality objectives that are intended to protect the beneficial uses of the basins. The Central Valley has region-wide and water body/beneficial use– specific water quality objectives. The has set water quality objectives for all surface waters in its region for the following substances and parameters: ammonia, bacteria, biostimulatory substances, chemical constituents, color, dissolved oxygen, floating material, oil and grease, pH, pesticides, radioactivity, salinity, sediment, settleable material, suspended material, tastes and odors, temperature, toxicity, and turbidity. Specific objectives for concentrations of chemical constituents are applied to bodies of water based on their designated beneficial uses (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 1998). Water quality objectives applicable to all groundwaters in the region have been set for bacteria, chemical constituents, radioactivity, tastes and odors, and toxicity (Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 1998). Basin plans are primarily implemented by using the NPDES permitting system to regulate waste discharges so that water quality objectives are met (see the discussion of the NPDES system in the “Clean Water Act” section above). Basin plans are updated every 3 years and provide the technical basis for determining WDRs and taking enforcement actions. Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Open Space/Conservation Element of the Stanislaus County General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to hydrology and water quality: Goal 2: Conserve water resources and protect water quality in the County. Policy 5: Protect groundwater aquifers and recharge areas, particularly those critical for the replenishment of reservoirs and aquifers. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 1. Proposals for urbanization in groundwater recharge areas shall be reviewed to ensure that as much water as possible is returned to the recharge area, the development will not cause discharge of materials detrimental to the quality of the water, and the development will not result in significant groundwater overdrafting or deterioration in quality. The Department of Environmental Resources shall require: A. In those areas where groundwaters are susceptible to overdrafting, the project proponent shall perform a hydrogeological analysis and include appropriate mitigation measures in the proposal. B. In those areas where groundwater quality is susceptible to deterioration or is already of reduced quality, the level of wastewater treatment shall be such that it will not cause further quality deterioration. 4. During the project and environmental review process, encourage new development to incorporate water conservation measures to minimize adverse impacts on water supplies. Possible measures include, but are not limited to, low-flow plumbing fixtures, use of reclaimed wastewater for landscaping when feasible, and use of drought-tolerant landscaping. 5. Continue to implement the landscape provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, which encourage drought-tolerant landscaping and water-conserving irrigation methods. City of Modesto City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Chapters V and VI of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan contain the following goals and policies related to hydrology and water quality: Chapter V—Community Services—Water Baseline Developed Area Policy V-C.3[j]. The City of Modesto will encourage the optimum beneficial use of water resources within the City. The City shall strive to maintain an adequate supply of high quality water for urban uses. At a minimum, potable water supplies (including well water) delivered to water customers shall conform to the primary maximum contaminant levels as defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 64431-64444. Policy V-C.3[k]. The City of Modesto will strive to stabilize groundwater levels and eliminate groundwater overdraft, as part of a conjunctive groundwater- surface water management program. The City shall view regional water resources, such as groundwater, surface water, and recycled wastewater, as an integrated hydrologic system when developing water management programs. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy V-C.3[l]. The City of Modesto will be the sole provider of municipal and industrial water services to the area within the City's Sphere of Influence. The City will cooperate with the overlying agricultural water providers, MID and TID, and with adjacent municipal and industrial providers for the mutually beneficial management of the limited water resources. The City will also take into consideration its public trust duty with regard to environmental uses of water resources. Policy V-C.3[m]. The City will provide water service within the original Del Este service area. Policy V-C.3[n]. Water facilities will be constructed, operated, maintained and replaced in a manner that will provide the best possible service to the public. The City shall ensure that infrastructure is installed before or concurrently with development. The City will take a comprehensive approach to financing, using a blend of special taxes, benefit assessments, and other methods to ensure that infrastructure installation occurs in a timely manner. Policy V-C.3[p]. The City of Modesto shall participate in the development of a TID Surface Water Supply Project (SWSP). Policy V-C.3[q]. The City of Modesto shall implement Local Basin Management Objectives (BMOs) discussed in the Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan that relate to the specific approaches to water management goals including groundwater supply, groundwater quality, and protection against inelastic land surface subsidence. Policy V-C.3[r]. The City of Modesto shall support the Regional BMOs discussed in the Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan. Planned Urbanizing Area Policy V-C.4[a]. All of the Water Policies for the Baseline Developed Area apply within the Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy V-C.4[b]. The City of Modesto shall coordinate land development projects with the expansion of water treatment and supply facilities. Chapter V—Community Services—Storm Drainage Baseline Developed Area Policy V-E.3[c]. The City of Modesto shall prevent water pollution from urban storm runoff as established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board for surface discharges and Environmental Protection Agency for underground injection. Policy V-E.3[d]. Stormwater drainage facilities shall be constructed, operated, maintained, and replaced in a manner that will provide the best possible service to the public, as required by federal and state laws and regulations. In developing implementation plans, consideration shall be given to rehabilitation of existing facilities, remediation of developed areas with inadequate levels of drainage service, and the timely expansion of the system for future development. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy V-E.3[e]. The City shall update and maintain its Storm Drainage Master Plan to cover the entire area within the City’s Sphere of Influence. The City of Modesto shall adopt the Storm Drainage Master Plan, in consultation with Stanislaus County, MID, and TID, to address the projected cumulative flows that would be discharged to MID and TID facilities from the urbanized drainage areas. The master drainage program should include the procedures for planning, evaluation, and design of necessary stormwater drainage facilities to ensure that facilities are capable of accommodating the additional flows. The master drainage program should include capital improvement, operations, and maintenance-financing plans necessary to ensure that facilities are constructed in a timely fashion to reduce the impacts from potential flooding problems. Policy V-E.3[f]. New development shall comply with City requirements for conveyance, retention, and detention. New development shall include onsite storage of stormwater as necessary. Rockwells shall not be allowed for new development except at infill areas smaller than three acres where no other feasible alternative is available. Policy V-E.3[h]. Construction activities shall comply with the requirements of the City’s Stormwater Management Plan under its municipal NPDES stormwater permit, and the State Water Resources Control Board’s General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. Policy V-E.3[i]. For developments within a mapped 100-year floodplain, studies shall be prepared that demonstrate how the development will comply with both the construction and post-construction programs under the City's municipal NPDES permit. Developments in these areas shall not lead to increased erosion or releases of other contaminants that would cause violations of the City's municipal NPDES permit. Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy V-E.4[a]. All of the Stormwater Drainage Policies for the Baseline Developed Area apply within the Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy V-E.4[b]. The City of Modesto shall require each new development area to be served with positive storm drainage systems. A positive storm drainage system may be comprised of catch basins, pipelines, channels, recharge/detention basins, and pumping facilities that discharge stormwater to surface waters. New detention basins must typically include new technologies in their design that allow for full, healthy, and sustainable landscaping. The City of Modesto Design Standards for Dual Use Flood Control / Recreation Facilities manual is the guiding document for the development of these facilities. The positive storm drainage facilities shall consider the requirements presented in Table 9-1 of the Final Master Environmental Impact Report and the SDMP. Chapter VI—Public Safety Issues—Flooding Hazards Baseline Developed Area. When development is proposed on parcels located within any “Flood Potential Study Area” shown on Figure VI-2, the following policies apply: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy VI-C.2[a]. New urban development shall be approved only when the developer shows it to be protected from "200 year" floods and otherwise complies with the City’s Floodplain Management Ordinance (title 9, Chapter 4 of the Modesto Municipal Code). Policy VI-C.2[b]. Undeveloped floodway areas as well as the Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan, the Dry Creek Master Plan, the Tuolumne River Comprehensive Planning District (CPD), and the Dry Creek CPD shall be preserved for undeveloped and non-urban use, as provided in the City’s Floodplain Management Ordinance. Policy VI-C.2[c]. Appropriate emergency plans for the safe evacuation of people from areas subject to inundation from dam failure shall be reviewed and periodically updated. The City Fire Department, Police Department, and Public Works Department shall continue to work with other jurisdictions to develop evacuation routes to be used in case of dam failure. Evacuation routes will serve all of the jurisdictions in the County. Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy VI-C.3[a]. All of the Flood Hazard Policies adopted for the Baseline Developed Area apply equally within the Planned Urbanizing Area. City of Modesto Municipal Code The City has adopted the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook: Construction as the standard for all municipal construction projects (Modesto Municipal Code 5- 10.204[c]). Chapter 16 of the City of Modesto Standard Specifications, 2006 revision, outlines the basic stormwater BMPs that are required for all construction sites. The City requires the preparation of a Water Pollution Control Plan (WPCP) for all City projects less than 1 acre in size. For projects greater than 1 acre, the City will obtain coverage from the for the project under the Construction General Permit, as described above. City of Modesto Stormwater Management Program As discussed previously, the City has developed a SWMP to reduce pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable, according to federal and state mandates (City of Modesto 2003b). The SWMP includes public awareness and participation, source control, regulatory restrictions, water quality monitoring, and treatment control. The City prepared a guidance manual for the New Development Management Program element of the SWMP that includes design guidelines for source-control measures and treatment-control measures to specifically control urban-runoff pollutants from new development and redeveloped areas (City of Modesto 2001). The New Development Management Program includes BMP requirements based on four types of land use developments single-family residential, multifamily residential, commercial, and industrial), the size of the lot (less than or greater than 1 acre), and whether the development is in an area served by rockwells and/or City treatment control basins stormwater retention/detention basins). Source control measures are generally required for ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 all new development, and are defined as operational and/or structural practices that prevent or reduce pollutants at their source. Source control measures typically consist of good housekeeping practices (spill prevention, proper storage methods, and proper waste cleanup procedures). Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres General Plan Policies In addition, Chapter 6, “Agriculture and Natural Resources,” of the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document contains the following policies relevant to the proposed program: Goal 6.B To protect and enhance the natural qualities of the Ceres area’s rivers, creeks, and groundwater. 6.B.2. The City shall cooperate with other jurisdictions to jointly study the potential for using surface water sources to balance the groundwater supply to protect against aquifer overdrafts and water quality degradation. 6.B.4. The City shall continue to require the use of feasible and practical best management practices (BMPs) to protect receiving waters from the adverse effects of construction activities and urban runoff. City of Turlock General Plan Policies In addition, Section 4, Community Services, of the Turlock General Plan contains the following policies relevant to the proposed program: 4.3-a Promote the orderly and efficient expansion of public utilities and the storm drainage system to adequately meet projected needs. 4.3-b Coordinate capital improvements planning for all municipal service infrastructure with the direction, extent, and timing of growth. 4.3-h Encourage the use of porous materials for outdoor spaces and require public work improvements to incorporate their use where feasible. 4.3-i Require outdoor storm-water detention at project sites larger than two acres and consider using economic incentives to encourage projects to use porous surfaces and detain water at site. 4.3-j Require new construction sites to provide plans for erosion control and sedimentation control from their sites during construction; establish guidelines for erosion control practices in Turlock. 4.3-n Continue the City program of water system improvements to complement existing sewer system service capacities in the urban service area. Establish improvement priorities based on General Plan policies regarding the direction, extent, and timing of urbanization. 4.3-p Support County programs to protect valuable groundwater resources. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Waterford General Plan Policies The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan provides the following service standard which is applicable to the proposed program: Provide an adequate, reliable, and safe water supply, storage and distribution system to meet the City’s potable water and fire flow needs as set forth in the City’s approved Water System Master Plan and Urban Water Management Plan. In addition, Chapter 6, “Public Services and Facilities,” of the general plan contains the following policies relevant to the proposed program: PF-1.1 Establish and Maintain Adequate & Uniform Municipal Infrastructure and Service Standards. PF-1 .2 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Operation and Maintenance of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Community Needs. PF-1.3 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Expansion of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Future Community Growth Needs. PF-1 .4 Establish and Maintain Facility Maintenance Programs that Assure Maximum Utilization of Capital Equipment and Facilities. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  violate water-quality standards or waste discharge requirements,  substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or the course of a stream or river in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite,  create or contribute runoff water that would provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff,  place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area or place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows,  expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or  substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or the course of a stream or river that would result in flooding onsite or offsite. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Methods and Assumptions Because details of the proposed program’s specific components are not yet available, this impact assessment was conducted qualitatively and on a programmatic general) basis. Mitigation measures are identified below to reduce any impacts to less-than-significant levels, as appropriate. Subsequent projects will require the incorporation of mitigation measures as necessary to reduce impacts to less than significant. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact HYD-1: Water Quality Impacts from Program Construction (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Construction-related earth-disturbing activities would occur during implementation of the proposed program, including grading, excavation, and trenching. These activities could cause soil erosion and sedimentation to local waterways. In addition, construction equipment would have the potential to leak hazardous materials, including oil and gasoline. Improper use of fuels, oils, and other construction-related hazardous materials may also pose a significant threat to surface or groundwater quality. However, compliance with statutory regulations governing discharges from construction activities (NPDES compliance as discussed in Chapter 2) would reduce these impacts to a less-than- significant level. The process for installing pipelines across creeks or canals, such as the Tuolumne River or irrigation canals, may involve microtunneling. Microtunneling may use a mixture of bentonite (a naturally occurring, inert clay) or other inert additives to create a liquid slurry to assist the tunnel boring and transport tunnel spoils back to an access pit. The drilling fluids are typically screened on-site and recirculated back into the boring during drilling. Upon completion of drilling activities, the fluids would require disposal. Improper handling and/or discharge of drilling fluids, if used, could result in a potentially significant impact on surface water quality. In addition, microtunneling could potentially result in an inadvertent release of drilling fluid or a “frac-out,” in which the pressurized drill fluid travels upward through the substrate and is released to the ground surface or water column (if drilling is conducted under an actively flowing water body). A release such as this can smother habitat and increase turbidity and suspended sediments in the water column. This would constitute a potentially significant impact on water resources. However, implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1, which requires the preparation and implementation of a frac-out contingency plan (if drilling fluids under pressure are used) and appropriate management of drilling fluids, would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The Grayson Drain, San Joaquin River, lower Stanislaus River, and lower Tuolumne River are designated as water quality-impaired by pesticides, mercury, sediment toxicity, and unknown toxicity due to agricultural and other unknown activities (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2006). As discussed previously, the 303(d) listing requires development of a TMDL to address impairments. A TMDL was adopted by the in 2005 for diazinon and chlorpyrifos pesticides. However, for other impairments listed for waters in the study area are identified as a low priority for development by the In lieu of implementation of TMDL requirements, the regulates the quality of discharges through the issuance of municipal stormwater discharge permit requirements. The City of Modesto would continue to comply with the requirements of municipal stormwater discharge permits. Additionally, once completed, the proposed program would not result in discharges to the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, or Tuolumne rivers. There would be no impact on waters identified as impaired. Mitigation Measure HYD-1—Prepare and Implement a Drilling- Contingency (or “Frac-out”) Plan during Microtunneling The City or its contractor will prepare and implement a Drilling- Contingency Plan to manage the inadvertent release, or “frac-out,” of drilling fluids. If the contactor prepares the plan, it will be subject to approval by the City before tunneling can begin. The Drilling- Contingency Plan will include measures to minimize the potential for a frac-out pre-planning of the drilling profile based on ground conditions such that potential release of the fluids is minimized); provide for the timely detection of frac-outs; and ensure an organized, timely, and “minimum-impact” response in the event of a frac-out and release of drilling fluid. The City will ensure that drilling fluids contain only water and bentonite or similar inert substances contain no environmental pollutants) and that any drilling fluids used in microtunneling processes for installation of underground pipelines. If on-site containment and dewatering methods are used, the City and its contractors will ensure the contained materials are not susceptible to runoff during a storm event. This shall be achieved by installing a barrier silt fence or dirt berm) along the creek or canal side of the launching and receiving pits for the drilling (start and end points of the microtunnel) to prevent drill fluids from the work area from being carried to the water body. Drilling fluids will be dewatered on-site if approved by regulatory permitting agencies and/or properly disposed of off-site. In addition to the above specifications, the Drilling-Contingency Plan will require, at a minimum, the following measures and content:  A monitor to be on site during drilling operations to look for observable inadvertent release or frac-out conditions or lowered pressure readings on drilling equipment that may indicate a potential frac-out. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  If the contractor and/or drilling-machine operator suspect that there is a frac-out notices a loss of circulation of drilling fluid and cuttings do not show a large quantity of gravel) or drilling fluid is observed at the surface, all work will stop, including the recycling of drilling fluid. The location and extent of the frac-out will be determined. The contractor will implement measures to stop the frac- out, such as reducing the drilling pressure or thickening the drilling fluid by using less water).  If the drilling fluid does not surface, no other actions will be taken.  If the drilling fluid surfaces, the affected area will be surrounded with a barrier silt fence) to prevent further dissemination of the fluid. If the drilling fluid is released into a water body (creek or canal) when there is flow and there is a visible plume, a sediment boom or curtain shall be installed of the frac-out to attempt to capture the released drilling fluid. The drilling fluid will then be removed using the minimum amount of equipment needed to remove it manually or by suction hose using a vacuum truck) in order to minimize impacts to the surface area where the frac-out occurred.  Upon implementation of the response measures described above, and the frac-out is contained, drilling may resume.  The City will ensure that the frac-out plan also includes notification procedures to applicable regulatory agencies Water Board and USACE) for reporting frac-outs. The City will consult with these agencies to implement the most appropriate measures to protect water quality in the event of a frac-out. To this end, the City shall provide a copy of the plan to the USACE, Water Board, USFWS, and CDFG prior to construction, as part of the project permitting process. Impact HYD-2: Changes in Groundwater Quantity (Less than Significant) The proposed program involves the construction and operation of impervious features such as storage tanks, buildings to house booster pump stations and groundwater wells, and a corporation yard. These features are expected to result in only an incremental increase in impervious surfaces and would not substantially affect percolation of rainfall or groundwater recharge. The City of Modesto’s proposed program would include 5 new and 3 replacement groundwater wells (each with 1,000 to 1,500 gpm pumping capacity). As described in the Engineer’s Report, a model was developed to analyze the system and determine the existing and future water system needs. To determine the water supply needs in the outlying communities where groundwater is the primary or only source of water, the maximum operating yield of the Modesto and Turlock groundwater sub-basins was incorporated into the model. As described in section 3.15, Utilities and Service Systems, the Engineer’s Report was developed in consideration of the operating yield of the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-20 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Modesto and Turlock groundwater sub-basins. This operating yield was calculated to better manage the groundwater basin in consideration of estimates of annual recharge and pumping activities, and to prevent lowering of the groundwater table. Therefore, by design, operation of existing and proposed wells in the program area would not lower the level of water or the capacity of the groundwater basins. The proposed program would diversify water supply sources and improve supply reliability, especially during emergency or drought conditions. The increased quantity of surface and ground water required for operation of the proposed facilities have been previously assessed in EIRs prepared by the City of Modesto, MID, and TID. Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures identified in those EIRs would not be hindered by the proposed program. Additionally, the proposed program would comply with those measures. There would be a less- than-significant impact on groundwater due to the proposed program. Impact HYD-3: Water Quality Impacts from Changes to Drainage Patterns (Less than Significant) The proposed program would not involve the alteration of existing natural drainage patterns, including the alteration of a stream or a river. The majority of the proposed facilities would be located underground. Operation of wells and pipelines could require periodic flushing or purging for maintenance. Thus, periodic discharges of potable water would be released to the existing storm drainage or sanitary sewer systems in the program area. Such discharges are covered under the City’s Municipal NPDES permit, and would not threaten people or the environment because it is treated drinking water clean water). The quantity of water released during these maintenance activities would not exceed the system’s capacity. Additionally, discharges to storm drainage systems could ultimately discharge to creeks or drainage channels, the outfalls of which are maintained under separate federal, state, and local mandates to prevent bank erosion or siltation. This impact would be less than significant. Impact HYD-4: Flooding Impacts from Changes to Drainage Patterns (Less than Significant) Impervious surfaces created as part of the proposed program that would contribute to increased stormwater runoff include storage tanks, structures associated with booster pump stations and groundwater wells, and the proposed corporation yard. These facilities would be located on undeveloped or agricultural lands, which are pervious to precipitation. The facilities and associated paved access areas would create impervious areas, which would cause precipitation to pond or runoff as opposed to infiltrating to the ground. An incremental amount of runoff would be generated by the proposed facilities, but even if all the proposed facilities are constructed, the increased amount of storm runoff is not expected to affect the capacity of existing or planned storm drainage systems. The proposed program also would adhere to the City’s municipal stormwater permit regulations, including storm drainage design standards. The proposed program would further comply with federal, state, and local ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-21 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 requirements, which would adequately protect against impacts due to storm runoff, and therefore the proposed program would have a less than significant impact on flooding due to stormwater runoff. Impact HYD-5: Flood Hazards (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The proposed program does not include construction of new housing and therefore would not place any housing within a 100-year floodplain. There would be no impact. The majority of structures proposed would be constructed belowground or outside the 100-year flood hazard area. However, some storage tanks and the corporation yard may be constructed within 100-year flood hazard areas, as mapped by FEMA. Significant impacts on local flooding conditions associated with placement of fill within the 100-year flood hazard area could result from construction in these areas. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-2 would be required to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Flooding can also occur as a result of catastrophic dam failure and the release of waters contained in upstream reservoirs, as discussed above. The program area could be affected if one or more of the several dams in the vicinity were to fail catastrophically. In the event of a dam failure, the proposed program would not increase the duration or extent of flooding, because there would limited aboveground structures that could significantly redirect floodflows. There would be a less-than-significant impact. Mitigation Measure HYD-2: Conduct Floodplain Studies Prior to Program Design Prior to program design, the City of Modesto shall determine if the program area lies within a FEMA-identified 100-year floodplain. For program components constructed within a 100-year floodplain, the City shall retain a qualified registered civil engineer or licensed hydrologist to conduct the appropriate floodplain studies to determine whether the proposed floodplain encroachments could be constructed without increasing base flood elevations upstream or of the proposed structures. If floodplain modeling indicates that the encroachments could be constructed without impacts on the base flood elevations, the City will work with FEMA and the State of California Reclamation Board to ensure that the design is appropriate and that all necessary permits are acquired prior to construction. If the floodplain studies indicate that base flood elevations would increase due to construction of the structures, then other appropriate modifications will be considered to offset the increases. If no feasible options are available to offset modeled increases in base flood elevations, then the proposed fill placement will not be constructed. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.8-22 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact HYD-6: Dam Failure, Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow Hazards (Less than Significant) The proposed program area is located far from the ocean or other large bodies of water and would not be subject to tsunami or seiche. Similarly, the landscape is relatively flat and not subject to mudflow. There would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.9 Land Use and Planning The environmental setting and impact analysis for land use and planning were developed through a review of:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  Master Plan: Tuolumne River Regional Park (EDAW 2001b), and  planning documents from outlying communities. Environmental Setting Modesto The City of Modesto is located in central Stanislaus County, in the northern section of California’s San Joaquin Valley. Modesto is located approximately 95 miles east of San Francisco and 80 miles south of Sacramento. The Tuolumne River runs along the southern edge of the city. SR 99 intersects the city along the north–south axis, and SR 132 intersects the city along the east–west axis. Nearby cities include Riverbank, Ripon, and Manteca to the north and Ceres, Turlock, and Merced to the south. Before 1960, most of Stanislaus County’s population lived in unincorporated areas. Today, the population of the nine incorporated cities substantially exceeds that of the unincorporated area. While the county’s economic base remains predominantly agricultural, the regional economy is diversifying. As housing prices have increased in the Bay Area, workers seeking affordable housing have moved to the Central Valley. Housing development has significantly increased the urbanized land area within Modesto. Because many of these new residents continue to work in the Bay Area, traffic along SR 99, SR 132, and Interstate 5 has increased noticeably (Jones & Stokes 2003). The existing urbanized area of Modesto includes commercial uses along SR 99, the Southern Pacific Railroad corridor, and major arterial roadways; industrial uses south of Yosemite Boulevard, adjacent to the Modesto City-County Airport; and mixed residential neighborhoods throughout the city. The central highway/railroad corridor between Morse Road and the Tuolumne River is a redevelopment zone. The City’s general plan designates undeveloped lands along the outer boundaries of the program area for future regional commercial, business park, village residential, and mixed use. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Ceres The City of Ceres is located along State Route 99, south of Modesto and north of Turlock. The Tuolumne River abuts the northern boundary of the city. The city encompasses approximately 7 square miles, the majority of which is designated as low-to-medium density residential land use. Del Rio The community of Del Rio is located 8.5 miles north of the City of Modesto, along the Stanislaus River. Approximately two-thirds of the 1.7 square mile community is designated as low-to-medium density residential land use. The other third of the community is designated for recreational uses, primarily a golf course. Empire The community of Empire is located immediately east of the City of Modesto, south of Dry Creek and north of the Tuolumne River. The community occupies 1.6 square miles, the majority of which is designated as residential land use. Grayson The community of Grayson is located approximately 14 miles west of the City of Modesto. The community occupies 2.7 square miles, all of which is designated as residential housing. Hickman Hickman is located 14.5 miles west of the City of Modesto, south of the Tuolumne River. The community covers approximately 1.3 square miles. The Stanislaus County General Plan has designated residential, agriculture, open space, and public land uses within the area encompassed by Hickman. Salida The community of Salida is located northwest of the City of Modesto, along Highway 99 and south of Ripon. The community encompasses 5.2 square miles, the majority of which is occupied by residential housing. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Turlock The City of Turlock is the second largest city in Stanislaus County, covering 13 square miles. The city is divided into four planning area quadrants; northeast, northwest, southeast, and southwest. The city has developed specific plans for the majority of these quadrants. The Southern-Pacific railroad and Highway 99 bisect the city from the northwest to the southeast. Land uses in the city are influenced by the California State University, Stanislaus and the agricultural industry. Waterford The City of Waterford is located on the north bank of the Tuolumne River, west of the City of Modesto. The city is a popular stopping place for vacationers travelling east on their way to Yosemite Valley and the many recreational reservoirs along Highway 132. The primary land use within the city limits is residential. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan applies to the unincorporated lands surrounding Modesto, including unincorporated lands within the City’s SOI, and the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman. The Stanislaus County General Plan does not govern lands within the city limits of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, or Waterford, which are incorporated cities. The Stanislaus County General Plan has the following applicable policies for the proposed program. Land Use Element LU-1: Land will be designated and zoned for agricultural, residential, commercial, industrial, or historical uses when such designations are consistent with other adopted goals and policies of the general plan. (Policy 1) LU-2 Land designated Agriculture shall be restricted to uses that are compatible with agricultural practices, including natural resources management, open space, outdoor recreation and enjoyment of scenic beauty. (Policy 2) LU-3: Urban development shall be discouraged in areas with growth-limiting factors such as high water table or poor soil percolation, and prohibited in geological fault and hazard areas, flood plains, riparian areas, and airport hazard areas unless measures to mitigate the problems are included as part of the application. (Policy 4) ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 LU-4: Residential densities as defined in the General Plan shall be the maximum based upon environmental constraints, the availability of public services, and acceptable service levels. The densities reflected may not always be achievable and shall not be approved unless there is proper site planning and provision of suitable open space and recreational areas consistent with the supportive goals and policies of the General Plan. (Policy 5) LU-5: Preserve and encourage upgrading of existing unincorporated urban communities. (Policy 6) LU-6: Riparian habitat along the rivers and natural waterways of Stanislaus County shall to the extent possible be protected. (Policy 7) LU-7: New areas for urban development (as opposed to expansion of existing areas) shall be limited to less productive agricultural areas. (Policy 10) LU-8: Development of residential areas shall be adjacent to existing compatible unincorporated urban development or, in the case of remote development, included as part of a specific plan. (Policy 11) LU-9: The expansion of urban boundaries of unincorporated communities shall attempt to minimize conflict between various land uses. (Policy 12) LU-10: Expansion of urban boundaries of unincorporated communities should be based on infilling and elimination of existing "islands" and should not permit leapfrog development or create new "islands.” (Policy 13) LU-11: Uses shall not be permitted to intrude into or be located adjacent to an agricultural area if they are detrimental to continued agricultural usage of the surrounding area. (Policy 14) LU-12: Uses should not be permitted to intrude into or be located adjacent to areas that are identified as existing and/or potential sites for solid waste facilities if such uses would not be compatible. (Policy 15) LU-13: Agriculture, as the primary industry of the County, shall be promoted and protected. (Policy 16) LU-14: Promote diversification and growth of the local economy. (Policy 17) LU-15: Accommodate the siting of industries with unique requirements. (Policy 18) LU-16: Nonconforming uses are an integral part of the County's economy and, as such, should be allowed to continue. (Policy 19) LU-17: Facilitate retention and expansion of existing businesses. (Policy 20) LU-18: At least three net acres of developed neighborhood parks, or the maximum number of acres allowed by law, should be provided for every 1,000 residents, through land dedication and development, payment of in-lieu-of fees, or other methods acceptable to the Parks Department. (Policy 21) ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 LU-19: Future growth shall not exceed the capabilities/capacity of the provider of services such as sewer, water, public safety, solid waste management, road systems, schools, health care facilities, etc. (Policy 22) LU-20: New development shall pay its fair share of the cost of cumulative impacts on circulation and transit systems. (Policy 23) LU-21: Development, other than agricultural uses and churches, which requires discretionary approval and is within the sphere of influence of cities or in areas of specific designation created by agreement Sperry Avenue and East Las Palmas Corridors), shall not be approved unless first approved by the city within whose sphere of influence it lies or by the city for which areas of specific designation were agreed. Development requests within the spheres of influence or areas of specific designation of any incorporated city shall not be approved unless the development is consistent with agreements with the cities which are in effect at the time of project consideration. Such development must meet the applicable development standards of the affected city as well as any public facilities fee collection agreement in effect at the time of project consideration. (Comment: This policy refers to those development standards that are transferable, such as street improvement standards, landscaping, or setbacks. It does not always apply to standards that require connection to a sanitary sewer system, for example, as that is not always feasible.) (Policy 24) LU-22: Whenever an application is to be considered which includes property within the sphere of influence of a city or special district sewer, water, community services) or areas of specific designation created by agreement between County and City, the following procedures should be followed: 1. Development, other than agricultural uses and churches, which requires discretionary approval from incorporated cities shall be referred to that city for preliminary approval. The project shall not be approved by the County unless written communication is received from the city memorializing their approval. If approved by the city, the city should specify what conditions are necessary to ensure that development will comply with city development standards. Requested conditions for such things as sewer service in an area where none is available shall not be imposed. Approval from a city does not preclude the County decision-making body from exercising discretion, and it may either approve or deny the project. 2. Agricultural uses and churches which require discretionary approval should be referred to that city for comment. The County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall consider the responses of the cities in the permit process. If the County finds that a project is inconsistent with the city's general plan designation, it shall not be approved. Agricultural use and churches shall not be considered inconsistent if the only inconsistency is with a statement that a development within the urban transition area or sphere of influence shall be discouraged (or similar sweeping statement). The city shall be asked to respond to the following questions: Is the proposed project inconsistent with the land use designation on the city's general plan? If so, please include a copy of the map (or that portion which includes the subject property) and the text describing uses permitted for ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 the general plan designation. All findings of inconsistency must include supporting documentation. If the project is approved, specifically what type of conditions would be necessary to ensure the development will comply with city development standards such as street improvements, setbacks and landscaping? In the case of a proposed project within the sphere of influence of a sanitary sewer district, domestic water district or community services district, the proposal shall be forwarded to the district board for comment regarding the ability of the district to provide services. If the district serves an unincorporated town with a Municipal Advisory Council (MAC), the proposal shall also be referred to the MAC for comment (Spheres of Influence, Policy Del Rio Community Plan The Community of Del Rio prepared a community plan in 1992 that was adopted by the Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors. The community plan designates land uses in two development areas. The northern portion (Area I) of Del Rio is designated as low-intensity residential and agriculture, while the southern portion (Area II) is designated as agriculture and future-specific planning. A specific plan for Area II has not been developed. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies The City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan provides the following policies related to land use and planning. Baseline Developed Area Policy III-C.1[a]. The Zoning Code (Title X of the Modesto Municipal Code) and the Zoning Map, shall be used as the primary vehicle to guide future development in the Baseline Developed Area. A secondary vehicle is policies in existence in the Base Year (2007) of this General Plan. Policy III-C.1[b]. Section 65803 of the Government Code indicates that in charter cities such as Modesto, zoning need not be consistent with the General Plan. Notwithstanding, development plans within the Baseline Developed Area may be found consistent with the General Plan if they are consistent with the Zoning Code and Map and the various policies of the General Plan. Zone changes may be approved anywhere in the General Plan Area, if the following findings are made: 1) The requested zone change is required by public convenience or necessity. 2) The requested change will result in an orderly planning use of land resources. 3) The requested zone change is in accordance with the community’s objectives as set forth in: the “Neighborhood Plan Prototype” policies presented ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 in Section C-2, below (for property within the Baseline Developed Area); or a Specific Plan prepared in accordance with this Chapter (for property within the Planned Urbanizing Area); or the Redevelopment Plan (for property within the Redevelopment Area). 4) Adequate environmental mitigation has been provided through the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures established by the Master Environmental Impact Report and any supplements to the MEIR. Traffic and public facility issues are particularly relevant in this analysis. Policy III-C.1[c]. Additional vehicles to guide future development, in both the Baseline Developed Area and the Planned Urbanizing Area, include: Nontraditional Planning Policies (C-3, below) and the Neighborhood Plan Prototype Policies (C-2, below). Policy III-C.1[d]. Specific Plans, adopted pursuant to Section 65450 et seq. of the California Government Code, may be used for the systematic implementation of the General Plan for all or part of the area covered by the General Plan. Accordingly, each Specific Plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out the preceding items and Specific Plans may incorporate any of the Land Use Designations presented on the Land Use Diagram, and they may be used within any Growth Strategy Designation: Redevelopment Area, Baseline Developed Area, or Planned Urbanizing Area. Where the Neighborhood Plan Prototype is applied to a Comprehensive Planning District, it shall be implemented by a Specific Plan. Any such Specific Plan shall cover a minimum of approximately 480 acres of area or be based on a logical unit of infrastructure, such as an elementary school service area or park planning area. Policy III-C.1[e]. Annexation of Noncontiguous Land (not shown on Land Use Diagram). Section 65300 of the California Government Code allows the General Plan to address policies to any land “outside its boundaries which in the [City’s] judgment bears relation to its planning.” In addition, Section 56742 a–b of the Government Code allows the City of Modesto, upon approval of the Stanislaus Local Agency Formation Commission, to annex noncontiguous territory not exceeding 300 acres in area, which is located in the same county as that in which the city is situated, and which is owned by the city and is being used for municipal purposes at the time commission proceedings are initiated. The territory that is used by a city for ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 reclamation, disposal, and storage of treated wastewater may be annexed to the city pursuant to this section without limitation as to the size of the territory being annexed. In the past, the city has relied upon Section 56742 a–b of the Government Code to annex properties noncontiguous to the city, for the purpose of establishing and expanding certain wastewater treatment facilities on Jennings Road, adjacent to the San Joaquin River. Annexation of all of the Wastewater Treatment Plant land is underway at the Jennings Road facilities. Because this site is approximately seven miles from the city limits it is not depicted graphically on the Land Use Diagram. Nevertheless, as long as Section 56742 a– b remains in effect, the city will continue to expand the treatment facilities, and annex the land to the city as appropriate and as needs dictate. The Sphere of Influence should reflect the ability of the City to take this action. The City will designate a riparian habitat preserve for the Jennings Road and Sutter Avenue wastewater facilities, where they adjoin the San Joaquin and Tuolumne Rivers, respectively, to foster the best conjunctive management of wastewater facilities. The Jennings Road and Sutter Avenue wastewater sites have been incorporated into the Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP) Master Plan, and the designation of riparian habitat preserves at these locations is consistent with provisions in the TRRP Master Plan. The designation of riparian preserves at these locations will help preserve open space and protect habitat for threatened and endangered species, including valley elderberry longhorn beetle and Swainson’s hawk. Local Open Space Plan Open space needs are broadly identified by the state Legislature. It is within this scope that local jurisdictions must identify specific areas and targets of preservation, development and/or production. Government Code Section 65560 lists four broad categories to be designated on a local open space plan: Open space for 1) the preservation of natural resources, 2) public health and safety, 3) managed production of resources, and 4) outdoor recreation. These categories will be discussed in detail as they relate to the Modesto Urban Area. Policy VII-B.1. Open Space for the Preservation of Natural Resources State law defines this as areas required for the preservation of plant and animal life and areas required for ecologic and other scientific study purposes: rivers, streams, bays, estuaries, coastal beaches, lakeshores, and watershed lands. The Modesto Urban Area contains three such areas of preservation of natural resources: the Stanislaus River, Tuolumne River, and Dry Creek. All three of these rivers are proposed to be acquired and maintained as Regional Parks. Chapter III of this General Plan presents detailed policies, in the form of Comprehensive Planning Districts, for the development of these three parks. Policy VII-B.2. Open Space for Public Health and Safety Open space for public health and safety includes, but is not limited to, areas that require special management or regulation because of hazardous or special conditions such as earthquake fault zones, unstable soil areas, floodplains, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 watersheds, areas presenting high fire risks, areas required for the protection of water quality and water reservoirs, and areas required for the protection and enhancement of air quality. Chapter VI of this General Plan presents policies to address the issues raised in the above state statute. More specifically there is not an earthquake fault beneath the Modesto Urban Area, and there are also not significant opportunities for landslides, volcanic hazards, erosion, or expansive soils. Designated floodways have been established on both Dry Creek and the Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers, and permits are required from the State Reclamation Board before any construction is approved. The Building Code regulates all construction in these areas. The Tuolumne River Regional Park and Dry Creek Park contribute to preservation of the floodway. Policy VII-B.3. Open Space for Managed Production of Resources The Government Code includes, but is not limited to, the following kinds of land used for managed production of resources: forest lands, rangeland, agricultural lands and areas of economic importance for the production of food or fiber; areas required for recharge of groundwater basins; bays, estuaries, marshes, rivers, and streams that are important for the management of commercial fisheries; and areas containing major mineral deposits, including those in short supply. The Modesto Urban Area has two areas in which the managed production of resources is important: recharge of the groundwater basin and agricultural lands. Groundwater has traditionally been used by the City of Modesto (City) for its domestic, commercial, and industrial needs. With the City’s continued growth, this has led over the years to overdrafting of the groundwater basins. As a result, the City of Modesto has undertaken several steps to stabilize the groundwater basins. Policies to address groundwater stabilization are found in Section V-C. Agricultural issues are presented in more detail in Section VII-D, below. Policy VII-B.8. Implementation a. The Neighborhood and Community Parks implementation programs are presented in Chapter V. b. The Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan (TRRP) and the Master Environmental Impact Report are the guiding documents for the development and use of TRRP-controlled lands in the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek CPDs. c. The Regional Park system consisting of Dry Creek, Stanislaus River, and Tuolumne River shall be developed through the “Comprehensive Planning District” process outlined in Chapter III. The River Greenway Program policies (Section VII-B.7, above) shall be incorporated into each of these three Comprehensive Planning Districts by including the following design elements: A riparian protection, restoration, and maintenance plan. A Riverfront Greenway trail element identifying access points and interconnection with any appropriate pathway programs. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Dedication requirements to guarantee access is permanent dedication of fee, easement, or deed restriction). A maintenance and operations element specifying how trails and accessways shall be maintained and operated and by what agency. A trail/accessway standards element specifying standards including minimum width of trails, trail surface, etc. consistent with state and federal law and state standards, and as outlined in the City of Modesto’s Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. d. Any action by a county or city by which open space land or any interest therein is acquired or disposed of or is restricted or regulated, whether or not pursuant to this part, must be consistent with the local open space plan (Section 65566, Government Code). City of Modesto Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan The TRRP master plan is a long-range plan for a riverfront park south of Modesto (EDAW 2001b). The plan encompasses more than 500 acres and is along a 7-mile stretch of the Tuolumne River, generally bounded by Mitchell Road to the east and Carpenter Road to the west. The master plan provides a long-range vision for the park to guide projects, such as the Riverwalk, boat and fishing piers, vista points, a sports complex, an interpretive center, trails, roadways, and parking areas, which are intended to enhance the natural environment as well as recreational and educational opportunities at the park. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres General Plan The City of Ceres’ general plan establishes the following land use designations: Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Other, and Reserve. The following policies are applicable to the proposed program. 1.B.1 The City shall ensure that land is designated for development consistent with the needs of the community and to maintain a positive fiscal balance for the City. 1.B.3 The City shall ensure that future development occurs in an orderly sequence based on the logical extension of public facilities and services. 1.B.4 The City shall phase future growth and development to provide for orderly growth and prevent premature conversion of agricultural lands. 1.C.1 The City shall support residential development at a manageable pace to achieve its fair share of regional housing needs and provide for orderly extensions of infrastructure and public services. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Turlock General Plan (Land Use Element) The City of Turlock has established the following land use designations: Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Public/Institutional, Parks, Agricultural, and Urban Reserve. The following policies are applicable to the proposed program. 2.7a Continue to promote orderly expansion of the City’s boundaries through prezoning territory prior to annexation. 2.7b Ensure the adequacy and quality of public services and facilities for all residents. 2.7c Modify growth policies as needed in response to changing development economics and changing city priorities. 2.7d Keep growth in pace with city services. 2.7g Continue to annually review the City’s Capital Improvement Program in order to increase capacity of needed public services in response to City growth. 2.7h Proposals for pre-zoning and annexation shall comply with the Residential Annexation Policy, Area-Wide Planning Policy, and the municipal code requirements relating to orderly and contiguous development, and public services and facilities. City of Waterford General Plan The City of Waterford’s general plan designates Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Public/Government, Open Space-Park/Recreation Facility, and Agriculture land uses. The proposed program would not directly affect any of the policies contained within Waterford’s general plan. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  physically divide an established community,  conflict with any applicable land use plan, polity, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the program adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, or  conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Methods and Assumptions The locations of the proposed programs have not been identified. Thus, this impact assessment is conducted at a program level. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact LAND-1: Physical Division of a Community (Less than Significant) The construction of water system improvements would not physically divide established neighborhoods within the contiguous or the outlying communities included in the proposed program. The water system upgrades would facilitate redevelopment and new urban development by reducing deficiencies in the existing water storage and conveyance system. The improvements would increase the cohesiveness of the program area, rather than divide communities. However, the construction of facilities within or adjacent to existing roadway ROWs could temporarily disrupt neighborhood land uses. Potential direct and indirect impacts on surrounding land uses from construction-related traffic delays, public-safety hazards, air emissions, and noise are addressed in other sections of this PEIR. Because construction is a short-term activity, the disruption of existing neighborhoods and access routes would be temporary. This impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact LAND-2: Conflict with Land Use Plans, Policies, or Regulations (Less than Significant) Applicable land use plans include the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan and TRRP master plan, the City of Ceres’ general plan, the City of Turlock’s general plan, and the Stanislaus County General Plan. Construction of the pipelines, storage tanks, groundwater wells, and the corporation yard are all consistent with adopted general plans of Stanislaus County and its incorporated cities. All construction in accordance with the proposed program would occur within the planned urbanizing areas of each of the communities included in the plan, as analyzed by the County, Modesto, Ceres, Turlock, and Waterford general plan EIRs. There are no facilities proposed within planned land uses under the TRRP master plan. Thus, there would no long-term conflicts with planned habitat protection or public access under the TRRP master plan. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation is required. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Land Use and Planning 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.9-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact LAND-3: Conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans (No Impact) The proposed program would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP because the study area does not occur within an area covered by any of these types of plans. Therefore, there would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.10 Noise This section describes the environmental setting for analyzing noise impacts, including a discussion of the relevant regulations that apply to noise. The section concludes with an analysis of the potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures. Relevant Program Characteristics Potential sources of noise associated with the proposed program include:  activities associated with construction of proposed program-related improvements,  drilling of wells,  operation of well pumps, and  operation of engines at pump stations. Environmental Setting The following is a brief discussion of common noise terminology and descriptors used in this report.  Sound: a vibratory disturbance created by a vibrating object, which, when transmitted by pressure waves through a medium such as air, can be detected by a receiving mechanism, such as human ears or a microphone.  Noise: sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or otherwise undesirable.  Decibel (dB): a measure of sound or vibration amplitude on a logarithmic scale that indicates the squared ratio of sound pressure or vibration velocity root-mean-squared amplitude to a reference sound pressure or vibration amplitude. For sound, the reference pressure is 20 micropascals.  A-weighted decibel (dBA): an overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear.  Equivalent sound level (Leq): the equivalent steady-state sound or vibration level that would contain the same acoustical or vibration energy in a stated period of time.  Day/night sound level (Ldn): The day/night average sound level is the 24- hour day and night A-weighed noise exposure level that accounts for the greater sensitivity of most people to nighttime noise by weighting noise levels at night. Noise between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. is weighted by adding 10 dBA to take into account the greater annoyance of nighttime noise. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 In general, human sound perception is such that a change in sound level of 3 dB is just noticeable, a change of 5 dB is clearly noticeable, and a change of 10 dB is perceived as a doubling or halving of the sound level (Cowan 1994). Sources of information for this section are field measurements conducted by ICF Jones & Stokes at similar facilities, regulatory information from the City and Stanislaus County (County), and sound level data provided by U.S. Electrical Motors. Existing Conditions The program area comprises a mix of conditions, and encompasses both urban areas and rural agricultural and grazing land, with scattered residences. Sources of noise in the area include traffic, industrial activities, wildlife, agricultural activities, groundwater pumps, and irrigation district lift stations. Because of the wide variety of locations proposed, and the lack of specific information on the location of proposed program-related improvements at this time, site-specific noise monitoring was not conducted. Field measurements previously conducted by ICF Jones & Stokes will be used to quantify existing background noise conditions and noise from similar water distribution and pumping operations. The background noise investigation was conducted on November 6, 2000, between 7:30 a.m. and noon. Sound level measurements were conducted with a Larson Davis Model 812 Type 1 sound- level meter. Calibration of the meter was checked before and after each measurement session using a Larson Davis Model CA250 calibrator. Temperature, wind speed, and humidity were sampled manually throughout the day with a Kestrel Model 3000 handheld weather station. Class 3 cloud cover conditions (sunny, with the sun essentially unobscured 80% of the time) were present all day. In the morning, wind conditions were generally calm (speeds less than 2 miles per hour [mph]). As the day progressed, wind speeds increased to the range of 8 to 13 mph. Ambient sound levels of 35–51 dBA were measured throughout the day. The quietest ambient sound level (35 dBA) was measured in the early morning, when wind speeds were lowest; this sound level was generated primarily by noise from distant traffic and natural sources birds). As wind speeds increased, it became clear that the effects of the wind were governing the ambient sound level and increasing background sound levels. Sound level measurements were taken in the vicinity of two groundwater pumps driven by diesel engines and in the vicinity of four groundwater pumps driven by electric motors. At a distance of 50 feet, the diesel engines produced sound levels of 81–86 dBA. At a distance of 25 feet, three of the electric pumps produced sound levels of 57–58 dBA, and the fourth electric pump produced a sound level of 68 dBA. The fourth pump was producing a high-frequency squeal, indicating that it may not have been operating properly. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Sensitive receptors in the proposed program area would include residences, and possibly schools and churches. The proximity of these sensitive receptors to the proposed noise sources is not known at this time. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan Noise Element’s goals, policies, and implementation measures limit the unincorporated community’s exposure to excessive noise; the Noise Element was comprehensively revised in 2004. The County has adopted a modified version of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) compatibility criteria (Table 3.10-1). Table 3.10-1. County of Stanislaus Noise Element Standards Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure from Stationary Noise Sourcesa Daytime dB (7 a.m.–10 p.m.) Nighttime dB (10 p.m.–7 a.m.) Hourly Leq 55 45 Maximum level 75 65 Source: Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development 2008.. a As determined at the property line of the receiving land use. When determining the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, the standards may be applied on the receptor side of noise barriers or other property line noise mitigation measures. The County’s noise standards affect lands within the city limits that adjoin the county. Otherwise, within Modesto, City standards apply exclusively. The County does not have a noise ordinance. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Noise Element The City uses the OPR’s land use compatibility standards for establishing guidelines for noise within Modesto. For areas zoned for single-family residential uses, the City has established 65 dBA Ldn as the maximum acceptable noise level. For areas zoned for other uses, the standards from Table VII-2 of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan apply. In addition, the City has adopted the following policies as part of its general plan (City of Modesto 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 All development projects located within the Baseline Developed Area (and Redevelopment Area) shall be required to incorporate the following measures into the project. Policy VII-G.3[a]. The City of Modesto shall require construction activities to comply with the City’s noise ordinance (Title 4, Chapter and noise- reducing construction practices to be implemented as conditions of approval for development projects where substantial construction-related noise impacts would be likely to occur where construction would include extended periods of pile driving, where construction would occur over an unusually long period, or where noise-sensitive uses like homes and schools would be in the immediate vicinity, etc.). The City should consider potential mitigation measures, including, but not limited to, the following:Construction equipment and vehicles should be equipped with properly operating mufflers according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. Air compressors and pneumatic equipment should be equipped with mufflers, and impact tools should be equipped with shrouds or shields. Equipment that is quieter than standard equipment should be utilized. Haul routes that affect the fewest number of people should be selected. Policy VII-G.3[b]. During City review of a proposed project consistent with the updated General Plan, the City of Modesto shall use the following guidelines to decide whether to require additional study and/or mitigation for outdoor activity areas typically defined as common outdoor recreational areas, as discussed below: Single family Residential uses: the noise would exceed 65 dBA Ldn at outdoor activity areas. Outdoor activity areas for single-family residences are defined as backyards. Other proposed uses: the noise/land use compatibility guidelines those noise levels which are “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” or “clearly unacceptable,”) shown in Table VII-2. For multi-family residential uses, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied at the common outdoor recreation area, such as pools, play areas, or tennis courts. Where such areas are not provided in multi-family residential uses, the standards shall be applied at individual patios and balconies of the development. Outdoor activity areas of transient lodging facilities include swimming pool and picnic areas. Policy VII-G.3[d]. The City of Modesto shall use the most recent noise contour map to implement the requirements of Noise Insulation Standards contained in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. (Title 24 applies to multi-family housing, not single-family.) Title 24 also specifies minimum values for the sound insulation afforded by interior partitions separating different dwelling units from each other and from interior common space. Policy VII-G.3[e]. For proposed non-residential uses, where noise mitigation is deemed necessary for new developments to meet the exterior noise land use compatibility guidelines (Table VII-2), the City of Modesto shall require developers to demonstrate that the proposed development will incorporate measures to reduce noise impacts to a less-than-significant level, as follows: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Where feasible and consistent with General Plan policy, incorporate setbacks and/or locate less-sensitive uses between a noise source and noise- sensitive uses. Provide (to the extent feasible and consistent with General Plan policy) berms, barriers, or other techniques to shield noise-sensitive uses from noise sources. Incorporate construction techniques to achieve specified interior noise limits. One source that can be used for such specifications is the Noise Control Manual for Residential Buildings (Builder's Guide) by David A. Harris (1997). Policy VII-G.3[g]. In recognition of the conservative methodology used to develop the noise contours shown on Figure VII-2, builders, developers (for private development projects), and the City (for Capital projects) shall be allowed to demonstrate that detailed noise studies and/or mitigation are not necessary because future noise levels would be substantially less than depicted on Figure VII-2 due to, for example, natural shielding (e.g. from intervening topographical features or man-made structures) of a site or inapplicability of assumptions (shown on Table 3-3 of the Master Environmental Impact Report) used to develop the contours. Policy VII-G.3[h]. The City of Modesto shall limit trucking to specific routes, times, and speeds that minimize adverse effects to sensitive land uses such as schools and residential areas. Planned Urbanizing Area Policy VII-G.4[a]. The Focused EIR for each Comprehensive Planning District shall include a Noise Analysis prepared by a qualified person experienced in the fields of environmental noise assessment and architectural acoustics. Noise mitigation measures shall be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses that minimizes the exposure of present and future community residents to excessive noise. The noise contours developed by the Noise Analysis shall be used to determine the land use pattern appropriate within the Specific Plan. (For example, noise from a freeway or expressway might indicate the need for sound barriers or for non-residential uses adjacent to the noise source.) Policy VII-G.4[b]. All Noise Mitigation policies adopted for the Baseline Developed Area apply equally in the Planned Urbanizing Area. City of Modesto Noise Ordinance Additionally, the noise ordinance prohibits the “loud and raucous operation or use of any of the following before 7:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. daily (except Saturday and Sunday and State or federal holidays, when the prohibited time shall be before 9:00 a.m. and after 9:00 1. A hammer, or any other device or implement used to pound or strike an object. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 2. An impact wrench, or other tool or equipment powered by compressed air. 3. A hand-powered saw. 4. Any tool or piece of equipment powered by an internal-combustion engine such as, but not limited to, chain saw, backpack blower, and lawn mower. 5. Any electrically powered (whether by alternating current electricity or by direct current electricity) tool or piece of equipment used for cutting, drilling, or shaping wood, plastic, metal, or other materials or objects, such as, but not limited to, a saw, drill, lathe, or router. 6. Any of the following: heavy equipment (such as but not limited to bulldozer, steam shovel, road grader, back hoe), ground drilling and boring equipment (such as but not limited to derrick or dredge), hydraulic crane and boom equipment, portable power generator or pump, pavement equipment (such as but not limited to pneumatic hammer, pavement breaker, tamper, compacting equipment), pile-driving equipment, vibrating roller, sand blaster, gunite machine, trencher, concrete truck, and hot kettle pump. 7. Any construction, demolition, excavation, erection, alteration, or repair activity. In the case of urgent necessity and in the interest of public health and safety, the Chief Building Official may issue a permit for exemption from [these.] Such period shall not exceed three working days in length while the emergency continues but may be renewed for successive periods of three days or less while the emergency continues. The Chief Building Official may limit such permit as to time of use and/or permitted action, depending upon the nature of the emergency and the type of action requested. Other Relevant Criteria Federal Transit Administration Suggested Construction Noise Criteria The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) suggests the guidelines in Table 3.10-2 as reasonable criteria for the assessment of construction noise impacts. Table 3.10-2. Federal Transit Administration Suggested Construction Noise Criteria Land Use One-Hour Leq (dBA) Day Night Residential 90 80 Commercial 100 100 Industrial 100 100 Source: Federal Transit Administration 1995. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies,  expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels,  result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the program vicinity above levels existing without the proposed program,  result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the program vicinity above levels existing without the program,  be located within an airport land use plan area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public-use airport and expose people residing or working in the program area to excessive noise levels, or  be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or working in the program area to excessive noise levels. Based on the State CEQA Guidelines and professional judgment, implementation of the proposed program would result in a significant noise impact if construction and operations would result in noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses that exceed the standards of the City or the County’s general plan Noise Element. Methods and Assumptions Sound levels produced by the various program-related sources are based on data from standard references, previous studies, and equipment manufacturers’ data. Projected sound levels from these sources are then estimated using a point-source attenuation model. With this model, noise from the source is assumed to attenuate at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance. Additional attenuation is assumed to result from molecular absorption and anomalous excess attenuation (Hoover and Keith 1996). For standard conditions (59ºF, 70% relative humidity), molecular absorption is taken to be 0.7 dBA per 1,000 feet, and anomalous excess attenuation is assumed to be 1.0 dBA per 1,000 feet. To determine potential noise impacts, the distances needed for noise to attenuate to the lowest noise threshold, the County noise-level standard of 45 dBA (nighttime), are assessed for each source. Potential effects of construction or operation of the proposed program within the vicinity of an airport would not result in different or more substantial impacts ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 than those discussed below for noise-sensitive receptors located in any other location within the service area. The specific effects of program implementation on noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity of an airport are not discussed further. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact NOISE-1: Exposure of Residences to Noise from Grading and Construction Activities (Significant and Unavoidable) Additional information on the location of proposed improvements and facilities and the size and type of equipment is needed for a more specific project-level analysis. A general, or screening, impact analysis has been conducted. For the purposes of the analysis, construction noise that exceeds 65 dBA, occurring outside the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. daily on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday and on state or federal holidays, is considered significant. Construction noise that exceeds 90 dBA near a residential area or 100 dBA near a commercial or industrial area, occurring within the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. daily on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday and on state or federal holidays, is considered significant. The assessment of potential construction noise levels was based on methodology developed by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) (Federal Transit Administration 2006). Table 3.10-3 summarizes noise levels produced by commonly used construction equipment. Individual types of construction equipment are expected to generate noise levels ranging from 74 dBA to 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. The construction noise level at a given receptor depends on the type of construction activity, the noise level generated by that activity, and the distance and shielding between the activity and noise-sensitive receptors. Table 3.10-3. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) 50 Feet from Source Grader 85 Bulldozers 85 Truck 88 Loader 85 Roller 74 Air compressor 81 Backhoe 80 Pneumatic tool 85 Paver 89 Concrete pump 82 Source: Federal Transit Administration 2006. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Potential noise levels resulting from construction of the proposed program were evaluated by summing the noise levels of the three loudest pieces of equipment (bulldozer, paver, and heavy truck) that likely would operate at the same time in a given location. The combined noise level is 92 dBA at 50 feet. Table 3.10-4 shows the estimated sound levels from construction activities as a function of distance, based on calculated point-source attenuation over “soft” acoustically absorptive) ground. The results in Table 3.10-4 indicate that construction activities for the proposed program would exceed the noise threshold of 65 dBA at residences located within approximately 550 feet of a project site. To mitigate for this impact, the City has committed to requiring the construction contractor to employ noise- reducing practices, as described under Mitigation Measure NOISE-1, which would ensure that noise from construction would not exceed applicable City noise ordinance limits. In addition, for daytime construction within 50 feet of a residence, the proposed program could have noise levels that exceed by 2 dBA the residential daytime significance threshold of 90 dBA. A difference of 2 dBA is not discernable to the human ear. However, the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-1 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Because noise from construction could occur outside the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. daily on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and state or federal holidays, program-related noise from nighttime construction is considered to be significant. The implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE-2 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. However, there may be situations where Mitigation Measure NOISE-2 is not feasible. In these cases, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure NOISE-1: Employ Noise-Reducing Construction Practices The following measures will be implemented by the City or its contractor to reduce adverse effects from construction noise:  locating stationary equipment as far as practical from noise-sensitive land uses,  using sound-control devices on equipment that are more effective than devices originally provided on the equipment,  using noise-reducing enclosures around noise-generating equipment, and  installing temporary barriers between noise sources and noise- sensitive land uses, or taking advantage of existing barrier features (terrain and structures) to block sound transmission. When determining haul truck routes, consideration will be given to altering haul routes to avoid sensitive receptors when feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 3.10-4. Heavy Construction Equipment Source Data: Construction condition: Site leveling Average height of sources (Hs) = 10 feet Average height of receiver (Hr) = 5 feet Ground type (soft or hard) = soft Maximum Sound Level (dBA) Utilization Factor Leq Sound Level (dBA) Source 1: Truck—sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 88 1 88.0 Source 2: Paver—sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 89 1 89.0 Source 3: Bulldozer—sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 85 1 85.0 Calculated Data: All sources combined—Leq sound level (dBA) at 50 feet = 92 Effective height (Hs+Hr)/2 = 7.5 Ground factor = 0.62 Distance Between Source and Receiver (feet) Geometric Attenuation (dB) Ground Effect Attenuation (dB) Calculated Leq Sound Level (dBA) 50 0 0 92 100 -6 -2 85 200 -12 -4 77 300 -16 -5 72 425 -19 -6 68 550 -21 -6 65 600 -22 -7 64 700 -23 -7 62 800 -24 -7 61 900 -25 -8 60 1,000 -26 -8 58 1,200 -28 -9 56 1,400 -29 -9 55 1,600 -30 -9 53 1,800 -31 -10 52 2,000 -32 -10 50 2,500 -34 -10 48 3,000 -36 -11 46 Notes: Calculations are based on Federal Transit Administration 2006. These calculations do not include the effects, if any, of local shielding from walls, topography, or other barriers, which may reduce sound levels further. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Mitigation Measure NOISE-2: Limit Nighttime Construction Noise When feasible, the City and its contractor will ensure that no construction activities are conducted within 550 feet of a residence outside the hours of 7 a.m.–9 p.m. on weekdays and 9 a.m.–9 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and state or federal holidays. Impact NOISE-2: Exposure of Residences to Noise from the Operation of Engines at Proposed Improvements Such as Wells and Pump Stations (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The Engineer’s Report identifies a number of system improvements, including the installation of wells, pipelines, and pump stations. Implementation of these proposed improvements would involve the use of pumps at wells and lift stations, which would generate noise at nearby receptors. For the purpose of this analysis, it is assumed that a single pump with an engine rating of up to 100 horsepower (hp) would be used at each new wellhead. Based on the current program description, all pumps would be powered by electric engines. Data provided by U.S. Electrical Motors for a 100-hp electric motor running under no load (Roughton pers. comm. indicate that the motor would produce a sound level of 56 dBA at 50 feet. To approximate the sound level produced under a load, 3 dB were added to the no-load condition for a resulting source level of 59 dBA at 50 feet. The distance needed for a source of this level to attenuate to the lowest County noise-level standards is 250 feet for 45 dBA (nighttime standard). Noise at sensitive receptors located closer than 250 feet to proposed well locations or pumps could exceed the threshold of significance. In the event that propane- or natural gas–powered engines are used at some of the proposed improvement locations, the sound level of a similarly-sized pump operated by a propane-fueled reciprocating engine was calculated using the equations for reciprocating engines from Noise Control for Buildings, Manufacturing Plants, Equipment and Products (Hoover and Keith 1996). Based on these calculations, a 100-hp, propane-fueled engine would produce a sound level of 75 dBA at 50 feet. This sound level would represent the highest potential noise level from well pumping activities, or the worst-case scenario at the proposed well locations. The distances needed for a source of this level to attenuate to the lowest County noise-level standards is 1,250 feet for 45 dBA (nighttime standard). The exact location of all proposed improvements is not known at this time. Therefore, the proximity of proposed wells or pump stations to sensitive receptors is not known at this time. The preliminary analysis indicates that there is the potential for noise from engines at proposed facilities with the maximum horsepower rating to exceed County nighttime noise standards at residences located within 250 feet of electric engines, or within 1,250 feet of a propane- powered engine. For sensitive receptors within Modesto, the noise standard allows a higher exposure level, and the residences could be located closer than 250 feet. This impact is considered potentially significant. Implementation of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Noise 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.10-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 the following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure NOISE-3: Employ Noise-Reducing Methods During Operations The City will implement noise-reducing methods so that noise from well operations does not exceed County noise-level standards at adjacent residences. Measures to be implemented may include:  restricting engine installations to beyond 250 feet for electric motors and beyond 1,250 feet for propane-powered motors from residences, where feasible, or  using sound attenuation enclosures designed to achieve noise reductions sufficient to comply with City and County standards for noise-generating elements of the operation, when no other feasible control method is available. Impact NOISE-4: Exposure of Persons to, or Generation of, Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels (Less than Significant) Construction activities associated with the operation of heavy equipment may generate localized groundborne vibration. Vibration from non-impact construction activity is typically below the threshold of perception when the activity is more than about 50 feet from the receptor. Additionally, vibration from these activities would be of limited duration, and would end when construction is completed. For these reasons, the proposed program would not expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels. Thus, this is a less-than-significant impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.11 Population and Housing This section describes the proposed program’s potential for impacts related to population and housing. The environmental setting and impact analysis for population and housing were developed through a review of:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  American FactFinder: Modesto, California (U.S. Census Bureau 2007), and  population estimates for California counties and cities for 1970–1980, 1991– 2000, and 2001–2009 (multiple reports) (California Department of Finance 2009). Environmental Setting The population of the entire service area, which includes the contiguous and outlying service areas, was estimated to be 264,209 persons in 2005, according to the 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) (City of Modesto 2008). The Urban Water Management Plan is an important component of the Engineer’s Report. The UWMP projects future growth within the service area and the associated water demand. The Engineer’s Report identifies infrastructure upgrades to meet the projected water demands within the service area. Assuming 1% of growth per year from 2005, the estimated population within the service area in 2009 is 274,937. The population within the City of Modesto represents the majority of people within the service area. However, it is important to recognize that the service area encompasses a larger population than Modesto. The City of Modesto is the Stanislaus County seat, with an estimated 2009 (as of January 1st) population of approximately 210,088 persons (California Department of Finance 2009). With nearly 70,900 housing units and an average 2.98 persons per household, it is the largest city in the county (U.S. Census Bureau 2007). Modesto is a charter city organized under a council-manager structure. As shown in Table 3.11-1, Modesto has experienced a rapid rate of growth in the last few decades, with an average annual increase of approximately 3.6% between 1970 and 2005, the majority of which occurred during the period from 1980 to 2005, when the number of Modesto residents doubled. The city added approximately 57,000 residents between 2000 and 2005; growth has slowed appreciably since 2005 with an increase of 23,000 between 2005 and 2009. This growth has changed Modesto from a small, agriculturally-based community into a medium-sized metropolitan hub. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Similarly, the City of Turlock has changed from a small, agriculturally-based community into a medium-sized city. However, the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman, along with the cities of Ceres and Waterford, continue to maintain a small, agriculturally-focused setting. As shown in Table 3.11-1, population estimates show that Turlock has grown significantly in the last 20 years, and that Waterford’s population has doubled. However, the smaller communities of Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman have experienced minor fluctuations in population size. Table 3.11-1. Population Growth in the Program Area, 1970–2009 Stanislaus County 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005 2006 2007 2009 194,506 265,900 370,522 446,997 503,157 511,617 517,837 526,383 Ceresa 6,029 13,281 28,850 34,609 38,712 40,723 41,700 42,998 Del Riob 1,168 Graysonb 1,077 Hickmanb 457 Modesto 61,712 106,963 164,746 188,861 207,084 206,993 207,700 210,088 Turlocka 13,992 26,287 41,750 55,811 66,836 67,519 68,842 70,256 Waterford 2,243 2,683 4,570 6,924 7,876 8,171 8,529 8,816 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2007 and California Department of Finance 2009. a The City of Modesto only serves a portion of the total population of the cities of Ceres and Turlock. b Population estimates for the unincorporated communities of Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman were only available for the year 2000. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Land Use Element, Chapter 1, of the Stanislaus County General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to population and housing. Goal 1: Provide for diverse land use needs by designating patterns which are responsive to the physical characteristics of the land as well as to environmental, economic and social concerns of the residents of Stanislaus County. Policy 5: Residential densities as defined in the General Plan shall be the maximum based upon environmental constraints, the availability of public services, and acceptable service levels. The densities reflected may not always be achievable and shall not be approved unless there is proper site planning and provision of suitable open space and recreational areas consistent with the supportive goals and policies of the General Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Implementation Measure 1: Residential development shall not be approved at the maximum density if: it threatens riparian habitat; growth-limiting factors such as high water table, poor soil percolation, geological fault areas, and airport hazard areas exist; development is in a designated floodway or does not meet the requirements of Chapter 16.40 of the County Code; it does not comply with airport height limiting ordinance restrictions; there is lack of, or inadequate, sanitary sewer or public water service; or environmental impacts, including traffic, cannot be mitigated. Policy 6: Preserve and encourage upgrading of existing unincorporated urban communities. Implementation Measure 3: Land within the sphere of influence of a community services district, sanitary district or domestic water district shall be rezoned for development only if the US (Urban Service) combining district is used. Goal 4: Ensure that an effective level of public service is provided in unincorporated areas. Policy 22: Future growth shall not exceed the capabilities/capacity of the provider of services such as sewer, water, public safety, solid waste management, road systems, schools, health care facilities, etc. Implementation Measure 1: The County shall continue to implement its Public Facilities Fees Program, which is intended to help finance public facilities needed to maintain current levels of service. Implementation Measure 5: The current level of service of public agencies shall be determined and not allowed to deteriorate as a result of new development. Implementation Measure 9: The County will coordinate development with existing irrigation, water, utility and transportation systems by referring projects to appropriate agencies and organizations for review and comment. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Chapter II, Community Growth Strategy, of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to population and housing. Policy II-B.1[a]. Provide Economic Development Opportunities and Sufficient Land Supply Economic development should be a key consideration of future expansion, irrespective of population projections. Expansion for business park areas, particularly between now and 2015 should be given top priority. Regional commercial uses should be allowed, where appropriate, within business park areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The Land Use Diagram presented in Chapter III provides adequate land and opportunities to expand and diversify Modesto's economic base to provide for future employment needs through establishment of business park areas. These opportunities should be focused on the types of businesses that will thrive in the 21st century. Simultaneous with this diversification of the economic base, Modesto’s current agricultural and industrial bases shall be preserved for as long as possible. The Land Use Diagram should locate business parks and other industrial land near existing and proposed transportation corridors such as State Highways 99, 132, 219, and proposed expressways. These business park locations should foster efficient use of land and resources, as well as reduce aggravation of existing circulation problems. The Land Use Diagram promotes the expansion of the Modesto Urban Area towards the west to ensure that the downtown redevelopment area remains the "central core" of Modesto, and to provide social and economic development for the west side of Modesto. Policy II-B.1[b]. Provide Timely Infrastructure As the City expands and vacant land becomes developed, infrastructure such as roads, sewer, water and drainage is necessary to support that development. As the City directs the extension of this infrastructure, economic development opportunities should receive the highest priority for receiving such infrastructure. The City shall establish the timely provision of infrastructure to support the policies in Section II-B.2. Policy II-B.1[c]. Expedite the Development Process In order to accommodate the magnitude of job opportunities projected in the future, simply designating business park land is not sufficient. The City will proactively assist the private sector to establish viable business parks by expediting the processing of such development requests. The comprehensive planning policies presented in Chapter III, as well as the full utilization of the Master Environmental Impact Report process provided by the State Law, will serve to expedite those future development proposals which stimulate economic growth in accordance with the City’s economic development goals. Policy II-B.2. Maintenance and Enhancement of the City's Fiscal Base The City’s overall Community Development Strategy is that new growth and development should, to the extent provided by law, provide public infrastructure and should generate public revenue so that the City’s overall fiscal base is maintained and enhanced. In evaluating development proposals, the City should consider the long-range impact on the City’s fiscal balance.a. In order to achieve desirable levels of community facilities, it will be necessary to address existing deficiencies. The long-term financing strategy should provide for broad-based funding approaches to meet broad-based community needs. b. Typically, there is a long lead time to plan, finance, and construct infrastructure to serve new areas. Long range infrastructure planning should identify cost estimates and accompanying rate structures, and buy-in fees, and ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 staging and coordination issues which can be included in any long-term financing strategy. c. Development proposals within the Baseline Development Area do not require the same attention to fiscal impact analysis as in the Planned Urbanizing Area because projects will tend to be smaller, in-fill type, which will be served by existing infrastructure. Nonetheless, community-wide financing strategies should apply to Baseline Development as well. d. Community growth should be managed so that the quality of life is enhanced without imposing significant fiscal burdens on the existing community. The City shall ensure the timely provision of infrastructure. e. Require new development to support the infrastructure and public services necessary to serve that development. General fund and other broad-based outlays should be limited to those situations where the infrastructure will provide Citywide benefits or will otherwise offer a tangible benefit beyond the area of the new development. f. Substantial areas proposed for new development will be required to plan for appropriate infrastructure and its funding consistent with the City’s Specific Plan Guidelines. Infrastructure shall be in place before or concurrently with development. Similarly, infrastructure-financing mechanisms shall be required to be in place prior to development within approved specific plans. The City will take a comprehensive approach to financing, using a blend of special taxes, benefit assessments, bonds, and other methods to ensure that infrastructure installation occurs in a timely manner. g. New development shall be phased according to the capacity of public facilities and services to serve new development. h. The City shall require a fiscal impact analysis to identify operation and maintenance costs for discretionary development proposals of potential fiscal significance. i. The City shall develop, collect, and update standard processing/administration fees for staff time to process will-serve letters, water supply assessments/verifications, and/or other future water-related, unfunded state-mandated studies/assessments. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres The City of Ceres’ general plan contains the following goals and policies related to population and housing. Goal 1.B: To grow in an orderly pattern consistent with economic, social and environmental needs, maintaining Ceres’ small town character and preserving surrounding agricultural lands. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy 1.B.1: The City shall ensure that land is designated for development consistent with needs of the community and to maintain a positive fiscal balance for the City. Policy 1.B.3: The City shall ensure that future development occurs in an orderly sequence based on the logical extension of public facilities and services. City of Turlock General Plan The City of Turlock’s general plan contains the following policies related to population growth and associated infrastructure to support that growth. Policy 3-3-4: Seek federal and state financial assistance to facilitate the adequate provision of necessary public improvements, such as water, sewer, storm drainage, and transportation infrastructure to accommodate future residential growth. Policy 4-1-4: Install and upgrade public service facilities (streets, curb, gutter, drainage facilities, and utilities) to encourage increased private market investment in declining or deteriorating neighborhoods. Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan The City of Waterford’s general plan contains the following policies related to population growth and associated infrastructure to support that growth. Policy UE-3. The City Shall Accommodate Urban Development on Non-Prime Soils Whenever Feasible. UE-3d. Limit the expansion of City services to only those areas within an established urban expansion boundary. City services, including sewer, water, public protection services, etc., shall only be extended to areas within the incorporated limits of the City. UE-3e. Maintain a clear set of procedures for coordinating new development with the County and continue to require mutual agreement for all amendments to urban expansion boundaries (URBAN PLANNING AREA) and developed urbanized areas outside City boundaries but within the City’s area of interest. The City and County are committed to providing efficient and adequate services to the residents of the Waterford urban area. To the maximum extent feasible, it is the City’s policy that urban development should be provided the full range of urban services, and this can best be provided within the incorporated limits of the City. Policy UE-4 The City shall control the timing, density, and location of new land uses within its urban expansion boundaries to reflect the availability of urban and utility service. UE-4a. The City shall require that all new development be contiguous to existing urban areas and have reasonable access to public services and facilities. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 It is desirable for annexation proposals to be contiguous to the corporate boundaries of the City to ensure the logical extension of services and to minimize the potential for creating “county islands” within the incorporated limits of the City. UE-4b. The City should create a means to swiftly evaluate the cost of providing various services to new development and establish clear policy for meeting those costs. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, impacts are considered significant if a project has a “substantial, demonstrable negative effect.” Based on Appendix G criteria, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly through the extension of roads or other infrastructure),  displace a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, or  displace a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Methods and Assumptions The proposed program was evaluated qualitatively for potential impacts resulting from housing displacement and the inducement of population growth within the contiguous service area and outlying areas specified in the Program Description (Chapter Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact POP-1: Potential to Displace a Substantial Number of Existing Housing Units or People (No Impact) Water system improvements within existing developed neighborhoods would be located within existing roadway rights-of-way. As such, these improvements would not displace existing housing units or people. The construction of new pipelines, storage tanks, and groundwater wells in undeveloped areas would be phased based on future development patterns. Therefore, it is expected that the facilities would be planned in conjunction with future development, and would ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 be located in currently undeveloped lands or agricultural areas converting to urban uses. For these reasons, the proposed program would not result in the removal or relocation of existing residences or people. There would be no impact. No mitigation is required. Impact POP-2: Potential to Induce Substantial Population Growth (Significant and Unavoidable) Growth can be induced directly by building new homes or businesses, or by creating new jobs) or indirectly by removing obstacles to growth, such as through the extension of infrastructure). This analysis considers both direct and indirect growth-inducing effects, as well as their secondary environmental impacts. The proposed program would have limited potential for directly inducing growth. Although the construction of the facilities under the program would require workers, it is unlikely that it would generate a substantial number of new jobs that would measurably affect population growth in the program area. Once constructed, maintaining the facilities is not anticipated to require any new workers. However, expansion of and upgrades to the water system to provide new service to currently undeveloped parcels within the communities of North Ceres, Turlock, and Waterford1 To provide an idea of the magnitude of population growth that would be facilitated by the proposed program, an estimate was prepared and is summarized in Table 3.11-2. This estimate was derived by using a land-use-based methodology within the study area. The number of new dwelling units was calculated based on the number of undeveloped acres, the development of which would be facilitated by the proposed program, and the zoning designation the number of units per acre) as published in corresponding general plans housing elements. Under the program, a total of 27,846 new dwelling units would be built in the contiguous service area and 1,529 new dwelling units would be built in the outlying service areas by 2038. , and the planned urbanizing areas of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, and Modesto (including the contiguous service area), would remove an obstacle to population growth. Although this growth is consistent with and not in excess of what was projected in adopted general plans, it could not occur without the expanded and upgraded water system. 1 The Engineer’s Report considered undeveloped parcels within Waterford based on growth projections included in the 2006 update of the Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan. Future growth identified in Waterford’s 2006 general plan update would not be served under the City of Modesto’s service area, and thus water demand for Waterford was based on buildout of 2002 growth projections. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 3.11-2. Estimated Population Growth Facilitated by the Proposed Program Program Area Residential Land Use Type Dwelling Units/Acre Undeveloped Acres as of 2008 New Dwelling Units at Buildout (2038) New Growth (3 persons/ unit) Contiguous Service Area Residential 7.5 226 1,695 5,085 Village residential 5.1 5,081 25,913 77,739 Redevelopment planning district 14 0 0 0 Mixed use 14 17 238 714 Salida Community Plan 14 0 0 0 North Ceres* - 0 0 0 Total Growth in the Contiguous Service Area 83,538 Outlying Areas Ceres (Walnut Manor)* 5 0 0 0 Del Rio 4 236 944 2,868 Grayson 5 10 50 225 Hickman 4 15 60 338 Total Growth in Unincorporated County areas 3,431 Turlock (3 sites)* 5 0 0 0 Waterford 5 95 475 1,454 Total Growth in Outlying Areas 4,884 Total Growth in Service Area 88,422 * The City of Modesto only serves a portion of the total population of the cities of Ceres and Turlock. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 To determine the population growth that would result from buildout of undeveloped acres in the service area, the average number of 3 persons per dwelling unit, which is the average dwelling density for Stanislaus County, was used (California Department of Finance 2008). The estimated population growth based on the undeveloped acres and average dwelling density in the service area is shown in the right column of Table 3.11-2. No growth is projected to occur within the following service areas: portions of Ceres and Turlock, Salida, and Empire. The proposed program would facilitate population growth within the contiguous service area by 83,538 people and within the outlying service area by 4,884 people. The total increase in population within the entire service area is estimated to increase by 88,422 people in 2038. The current (2009) estimated population within the service area is 274,937. Therefore, the total population within the service area as facilitated by the proposed program would be 363,359 in 2038. As stated in the Urban Water Management Plan, the projected population within the service area in 2030 is 387,486 (City of Modesto 2008). Therefore, growth facilitated by the proposed program would not exceed projected, adopted population values. The proposed program would increase the population within unincorporated Stanislaus County by 3,431 people. Compared to the projected population for Stanislaus County, which is 587,600 persons by 2010, and considering that the total population of the County is currently 526,383 (2009), the estimated increase in population within unincorporated areas would not exceed projected growth in the county (Stanislaus County 2003; California Department of Finance 2009). Similarly, the proposed program would not result in unplanned growth in the City of Waterford. The population within Waterford would increase by 1,454 persons, equating to a total population of 10,270 in 2038. The projected growth in Waterford according to historic growth trends is 15,900 by 2030 (City of Waterford 2006). Growth facilitated by the proposed program would not exceed projected and adopted growth projections. New growth facilitated by the proposed program would result in associated physical environmental impacts. These secondary impacts of population growth are many and varied, but generally include increased traffic congestion, noise generation, worsening air quality, and a loss of biological resources and habitats. Growth-inducing impacts are moderated by the policies of the general plans of Stanislaus County and the relevant cities. These policies ensure that development within the planned growth areas occurs as demand arises and services are available, and that future roads and utility extensions are sized appropriately to serve planned development. The general plans mitigate for impacts through advanced planning and the implementation of growth management strategies, the provision of public services and utilities, and the protection of open space and habitat areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Population and Housing 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.11-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The proposed improvements to the water supply system would remove an obstacle to further urban development and population growth within the program area. This development would occur in accordance with the general plans and therefore would not result in unplanned or disorderly growth. Despite this fact, the program would remain growth-inducing, and the impacts of growth inducement, and the secondary environmental effects, are considered significant. Although the policies contained in the general plans would reduce the secondary environmental effects of growth, they would not eliminate growth, nor would they necessarily reduce secondary environmental effects to a level of insignificance. Individual development projects would be required to comply with CEQA, which may result in further mitigation for growth and its effects; however, such mitigation cannot be known at this time. Additional mitigation is outside the scope of the program. As such, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.12 Public Services The environmental setting and impact analysis for public services were developed through a review of:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan and the general plan MEIR,  the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document,  the Turlock General Plan, and  the Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan and general plan EIR. Environmental Setting Fire Protection The Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District provides fire protection services for 195 square miles of Stanislaus County. The operates out of 6 stations and provides fire suppression, emergency first response, rescue services, as well as public education programs. The is currently meeting its established service goals, with response times of 5 minutes for emergency calls 80% of the time within the city. All fire departments in Stanislaus County have a mutual aid pact, which allows for jurisdictions to call for assistance from other communities as necessary. The operates the Waterford fire station (Station 34), located at 321 Street in the City of Waterford. This fire station has a service area of 105 square miles, which includes the city of Waterford and the community of Hickman. The West Stanislaus Fire District provides fire protection for approximately 625 square miles west of the main flow of the San Joaquin River, which includes the community of Grayson. The WSFD operates out of five fire stations, the closest of which is located in the community of Westly (approximately 1.5 miles southwest of Grayson) (Stanislaus LAFCO 2007). Fire protection services in the contiguous service area (Modesto, Empire, Salida), except the City of Ceres, are provided by the Modesto Fire Department. The fire department is also Modesto’s first responder to many emergency situations, including chemical-related emergencies. In 2004, the Modesto Fire Department responded to 1,279 fire-related calls, of which 193 were structure fires. The Modesto Fire Department strives to maintain an emergency response system capable of achieving a “first in” response time within 6 minutes of dispatch in all areas of the city, an “effective response force” on scene at all structure fires within 10 minutes, and a second alarm assignment arrival within 15 minutes of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 dispatch. These service standards are intended to be met more than 95% of the time. The Ceres Fire Protection District operates 4 fire stations and responded to over 4,000 emergency calls in 2004. The City of Ceres also provides hazardous materials response, confined space rescue, swift water rescue, and reserve fire fighters (City of Ceres 2008). The Turlock Fire Department provides response to medical emergencies, fires, hazardous materials spills, technical rescues, public assistance, and other emergency calls. As of 2001, there are 4 fire stations operating in the City of Turlock, all of which house suppression equipment and 24-hour fire response personnel (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002). Police Protection The Modesto Police Department (MPD) serves the City of Modesto. The MPD also responds to requests from agencies outside the city limits when necessary. Agencies that may request assistance include the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The MPD responds to emergency calls related to crimes in progress, threats to public safety, traffic accidents, and other urgent requests. The response rate is determined by the number of full-time police personnel per 1,000 citizens, and varies by type of incoming call. Current and future staffing plans for the MPD aim to achieve a ratio of 1.85 sworn officers per 1,000 persons in the service area. Calls reporting crimes in progress receive the highest priority and the quickest response; currently, the response times range between 5.5 and 6.5 minutes. The City of Ceres operates its own full-service emergency communications center and enforcement units. The Emergency Services Division operates as part of a unified county-based dispatching system. Ceres supports police traffic, canine, mounted, SWAT, and community service units, which employ approximately 30 trained officers (City of Ceres 2008). The Turlock Police Department (TPD) responds to emergency calls related to crimes in progress, threats to public safety, traffic accidents, and other urgent requests within the City of Turlock. Current staffing ratio (as of 2001) of the TPD is 1.22 sworn officers per 1,000 persons in the service area; however, future staffing plans aim to achieve a ratio of 1.5. The average response time of the TPD for priority calls is just over 6 minutes (Lopes 2008). Outside city limits, the CHP and the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department provide law enforcement services. This includes services for the City of Waterford, and the Del Rio, Grayson and Hickman communities. The CHP provides law enforcement and traffic control services along SR 99. The Sheriff’s Department breaks Stanislaus County into six “area commands.” Of these, the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 West, Central, Northwest and Southeast Area Commands encompass the remaining portions of the study area not covered by MPD or TPD. In 2004, the Sheriff’s Department received 51,136 calls for service. Response times for all calls were within Sheriff Department standards (Waterford 2006). Schools Modesto is served by a total of eight school districts. The majority of the city is within the Modesto City Schools service boundaries. Approximately 64% of all children within the Modesto planning area are enrolled in Modesto City Schools. The other seven school districts that provide service within the Modesto planning area are Shiloh, Paradise, Hart-Ransom, Salida, Stanislaus, Sylvan, and Empire. In the last 15 years, enrollment in Modesto City Schools’ elementary schools has grown by 41%, and enrollment in junior high schools has grown by 55%. The community of Del Rio is served by the Stanislaus and Modesto high school districts (Del Rio 1992). The City of Ceres is served by the Ceres Unified School District, which operates eleven elementary schools, two junior high schools, two comprehensive high schools, one continuation high school, one charter high school, an independent study alternative center, and an adult school (City of Ceres 2008). Students residing in the City of Waterford and the community of Hickman attend Waterford Unified School District schools. WUSD serves approximately 2,000 students in pre-kindergarten through the 12th grade. Enrollment data for the 2006/2007 school year indicate that enrollment levels have nearly tripled in the last 10 years (ED-Data 2008). In addition to its 1 elementary school, 1 middle school, and 1 high school, WUSD also contains a recently-created charter school, Connecting Waters Charter School, which provides K-12 services for an eight- county area (Waterford 2006). The City of Turlock planning area includes three high school districts – Turlock Joint Union, Denair Unified, and Hughson Union High School – and five elementary school districts –Turlock Joint, Denair Union, Keyes Union, Hughson Union Elementary, and Chatom Union. In addition to these public schools, 7 private schools operate within the Turlock planning area. Enrollment from 1990 to 2000 for the Turlock Joint Unified School District has increased by 25.4 percent (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002). Students residing in the Grayson community attend the Patterson Joint Unified School District. The PJUSD includes 5 elementary schools, 1 middle school, and 2 high schools. Enrollment data for the 2006/2007 school year indicate that enrollment levels have increased by 50% in the last 10 years (ED-Data 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Parks Discussion regarding parkland effects is provided in the “Recreation” section, section 3.13, prepared for this PEIR. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan and the Del Rio Community Plan do not contain policies or goals relevant to the proposed program. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Chapter V of the City’s general plan (“Community Services and Facilities”) establishes policies intended to guide the development of public services in the City SOI. Policies applicable to the proposed program include the following. Policy V-J.3[a]. The City of Modesto should maintain an adequate personnel level, to organize patrol areas and provide investigative responses to achieve a comfortable and safe community climate conducive to a high quality of life and to maintain an active and growing commercial and business environment. To the maximum economic extent feasible, police operations should include proactive law enforcement and administrative efforts, all to be expanded as the City’s population grows. Policy V-J.3[g]. The City of Modesto’s Police Department shall review proposed projects in order to evaluate security features, encourage crime prevention through environmental design, and evaluate traffic flow with respect to speed and collision mitigation. Policy V-J.3[h]. The City of Modesto shall ensure that the following CPTED principles are incorporated in specific sites and situations, including new developments. Territoriality is a design concept that clearly delineates private space from semi-public and public spaces and also creates a sense of ownership. Ownership thereby creates an environment where appearances of such strangers and intruders stand out and are more easily identified through: The enhanced feeling of legitimate ownership by reinforcing existing natural surveillance and natural access control strategies with additional symbolic or social ones. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The design of space to allow for its continued use and intended purpose. The use of pavement treatments, landscaping, art, signage, screening and fences define and outline ownership of space. Natural surveillance is a design concept directed primarily at keeping intruders under observation. Provision of natural surveillance helps to create environments where there is sufficient opportunity for people engaged in their normal behavior to observe the space around them. Areas can be designed so they are more easily observed through: Design and placement of physical features to maximize visibility. This may include: building orientation, windows, entrances and exits, parking lots, refuse containers, walkways, guard gates, landscape trees and shrubs, use of wrought iron fences or walls, signage and other physical obstructions. Placement of persons or activities to maximize surveillance possibilities. Minimum maintained lighting standards that provide for nighttime illumination of parking lots, walkways, entrances, exits, and related areas to promote a safe environment. Access control is a design concept directed primarily at decreasing criminal accessibility. Provision of natural access control limits access and increases natural surveillance to restrict criminal intrusion, especially into areas where they will not be easily observed. Intruders are more readily recognized through: The use of sidewalks, pavement, gates, lighting and landscaping to clearly guide the public to and from entrances and exits. The use of gates, fences, walls, landscaping and lighting to prevent or discourage public access to or from dark or unmonitored areas. Activity support is the presence of activity planned for the space, and involves placing activity where the individuals engaged in an activity will become part of the natural surveillance system. Examples include: Place safe activities in areas that will discourage would-be offenders, to increase the natural surveillance of these activities and the perception of safety for normal users, and the perception of risk for offenders. Place high-risk activities in safer locations to overcome the vulnerability of these activities by using natural surveillance and access control of the safe area. Locate gathering areas in locations that provide for natural surveillance and access control or in locations away from the view of would-be offenders. Improve the scheduling of space to allow for effective use and appropriate intensity of accepted behaviors. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Proper maintenance of landscaping, lighting treatment, and other features can facilitate the principles of CPTED. Functions include: Proper maintenance of lighting fixtures to prescribed standards. Landscaping that is maintained at prescribed standards. Minimizing the conflicts between surveillance and landscaping as groundcover, shrubs and trees mature. Policy V-K.2[a].The City of Modesto shall maintain adequate fire flows in relation to structure size, design, and requirements for construction and/or built- in fire protection systems in accordance with the California Fire Code and adopted local ordinances. Maintenance of adequate fire flows includes factors such as adequate storage, system gridding, hydrant spacing, and spacing and sizing of water mains. Policy V-K.2[b]. The City of Modesto shall ensure adequate ingress and egress to all structures for fire fighting and rescue purposes independent of privately owned and maintained driveways. Policy V-K.2[c]. The City of Modesto shall provide protection of life and property through the use of engineered fire protection systems and fire resistive roof systems. Policy V-K.2[e]. The City of Modesto shall strive to ensure that fire stations, apparatus, equipment, and personnel are in place concurrent with construction in the Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy V-K.2[f]. Future fire station sites and facilities should be closely coordinated with existing and planned public parks, libraries, and other activity centers in order to encourage maximum efficiency of public facilities. Policy V-K.2[i]. The City of Modesto Fire Department shall maintain equipment, staffing, and facilities to provide Emergency First Response level Emergency Medical Services, Urban Search and Rescue, and Hazardous Materials emergency response capabilities. Policy V-K.2[j]. The City of Modesto shall provide an adequate Fire and Life Safety Delivery system through the achievement of the following standards: The City of Modesto shall maintain an emergency response system capable of achieving the following standards in 90% of all cases. The first fire emergency response unit arrives within 6 minutes of dispatch. A full alarm assignment consisting of three engines, one truck, one chief officer, and 14 personnel arrives within 10 minutes of dispatch. A second alarm assignment consisting of two additional fire units with a minimum of six personnel arrives within 15 minutes of dispatch. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The City shall maintain a fire and life safety delivery system adequate to achieve an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of Class 2, with the optimum goal to achieve a Class 1 rating. The city shall maintain a fire and life safety delivery system adequate to achieve International Accreditation through the Center for Public Safety Excellence. Policy V-K.2[k]. The City of Modesto shall protect life and property by requiring engineered fire protection systems and fire resistive roof systems as part of all new construction; in situations where access is limited, fire sprinklers shall be required for new construction. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres Chapter 7, “Health and Safety,” of the City of Ceres general plan contains the following polices related to public services. 7.C.1 The City shall require that new development meets state, county, and local fire district standards for fire protection. 7.C.2 The Emergency Services Division of the City Public Safety Department shall review development proposals for compliance with fire safety standards. 7.D.2 The City shall promote crime prevention programs for commercial and industrial areas. New commercial and industrial development should include crime prevention mechanisms to aid community surveillance and the patrol operations of law enforcement personnel. 7.D.6 The City shall discourage crime through the incorporation of “defensible space” concepts into design of dwellings and structures as follows: b. Industrial and Commercial i. Landscaping and the location of buildings and walls should facilitate surveillance from street and from neighboring structures, and should not provide places for concealment near ii. The street system should allow emergency vehicle access around buildings to the full extent possible. iii. Parking and walkways should be located where surveillance from streets or an attendant is possible to reduce worker or customer isolation when walking to and from cars. iv. Access to buildings and buildings groups and access between buildings should be limited. v. Access to roofs by pallets and flag poles should be eliminated or avoided. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Turlock Section 4 of the City of Turlock’s general plan (“Public Facilities and Services”) establishes policies intended to guide the development of public services in the City SOI. Policies applicable to the proposed program include the following. 4.4-b Continue to promote the orderly and efficient expansion of public safety facilities to adequately meet the needs of the community while minimizing adverse fiscal and environmental impacts. 4.4-m Continue to monitor the water fire-flow capability throughout the City and improve water availability if locations have flows considered inadequate for fire protection. City of Waterford Chapter 6 of the City of Waterford general plan (“Public Facilities”) establishes policies intended to guide the development of public services in the City SOI. Policies applicable to the proposed program include the following. PF-1.1 Establish and maintain adequate & uniform municipal infrastructure and service standards. PF-1.3 Establish and maintain a program for cost effective expansion of municipal services and facilities to meet future community growth needs. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically-altered governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities. Methods and Assumptions Impacts of the proposed program were evaluated qualitatively, based on the potential for construction or operation of proposed facilities to disrupt existing service systems. Potential impacts on parks and other recreational facilities are discussed in section 3.13 “Recreation.” ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Public Services 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.12-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact PUB-1: Potential Disruption of, or Increased Demand for, Fire or Police Services (Less than Significant) Currently, deficiencies in the existing infrastructure and lack of storage in some areas hinder the City’s ability to provide adequate water supply for fire response needs. Without the proposed water system improvements, the ability of the fire departments to respond to emergency calls for fire suppression would decrease over time as population and demands increase. As such, proposed storage tanks and pipeline upsizing will allow the City to meet the Fire Marshall’s requirement for fire flow storage. This is considered a beneficial impact of the proposed program. Construction required for the proposed facilities may cause temporary lane closures, and, potentially, infrequent road closures, when installing pipelines under existing city streets and other developed areas. These temporary actions may interfere with the ability of the fire and police departments to provide adequate emergency response. Road closures and access impacts are discussed in further detail in section 3.14, “Transportation/Traffic,” of this PEIR. As stated in the “Transportation/Traffic” section, standard conditions state that a traffic control plan will be created on a site-by-site basis for any project that could cause road closures or changes in access. Standard conditions also require that the appropriate fire and police departments receive proper notification prior to the closure. This would enable them to take alternative routes, ensuring that any impacts on fire or police protection services during program construction would be less than significant. The program would not directly create any demand for fire or police services. Impacts are considered less than significant. Increases in demand as a result of growth inducement are discussed in section 3.11, “Population and Housing.” Impact PUB-2: Potential Disruption of, or Increased Demand for, School Services or Other Public Facilities (Less than Significant) The program would not disrupt or create demand for schools or public facilities. Impacts are considered less than significant. Increases in demand as a result of growth inducement are discussed in section 3.11, “Population and Housing.” ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.13 Recreation The environmental setting and impact analysis for recreation were developed through a review of:  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (City of Modesto 2008),  Master Plan: Tuolumne River Regional Park (EDAW 2001b), and  planning documents from the outlying communities. Environmental Setting Modesto City of Modesto parks and recreational facilities are under the jurisdiction of the Parks, Recreation and Neighborhoods Department. As of 2006, the following developed or undeveloped parks were located within the City: 706 acres of regional parks (324 acres developed and 382 acres undeveloped), 131 acres of community parks (65 acres developed and 66 acres undeveloped), 337 acres of neighborhood parks (316 acres developed and 21 acres undeveloped), 8 acres of developed miscellaneous parks (including tot lots and public squares), 11 community centers (six developed and five undeveloped), one family aquatic center (undeveloped), 363 acres of golf courses (developed), 12 acres of minor league professional baseball field complex (developed), and 208 acres of sports complex facilities (undeveloped but planned as outlined in the Regional Sports Facility Study prepared for Stanislaus County [the County] and the City, adopted in March 2002). The centerpiece of existing and planned parklands in the region is the Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP). The TRRP extends for approximately 7 miles along the lower Tuolumne River, from Carpenter Road on the west to Mitchell Road on the east, and encompasses approximately 500 acres south of downtown Modesto. The TRRP master plan contains goals and actions for riparian restoration, wildlife habitat enhancement, circulation and access, and proposed land use activities. Planned land uses include a future sports complex north of the wastewater treatment plant, an interpretive center, trails, roadways, multiuse meadows, new parking areas at the Gateway Parcel, a Riverwalk, vista points, and various improvements to Legion Park. Several boat and fishing piers also would be installed along the river. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Ceres The City of Ceres maintains four community parks: River Bluff Regional Park, Park, Roeding Heights Park, and Whitmore Park, as well as smaller neighborhood parks located throughout the city. The largest, the River Bluff Regional Park, is 76 acres and has 38 acres of sports fields, including five dedicated soccer fields, two softball fields, one outdoor basketball court, one outdoor volleyball court, playground equipment, concession stands, restrooms, and an observation deck overlooking the 38 acres of the lower terrace and the Tuolumne River. Del Rio Residents of the Del Rio community can access a County-maintained park along the north side of the Stanislaus River, which is accessible via East River Road off of McHenry Avenue. Swimming and picnic tables are available for public use. The private Del Rio Golf Course and Country Club encompasses approximately 130 acres in the center of the Del Rio community plan area. The 18-hole golf course is proposed to be expanded by approximately 30 acres for a future total of 160 acres and 27 holes. This golf course is private, open to members only, and includes several tennis courts on site. Many Del Rio residents belong to the country club. There are no plans to develop additional recreational facilities for the community. Empire, Hickman, and Salida Most recreational activities in the communities of Empire, Hickman and Salida take place on school property. Currently, there are no plans to develop additional recreational areas within these communities. Grayson The primary recreational facility in Grayson is the United Community Center and Park, which covers 4.8 acres and includes a community center with a multipurpose room, office, and a technology lab. The park includes play fields, an outdoor amphitheater, a playground, basketball courts, and a picnic area. Turlock The City of Turlock supports 300 acres of recreational area, including community parks. The City has identified the need for a municipal golf course, ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 but has not secured the land or funding to begin construction. The City’s general plan proposes an additional 120 acres of public parks to accommodate the planned buildout. Waterford The City of Waterford supports approximately 15 acres of parkland, more than 3 acres of “greenways” (or linear strip parks), and more than 6 acres of undeveloped parkland, which includes the recently-acquired parks along the Tuolumne River corridor. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies The Stanislaus County General Plan includes a number of goals and policies related to parks and recreation facilities in the Land Use Element and the Conservation/Open Space Element. Land Use Element 7. Riparian habitat along the rivers and natural waterways of Stanislaus County shall to the extent possible be protected. Conservation and Open Space Element Goal 1. Encourage the protection and preservation of natural and scenic areas throughout the County. Policy 1. Maintain the natural environment in areas dedicated as parks and open space. Policy 3. Areas of sensitive wildlife habitat and plant life vernal pools, riparian habitats, flyways and other waterfowl habitats, etc.) including those habitats and plant species listed in the General Plan Support Document or by state or federal agencies shall be protected from development. Goal 4. Provide for the open-space recreational needs of the residents of the County. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies Chapter VII, “Environmental Resources and Open Space,” of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan includes policies relevant to the proposed program. Policy VII-B.4. Open Space for Outdoor Recreation Government Code defines open space for outdoor recreation to include, but not be limited to, areas of outstanding scenic, historic, and cultural value; areas particularly suited for parks and recreation purposes, including access to lakeshores, beaches, and rivers and streams; and areas that serve as links between major recreation and open-space reservations including utility easements, banks of rivers and streams, trails, and scenic highway corridors. Section V-G of this General Plan focuses on the City’s neighborhood and community park system as the major source of outdoor recreation opportunities in the City. Policy VII-B.6. Open Space Policies - Parks a. Figure V-5 presents the existing (2007) park system. Section V-G.2 presents a variety of policies applying to parks within the Baseline Developed Area. b. Within the Redevelopment Area, the Redevelopment Plan, adopted in 2007, contains adequate policies applicable to the Redevelopment Project Area. c. Within the Planned Urbanizing Area, development of new parkland and open space shall be accomplished through the application of specified performance standards presented in Section V-G.3. d. The regional park systems for Dry Creek and the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers are defined in Chapter III, as follows: the Stanislaus River Comprehensive Planning District, the Tuolumne River Comprehensive Planning District, and the Dry Creek Comprehensive Planning District. Policy VII-B.7. Open Space Policies - River Greenway Program The State Lands Commission holds a fee ownership in the bed of the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers between the two ordinary low water marks. The entire rivers between the ordinary high water marks are subject to a Public Trust Easement. Both easement and fee-owned lands are under the jurisdiction of the State Lands Commission (Public Resources Code Sections 6301 and 6216). Use of lands underlying the state’s easement must be consistent with Public Trust needs in the area. In addition, the state may have a sovereign interest in Dry Creek. Due to staff limitations of the State Lands Commission, a study of this area to define the precise nature and extent of the state’s interest has not been done. However, the California State Parks Department is interested in providing additional recreational opportunities with the support of local jurisdictions. The California State Parks Department’s Central Valley Vision Report was completed in 2007. The report provides recommendations to develop additional recreational opportunities in the Central Valley, including the City of Modesto. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 One of the recommendations of the report is to significantly expand recreational opportunities, programs, and services and preserve resources, particularly along river corridors. The Central Valley Vision Report identified the Tuolumne River as one of its four rivers of significant interest. One of the Department’s river studies currently underway includes the Tuolumne River. State Lands Commission staff believes that the general plan update is an excellent opportunity to incorporate public trust resource protection values and, specifically, a greenway concept. The City Parks and Recreation Director agrees with State Lands Commission staff; therefore, the following policies, collectively referred to as the "River Greenway Program," are adopted to guide the development of parkland within the Dry Creek, Stanislaus River, and Tuolumne River Comprehensive Planning Districts (see Chapter III): a. Visual corridors of the river will be protected and enhanced. b. Visual corridors and access points on the riverfront will be recreated through redevelopment. c. Identifiable park entrances will be created. A comprehensive program of park signage and graphics will be developed. d. Adequate circulation throughout the park will be provided in order to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles, as well as equestrians and boaters, if appropriate. Opportunities for park access via public transportation will be provided. e. Active and passive recreational areas with universal access will be created. f. Vehicular and pedestrian connections to the park that are direct and user- friendly will be provided. g. Adequate parking for park activities will be provided. h. A continuous trail linkage will be provided throughout the park that includes a range of experiences. i. Public access points and linear foot and bike paths will be incorporated into residential redevelopment as discussed in the Non-Motorized Transportation Master Plan. j. Riverfront vegetation will be consistent with riparian habitat zones. k. Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on such resources shall be allowed within such areas nature education and research; fishing and habitat protection). l. Sensitive habitats and natural areas, including wetlands and riparian corridors, will be protected and enhanced, when feasible. m. Existing wildlife habitat areas will be protected and enhanced, when feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 n. Aquatic species and habitat will be protected and enhanced, when feasible. o. The natural forces influencing the development of recreational areas, including potential flooding, prevailing winds, sun orientation, and topography will be considered during design. p. A flood management program that provides protection from catastrophic flooding and contributes to the ecological values of the river corridor will be promoted. q. The scenic resources of Public Trust lands and resources shall be considered and protected as a resource of public importance. Permitted development shall be sited and designed to protect scenic views associated with Public Trust lands and resources. r. Areas to accommodate multiple purposes and changes in recreational preferences over time will be developed. s. Park and trail systems will be expanded as land becomes available. t. Adequate support facilities for recreational activities will be developed. u. Historical and archaeological resources will be preserved and protected, when feasible. The locations of archaeological resources will not be disclosed to the public. v. Support the California State Parks Department’s efforts to provide additional recreational opportunities within the City. w. Support the findings and recommendations discussed within the California State Parks’ Central Valley Vision Report as well as subsequent studies that pertain to the city. Policy VII-B.8. Implementation b. The Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan (TRRP) and the Master Environmental Impact Report are the guiding documents for the development and use of TRRP-controlled lands in the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek CPDs. c. The Regional Park system consisting of Dry Creek, Stanislaus River, and Tuolumne River shall be developed through the “Comprehensive Planning District” process outlined in Chapter III. The River Greenway Program policies (Section VII-B.7, above) shall be incorporated into each of these three Comprehensive Planning Districts by including the following design elements: A riparian protection, restoration, and maintenance plan. A Riverfront Greenway trail element identifying access points and interconnection with any appropriate pathway programs. Dedication requirements to guarantee access is permanent dedication of fee, easement, or deed restriction). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 A maintenance and operations element specifying how trails and accessways shall be maintained and operated and by what agency. A trail/accessway standards element specifying standards including minimum width of trails, trail surface, etc. consistent with state and federal law and state standards, and as outlined in the City of Modesto’s Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. d. Any action by a county or city by which open space land or any interest therein is acquired or disposed of or is restricted or regulated, whether or not pursuant to this part, must be consistent with the local open space plan (Section 65566, Government Code). Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan The TRRP master plan is a long-range plan for a riverfront park south of Modesto, described above under “Environmental Setting” (EDAW 2001b). The TRRP master plan provides a long-range vision for the park to guide projects that are intended to enhance the natural environment as well as recreational and educational opportunities at the park. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres General Plan Chapter 5, “Recreational and Cultural Resources,” of the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document contains the following applicable policies: 5.A.8 The City shall continue to cooperate with Stanislaus County and the City of Modesto in the development of the Tuolumne River Regional Park. 5.A.9 The City shall continue to cooperate with the public and quasi-public agencies in the joint development, maintenance, and use of facilities. The City shall explore of partnerships for development of regional youth and adult sports facilities and recreation programs. To this end, the City shall continue the joint use agreements with the school district for the utilization of park and school facilities. 5.A.13 The City shall ensure that recreation facilities are sited to minimize negative impacts on surrounding residential neighborhoods (i.e. parking, night lighting, excessive noise). City of Turlock General Plan The following policies contained in the Public Facilities and Services Element of the City of Turlock’s general plan are applicable to the proposed program. Policy 4.1-a Develop a high quality, diversified public park system that provides a variety of recreational opportunities for all City residents. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy 4.1-h Implement the objectives of the Park Master Plan, approved in 1995.  Objective 1: Park System Development. Develop a high-quality public park system with adequate space and facilities to provide an appropriate mix of recreation activities for the City’s residents and work force.  Objective 3: Operations and Maintenance Programs. Provide for a high quality of maintenance for all city parks, landscaped open space areas, and recreational facilities that enhance the visual attractiveness of Turlock while being as cost-effective as feasible.  Objective 4: Open Space Greenway and Recreation Trail Protection Programs. Establish methods to identify, acquire, develop and maintain important open space buffers and trail corridors throughout the community which offer leisure recreational facilities, protect the local environment, and enhance the community quality of life. Policy 4.1-i Examine the present organizational arrangement of park and recreation facility management and maintenance to enhance these relationships including park planning, programming, design and facility acquisition to reflect the heightened importance of parks and recreation to the City. City of Waterford General Plan The following policies in the “Public Services and Facilities” chapter of the City of Waterford’s general plan are applicable to the proposed program. Policy PF-1.1 Establish and Maintain Adequate & Uniform Municipal Infrastructure and Service Standards. Policy PF-1 .2 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Operation and Maintenance of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Community Needs. Policy PF-1.3 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Expansion of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Future Community Growth Needs. Policy PF-1 .4 Establish and Maintain Facility Maintenance Programs that Assure Maximum Utilization of Capital Equipment and Facilities. Policy PF-1.5 Assure that Expansion of the City Results in the Enhancement of Municipal Services and Facilities within Waterford Without Increasing Costs to the Existing City. Policy PF -2-1 Provide high-quality park and open space facilities to serve the needs of a growing population. Policy PF -2-2 Maintain the City's existing high-quality open space facilities. Policy PF -2-3 Develop a diverse and integrated system of park facilities throughout Waterford. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Recreation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.13-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to the Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  cause any changes in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, or  include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical impact on the environment. Methods and Assumptions The exact locations of the proposed facilities are unknown; thus, this impact analysis was conducted on a programmatic level. Potential impacts due to growth-inducing effects of the proposed program are discussed in Chapter 4. Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact REC-1: Alteration of Existing Parks or Recreational Facilities (No Impact) The proposed program would not cause increased demand for or long-term conflicts with recreational facilities, either in Modesto or the outlying communities. There would be no impact on existing parks or recreational facilities from the proposed program. Increases in demand for parks or recreational facilities as a result of growth that may be facilitated by the program are discussed in section 3.11, “Population and Housing.” Impact REC-2: Requirement of Construction or Expansion of Recreational Facilities (No Impact) As all of the facilities would be constructed underground or on existing right-of- way (ROW), none of the facilities are proposed within, or would be consistent with the zoning requirements for, land identified for public use. As such, the proposed program would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities in any of the communities included in the Engineer’s Report. The need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities as a result of population growth that may be facilitated by the program is discussed in section 3.8, “Population and Housing.” There would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.14 Traffic/Transportation This section examines the proposed program’s potential effects on traffic levels. The character of this program is such that its impacts on traffic would occur during the construction phase only. Once installed, the proposed facilities would require only routine and occasional maintenance. These operational activities would not generate substantial traffic. The study area for program-related impacts consists of the streets along which the program components would be installed. Because the details of these installations the amount and type of equipment, the size of the work area, and the duration of work) are unknown at this time, the program’s potential adverse effects are analyzed at a general level. Background Information The transportation environmental setting and impact analysis were developed through a review of the following documents:  City of Modesto General Plan and EIR, Circulation Element (City of Modesto 2008),  Turlock General Plan, Circulation Element (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002),  Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan, Circulation Element (City of Waterford Planning Department 2007),  Community of Hickman Strategic Plan (Community of Hickman 2005),  Del Rio Community Plan (Community of Del Rio 1992), and  Stanislaus County General Plan, Circulation Element, and EIR (Stanislaus County 2007a). Relevant Program Characteristics As detailed in Chapter 2, “Program Description,” the installation or upgrade of water infrastructure components (a new corporation yard for the City of Modesto, storage tanks, booster pump stations, groundwater wells, and pipelines, and other miscellaneous facilities) is proposed as part of the program to alleviate existing deficiencies and accommodate water service demands accorded to future development within the contiguous and outlying service areas. The exact locations of these new facilities have yet to be finalized. Facilities such as pipelines, storage tanks, booster pump stations, and groundwater wells would be built on prepared sites. They would generate construction traffic caused by ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 bringing workers and delivering machinery and materials to these sites. The delivery of cranes or drilling rigs to the sites would require large vehicles, but would not occur frequently during any construction operation. Oversized vehicles would follow all established traffic regulations, and would not be expected to affect traffic flow to any extent. The City’s new corporation yard would include property acquisition (approximately 8 acres), construction of a new building (approximately 10,000 square feet), and site development parking, landscaping, lighting, and security measures). The site also would be used to store soil, concrete, and asphalt removed during the construction of water projects for later reuse as part of the City’s recycling program. The location of the new corporation yard has not been finalized at this time. It would generate traffic during construction, but, as with the other facilities, is not expected to generate sufficient traffic to result in congestion on affected streets. During operations, the corporation yard would generate traffic from workers and from truck deliveries/removals of construction materials for storage. These truck trips would occur throughout the day during working hours, at a level dependent upon the extent of future construction projects. The city’s existing corporation yard has not adversely affected traffic flow on adjoining streets. The same is expected of the new corporation yard. Pipelines typically would be installed within or adjacent to existing or proposed roads. The general process for pipeline installation would involve digging a trench, installing the pipe, and backfilling the trench (a method referred to as “cut and cover”). In existing streets, this would involve removing the asphalt, roadway base, and underlying soil; all materials would be replaced at the completion of the proposed program, and the road surface would be restored. The depth and width of the trenches would vary depending upon the site slope and the size of the pipe, and in consideration of other existing utility lines. Typical equipment used for pipeline installation includes excavators, cranes, dump trucks, backhoes, water trucks, compactors, and pavement equipment. Depending upon the pipeline alignment, construction crews may close one or more lanes of traffic temporarily during pipe installation. In general, the maximum length of an open trench would be the distance necessary to accommodate the amount of pipe that could be laid in one day, typically 200 to 500 feet. As a result, the proposed program would have the potential to disrupt traffic temporarily during construction through trenching in travel lanes, working or trenching adjacent to travel lanes, and temporarily placing machinery in travel lanes. Any disruption would occur over the length of road being worked on that day. In areas where the cut-and-cover method is infeasible, such as where a pipeline would cross irrigation laterals, railroad tracks, or State Route (SR) 99, the City would use trenchless construction methods. Common trenchless methods include the jack-and-bore method and microtunneling. Both methods reduce disturbance to the ground surface and disruption to other facilities or surface features. The jack-and-bore method uses powerful hydraulic jacks to push pipe from a launch ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 (bore) pit to a receiving pit, and the microtunneling technique uses a small tunneling machine. Construction crews would spend 3–4 weeks excavating the launch and receiving pits. Any traffic disruption would be limited to the areas adjacent to the pits. Environmental Setting Roadways The following sections describe the roadway characteristics within the proposed program’s study area. Modesto Regional access to Modesto is provided by SR 99, SR 108, SR 132, and SR 219, all of which are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). In its general plan circulation element, the City categorizes the roadways that constitute its network as freeways, expressways, arterial streets, collector streets, and local streets, depending on their function and capacity. The major elements of the circulation network—existing and planned—are shown in Figure V-1 of the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan. State routes within the city are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. All other roadways within the City’s incorporated boundaries are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the City’s Public Works Department. Ceres Ceres is located south of Modesto, on SR 99. Regional access is provided by SR 99. The 1997 Ceres general plan categorizes and identifies the elements of its roadway network as freeways, expressways, arterials, primary collectors, secondary collectors, and local streets. Under the Ceres Municipal Code, the Public Works Department undertakes operations and maintenance. Del Rio Because of the location of the community of Del Rio, freeway access to the community is limited. Freeway access is from SR 99, located approximately 6 miles to the west. From SR 99, Del Rio is accessed via SR 219 (Kiernan Avenue) and Carver Road, Tully Road, St. John Road, or McHenry Avenue. McHenry Avenue, running along the eastern boundary of Del Rio, is the major roadway within the community. All roadways within the community are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of Stanislaus County (County). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Empire Highway access to Empire is provided via SR 132. All roads within this community are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the County. Grayson Because of the location of Grayson, highway access to this unincorporated community is limited. Highway access is provided via SR 132, located approximately 6 miles to the north, or SR 33, located approximately 1 mile to the west. From SR 132, Grayson is accessed via County Road J3. From SR 33, Grayson is accessed via County Road J16. All roads within the community are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the County. Hickman This unincorporated community also has limited highway access. Highway access is provided via SR 132, located approximately 1 mile to the north. From SR 132, Hickman is accessed via County Road J9. All roads within the community are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the County. Salida The unincorporated community of Salida is north of Modesto, along SR 99. The road network is described in the Salida Community Plan adopted by the County Board of Supervisors in August 2007 (Stanislaus County 2007b). Primary new growth in Salida is projected to occur east of SR 99, where it would connect to existing major roads shared with Modesto Kiernan Avenue). In addition, a new east-west expressway is proposed to be built south of the Stanislaus River. Turlock Freeway access to Turlock is provided via SR 99, which runs through the eastern side of the city. Through movement within the city is provided by a number of expressways, including North Golden State Boulevard, Keyes Road, West Harding Road, North Washington Road, and Geer Road. The City of Turlock’s general plan identifies designated arterials, collectors, and local access streets within Turlock (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002). State routes within the city are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. All other roadways within the city’s incorporated boundaries are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the City of Turlock’s Public Works Department. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Waterford Regional access to Waterford is provided via SR 132 (Yosemite Boulevard, within the city), which also provides for east-west through movement within the city. Primary north-south through movement is provided via the Oakdale- Waterford Highway. The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan identifies designated arterials, collectors, and local access streets within Waterford (City of Waterford Planning Department 2007). State routes within the city are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. All other roadways within the city’s incorporated boundaries are within the operational and maintenance jurisdiction of the City of Waterford’s Public Works Department. Transit Intercity, fixed-route, and dial-a-ride bus service is provided throughout the county by Stanislaus Regional Transit (StaRT). Modesto and Turlock also provide local bus service within their cities. The commercial operator Greyhound provides intercity bus service to points throughout the state and nation. Greyhound stations are located in Modesto and Turlock. The following sections describe the transit characteristics within the proposed program’s service area. Transit operations would be affected only to the extent that program-related construction would constrict traffic on a road that is on a bus transit route. Modesto Modesto is served by StaRT fixed and shuttle routes providing bus connections between Modesto and Turlock, Patterson, Grayson, Westley, Riverbank, Oakdale, and Merced. Modesto Area Express (MAX) provides daily, regularly-scheduled, public bus service within the city via 20 fixed routes. MAX Route 25 connects the Downtown Transportation Center with the Amtrak station in eastern Modesto Monday through Saturday. In addition, MAX’s Modesto ACE Express bus provides three trips in the morning from Modesto’s Vintage Faire Mall park-and- ride lot nonstop to the Lathrop/Manteca Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) train station and three return trips in the evening. MAX’s Modesto BART Express departs from the Modesto Downtown Transportation Center for the Dublin/Pleasanton Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station twice each morning and provides two return trips in the evening. Modesto Area Dial-A-Ride provides door-to-door bus and car transit on an on- call basis within the city for elderly and disabled individuals, and provides evening and Sunday service to the general public. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Del Rio The community of Del Rio is served by the StaRT Eastside Shuttle, which provides a connection to Modesto’s Downtown Transportation Center and other destinations in Modesto, where connections can be made to the regional transit system. Grayson The community of Del Rio is served by StaRT Route 40 (Modesto/Grayson/Westley/Patterson), which provides a connection to the Downtown Transportation Center in Modesto, where connections can be made to the regional transit system. Hickman The community of Hickman is served by the StaRT Waterford Dial-A-Ride and the Waterford/Modesto Runabout. The Waterford/Modesto Runabout provides a connection to the Downtown Transportation Center and other destinations in Modesto, where connections can be made to the regional transit system. Turlock Turlock is served by StaRT fixed and shuttle routes providing connections to Modesto, Patterson, Newman, Gustine, and Merced. The City of Turlock also provides a fixed route service called the Bus Line Service of Turlock (BLAST). All BLAST routes begin and end each run together at a central transfer hub near Donnelly Park. Service is provided on four fixed routes. The City of Turlock also operates a demand-responsive service called Dial-A- Ride Turlock (DART), which provides general public service for areas more than 0.25 mile away from a BLAST route and provides door-to-door service for residents with disabilities who live with the 0.25-mile service area (City of Turlock 2008). Waterford Waterford is served by the StaRT Waterford Dial-A-Ride and the Waterford/Modesto Runabout. The Waterford/Modesto Runabout provides a connection to the Modesto Downtown Transportation Center and other destinations in Modesto, where connections can be made to the regional transit system. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Railways Railroad operations in Stanislaus County include high-speed mainline operations on the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), and low-speed mainline and switching operations on the BNSF Railway, UPRR, Sierra Railroad, California Northern Railroad, Modesto & Empire Traction Company Railroad, and Tidewater Southern Railroad. The UPRR in Stanislaus County includes operations on the main line, which passes through Salida, Modesto, Ceres, Keyes, and Turlock. The Modesto & Empire Traction Company is a short-line railroad that connects switching operations between the UPRR in Modesto and the BNSF Railway in Empire. The Tidewater Southern Railroad is a branch line operation of the UPRR. The line runs in a general north-south route through Stanislaus County, from Stockton to north Modesto and from Turlock to south Modesto. As discussed above, any rail lines would be crossed by tunneling. Therefore, the rail operations would not be affected. Regulatory Framework State Regulations Traffic analysis for California state highways is guided by policies and standards set by Caltrans. Although it has not formally adopted a level of service (LOS) standard for traffic flow on state routes, Caltrans generally considers LOS D to be their standard. Work within the right-of-way of a Caltrans highway or other facility can proceed only upon issuance of an encroachment permit from Caltrans. An encroachment permit would be conditioned to ensure that no permanent harm comes to the Caltrans property, and that sufficient measures are taken during construction to avoid causing a traffic hazard. Local Regulations The proposed program should adhere to the adopted transportation policies of the jurisdiction in which the particular program-related component would be located. This would include obtaining encroachment permits for any work done within the rights-of-way of any city or county roads. Transportation goals and policies that may apply to the proposed program, as defined in the adopted plans of the local jurisdictions, include those discussed below. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Stanislaus County Policies that may apply to transportation elements of the proposed program, as defined in the adopted Stanislaus County General Plan (Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development 2008), include those listed below. Policy One Development will be permitted only when facilities for circulation exist, or will exist as part of the development, to adequately handle increased traffic. Implementation Measures 5. The circulation systems of development proposals shall be reviewed to ensure no adverse effects to adjoining land. 6. To identify the potential impacts of new development on traffic service levels, the County shall require the preparation of a traffic impact study at the sole expense of the developer for developments determined to be large enough to have a potentially significant impact on traffic. As appropriate, the study may be required to follow the Caltrans’ “Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies” and/or other procedures specified by the Department of Public Works. Policy Two Circulation systems shall be designed and maintained to promote safety and minimize traffic congestion. Implementation Measures 1. The County shall maintain LOS C or better for all County roadways and intersections, except, within the sphere of influence of a city that has adopted a lower level of service standard, the City standard shall apply. The County may adopt either a higher or lower level of service standard for roadways and intersections within urban areas such as Community Plan areas, but in no case shall the adopted LOS fall below LOS D. Policy Five Transportation requirements of commercial and industrial development shall be considered in all planning, design, construction, and improvements. Implementation Measures 3. Industrial and commercial development shall be planned so that truck access through residential areas is avoided. 6. On-street truck parking shall be discouraged where such parking restricts adequate sight distances, detracts from the visual aesthetics of the area, or poses a potential hazard to motorists, bicyclists, or pedestrians. Policy Seven ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Bikeways and pedestrian facilities shall be designed to provide reasonable access from residential areas to major bicycle and pedestrian traffic destinations such as schools, recreation and transportation facilities, centers of employment, and shopping areas. Implementation Measures 7. Whenever a roadway is resurfaced or restored, adequate pavement shoulder and/or striping will be considered to safely accommodate bicycle travel in accordance with the County Standards and Specifications, the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, or other nationally recognized standard, where adequate right- of-way exists. Policy Eight Promote public transit as a viable transportation choice. Implementation Measures 3. Ensure that provisions are made in proposed development for access to current and future public transit services. In particular, continuous segments of walls or fences should not impede pedestrian access to collectors, major, or expressways with transit service. City of Modesto Policies that may apply to transportation elements of the proposed program, as defined in the adopted City general plan (City of Modesto 2008), include those listed below. Policy V-B.6[f]. The highest possible levels of service for all transportation modes (vehicle, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle) shall be maintained on City roadways, consistent with the financial resources reasonably available to the City and without unreasonably burdening property owners or developers with excessive roadway improvement costs. On roadways where the LOS is expected to exceed level F, the City should consider mitigation measures other than road widening, such as the addition of bicycle lanes, improved pedestrian access, improved transit service, and the establishment of walkable development patterns. Data from the General Plan Traffic Analysis, described in The Traffic Appendix of the Master Environmental Impact Report, as updated from time-to- time, shall be used to evaluate the effectiveness of traffic mitigation measures adopted by the City Council. Policy V-B.7[b]. The City may allow individual locations to fall below the City’s LOS standards in instances where the construction of physical improvements would be infeasible, be prohibitively expensive, significantly impact adjacent properties or the environment, significantly impact non- motorized transportation systems, or have a significant adverse effect on the character of the community. To the extent feasible, the City shall strive for LOS D on all streets and intersections. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Policy V-B.7[c]. Individual development projects that could affect conditions on traffic facilities predicted by the General Plan Traffic Analysis to operate at LOS D or better in 2025 (as shown in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR) cannot cause, without further study, conditions to be worse than LOS D at any time prior to 2025. If implementation of this Level of Service is impractical or infeasible, or may result in secondary impacts on the non-motorized transportation system, subsequent environmental review, including a Comprehensive Traffic Study, shall be required. The subsequent environmental review may take the form of: A mitigated negative declaration, if feasible mitigation measures or alternatives will be incorporated to avoid the worsening of the LOS standards presented in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR (Section 21157.5(a) of CEQA) An EIR, if mitigation measures cannot avoid the worsening of the LOS Standards presented in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR (Section 21157.5(b) of CEQA) The Comprehensive Traffic Study shall include appropriate measures to update the General Plan Traffic Analysis for all subsequent Specific Plans, and for development within the affected Baseline Developed Area and Redevelopment Area, and shall conform to the Criteria for a Traffic Impact Study. Policy V-B.7[d]. Individual development projects that could affect conditions on traffic facilities predicted by the General Plan Traffic Analysis to operate at LOS E (as shown in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR) shall not, without further study, cause conditions on those facilities to exceed LOS E at any time prior to 2025. If implementation of this Level of Service is impractical or infeasible, subsequent environmental review, including a Comprehensive Traffic Study, will be required. The subsequent environmental review may take the forms stated above in Policy V-B.7[c]. Policy V-B.7[e]. Individual development projects that could affect conditions on traffic facilities predicted by the General Plan Traffic Analysis to achieve LOS F (as shown in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR) shall not, without further study, cause further substantial degradation of conditions. Further substantial degradation shall be defined as an increase in the daily vehicle/capacity (v/c) ratio of 0.05 or greater for roadway segments whose v/c ratio is estimated to be 1.00 or higher in 2025 by the traffic model. If implementation of this Level of Service is impractical or infeasible, subsequent environmental review, including a Comprehensive Traffic Study, will be required. The subsequent environmental review may take the forms stated above in Policy V-B.7[c]. Policy V-B.7[f]. Designated City staff will review future development project proposals within the Baseline Developed Area, on a case-by-case basis. The following criteria may be applied to each proposal, and a determination made by ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 the designated staff of the Public Works Department or other City department, regarding the acceptable or appropriate level of project impact on the circulation network. For proposed development projects that conform to the General Plan– approved land use for the site, it is assumed that the adopted performance standards for the circulation system within the area of impact will be maintained. For such projects, the designated City staff may establish an appropriate scope of study for a “Site Access Study,” if necessary, which may address project impacts to adjacent or nearby intersections, as described in Policies V-B.6[a] through V-B.6[c]. The “Site Access Study” shall, at a minimum, analyze and resolve the following: Impacts to roadway segments adjacent to the project site. Impacts to intersections considered to have a key role in regulating access to the project site or substantial traffic flow between the project site and a key arterial roadway. Impacts to and design needs for access between internal and off-site vehicular circulation, and linkages to off-site bicycle/pedestrian circulation systems, and transit services. Onsite parking needs and impacts to off-site parking, when applicable. Other operational or safety-related concerns and issues, including site access. The proposed development project will be designed to incorporate all recommendations of the “Site Access Study.” If implementation of the definitive recommendations of the Site Access Study is impractical or infeasible, subsequent environmental review, including a Comprehensive Traffic Study, may be required. That Study shall include appropriate measures to update the General Plan Traffic Analysis for all subsequent Specific Plans, and for development within the affected Baseline Developed Area and Redevelopment Area. For projects that do not conform to the General Plan–approved land use, further supplemental environmental review may be necessary, in accordance with Section 21157.1(d) of the Public Resources Code. Policy V-B.7[g]. Data from the General Plan Traffic Analysis, described in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR, shall be utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of the policies presented above. Policy V-B.8[c]. For individual proposed projects that conform to a Specific Plan’s land use designations (for amount and type of land use) a subsequent Site Access Study may be required. Each Site Access Study should, at a minimum, focus on the following issues: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Impacts to roadway intersections that are adjacent to the project site. Impacts to and design needs for access between internal and off-site vehicular circulation, and linkages to bicycle/pedestrian circulation systems and transit services. Onsite parking needs. Other safety-related concerns. Conceivably, the Comprehensive Traffic Study may contain sufficient detail to obviate some or all portions of a “Site Access Study.” Policy V-B.8[d]. Data from the General Plan Traffic Analysis, described in the Traffic Appendix of the Master EIR, shall be utilized to evaluate the effectiveness of the policies presented above. Policy V-B.8[e]. Projects that do not conform to the General Plan-approved land use, further supplemental environmental review may be necessary, in accordance with Section 22157.1(d) of the Public Resources Code. Ceres The City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document and Ceres Municipal Code contain the following provisions that relate to work in city streets. City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document (1997) Policy 2.A.2. The City shall develop and manage its roadway system to maintain Level-of-Service of at least C on secondary collectors and local streets and Level-of-Service D on primary collectors, arterials, expressways, and freeways. Ceres Municipal Code Title 12, Chapter 12.08 Streets and Excavations Section 12.08.010 requires a permit from the city engineer prior to excavation in or under any street. The street must be returned to its original condition. Section 12.08.045 restricts new trench cuts in streets that have been newly constructed or repaved within 3 years of the work. It restricts trench cuts where streets have been slurried within 1 year of the slurry application. Exceptions are made for new service under specified circumstances. Section 12.08.130 requires safe crossings to be maintained at intersections during street work. Access must be provided to all fire hydrants during construction. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Del Rio Policies that may apply to transportation elements of the proposed WSIP, as defined in the Del Rio Community Plan (Community of Del Rio 1992), include the following. Goal 3 Further development in the Del Rio area should be planned to ensure that adverse impacts on services and utilities, schools, transportation and circulation, agriculture, water, and air quality are property mitigated. Policy A All future developments in Del Rio shall be Planned Developments and approved only after a specific plan and EIR are prepared which address cumulative development impacts on the entire Del Rio area., Community Plan conformance, and methods of plan implementation. The Del Rio community is also subject to the applicable plans and policies of the County. Hickman The community of Hickman has not established any local plans or policies related to transportation, but it is subject to the applicable plans and policies of the County. Grayson The community of Grayson has not established any local plans or policies related to transportation, but it is subject to the applicable plans and policies of the County. Turlock Policies that may apply to transportation elements of the proposed program, as defined in the Turlock General Plan (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002), include the following. Implementing Policies 5.1-c Strive to maintain LOS C for all freeways and expressways 5.1-d Approve LOS D as an allowable standard for arterial and collector streets where existing conditions limit improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 5.1-e Recognize that the City’s land use pattern, the limited number of continuous north-south streets, and the concentration of activity on the east side of the freeway will result in very poor service levels on a small number of streets where capacity cannot be increased because it would create unacceptable disruption. 5.1-f On streets where poor service levels are anticipated, investigate and implement improvement projects which will improve traffic operations. To reduce demand at congested intersections on Geer Road and Lander Avenue, new development projects will be required to provide auto access from side streets wherever possible. 5.1-h Design roadway improvements and evaluate development projects using suggested LOS criteria prescribed in policies 5.1-c, 5.1-d, and 5.1-e. Guiding Policies 5.2-a Promote safe and efficient vehicular movement. 5.2-c Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities 5.2-d Coordinate local actions with State and County agencies to ensure consistency between local and regional actions including by not limited to the Regional Transportation Plan, Regional Expressway Study, Regional Transit Plan, and Regional Bicycle Action Plan. 5.2-z In reviewing designs of proposed developments, ensure that provision is made for access to current and future public transit services. Waterford Policies that may apply to transportation elements of the proposed program, as defined in the Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan (City of Waterford Planning Department 2007), include the following. Policy T-1.3 Design Major Roads to Maximize Efficiency Implementing Actions: 1.3.c Improve traffic flow of arterials and other major roadways, whenever possible, by avoiding or eliminating on-street parking. 1.3.d Work to insure that land uses fronting major streets have shared access across adjacent properties and provide sufficient on-site parking to avoid depending upon on-street parking. Policy T-1.4 Promote Traffic Safety Implementing Actions: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 1.4.c Promote increased traffic safety with special attention to hazards which could cause personal injury. Policy T-1.6 Minimize Adverse Impacts on the Environment from Existing and Proposed Road Systems Implementing Actions: 1.6.a Continue working to minimize environmental impacts associated with heavily traveled traffic corridors, such as high noise levels and stop and go traffic situations (which contribute heavily to air pollution problems). Policy T-1.7 Minimize Street System Impacts on Residential Neighborhoods and Other Sensitive Land Uses Implementing Actions: 1.7.b Whenever feasible, approve street circulation patterns that discourage exterior traffic from driving through neighborhoods. Policy T-2.1 Support and Enhance the Use of Public Transit Implementing Actions: 2.1.c Whenever feasible, avoid creating barriers that prevent convenient access to current or prospective public transit routes. Policy T-2.2 Support a Safe and Effective Public Transit System Implementing Actions: 2.2.a Include public transportation access in the review process for major public and private development projects, as well as all significant land use design proposals considered by the City. Policy T-2.7 Improve Planning for Pedestrians Implementing Actions: 2.7.c Continue to review land use and project proposals with the intent to avoid pedestrian barriers that prevent, or create unnecessarily circuitous, access to community and commercial areas. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-16 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and the capacity of the street system result in a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections),  cause, either individually or cumulatively, an exceedance of an LOS standard established by the County congestion management agency for designated roads or highways,  result in inadequate emergency access, or  result in inadequate parking capacity. Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines identifies the following additional traffic impact criteria that are not pertinent to this proposed program. The reasons they are not pertinent are explained below.  The proposed program would have a significant impact if it resulted in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. The proposed program does not contain any components that would affect air traffic.  The proposed program would have a significant impact if it substantially increased hazards because of a design feature sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses farm equipment). Upon completion, there would be no program features that would obstruct or change the design of any roadway.  The proposed program would have a significant impact if it conflicted with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation bus turnouts and bicycle racks). The program would not generate any substantial traffic and would not place any above-surface facilities within road rights-of-way. Therefore, it would not affect the provision of alternative transportation. Methods and Assumptions A technical traffic analysis of specific program-related elements was not conducted for this PEIR because of the proposed program’s wide reach, the lack of specific detail about individual actions, and the negligible amount of permanent traffic that would be generated by program-related operations. Accordingly, the following discussions of existing conditions and program- related impacts represent a generalized, qualitative analysis of the proposed program’s relationship to roadways, transit, and other transportation features. Once installed, water supply facilities generate little or no traffic. Such traffic is largely limited to traffic for periodic and routine maintenance work on wells, pumps, or storage tanks. Therefore, the following impact analysis focuses on the typical traffic impacts that are associated with construction in or adjacent to roads. This would consist of the installation of new water pipelines and the replacement of existing pipelines. These construction activities would require ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-17 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 trenching either in or adjacent to existing roads. During construction, one or more lanes of traffic typically would be shut to allow room for work. In some cases, a local road may need to be closed for short periods for construction during the installation of an underground vault, or when pipeline is crossing perpendicular to the direction of the road). Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact TRA-1: Substantial Increase in Traffic Over Existing Levels or Exceedance of an Adopted LOS (Less than Significant) The proposed program would generate a very small amount of traffic during individual project construction, and a negligible amount of traffic during ongoing operation of the new facilities. Ongoing maintenance, monitoring, and repair of some facilities proposed in the individual projects may increase the number of vehicles on local roadways. This minor amount of new trips would not cause a noticeable increase in traffic on adjacent streets. Therefore, this operational impact would be less than significant. Construction of the proposed program-related elements would generate short- term increases in vehicle trips by construction workers and construction vehicles on area roadways. Construction-related vehicle trips typically would include construction workers traveling to and from the project sites, haul trucks associated with the disposal of excavated materials, and trucks delivering material and equipment to the sites. The number of construction workers and construction vehicles would vary by action, phase, planned activity, and material needs. Construction traffic could result in short-term increases in traffic volumes traveling on roadways and waiting at intersections in the immediate vicinity of the individual projects and along the selected haul routes. The addition of construction traffic to roadway volumes could result in minor increases in congestion and delay for vehicles. The presence of construction truck traffic would temporarily reduce roadway capacity because of the slower travel speeds and larger turning radii of trucks. Construction of program-related features, such as pipelines, within existing roads and rights-of-way would obstruct traffic temporarily. The reduction in roadway capacity through temporary lane closures could further increase congestion and delays for vehicles using the roadway. The specific impact of construction on roadways would depend on the number and type of construction-related vehicles, the number of travel lanes on the roadways, existing traffic volumes on these roadways, the terrain, and other factors. Minor, temporary traffic increases are common for all construction projects and generally are not considered a significant impact because of their limited duration and intermittent activity. Construction traffic may temporarily contribute trip volume to cumulative impacts, including roadways and intersections that currently operate below local LOS standards or that are anticipated to operate below those standards in the future. Construction activities that affect roadway ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-18 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 operations are typically regulated through permits and construction requirements to ensure acceptable levels of traffic flow during periods of traffic disruption. Construction best management practices (BMPs) pursuant to requirements of the local jurisdictions (listed under “Standard Construction Procedures,” in Chapter 2, including the preparation of a traffic control plan, strategic scheduling, and consultation with affected agencies) would minimize the effects of construction traffic on the roadways adjacent to the project sites and minimize the effects on traffic operations. With adherence to these standard measures, temporary impacts of construction-generated traffic would be less than significant. Impact TRA-2: Inadequate Emergency Access (Less than Significant) Program-related construction would temporarily increase hazards during certain construction activity by closing or narrowing lanes for trenching and other methods requiring work beneath or adjacent to roadways. Pipelines included as part of the proposed program may be constructed beneath existing and future streets throughout the service areas. Program-related construction could affect the availability of travel lanes when construction occurs within or adjacent to public roadways and a portion of the pavement is required for construction purposes. Construction within city or County streets could result in a temporary reduction in the number or available width of travel lanes and could subject vehicles (including transit) that utilize the affected roadways to increased hazards, congestion, and delays. Construction within two-lane roadways generally would require travel lane closures, with two-way traffic operations maintained using temporary signals or flag persons. If right-of-way is not available for this operation, roadways may need to be closed temporarily, and detour routes may need to be established. Lane closures on four-lane roadways typically would allow for the maintenance of two-way traffic flow without substantially affecting traffic and transit operating conditions. However, on high- volume roadways, additional measures would be required to maintain traffic and transit flow along the affected roadway. Full or partial-lane road closures would create traffic hazards affecting vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic in the area. Because construction activities temporarily suspend the normal function of roadways, the potential exists for an increase in traffic safety hazards during construction of the proposed program elements. This increase in safety hazards would be represented by the increased potential for conflicts between construction vehicles, conflicts between the movement of traffic and construction activities, and confusion of drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians due to temporary alterations in otherwise familiar roadway conditions. Construction BMPs pursuant to standard city or County requirements (listed under “Standard Construction Procedures,” in Chapter 2) would minimize the effects of construction traffic on the roadways adjacent to the project sites. Such measures include preparing a traffic control plan, implementing a public notification program, and holding preconstruction meetings to notify all affected agencies and parties. Traffic control plans would identify the phasing and ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Traffic/Transportation 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.14-19 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 staging of temporary roadway closures and any temporary rerouting necessary to complete work beneath roadways. Adherence to these requirements would prevent individual projects implemented pursuant to the proposed program from resulting in significant hazards related to roadway closures. The impact of the proposed program would be less than significant. Impact TRA-3: Inadequate Parking Capacity (Less than Significant) The proposed program would not generate permanent parking demand. However, the corporation yard, wells, and storage tanks would include parking spaces for maintenance and monitoring staff. These additional spaces would not influence the parking demand or availability for the general public as the new spaces would only be available to and utilized by City staff. Construction activity would require temporary parking for construction workers; this would be provided in selected staging areas and in numbers sufficient to serve the temporary needs on the site. With adherence to the requirements of the local jurisdictions, the proposed program would result in less than significant parking impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 3.15 Utilities The environmental setting and impact analysis for utilities and service systems were developed through a review of:  the City of Modesto/Modesto Irrigation District Joint Urban Water Management Plan 2005 Update,  the Stanislaus County General Plan,  the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan and the general plan MEIR,  the Del Rio Community Plan,  the Turlock General Plan, and  the Waterford general plan and general plan EIR. Environmental Setting Sewer Modesto’s wastewater collection system conveys wastewater from residential, commercial, and industrial customers in its service area to treatment plants. Modesto’s existing collection system includes nearly 600 miles of sanitary sewer lines, ranging from 6 to 60 inches in diameter, and about 39 lift stations. Wastewater flowing into the collection system flows by gravity, or is pumped, to treatment plants that remove solid material and biological growths. After being treated, wastewater is either reused on City property or further disinfected and discharged into the San Joaquin River (Turnstone Consulting 2006). The City of Ceres operates a wastewater treatment plant that provides primary treatment to over 3 million gallons of wastewater per day. This wastewater is then conveyed to the City of Turlock for secondary and tertiary treatment. The City maintains 126 miles of pipelines and 13 lift stations (City of Ceres 2008). The City of Turlock provides wastewater treatment and disposal to users in the Turlock, as well as the Keyes and Denair Community Service Districts and the City of Ceres. Treated effluent is discharged into the San Joaquin River. The wastewater treatment facility is currently designed to treat a hydraulic flow of 20.0 million gallons per day (MGD). In 2000, the average daily flow was 11.9 MGD (City of Turlock Planning Division 2002). The City of Waterford’s wastewater treatment system currently operates and maintains a wastewater collection, treatment and disposal system with a capacity of one MGD. The current average flow is approximately 0.585 MGD generated by the current population, or 75 gallons per person per day. Build-out of the ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 current city limits will result in an estimated flow of 0.780 MGD at a population of approximately 10,400 (Waterford 2006). Each of the incorporated cities in Stanislaus County is served by their own sewer systems and treatment plants and several also provide services for adjacent unincorporated communities as well (Stanislaus County 1987). Sewer plants are located in each of the incorporated cities and in the unincorporated community of Grayson. Nearly all of these facilities are located within the city limits of the city which they serve (six of nine), and all but one of these facilities are surrounded on at least three sides by County land (Stanislaus County 1994). Stormwater Storm drainage infrastructure in the Modesto urban area consists of numerous rockwells and “positive” stormwater drainage facilities. A positive stormwater drainage system refers to the collection and conveyance of stormwater in centralized storage and discharge locations through the use of catch basins, pipelines, recharge/detention basins, and pumping facilities. Approximately two- thirds of the baseline developed area (including the Redevelopment Area) is served by rockwells that are designed to collect surface stormwater runoff and allow it to infiltrate to the groundwater. Approximately one-third of the area is served by positive stormwater drainage systems that convey runoff to localized detention basins, constructed drainage ways, or stream channels. Rockwells are rock-lined holes that are typically 6 feet in diameter and up to 50 feet deep. There are approximately 7,200 public and 2,000 private rockwells in Modesto. The rockwells are generally unable to accommodate the amount of drainage generated in the existing developed areas. In addition, the cost of maintenance for rockwells is high, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for rockwells are becoming more stringent. Consequently, the City is generally requiring positive stormwater systems to be installed in the existing urban areas. Rockwells are not being constructed in new developing areas, and these areas must be served by positive stormwater drainage systems. The City provides upgrades to storm drainage capacity on an as-needed basis. The City of Ceres’ Street Maintenance Division maintains 110 miles of paved streets and the storm drain system. The storm drain system includes 40 lift stations, 40 retention/detention ponds, over eight 850 drain inlets, 25 French drains, and 80 rock wells (City of Ceres 2008). The City of Turlock’s Utility Maintenance Division maintains more than 70 miles of storm drainage pipelines and 42 storm lift stations. The primary drainage pattern for the City of Waterford is south towards the Tuolumne River basin. Most runoff flows to the Tuolumne River through eight ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 storm drains. However, two drain lines that collect stormwater in the northern portion of the city drain into the MID canal along the northern boundary of the city. Waterford has been subject to localized flooding and a number of improvements have been installed to drain the area. These improvements include storm and detention ponds with lift/pump stations (Waterford 2006). Unincorporated areas of Stanislaus County are managed under the County’s Storm Water Management Program, which include the communities of Hickman, Del Rio, and Grayson. County stormwater facilities include a variety of stormwater systems including pipelines, detention basins, and rockwells. The most common form of stormwater disposal in the rural majority of the County is field percolation and ditch runoff to streams (Dry Creek, Tuolumne River, Stanislaus River, or the San Joaquin River). County crews are generally responsible for the maintenance of the storm drain infrastructure in these areas. (Stanislaus County 2004) Water Supply The City of Modesto is the primary domestic water purveyor in Stanislaus County, serving not only the City of Modesto, but also the cities and unincorporated communities of Waterford, Hickman, Del Rio, Salida, Grayson, Empire, and parts of Ceres and Turlock. The City of Modesto currently distributes treated surface water supplied by MID, and groundwater pumped from City-operated wells, to serve the water demands of its customers. The City’s current water supply is made up of approximately 60% groundwater and 40% surface water. Water supply needs include residential, agricultural, industrial uses, as well as emergency (fire) and drought supplies. Treated surface water is supplied to municipal customers within the City limits north of the Tuolumne River, including the communities of Empire and Salida, by MID’s Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant The treated surface water place of use is defined by the overlap of the MID water service boundary with the City of Modesto Municipal Water System service area north of the Tuolumne River. Areas served by the City of Modesto that lie outside the MID water service boundary south of the Tuolumne River), including the communities of Hickman, Grayson, parts of Ceres and Turlock, and the portion of the Modesto system south of the Tuolumne River, are served exclusively with groundwater. While the areas south of the Tuolumne River are within in the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) service area, TID currently serves only agricultural customers with surface water, and does not supply water for municipal uses. However, the proposed Regional Surface Water Supply Project anticipated to be online in 2014, would provide surface water to the south Modesto area. This would enhance Modesto’s ability to manage its surface and groundwater supplies. This is proposed in the program description as part of the contiguous service area, Option A, and is discussed further in the impact section below. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 3.15-1, below, summarizes existing supplies, as calculated in the proposed Engineer’s Report. Table 3.15-1. Existing Water Supplies (acre feet per year) Supply Existing (2006) 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Groundwater 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 53,500 Surface Watera 33,602 67,204 67,204 67,204 67,204 67,204 Total 87,102 120,704 120,704 120,704 120,704 120,704 Source: West Yost Associates 2009. a Based on the City’s agreement with MID in which 33,603 af/yr is supplied during Phase 1 of the Expansion and 67,204 af/yr is supplied after Phase 2 of the Expansion. Sources of Surface Water MID and TID obtain surface water supply from the Tuolumne River, stored in the Don Pedro Reservoir, which they jointly own. This water is obtained under TID and MID’s pre-1914 water rights. From Don Pedro, MID releases water through its power generation facilities directly into the river and diverts flows at La Grange Dam into its Upper Main Canal, which delivers water to Modesto Reservoir. From Modesto Reservoir, MID may release water to its Lower Main Canal for irrigation purposes, or to the Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant for municipal and industrial purposes. Following treatment at the water is conveyed to the City’s distribution system. On October 2005, MID and the City approved the Amended and Restated Water Treatment and Delivery Agreement between MID and the City of Modesto. This agreement supersedes the original Treatment and Delivery Agreement and set forth the Phase Two expansion of the With the expansion of the MID is allowed to deliver to the City’s contiguous service area up to 67,204 AFY of treated water for urban use. In September 2005, the State Water Resources Control Board approved an order for a long-term transfer through 2054 for 67,204 AFY of water from MID to the City of Modesto. Phase 2 of the will be online in 2009, providing an additional 30 MGD to the City of Modesto’s service area. Potential impacts due to the additional treatment and distribution of Tuolumne River water via the expansion were analyzed in that project’s EIR (Jones and Stokes 2005). TID is proposing to use its pre-1914 water rights and to treat and deliver a maximum of 42.5 MGD, or 47,606 AFY, of Tuolumne River water for domestic uses to be served to the communities of Ceres, Hughson, Keyes, South Modesto, and Turlock. Potential impacts due to diversions of 66 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water from the Tuolumne River to the Regional Surface Water Supply Project were analyzed in that project’s EIR (EIP 2006). ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Groundwater The City of Modesto supplies approximately 60 percent, on average, of its water demand during summer and fall months from city-owned and operated groundwater wells. The wells are located in the Modesto and Turlock sub-basins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. In general, the City of Modesto and its contiguous service areas located north of the Tuolumne River (Salida and Empire) rely on the conjunctive use of treated surface water and groundwater year-round. Surface water supplies are augmented with groundwater to meet increased demands in summer months. Demands originating south of the Tuolumne River are met with groundwater supplies year-round. Prior to the construction of the by MID, the City of Modesto and the surrounding communities relied solely on groundwater for domestic supply. The 1990 EIR noted that groundwater levels were declining, particularly near the center of the City, and that water quality degradation was also occurring as a result of increasing groundwater use. The effect of long-term groundwater pumping by the City (and the former Del Este Water Company) prior to operation of the formed a cone of depression, primarily under downtown Modesto, and resulted in an overdraft condition in the Modesto sub- basin. Declining water quality, combined with increasingly strict drinking water standards from the state and federal regulatory agencies, forced the City to take several wells out of service. According to the City’s Joint Urban Water Management Plan, annual groundwater production for the City of Modesto and outlying areas has averaged approximately 46,275 AFY from 2000 to 2005 (City of Modesto 2007). The Department of Water Resources (DWR) has reported that groundwater levels in the Modesto sub-basin declined nearly 15 feet between 1970 and 1995. However, since augmenting the City’s water supply with treated surface water from the beginning in 1995, the City has observed that groundwater levels have started to rise in the Modesto and Turlock sub-basins as a result of reduced groundwater pumping. The rising water levels suggest that the groundwater sub-basin has started to recover and that the current level of pumping in each sub-basin is less than the previously assumed “safe yields” of the two sub-basins. A sustainable yield is defined as the average annual amount of groundwater that can be extracted from a groundwater basin while maintaining a non-overdraft condition. The sustainable yields of the Modesto and Turlock sub-basins are currently unknown, and the City of Modesto is participating in a study with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to model the Modesto and Turlock sub-basins and quantify sustainable yields for both sub-basins. In the interim, the City has prepared an estimate of its “operational yield” for use in managing groundwater. Although the City has recently increased its groundwater pumping to meet current growth demands, current groundwater production is still less than historic highs, and overdraft conditions have not occurred in either sub-basin. Using historic groundwater level and pumping data from the past 25 years, the City of ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Modesto estimated an operational yield of 53,500 AFY for the Modesto water service area for use until a more accurate estimate of sustainable yield is available from the ongoing hydrogeologic studies and modeling being conducted by the USGS. This operational yield, or ultimate amount of groundwater extraction, represents the amount of groundwater that can be extracted from the two groundwater sub-basins without lowering groundwater levels below 40 feet ASL and potentially affecting long-term sustainability of the basin (RMC 2007). Water Demand The Modesto contiguous water service area includes the land within the city limits, Empire, Salida, and portions of Ceres. Water consumption fluctuates seasonally, with demand being lowest in the winter and highest in the summer. Projections of water demand for the areas within Modesto’s service area are shown below in Table 3.15-2. Further information on water demand for the program area can be found in the Modesto-MID Joint Urban Water Management Plan (RMC 2006) and in the Engineer’s Report prepared by West Yost Associates (2010). Table 3.15-2. 2006 Water Demands and Projections (average day demands) Area Existing Demand (MGD) Buildout Demand (MGD) Del Rio 0.62 1.42 Grayson 0.16 0.24 Hickman 0.17 0.35 Turlock 0.32 0.27 Modesto (contiguous service area) 67.13 83.47 Waterford 1.88 2.29 Source: West Yost Associates 2009 Solid Waste Modesto was one of the first cities in California to adopt a solid waste recycling program, which started in the early 1970s. About 54% of the city’s solid waste is diverted by source reduction, recycling, and composting activities. The Stanislaus Resource Recovery Facility is the primary facility for disposal of the solid waste generated in Modesto, and the Fink Road and Forward Inc. Class III landfills are secondary disposal facilities. Covanta Stanislaus, a private-sector company, operates the Stanislaus Resource Recovery Facility (SRRF) in partnership with the City and County. The Sanitary Landfill division of the Stanislaus County Public Works Department operates the Fink Road landfill. The Stanislaus Resource Recovery Facility and the Fink Road landfill adjoin and are located at 4000 Fink Road in western Stanislaus County, about 3.5 miles west of the Town of Crows Landing, and about 25 miles southwest of downtown Modesto. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Material that can be incinerated is sent to the SRRF, a waste-to-energy facility jointly owned by the City of Modesto and Stanislaus County. The designated operating capacity of the SRRF is 800 tons per day, and it will be able to operate through 2036 (Rodriguez pers. comm.). Pursuant to its permit from the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB), the Fink Road Landfill has a design capacity of approximately 12 million cubic yards (cy) for Class III waste and approximately 3.1 million cy for Class II waste. As of April 2007, the landfill has approximately 2,730,008 cy of remaining Class II waste capacity, and 7,740,587 remaining Class III waste capacity. Applying a 2 cy per ton conversion rate, the landfill has a capacity of approximately 3.8 million tons of Class III waste. At current disposal rates, the landfill has an estimated closure date of 2023. However, Stanislaus County is currently planning a 129-acre expansion of the landfill and a reconfiguration of the existing facility to occur prior to the estimated closure date. These improvements would extend the landfill’s useful life by approximately 40 years (Grider pers. comm.). Four private firms currently collect and transport solid wastes in the study area. Gilton Solid Waste Management, Bertolloti Disposal, Modesto Disposal, and Turlock Scavenger provide hauling and interim transfer stations for the program area’s waste disposal, transformation, and diversion streams (Stanislaus County 2008). Gilton Solid Waste Management has the largest service areas. The Gilton transfer station has a capacity of 1,200 tons per day. The transfer station processes both commercial and residential green waste and biosolids. Regulatory Framework Local Regulations Stanislaus County General Plan Goals and Policies Stanislaus County Ordinances 16.50.180 Standards for Utilities a. All new and replacement water supply and sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate: 1. Infiltration of flood waters into the systems; and 2. Discharge from systems into flood waters. Community of Del Rio Policies In addition to those listed for the County, the Del Rio Community Plan provides the following policy related to geology and soils: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Goal 3 - Further development in the Del Rio area should be planned to ensure that adverse impacts on services and utilities, schools, transportation and circulation, agriculture, water, and air quality are appropriately mitigated. Goal 5 - Future development shall be served by adequate public infrastructure. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Goals and Policies General Plan Chapter V of the City’s general plan (“Community Services and Facilities”) establishes policies intended to guide the development of utilities and service systems in the City SOI. Water Policies Policy V-C.3[h]. The City of Modesto shall prepare and maintain a Water Master Plan. The Water Master Plan shall be updated, as needed, to incorporate changes in growth projections, water supplies, and demands. Policy V-C.3[i]. The City of Modesto should continue to pursue additional potential water supply alternatives available to the City to accommodate growth and meet future demand in both normal and dry years. Policy V-C.3[j]. The City of Modesto will encourage the optimum beneficial use of water resources within the City. The City shall strive to maintain an adequate supply of high-quality water for urban uses. At a minimum, potable water supplies (including well water) delivered to water customers shall conform to the primary maximum contaminant levels as defined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 64431-64444. Policy V-C.3[k]. The City of Modesto will strive to stabilize groundwater levels and eliminate groundwater overdraft, as part of a conjunctive groundwater– surface water management program. The City shall view regional water resources, such as groundwater, surface water, and recycled wastewater, as an integrated hydrologic system when developing water management programs. Policy V-C.3[l]. The City of Modesto will be the sole provider of municipal and industrial water services to the area within the City’s Sphere of Influence, with the exception of private wells. The City will cooperate with the overlying agricultural water providers, MID and TID, and with adjacent municipal and industrial providers for the mutually beneficial management of the limited water resources. The City will also take into consideration its public trust duty with regard to environmental uses of water resources. Policy V-C.3[m]. The City will provide water service within the original Del Este service area. Policy V-C.3[n]. Water facilities will be constructed, operated, maintained, and replaced in a manner that will provide the best possible service to the public. The City shall ensure that infrastructure is installed before or concurrently with ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 development. The City will take a comprehensive approach to financing, using a blend of special taxes, benefit assessments, and other methods to ensure that infrastructure installation occurs in a timely manner. Policy V-C.3[p]. The City of Modesto shall participate in the development of a TID Surface Water Supply Project (SWSP). Policy V-C.3[q]. The City of Modesto shall implement Local Basin Management Objectives (BMOs) discussed in the Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan that relate to the specific approaches to water management goals including groundwater supply, groundwater quality, and protection against inelastic land surface subsidence. Policy V-C.3[r]. The City of Modesto shall support the Regional BMOs discussed in the Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan. Storm Water Drainage Policies Policy V-E.3[c]. The City of Modesto shall prevent water pollution from urban storm runoff as established by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board for surface discharges and Environmental Protection Agency for underground injection. Policy V-E.3[d]. Stormwater drainage facilities shall be constructed, operated, maintained, and replaced in a manner that will provide the best possible service to the public, as required by federal and state laws and regulations. In developing implementation plans, consideration shall be given to rehabilitation of existing facilities, remediation of developed areas with inadequate levels of drainage service, and the timely expansion of the system for future development. Policy V-E.3[f]. New development shall comply with City requirements for conveyance, retention, and detention. New development shall include onsite storage of stormwater as necessary. Rockwells shall not be allowed for new development except at infill areas smaller than three acres where no other feasible alternative is available. Policy V-E.3[h]. Construction activities shall comply with the requirements of the City’s Stormwater Management Plan under its municipal NPDES stormwater permit, and the State Water Resources Control Board’s General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. Policy V-E.4[a]. All of the Stormwater Drainage Policies for the Baseline Developed Area apply within the Planned Urbanizing Area. Policy V-E.4[b]. The City of Modesto shall require each new development area to be served with positive storm drainage systems. A positive storm drainage system may be comprised of catch basins, pipelines, channels, recharge/detention basins, and pumping facilities that discharge stormwater to surface waters. New detention basins must typically include new technologies in their design that allow for full, healthy, and sustainable landscaping. The City of Modesto Design Standards for Dual Use Flood Control / Recreation Facilities manual is the guiding document for the development of these facilities. The ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 positive storm drainage facilities shall consider the requirements presented in Table 9-1 of the Final Master Environmental Impact Report and the SDMP. Solid Waste Disposal Policies Policy V-L.2. The City of Modesto will comply with all the requirements of Assembly Bill 939 which mandates the diversion of solid wastes [by] 25% by 1995 and 50% by 2000, by way of source reduction, recycling, composting, and transformation. Other Cities’ General Plan Goals and Policies City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document Chapter 4, “Public Facilities and Services,” of the City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document contains the following policies that are applicable to the proposed program: 4.C.1 The City shall only approve new development that relies on a public water system and where an adequate water supply and conveyance system exists or will be provided. 4.E.1 All drainage designs shall be in accordance with the accepted principles of civil engineering, the Stanislaus County Storm Drainage Design Manual, and City improvement standards. 4.E.4 The City shall encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and impervious coverage. Turlock General Plan Section 4 of the Turlock General Plan (“Public Facilities and Services”) establishes policies intended to guide the development of public services in the City SOI. Policies pertinent to the proposed program include the following. 4.3-a Promote the orderly and efficient expansion of public utilities and the storm drainage system to adequately meet projected needs. 4.3-b Coordinate capital improvements planning for all municipal service infrastructure with the direction, extent, and timing of growth. 4.3-n Continue the City program of water system improvements to complement existing sewer system service capacities in the urban service area. Establish improvement priorities based on General Plan policies regarding the direction, extent, and timing of urbanization. Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan The Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan provides the following service standard, which is applicable to the proposed program: ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Provide an adequate, reliable, and safe water supply, storage and distribution system to meet the City’s potable water and fire flow needs as set forth in the City’s approved Water System Master Plan and Urban Water Management Plan. In addition, Chapter 6, “Public Services and Facilities,” of the general plan contains the following policies relevant to the proposed program: PF-1.1 Establish and Maintain Adequate & Uniform Municipal Infrastructure and Service Standards. PF-1 .2 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Operation and Maintenance of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Community Needs. PF-1.3 Establish and Maintain a Program for Cost Effective Expansion of Municipal Services and Facilities to Meet Future Community Growth Needs. PF-1 .4 Establish and Maintain Facility Maintenance Programs that Assure Maximum Utilization of Capital Equipment and Facilities. Impact Analysis Criteria for Determining Significance According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed program would be considered to have a significant impact if it would:  require or result in the construction of new water, stormwater, or wastewater treatment facilities or in the expansion of existing facilities,  have insufficient water supplies available to serve the program from existing entitlements and resources,  be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the program’s solid waste disposal needs, or  fail to comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to wastewater treatment or solid waste. Methods and Assumptions Impacts of the proposed program were evaluated based on the technical information presented in the Engineer’s Report, and the potential for construction or operation of proposed facilities to affect utilities in the study area. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Environmental Impacts—Proposed Program Impact UTL-1: Requirement of New or Expanded Water, Stormwater, or Wastewater Facilities (Less than Significant) The proposed program identifies major infrastructure improvements needed to effectively accommodate water demands and meet water supply requirements under existing, interim, and buildout conditions. The purpose of this PEIR is to identify the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Engineer’s Report. As detailed throughout this PEIR, the actions proposed would have various levels of impacts from less-than-significant to significant and unavoidable. Potential effects on stormwater or wastewater facilities due to population growth are evaluated in the Storm Drainage Master Plan and the Wastewater Master Plan, separate documents prepared by the City. The water supply facilities proposed in this program would not directly result in a substantial increase in the demand for stormwater drainage or wastewater treatment facilities. As previously discussed in section 3.8, “Hydrology and Water Quality,” runoff associated with new impervious surfaces of program facilities is expected to be minimal. As such, the proposed program would have a less than significant impact on stormwater drainage. Impact UTL-2: Insufficient Water Supplies to Serve the Program (Less than Significant) The proposed program was developed to evaluate existing deficiencies and to identify new facilities needed to accommodate planned buildout in the City of Modesto’s service area. The City of Modesto-MID Joint Urban Water Management Plan (RMC 2006) identified the water demand for all the communities in its service area and evaluated the available water supply, both surface and ground water, and options to meet this demand. The Engineer’s Report Update further proposes specific facility upgrades and new facilities to meet and maintain water demands in the service area. As described in the Engineer’s Report Update, a model was developed to analyze the contiguous and outlying service areas and to determine the existing and future water system needs. To determine the water supply needs in the outlying communities, where groundwater is the primary or only source of water, the maximum operating yield of the Modesto and Turlock groundwater sub-basins was incorporated into the model. As described above, an operating yield was calculated to better manage the groundwater basin in consideration of estimates of annual recharge and pumping activities, and to prevent lowering of the groundwater table. Therefore, by design of the proposed program, operation of existing and proposed wells in the program area would not lower the level of water or the capacity of the groundwater basins. Under the proposed Option A for the contiguous service area, treated water from a Regional Surface Water Supply Project (using TID supplied water) would be ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Environmental Analysis Utilities 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 3.15-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 used; under the proposed Option B, new groundwater wells and upgrades to existing wells would be constructed to meet buildout demands. Transfer of water from TID to the City of Modesto would occur under existing pre-1914 water rights, the use of which was evaluated in TID’s EIR (EIP 2006). The TID project, including water for the contiguous service area Option A, would not require new or expanded water entitlements, and sufficient water supplies are available from the Tuolumne River. The new groundwater wells proposed in Option B would not exceed existing available capacity in the Modesto or Turlock groundwater sub-basins. The proposed program would diversify water supply sources and improve supply reliability, especially during emergency or drought conditions. Sufficient surface water supply entitlements and groundwater supplies exist to serve the proposed program. The proposed program would have a less-than-significant impact on water supply. Impact UTL-3: Insufficient Landfill Capacity to Serve the Program (Less than Significant) Construction of program facilities would produce solid waste in the form of demolished asphalt, concrete, and excavated soils (construction waste). Construction waste would be transported to one of the recycling facilities currently used by the City of Modesto and outlying areas, and soils may be reused pending testing results (see section 3.7, “Hazards and Hazardous Materials”), thus minimizing the amount of waste sent to landfills. When construction waste recycling is not possible, waste would be transported to the Stanislaus County Fink Road landfill, located at 4000 Fink Road in Crows Landing. The landfill has a total permitted capacity of 14.5 million tons, about one-third of which is full. The facility has an estimated closure date of 2022. The landfill is currently considering alternatives for facility expansion, which would extend the closure date to approximately 2030 (California Integrated Waste Management Board 2007; Frank pers. comm.). Furthermore, the treatment and handling of all wastes produced during the construction period would adhere to all applicable federal, state, and local statutes. The generation of construction waste is considered a short-term impact that would not require existing disposal facilities or conveyance transfer and haul systems to be expanded. The proposed program would not result in the creation of additional solid waste once proposed facilities are operational. Therefore, the impact on solid waste generation as a result of the proposed program would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be necessary. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 4 Other CEQA Considerations Introduction Chapter 4 of this draft PEIR contains discussions of several considerations required by CEQA, as follows:  irreversible impacts,  growth-inducing impacts, and  cumulative impacts. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c) requires that an EIR must identify any irreversible impacts, also referred to as irreversible environmental changes, that may be caused by the proposed project. These include current or future commitments to using non-renewable resources, secondary impacts, or growth- inducing impacts that commit future generations to similar uses. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that the EIR discuss how the proposed project, if implemented, could induce growth. Growth inducement may be an indirect or secondary project impact, and a project may be growth-inducing if it indirectly fosters economic or population growth by removing obstacles to such growth. Under CEQA, growth is not assumed to be either beneficial or detrimental. Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. Cumulative impacts can result from individually-minor but collectively-significant projects taking place over a period of time. Under CEQA, an EIR must discuss the cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental contribution to the group effect is “cumulatively considerable.” An EIR does not need to discuss cumulative impacts that do not result in part from the project evaluated in the EIR. More background and analysis regarding each of these considerations is given in the ensuing sections. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Section 15126 of the CEQA Guidelines states that significant irreversible environmental changes associated with a proposed project may include the following:  uses of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project, which may be irreversible because a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely,  primary impacts, and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement that provides access to a previously inaccessible area) that commit future generations to similar uses, and  irreversible damage, which may result from environmental accidents associated with the project. The irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable resources would occur both as a primary and secondary result of the proposed program. Implementation would involve the construction of the various proposed facilities, which would require the use of fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources. As discussed below, the provision of treated water would accommodate planned growth. That planned growth would result in an increase in automobile and transit trips. These additional trips, plus construction activities from development for planned growth, would also require the use of fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources. Planned growth that is accommodated by provision of additional water supply would result in the conversion of non-urban agricultural areas to urban uses, such as residential and commercial use uses. Conversion of agricultural areas and open space to urban and suburban uses is generally considered irreversible. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts Section 15126.2(b) requires an EIR to describe any significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. All of the impacts associated with the proposed program would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of identified mitigation measures and environmental commitments, with the exception of the impacts discussed below. The following impacts have been identified as significant and unavoidable. Please refer to the impact sections in Chapter 3 for a full description of impacts.  Impact AES-4: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed New Corporation Yard.  Impact AG-1: Direct Conversion of Important Farmland.  Impact AIR-1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Impact AIR-2: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violation during construction of proposed improvements.  Impact AIR-4: Result in a cumulatively-considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the program region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).  Impact NOISE-1: Exposure of Residences to Noise from Grading and Construction Activities.  Impact POP-2: Potential to induce substantial population growth. Growth-Inducing Impact Analysis Section 15126.2(d) of the state’s CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to include a detailed statement of the proposed project’s anticipated growth-inducing impacts. The analysis of growth-inducing impacts must discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing in the project area. The analysis must also address project- related actions that, either individually or cumulatively, would remove existing obstacles to population growth. The project is considered growth-inducing because it removes water supply infrastructure as an obstacle to growth. Refer to Impact POP-2 in Chapter 3.11, Population and Housing, for a detailed discussion of the growth-related effects of the proposed program. Cumulative Impacts Analysis A cumulative impact refers to the combined effect of “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15355). As defined by the state of California, cumulative impacts reflect “the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time” (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15355[b]). The state’s CEQA Guidelines (Sec. 15130[a]) require that an EIR address the cumulative impacts of a proposed project when:  the cumulative impacts are expected to be significant, and  the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is expected to be cumulatively considerable or significant in the context of the overall (cumulative) level of effect. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 In order to meet the adequacy standard established by Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, an analysis of cumulative impacts must contain the following elements.  An analysis of related future projects or planned development that would affect resources in the project area similar to those affected by the proposed project.  A summary of the environmental effects expected to result from those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available.  A reasonable analysis of the combined (cumulative) impacts of the relevant projects. It must also evaluate the proposed project’s potential to contribute to the significant cumulative impacts identified, and must discuss feasible options for mitigating or avoiding any contributions assessed as cumulatively considerable. The discussion of cumulative impacts is not required to provide as much detail as the discussion of the effects attributable to the project alone. Rather, the level of detail should be guided by what is practical and reasonable. In addition, Section 15130(e) of the CEQA Guidelines directs that if a cumulative impact was adequately addressed in a prior EIR for a general plan, and the proposed project is consistent with that general plan, the project EIR need not further analyze that cumulative impact. Lead agencies may use a “list” approach to identify related projects, or may base the identification of cumulative impacts on a summary of projections in an adopted general plan or related planning document (CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15130[b]) (the “projection” approach). Methods Used in this Analysis As appropriate, this analysis considers short-term (construction-related) and long-term (operational) contributions separately. Analysis of the proposed program’s contribution to cumulative regional impacts focuses on the program’s direct impacts. The program also has the potential to make an indirect contribution to impacts on agricultural resources, air quality, water resources, noise levels, biological resources, and traffic by supporting planned growth in the County. This issue has already been discussed above under “Growth-Inducing Impact Analysis.” The cumulative impact analysis uses the projection approach. Table 4-1 provides an overview of the planning documents used in the analysis; Stanislaus County was the geographic area considered for the cumulative impact analysis. Additional information on each planning document can be obtained from the “Regulatory Framework” section of each individual impact discussion contained in Chapter 3. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Table 4-1. Planning Documents Considered for Cumulative Impact Analysis Document Summary City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan (2008) This general plan identifies goals and policies for growth and development within the Modesto area through the year 2025. The mission of the general plan is to provide a blueprint for preservation of “quality of life” while providing direction for the growth of business and industry. Key issues addressed in the plan include employment opportunities, comprehensive planning, environmental concerns, and efforts to define Modesto’s character, reduce automobile traffic impacts, maintain older neighborhoods and upgrade unsafe neighborhoods, integrate new neighborhoods, and preserve agricultural land. Over time, the City is anticipated to expand from its existing Baseline Developed Area and Redevelopment Area, which comprises approximately 25,100 acres, into a Planned Urbanizing Area consisting of an additional 17,600 acres. The general plan accommodates significant population growth, from a 2007 population of 208,150 to approximately 400,000 residents. While the general plan could accommodate this many residents, projected population at 2025 is anticipated to be more modest –approximately 265,000 residents. Stanislaus County General Plan (2008) Key issues addressed in this general plan include farmland conversion, expansion of city spheres of influence, economic development, jobs/housing balance, housing affordability, provision of adequate infrastructure and public services, environmental concerns, coordination between the County and other agencies to address population growth and development pressure, and public safety. The County (including its cities) currently is home to approximately 519,000 residents. Growth projections anticipate that the County will reach approximately 850,000 residents by the year 2030. Turlock General Plan (2002) Themes of the Turlock General Plan include establishing limits on urban growth to maintain the City as freestanding within productive agricultural land, maintaining economically and socially-diverse population by promoting a variety of housing types, providing commercial and industrial sites consistent with Turlock’s growth, fostering development that offers alternatives to auto use, creating an economic and social balance among different City sectors, and managing growth to implement general plan policies and enhance quality of life. The City currently has a population of approximately 69,000 residents. The general plan buildout population is approximately 85,000 residents, with an additional 4,700 acres of developed area and approximately 13,000 new dwelling units, compared to those that were present at the time the general plan was prepared. City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document (1997) The City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document provides a vision for development through 2015. Some of the key opportunities identified in the general plan include projected high rates of growth and a large supply of land available for expansion. The plan identifies a variety of constraints on development, including state and local financing problems, competition from Modesto and Stanislaus County, agricultural land conversion, air quality issues, geographic constraints (physical and political boundaries), patterns of existing development, public attitudes towards growth, and public facility financing. The general plan envisions a population of 73,200 residents at 2015, an increase from a population of approximately 30,000 at the time of general plan preparation. Annexations were anticipated to add another 8.400 residents. The city’s current population is 41,787. Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan (2007) The City of Waterford’s general plan, which provides a vision for community development through 2025, was founded on the Ahwahnee Principles, a set of “neo-traditional” planning concepts for urban development. Guiding principles include: conservation of natural resource areas; integration of housing, commercial development, and public facilities; reinforcing the city’s unique identity; expanding the city’s non-vehicular transportation network; promoting pedestrian access and public transit; reinforcing the downtown area as the heart of the city; conserving neighborhood character; and maximizing the use of city streets at public spaces. The city’s current population is 8,547 residents. The threshold population for planning purposes is identified as 30,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Cumulative Setting The following key impacts are considered cumulatively significant in the context of existing and future projects:  Agriculture—As described in this PEIR, Stanislaus County supports a large amount of productive agricultural land. Conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, especially as a result of urban development, is considered a key issue in the County.  Air Quality—The San Joaquin Valley has been designated by the SJVAPCD as in nonattainment status under both federal and state standards for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. The PM10 status is designated as serious at the federal level, and the one-hour ozone status is designated as severe at the state level. Several pollutants are undesignated at either the federal or state level: 24- hour PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations under federal standards, and hydrogen sulfide and visibility-reducing particles under state standards. As growth occurs in the County, increased emissions of these and other pollutants could result in continued nonattainment status or new nonattainment designations. In addition, anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are widely accepted in the scientific community as contributing to worldwide climate change “global warming”). According to Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers (IPCC 2007), there is no doubt that the climate system is warming. Global average air and ocean temperatures, as well as global average sea level, are rising. Of the last 12 years, 11 years have ranked as among the warmest on record since 1850. While some of the increase is explained by natural occurrences, the 2007 report asserts that the increase in temperature is very likely 90%) due to human activity, most notably the burning of fossil fuels. For California, similar effects are described in Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California (California Climate Change Center 2006). Based on projections discovered through using state-of-the-art climate modeling, the temperatures in California are expected to rise between 3 degrees Fahrenheit and 10.5°F (1.7 degrees Celsius and 5.8°C) by the end of the century. The exact temperature increase will depend on the future level of global GHG emissions reduction. The report states that these temperature increases will negatively impact public health, water supply, agriculture, plant and animal species, and the coastline. Climate change is a global problem and GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants (such as ozone precursors) and Toxic Air Contaminants, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Worldwide, California is the 12th to 16th largest emitter of CO2 (California Energy Commission 2006), and is responsible for approximately 2% of the world’s CO2 emissions (California Energy Commission 2006). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been established by the World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment Program to assess scientific, technical, and socio-economic information relevant to the understanding of climate change, its potential ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. The IPCC predicts that substantial increases in temperatures globally will adversely affect the natural environment. The 2006 Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature examined the IPCC data and concluded that climate change may affect California in the following ways, among others:  rising sea levels along the California coastline, particularly in San Francisco and the San Joaquin Delta due to ocean expansion,  extreme heat conditions, such as heat waves and very high temperatures, which could last longer and become more frequent,  an increase in heat-related human deaths, infectious diseases, and a higher risk of respiratory problems caused by deteriorating air quality,  reduced snow pack and stream flow in the Sierra Nevada, affecting winter recreation and water supplies,  potential increase in the severity of winter storms, affecting peak stream flows and flooding,  changes in growing season conditions that could affect California agriculture, causing variations in crop quality and yield, and/or  changes in distribution of plant and wildlife species due to changes in temperature, competition from colonizing species, changes in hydrologic cycles, changes in sea levels, and other climate-related effects. These changes in California’s climate and ecosystems are occurring at a time when California’s population is expected to increase from 34 million to 59 million by the year 2040 (California Energy Commission 2006). As such, the number of people potentially affected by climate change, as well as the amount of anthropogenic GHG emissions expected under a “business as usual” scenario, are expected to increase. Similar changes as those noted above for California would also occur in other parts of the world, with regional variations in resources affected and vulnerability to adverse effects. GHG emissions in California are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, utilities, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors (California Energy Commission 2006), as well as natural processes. Transportation is responsible for 41% of the state’s GHG emissions, followed by the industrial sector electricity generation agriculture and forestry and other sources (California Energy Commission 2006). Emissions of CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, among other sources. Methane, a highly potent GHG, results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills, among other sources. Sinks of CO2 include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. In 2002, Assembly Bill 1493 (AB 1493) launched an innovative and pro- active approach to dealing with GHG emissions and climate change at the state level. AB 1493 requires CARB to develop and implement regulations ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 to reduce automobile and light truck GHG emissions; these regulations will apply to automobiles and light trucks beginning with the 2009 model year. AB 1493 cited several potential risks that California faces from climate change, including reduction in the state’s water supply, increased air pollution creation by higher temperatures, harm to agriculture, and increase in wildfires, damage to the coastline, and economic losses caused by higher food, water, energy, and insurance prices. Further, the legislature stated that implementing technological solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would stimulate California economy and provide jobs. On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05. The goal of this Executive Order is to reduce California’s GHG emissions to: 2000 levels by 2010; 1990 levels by the 2020; and 80% below the 1990 levels by the year 2050. In 2006, this goal was further reinforced with the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions reduction goal for 2020 while further mandating that CARB create a plan (including market mechanisms), and implement rules to achieve “real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases.” Executive Order S-20-06 further directs state agencies to begin implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the state’s Climate Action Team. The SJVAQMD is considering, but has not yet established significance thresholds or guidance for evaluating and reducing impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions and their contribution to climate change. Climate change and GHG reduction is also a concern at the federal level; however, at this time, no legislation or regulations have been enacted specifically addressing GHG emissions reductions and climate change.  Biological Resources—While the various general plans contain policies addressing conservation and preservation of open space, ongoing development in the County is anticipated to result in the loss of riparian habitat, wetlands, and other sensitive natural communities, as well as direct take or loss of habitat for both common and special-status species.  Cultural Resources—Similar to biological resources, the various general plans contain policies regarding preservation of important cultural resources. Regardless, ongoing development could lead to the cumulative loss of significant historic, archeological, or paleontological resources.  Noise—As the County grows, the number of noise sources will multiply, and ambient noise levels are likely to increase in a variety of locations, particularly in urban areas.  Traffic—Automobile traffic congestion is already a severe problem in the County, particularly within the cities. Provision of adequate automotive transportation networks and reducing automobile traffic by providing alternative means of transportation are identified as key issues to be addressed in various general plans. Traffic conditions may worsen as development in the County continues. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Utilities and Service Systems—Similar to transportation infrastructure, provision of adequate water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste infrastructure will be key issues as the County continues to grow.  Water Resources—Development in the County will need to be supported by adequate water supply, considering both surface and groundwater resources. While progress has been made in reversing overdraft conditions in the County’s aquifers, it is possible that future pumping will increase, depleting groundwater resources. Surface water resources are generally believed to be adequate for County growth, considering the water rights held by MID and TID, and conversion from agricultural to urban uses over time. However, changed hydrologic conditions resulting from global climate change could alter surface water availability. In addition, various surface waters in the County and receiving waters are listed for water quality impairments under the CWA Section 303(d). Listed waterbodies include the Grayson Drain, the Tuolumne River, the Stanislaus River, the San Joaquin River, and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Impairments include pesticides, heavy metals, sediment toxicity, and unknown toxicity. The proposed program has been evaluated to determine whether it would make a considerable contribution to any of these cumulative impacts. Because no cumulative impacts have been identified related to aesthetics, geology, soils, minerals, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, public services, or recreation, these topical areas are not considered further. Cumulative Impacts Impact CUM-1: Conversion of Agriculture to Nonagricultural Uses (Significant and Unavoidable) The program would result in construction of facilities on areas of Farmland, and would convert these areas to non-agricultural uses. Given the existing and projected loss of Farmland in the County, any program contribution to this significant cumulative impact would be considerable. While implementation of Mitigation Measure AG-1 would compensate for these losses, it would not mitigate the direct loss of Farmland. No other feasible mitigation has been identified. As such, this cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Impact CUM-2: Construction-Related Emissions of PM10 and Ozone Precursors (Significant and Unavoidable) Construction of program-related facilities would result in ground disturbance and vehicle usage that would emit both particulates and ozone precursors. Given the non-attainment status for these pollutants, any program contribution to these significant cumulative impacts would be considerable. While implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 and AIR-2 would reduce PM10 emissions, it would ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 not address the emissions of ozone precursors, nor would it fully eliminate PM10 emissions. No other feasible mitigation has been identified to further reduce emissions of these pollutants. As such, this cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Impact CUM-3. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases (Significant and Unavoidable) Fabrication, construction, and operation of program facilities would involve combustion of fossils fuels which would emit greenhouse gases. While the program-related contribution to GHG emissions would be relatively small compared to global emissions, it would be measurable and would therefore be considered a considerable contribution. This impact is considered significant. Mitigation Measure CUM-1 would reduce impacts, but would not entirely eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. No additional feasible mitigation has been identified. For this reason, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure CUM-1. Greenhouse Gas Calculations and Emissions Reduction Measures The City or its contractors shall calculate the anticipated greenhouse gas emissions associated with each program component at the time that the component is ripe for project-level CEQA analysis. This shall include a calculation of both construction and operational emissions. The City or its contractors will then identify and implement greenhouse gas emission reduction measures to reduce or offset greenhouse gas emissions, with a goal of no net emissions. The measures chosen shall represent the best available technology that is economically achievable at the time of project implementation and, as applicable to the given project, will implement the best performance standards recommended by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Examples of measures during construction may include the use of electric or hybrid-engine construction equipment instead of equipment that uses gasoline or diesel- powered engines. Similarly, during operations, use of electric equipment in place of gasoline or diesel powered equipment will be preferred, along with other potential measures such as installation of solar panels to supply power, purchase of carbon offsets, etc. Impact CUM-4: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant for which the Program Region is in Nonattainment under an Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air Quality Standard (Including Releasing Emissions that Exceed Quantitative Thresholds for Ozone Precursors) (Significant and Unavoidable) The program site is located in the SJVAB, where air quality conditions are regulated by SJVAPCD. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, there remains any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a non-attainment area. The SJVAB is in non-attainment for ozone and PM10. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The SJVAPCD has not established significance criteria for construction emissions. However, because construction would result in emissions of ozone precursors (ROG and NOx), and PM10, and could result in the cumulative net increase in these pollutants, impacts of construction emissions could be significant. Since construction would not be long-term, construction related to the proposed program would not contribute to the cumulative SJVAB’s long- term air pollution problems. Operation of the equipment at proposed improvements is not anticipated to result in an increase in ozone precursor (NOx) emissions above the SJVAPCD thresholds of 10 tons per year, as the majority of the equipment is powered by electric engines. Operation of emergency generators would result in a net increase in emissions of ROG, NOx, and PM10. The SJVAPCD assumes air emissions to be cumulatively significant if, with mitigation, the program results in any increase in a pollutant for which the SJVAB is classified as a nonattainment area. Implementation of the proposed air quality Mitigation Measure will reduce emissions of PM-10 associated with construction. Emissions of PM-10, ROG, and NOx associated with operations will be reduced by the use of electric engines and emission control devices for back-up generators and mitigation measures. However, the operation of equipment will result in a cumulative net increase in emissions, and this impact is considered Significant and Unavoidable. Impact CUM-5: Effects on Biological Resources (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The program has potential to impact a variety of biological resources, including the following:  Special-status plants within grassland or vernal pool habitats,  Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle,  Burrowing Owl,  Swainson’s Hawk,  Bald Eagle, Tricolored Blackbird, and other Migratory Birds, including Raptors,  Vernal Pool Branchiopods,  California Tiger Salamander,  Western Pond Turtle,  Roosting Bats,  Riparian Brush Rabbit and Riparian Woodrat,  Special-Status Fish Species,  Shaded River Aquatic Cover and Riparian Habitat, and  Sensitive Natural Communities. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 The project-level impacts on each of these resources would be dependent upon the timing and location of activities. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-30 prescribe a variety of measures to reduce, avoid, or compensate for impacts, including timing of construction, biological surveys, relocation of species, compensation for lost habitat, etc. With implementation of these measures, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to biological resources. Impact CUM-6: Effects on Cultural Resources (Less than Significant with Mitigation) While unlikely, it is possible that construction of program-related facilities could result in demolition or modification of significant historic, archeological, or paleontological resources. The City’s general plan and Mitigation Measure CR-1 include policies that would be implemented as part of the proposed program to minimize or avoid impacts to historic or archeological resources. In addition, Mitigation Measure CR-2 prescribes measures that address the potential for discovery of unanticipated buried cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CR-3 prescribes measures to address potential effects on human remains and paleontological resources. With implementation of general plan policies and these mitigation measures, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to cultural resources. Impact CUM-7: Program-Related Noise Emissions (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Construction equipment used as part of the proposed program, such as backhoes, forklifts, and worker vehicles, would generate noise. However, construction noise in any given location would be short-term. In addition, Mitigation Measures NOISE-1 and NOISE-2 would require that the City employ noise- reducing construction practices and limit nighttime construction noise. As a result, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts from short-term noise generation. Once construction is complete, the program would generate operational noise from the use of pumps and pumping stations, other mechanical equipment, and the occasional use of backup generators. While this could increase long-term ambient noise levels, the City will implement Mitigation Measure NOISE-3, which would employ noise-reducing practices for new equipment and facilities, such as construction of noise-reducing enclosures. With implementation of this measure, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts from long-term noise generation. Impact CUM-8: Disruption to Automobile Traffic Patterns (Less than Significant) Construction related to the proposed program would generate traffic in the form of construction vehicles, deliveries of construction materials, and worker trips. In addition, construction itself may result in temporary lane or road closures. However, as part of the program, standard practices would be employed to ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Other CEQA Considerations 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 4-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 minimize effects on traffic, including scheduling of work, implementation of a public information program, coordination with appropriate agencies, and implementation of a traffic control plan. In addition, traffic effects in any given location would be short-term. Therefore, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to traffic. Impact CUM-9: Effects on Utilities and Service Systems (Beneficial) During construction, measures would be implemented to avoid any interruptions to utilities and service systems. Over the long-term, the program would not generate the need for additional stormwater or wastewater infrastructure or increased solid waste disposal needs. Additionally, the program would provide necessary water supply infrastructure to support planned development. As such, the program is anticipated to be beneficial from the standpoint of cumulative impacts related to utilities and service systems. Impact CUM-10: Effects on Water Supply (No Impact) The treated surface water that would be delivered by the proposed program would be supported by existing water rights. Groundwater pumping would be within the sustainable yield of the aquifer. As such, the program would not make any contribution to cumulative impacts related to water supply. Impact CUM-11: Effects on Water Quality (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The program could result in discharges of construction-related sediment or other contaminants, which could reach impaired water bodies. Mitigation Measures HYD-1 and HYD-2 would require compliance with NPDES permits, and implementation of spill prevention and control. These measures will ensure that any residual releases of contaminants will not contribute to listed impairments. With implementation of these measures, the program is not anticipated to make a considerable contribution to cumulative impacts related to water quality. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 5 Alternatives Introduction The purpose of the alternatives analysis in an EIR is to describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly attain most of the objectives of the project. Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the alternatives reduce or eliminate significant adverse environmental effects of the proposed project; such alternatives may be more costly or may otherwise impede to some degree the attainment of the project’s objectives. The range of alternatives considered must include those that offer substantial environmental advantages over the proposed project and may be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner considering economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. The analysis evaluates the comparative merits of the alternatives (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[a]). Program Objectives The objectives of the proposed program are to:  update current and projected build-out water demands,  update the water system’s hydraulic model,  identify and justify the various capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers,  develop cost estimates and prioritize the proposed improvements, and  determine the cost allocations of the needed improvements between existing ratepayers and future users. Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Program The following impacts have been identified as significant, but would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of mitigation. Please refer to the impact sections in Chapter 3 for a full description of impacts and mitigation. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Impact AES-3: Temporary Degradation of Visual Character or Quality during Construction Activities  Impact AES-4: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed Facilities  Impact AES-6: New Sources of Light or Glare  Impact BIO-1: Project-Related Impacts on Plants  Impact BIO-2: Impacts on the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle  Impact BIO-3: Construction-Related Loss of Occupied Burrowing Owl Habitat  Impact BIO-4: Construction-Related Loss of Swainson’s Hawk Foraging Habitat  Impact BIO-5: Construction-Related Impacts on Nesting Swainson’s Hawks  Impact BIO-6: Construction Disturbance of Bald Eagle, Tricolored Blackbird, and other Migratory Birds, Including Raptors  Impact BIO-7: Construction Impacts on Vernal Pool Branchiopods  Impact BIO-8: Construction Impacts on California Tiger Salamander  Impact BIO-9: Construction-Related Impacts on Western Pond Turtles  Impact BIO-12: Construction-Related Impacts on Riparian Brush Rabbit and Riparian Woodrat  Impact BIO-13: Construction-Related Impacts on Fish  Impact BIO-14: Loss of Shaded River Aquatic cover and Riparian Habitat  Impact BIO-15: Impacts on Sensitive Natural Communities  Impact BIO-16: Effects on Waters of the United States and Waters of the State  Impact BIO-17: Effects on Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nurseries  Impact BIO-18: Consistency with Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources  Impact CR-2: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Archaeological Resources  Impact CR-3: Impacts on Previously Undiscovered Human Remains  Impact CR-4: Impacts on Paleontological Resources  Impact GEO-1: Damage Due to Surface Rupture, Ground-Shaking, Liquefaction, Expansive Soils, or Landsliding  Impact GEO-2: Soil Erosion or Loss of Topsoil Due to Program Construction or Operation  Impact HAZ-4: Release of Hazardous Materials from an Existing Contaminated Site ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08  Impact HYD-1: Water Quality Impacts from Project Construction  Impact HYD-5: Flood Hazards  Impact NOISE-2: Exposure of Residences to Noise from Operation of Engines at proposed improvements such as wells and pump stations Significant Unavoidable Impacts of the Proposed Program The following impacts have been identified as significant and unavoidable. Please refer to the impact sections in Chapter 3 for a full description of impacts.  Impact AES-5: Permanent Degradation of Visual Character or Quality from Proposed New Corporation Yard  Impact AG-1: Direct Conversion of Important Farmland  Impact AG-3: Indirect Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Uses  Impact AIR-1: Conflicts with or Obstruction of Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan  Impact AIR-2: Violations of Any Air Quality Standard or Substantial Contribution to Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation during Construction of Proposed Improvements  Impact AIR-4: Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Any Criteria Pollutant for which the Program Region is in Nonattainment under an Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air Quality Standard Including Releasing Emissions that Exceed Quantitative Thresholds for Ozone Precursors  Impact NOISE-1: Exposure of Residences to Noise from Grading and Construction Activities  Impact POP-2: Potential to Induce Substantial Population Growth Alternatives Considered The following alternatives have been evaluated for their feasibility and their ability to achieve most of the program objectives while avoiding, reducing or minimizing significant impacts identified for the proposed program. These alternatives (with the exception of the No Program Alternative) were determined to be feasible or potentially feasible, and would generally meet the program objectives. The degree to which these alternatives substantially lower the significant impacts identified for the proposed program is discussed below. All subject areas are analyzed for each alternative, though at a more general level than for the proposed program, as provided by CEQA. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Alternative 1—No Program Alternative CEQA requires analysis of the No Program Alternative. In this situation, the no- program alternative consists of not installing the proposed system improvements. As a result, the water supply system would remain the same as today. Characteristics of this Alternative Under this alternative, no new water supply infrastructure would be constructed. Existing system deficiencies would continue to exist, and new development would be constrained by lack of water supply infrastructure. Where alternative sources of potable water are available, new development may still occur. This alternative would not meet the basic objective of the program, namely, to construct the capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers. Impact Analysis Aesthetics Because no new physical structures would be built, there would be no impact to visual resources under this alternative. Agricultural Resources Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed that could convert farmland to non-agricultural uses. As such, there would be no impact to agricultural resources. Air Quality Because no new facilities would be built, there would be no construction-related or operational emissions, and therefore no impacts to air quality under this alternative. Biological Resources Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed that could affect biological resources. As such, there would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Cultural Resources Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed that could affect cultural resources. As such, there would be no impact. Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed that could affect geologic, soil, or mineral resources. As such, there would be no impact. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative, there would be no activities that could result in the release of, or exposure to, hazardous materials. As such, there would be no impact. Water Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed that could cause impacts to water quality or affect flooding conditions. However, under this alternative, existing system deficiencies would not be corrected, and, as such, these existing adverse conditions would continue. The alternative, by constraining new development, would eliminate the increase in demand for the sources of potable water that would support the program groundwater and surface water supplies from MID, and potentially TID), and any impacts related to use of those supplies. Land Use and Planning The alternative would not result in any development that would have potential to physically divide an established community. This alternative would potentially conflict with relevant general plans by failing to provide the necessary infrastructure to support the development envisioned in those plans. Noise Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed; thus, new sources of noise would not be generated by their construction or operation. As such, there would be no impact. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-6 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Population and Housing This alternative would not provide any infrastructure that could remove an obstacle to growth. The alternative would therefore not be growth inducing. Public Services and Utilities Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed; thus, the provision of public services (such as fire and police protection) would not be affected by their construction or operation. The program would not create the need for parks, solid waste disposal, schools, or potable water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. As such, the alternative would have no impact. Recreation The alternative would not result in any activities that could affect recreation. There would be no impact. Transportation and Traffic Under this alternative, no new facilities would be constructed; thus, traffic conditions would not be affected by their construction or operation. As such, there would be no impact. Alternative 2—Reduced Intensity Alternative Under this alternative, only facilities located in the Contiguous Service Area would be constructed. No facilities in the Outlying Service Areas would be constructed. Overall, the water supply system would still be expanded, but it would be to a lesser extent and would be restricted to a limited geographic area. Characteristics of this Alternative Under this alternative, only the portion of the identified water supply infrastructure improvements that are located in the Contiguous Service Area would be constructed. Existing system deficiencies in the Outlying Service Areas would continue to exist, while those in the Contiguous Service Area would be remediated. New development in the Contiguous Service Area would be facilitated by provision of infrastructure, while development in outlying areas would be constrained, as water supply infrastructure would be a limiting factor. This alternative would partially meet the basic objective of the program, namely, to construct the capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-7 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 water service to existing and future customers. This objective would be met to a lesser extent than it would be under the proposed program. Impact Analysis Aesthetics Under this alternative, some new aboveground facilities would be constructed that could have adverse effects on visual resources. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of reduced geographic extent; impacts would be avoided in the outlying areas. Agricultural Resources Under this alternative, some new facilities would be constructed that could convert farmland to non-agricultural uses. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program; however, less farmland would be converted due to the reduced number of facilities. Farmland conversion would not occur in the outlying areas. Air Quality The new facilities that would be built under this alternative would result in some construction-related and operational emissions. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities. Biological Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative could result in impacts to biological resources. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities, and reduced spatial extent of impacts. Cultural Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative could result in impacts to cultural resources. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities and reduced spatial extent of impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-8 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative would result in impacts to geology, soils, and mineral resources that are similar to those of the proposed program. However, impacts would be of lesser extent due to the reduced number of facilities. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative, construction and operation of the proposed facilities could result in the release of, or exposure to, hazardous materials. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities, and would be concentrated within the Contiguous Service Area. Water Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality Under this alternative, new facilities would be constructed that could cause impacts to water quality or affect flooding conditions. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but would be reduced and of smaller spatial extent due to the reduced number and location of such facilities. Under this alternative, some but not all existing system deficiencies would be corrected, and, as such, would result in the continuation of these existing adverse conditions related to water supply in the outlying areas. The alternative, by constraining new development in the outlying areas, would reduce the increase in demand for the sources of potable water that would support the program groundwater and surface water supplies from MID, and potentially TID), and would reduce any impacts associated with the use of those water supplies. Land Use and Planning Similar to the proposed program, this alternative would not result in any development that would have potential to physically divide an established community. This alternative would potentially conflict with relevant general plans by failing to provide the entire necessary infrastructure to support the development envisioned in those plans. Noise Under this alternative, construction and operation of the proposed facilities could generate new sources of noise. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities, and hence reduced extent of impacts. Impacts would also be concentrated within the Contiguous Service Area. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-9 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Population and Housing This alternative would provide infrastructure that would remove an obstacle to growth. The alternative would therefore be considered growth-inducing and would have related secondary impacts. However, these impacts would be of lesser extent than the proposed program, due to the reduced number of facilities and reduced extent of growth supported by the alternative. Public Services and Utilities Under this alternative, construction of new facilities could affect the provision of public services, such as fire and police protection. The alternative would not generate substantial needs for wastewater and stormwater infrastructure, solid waste disposal, schools, or parks. Recreation The facilities under this alternative would not cause increased demand for, or long-term conflicts with, recreational facilities. None of the facilities are proposed within land identified for public use, as all of the facilities would be constructed underground or on existing ROW. As such, this alternative would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities in any of the communities included in the proposed program. There would be no impact. Transportation and Traffic Under this alternative, construction of the proposed facilities could temporarily affect traffic conditions. These impacts would be similar to those of the proposed program, but of lesser extent due to the reduced number of such facilities and restricted geographic scope. Alternative 3—Alternative Sources of Water Supply Under Alternative 3, alternative sources of water supply would be used to address existing system deficiencies and meet increases in demand. This would alter the mosaic of capital improvements needed to deliver water to City customers. Alternative Characteristics Under this alternative, a variety of alternative sources of water supply and/or demand management measures would be implemented. This alternative would not ultimately alter the amount of water to be used; however, it would rely on a ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-10 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 greater range of sources for that water. It would require different capital facilities to utilize this water throughout the City’s service area than those proposed under the program. The actual facilities would depend upon the sources selected, and their relative contributions to the overall supply. Alternative sources of water supply under this alternative could include the following:  Additional Water Conservation and Revised Water Shortage Contingency Plan: The Modesto-MID Joint Urban Water Management Plan presents a water shortage contingency plan that only mandates rationing if MID surface water supplies are reduced by 25 percent (RMC 2007). One option available to the City for reducing long-term average groundwater extractions is to reduce water demands by implementing additional water conservation, and by mandating rationing during cutbacks when MID surface water supplies are reduced by 10 to 20 percent, instead of 25 percent. Lowering the trigger for implementation of water conservation actions would result in reduced water demand. Currently, the City is operating at Stage 1 of their contingency plan. Stage 1 targets a 10-20% reduction in water demand. Stage 2 targets a 20-30% reduction in water demand and Stage 3 targets 35- 50% demand reduction. In addition to reducing the trigger for implementing water conservation actions, declaration of Stage 2 or 3 of the contingency plan would dramatically reduce water demand within the service areas.  Additional Sources of Potable Water: A Phase Three Expansion project may be possible if there is a sizable future conversion of agricultural land to urban uses that would allow for a corresponding redistribution of MID’s existing surface water rights. Alternatively, the City may be able to purchase an additional water supply from another wholesale water agency Oakdale Irrigation District) that, through special arrangements, is then treated at the for transmission to the City.  Development of Recycled Water Options: The City completed a June 2005 feasibility study entitled “Northern San Joaquin Valley Water Reclamation Project” that examined the potential development of a regional wastewater treatment and recycling system that would offset a portion of the City’s potable demand. Tier I of this project has the potential to provide an additional 6,720 to 11,200 acre-feet per year (6 to 10 MGD) of water by using recycled water for industrial uses, and for irrigation at existing golf courses, parks, schools. Recycled water would also be used in future Comprehensive Planning Districts. Much of this additional supply, however, would not affect potable water supply needs because most of the golf courses and parks are already irrigated with non-potable water supply sources. The non-potable water supply sources, however, may be subject to cut-backs during dry years; the City would need to use groundwater to make-up the difference. Recycled water supplies are not subject to cut-backs, and, therefore, could reduce groundwater extractions during dry years. This would help the City meet its long-term average groundwater pumping yield.  More Refined and Seasonally Tied Operational Yield Estimate: The City could perform a more comprehensive hydrogeological groundwater yield study to determine if the preliminary operational yield can be increased. If so, the City could increase groundwater extraction rate, thus ensuring ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-11 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 additional water supplies to its contiguous and outlying service areas without impacting the groundwater basin.  Additional in-lieu groundwater recharge and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR): This option would involve storage of treated surface water in the aquifer for future use. For this option to be implemented, it would require use of treated surface water obtained through other options in this alternative. Impact Analysis Aesthetics Under this alternative, some new aboveground facilities would be constructed that could have adverse effects on visual resources. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the facilities. For facilities that would be different from those of the proposed program, impacts would occur in different locations. Agricultural Resources Under this alternative, some new facilities would be constructed that could convert farmland to non-agricultural uses. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the facilities. For facilities that would be different from those of the proposed program, impacts would occur in different locations. In addition, one of the potential sources of water supply under this alternative would be water previously used for agriculture. As such, it would be dependent upon the conversion of agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. Air Quality The new facilities that would be built under this alternative would result in some construction-related and operational emissions. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent of construction required to implement the various water supply options. Biological Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative could result in impacts to biological resources. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the location and extent of new facilities required to implement the various water supply options. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-12 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Cultural Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative could result in impacts to cultural resources. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent and location of new facilities. Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources The new facilities that would be built under this alternative would result in impacts to geology, soils, and mineral resources that are similar to those of the proposed program. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent and location of new facilities. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative, construction and operation of the proposed facilities could result in the release of, or exposure to, hazardous materials. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent and location of new facilities. Water Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality Under this alternative, new facilities would be constructed that could cause impacts to water quality or affect flooding conditions. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent and location of new facilities. The alternative, by using alternative means of addressing system deficiencies and meeting future water demand, would reduce the need for the sources of potable water identified for the proposed program groundwater and surface water supplies from MID, and potentially TID). As such, the impacts related to use of those water sources would be avoided. However, these new sources of water could have their own set of environmental impacts. While the water supply options evaluated under this alternative are very general in nature, examples of impacts include: reductions or changes of instream flows and related effects on water quality and/or instream habitat, injury to other legal holders of water rights, and third party effects, such as changes in land uses associated with changed water usage patterns. Appropriate mitigation would need to be developed to address any such impacts. No water supplies would be tapped without a prior agreement with their water rights holders. While altered approaches to groundwater management may be implemented as part of this alternative, the alternative would not involve groundwater pumping beyond the long-term sustainable yield of the aquifer. Therefore, it would not result in overdraft conditions. An ASR option would need to be designed such ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-13 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 that groundwater quality would not be adversely affected; avoidance of groundwater quality impacts would be ensured through the NPDES permitting process and compliance with the Anti-degradation Policy. Land Use and Planning Similar to the proposed program, this alternative would not result in any development that would have potential to physically divide an established community. This alternative would be consistent with relevant general plans by providing the necessary infrastructure and sources of water to support the development envisioned in those plans. Noise Under this alternative, construction and operation of the proposed facilities could generate new sources of noise. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the extent and location of new facilities. Population and Housing This alternative would provide infrastructure that would remove an obstacle to growth. The alternative would therefore be considered growth-inducing and would have related secondary impacts that are similar to those of the proposed program. Public Services and Utilities Under this alternative, construction of new facilities could affect the provision of public services, such as fire and police protection. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the duration of construction and location of new facilities. The alternative would have similar impacts as the proposed program in terms of the volume of potable water required. The alternative would not generate substantial need for wastewater and stormwater infrastructure, solid waste disposal, schools, or parks. Recreation The facilities under this alternative would not cause increased demand for, or long-term conflicts with, recreational facilities, either in Modesto or the outlying communities. None of the facilities are proposed within land identified for public use, as all of the facilities would be constructed underground or on existing ROW. As such, this alternative would not require the construction or ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-14 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 expansion of recreational facilities in any of the communities included in the proposed program. There would be no impact. Transportation and Traffic Under this alternative, construction of the proposed facilities could temporarily affect traffic conditions. These impacts could be greater or less than those of the proposed program, depending upon the duration of construction and location of new facilities. Alternatives Considered, but Dismissed from Further Consideration The following alternatives were dismissed from more detailed impact analysis in this EIR because they are either considered infeasible, would not meet program objectives, would not avoid or substantially lower the significant impacts identified for the proposed program, or are substantially similar to the two program alternatives considered above. The following alternatives to the proposed program were considered, but dismissed from further consideration for the reasons stated below.  Development Supply Alternative: Water supply would be provided by individual developers for urban projects. This alternative reduces the City’s costs of installing this infrastructure by placing much of the responsibility on individual projects. All conveyance and distribution piping would be the responsibility of the developer and/or landowner, rather than the City. Difficulties in the coordination of water system planning and design by different developers, and the uncertain timing of installation of portions of the system, would render this alternative difficult to implement. Additionally, this alternative would be unlikely to ultimately correct existing system deficiencies, and so would not meet the program objective of providing a reliable water supply.  Delayed Alternative: The capital improvements under the proposed program would be implemented, but their implementation would be delayed for some period 10 years). This alternative was dismissed because it would not ultimately reduce the impacts of the proposed program; all that would change is the timing of impacts. Existing adverse conditions that would otherwise be remedied by the program system deficiencies) would continue for a longer duration, and, in some cases, conditions could worsen as a result of delaying program implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Alternatives 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 5-15 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Environmentally Superior Alternative Based on the assessment of environmental impacts for the alternatives described above, the environmentally superior alternative is the No Program Alternative. This alternative would avoid the significant adverse impacts of the proposed program and various alternatives, in particular impacts to aesthetics, air quality, agricultural resources, noise, and growth inducement and its secondary effects. It bears noting that despite these benefits, the No Program alternative would result in continuation of existing deficiencies related to the water supply system, and would potentially be inconsistent with general plans by failing to provide the infrastructure needed to support the growth envisioned in those plans. If the No Program Alternative is selected as the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA Guidelines require that an environmentally superior alternative among the other analyzed alternatives be identified. Alternative 2, the Reduced Intensity Alternative, is considered the environmentally superior alternative among the other analyzed alternatives because it would reduce many of the significant adverse impacts associated with the proposed program, in particular impacts to aesthetics, air quality, agricultural resources, noise, and growth inducement and its secondary effects. It too would potentially result in the continuation of some system deficiencies, and would fail to be fully consistent with existing general plans. Alternative 3 was not considered the environmentally superior alternative because, while it would reduce some impacts through use of alternative water supplies, it would be anticipated to have impacts that are, on the whole, similar to those of the proposed program. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 6-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 6 References Cited Printed References Atwater, B. 1982. Surficial geology of the Delta area of California. U.S. Geological Survey. California Department of Conservation. 2008a. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Important Farmland Data Availability. Available online at the following web address: . Select: County Data, San Joaquin County 2004-2006 Land Use Conversion. Accessed: September 19, 2008. 2008b. Important Farmland Data Availability. Available online at the following web address: . Select: County Data, Stanislaus County 2004-2006 Land Use Conversion. Accessed: September 19, 2008. California Department of Conservation. 2007. Stanislaus County Important Farmland Map 2006. Rural Land Mapping Edition. Division of Land Resource Protection, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Published in October 2007. Available: 2007a. E-4 Historical Population Estimates for City, County and the State, 1970-1975, with 1970 and 1980 Census Counts. Sacramento, CA. 2007b. E-4 Historical Population Estimates for City, County and the State, 1991-2000, with 1990 and 2000 Census Counts. Sacramento, CA. August. 2007c. California County Population Estimates and Components of Change by Year, July 1, 2000–2007. Sacramento, CA. December. 2008. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State with Annual Percent Change—January 1, 2007 and 2008. Sacramento, CA. May. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto References Cited 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 6-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 California Department of Finance. 2009. E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2001–2009, with 2000 Benchmark. Sacramento, California, May 2009. Available:. Accessed: November 24, 2009. California Energy Commission. (2006). Climate Warming and Water Supply Management in California. March. California Environmental Protection Agency, California Climate Change Center. (2006). Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California. August. California Native Plant Society. 2008. Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Available: . Accessed: July 8, 2008. California Natural Diversity Database. 2008. Records search of Stanislaus County. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. Available: Accessed: July 8, 2008 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2005. Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins for the Control of Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos Runoff into the Lower San Joaquin River. Final Staff Report. October. Sacramento, CA. City of Ceres. 1997. City of Ceres General Plan Policy Document. Ceres, California. February. Available: . 2008. City of Ceres Website. Available at: . Accessed on September 18, 2008. 2008b. Municipal Code. Title 12, Chapter 12.08, Streets and Excavations. Available: . City of Modesto. 2008. City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan. October. Modesto, CA. Available: . City of Turlock Planning Division. 2002. Turlock General Plan. Turlock, CA. Adopted March 1993. Updated June 2002. Available . City of Turlock. 2003. Beautification Master Plan. Prepared for the City of Turlock Community Development Services by RRM Design Group. January. Oakdale, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto References Cited 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 6-3 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 2003b. City of Turlock Water Resources Division NPDES Phase II Storm Water Management Plan. Turlock, CA. Available: _swmp.pdf>. 2008. Turlock transit service. Available: . Accessed: July 18, 2008. City of Waterford. 2006a. Draft EIR for the Urban Area General Plan Update Waterford, CA. Available: . City of Waterford Planning Department. 2007. Waterford Vision 2025 General Plan. Waterford, CA. Available: . Community of Del Rio. 1992. Del Rio Community Plan. Available: . Community of Hickman. 2005. Community of Hickman Strategic Plan. Available: . Cowan, J. P. 1994. Handbook of environmental acoustics. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Federal Transit Administration. 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Washington, D.C. Holland, V. and D. J. Keil. 1989. California vegetation. California Polytechnic State University. San Luis Obispo, CA. Hoover, R. and R. H. Keith. 1996. Noise control for buildings, manufacturing plants, equipment and products. Houston, TX: Hoover & Keith, Inc. International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2007). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers. Approved February. Paris, France. ICF Jones & Stokes. 2008. Draft Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Update. (State Clearinghouse #[PHONE REDACTED].) March. Prepared for the City of Modesto Community and Economic Development Department, Modesto, CA. Sacramento, CA. 2008. Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Update: Responses to Comments. Final. July. (ICF J&S 06826.06.) Sacramento, CA. Prepared for: City of Modesto Community and Economic Development Department, Modesto, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto References Cited 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 6-4 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Jefferson, G. T. 1991a. A catalogue of late Quaternary vertebrates from California: Part One,mammals. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Technical Reports, No. 7. 1991b. A catalogue of late Quaternary vertebrates from California: Part Two, mammals. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Technical Reports, No. 7. Jones & Stokes. 2008. Draft Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Modesto Urban Area General Plan Update. (State Clearinghouse #[PHONE REDACTED].) March. Prepared for the City of Modesto Community and Economic Development Department, Modesto, CA. Sacramento, CA. 2007. Screencheck Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Modesto Storm Drainage Master Plan. November. Oakland, CA. Prepared for the City of Modesto, Modesto, CA. Marchand, D.E. and Allwardt, Alan. 1981. Late Cenozoic stratigraphic Units, northeastern San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1470. Mayer, K. and W. F. Laudenslayer (eds.). 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. October. California Department of Fish and Game. Modesto Area Express. 2008. System Maps. Available: . Accessed: July 18, 2008. Page, R.W. and Balding, G.N. 1973. Geology and Quality of water in the Modesto-Merced area, San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resoueurces Investigations Report 73-6. RMC Water and Environment. 2007. City of Modesto/Modesto Irrigation District Joint Urban Water Management Plan 2005 Update. Final Report. May. Robinson, A.Y. 1990. Sustainable agriculture: a brighter outlook for fish and wildlife. Izaak Walton League of America. Arlington, VA. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee. 1995. The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Policy And Positions Statements, Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines Committee. Available: . Accessed October 8, 2008. Stanislaus Council of Governments. 2008. 2008 Regional Housing Needs Assessment. Available online at the following web address: http://www.stancog.org/. Select: Documents. Accessed: September 20, 2008. ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto References Cited 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 6-5 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Stanislaus County. 2007b. Salida Community Plan. August. Modesto, California. Stanislaus County. 1987. Environmental Impact Report for the Stanislaus County General Plan Update. Prepared by EIP Associates. San Francisco, CA. Stanislaus County Planning and Community Development. 2008. Stanislaus County General Plan. Stanislaus County Planning Department, Modesto, CA. Available: . Stanislaus Regional Transit. 2008. System Maps. Available: . Accessed: July 18, 2008. Stanley, J. B. Mori, and D. L. Suddjian. 1991. The importance of riparian vegetation for wildlife in California: a literature The Habitat Restoration Group. Felton, CA. Prepared for the National Park Service Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance Program. Turnstone Consulting. 2006. City Of Modesto Wastewater Master Plan Update Environmental Impact Report. December. (State Clearinghouse # [PHONE REDACTED].) Prepared for the City of Modesto, Modesto, CA. U.S. Census Bureau. 2007. American FactFinder Website. Search for Modesto, California. Available: . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. . 2008. List of endangered and threatened species that may occur in or be affected by projects in Stanislaus County. Available: . Accessed: July 9, 2008. West Yost Associates. 2009. 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Options A and B. Prepared for City of Modesto. November. Draft. Personal Communications Roughton, Robert E. Director and principal engineer. Navigant Consulting, Inc., Rancho Cordova, CA. October 31, 2000–fax transmission to Brad Norton, Jones & Stokes. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 7-1 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Chapter 7 List of Preparers Lead Agency City of Modesto Public Works Department City of Modesto Public Works Department 1010 Tenth Street, Suite 4600 Modesto, CA 95353 209/577-5400 Contact: Jack Bond Draft PEIR Authors ICF Jones & Stokes 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Project Management Team  Sally ZeffProject Director  Antero Rivasplata—Project Manager  Amy Fransen—Project Coordinator Technical Team  Stephanie Myers—biological resources (wildlife)  Katherine Bode—biological resources (botany)  Jeff Peters—biological resources (fish)  Lynn Wall—air quality and noise  Amy Fransen—cultural resources; transportation and traffic  Katherine Haley— cultural resources ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto List of Preparers 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report 7-2 December 2009 ICF J&S 00049.08 Production Team  John Durnan—Graphic Artist  Ryan Patterson—Publications Specialist  Sarah Sol—Technical Editor Horizon Water and Environment, LLC 1330 Broadway, Suite 424 Oakland, CA 94612 Project Team  Michael StevensonProject Director and technical author for Other CEQA Considerations; alternatives; and GHG/climate change sections.  Jill Sunahara—Project Manager and technical author for aesthetics; agricultural resources; hazards and hazardous materials; land use; population and housing; and recreation sections.  Sandy Devoto—Project Coordinator and technical author for geology, soils and minerals; hydrology and water quality; public services, and utilities sections. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix A Notice of Preparation ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Notice of Preparation To: Responsible, Federal and Trustee Agencies From: City of Modesto Public Works Department (Agency) (Agency) P.O. Box 642 (1 010 Tenth Street) (Address) (Address) Modesto, CA 95353 Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report The Citv of Modesto Public Works Department will be the lead agency and will prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for the project identified below. We are requesting the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information that is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency may need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The project description, location, and potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. A copy of the initial study b [XI b not attached. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(a), the City has opted to forgo preparation of an initial study and proceed directly to the draft ER. Because of the time limits mandated by state law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice. Please send your response to Jack Bond at the address shown above. Please include your name or the name of a contact person in your agency. Project Title: 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Project Applicant, if any: This is a project of the City of Modesto Signature: Telephone: ' (209) 577-5424 Email: .j bond@,modestogov.com Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Notice of Preparation 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for: City of Modesto P.O. Box 642 (1010 Tenth Street) Modesto, CA 95353 Contact: Jack Bond 209/577-5424 Prepared by: ICF Jones & Stokes 630 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 958 14 Contact: Terry Rivasplata 9 16/737-3000 Horizon Water and Environment, LLC. 1330 Broadway, Suite 424 Oakland, CA 946 1 2 5 10/986-1850 September 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- ICF Jones & Stokes and Horizon Water and Environment. 2008. Notice of Preparation, 2008 Water System Engineer's Report PEIR. September. Prepared for the City of Modesto, Modesto, CA. ---PAGE BREAK--- Introduction Purpose of the NOP The City of Modesto (City) is the lead agency for the preparation and review of the City of Modesto S 2008 Water System Engineer's Report (Engineer's Report), which is a comprehensive capital improvement program (CP) to address existing deficiencies and future needs to adequately serve existing and future growth anticipated in its entire water service area. The proposed project or CIP, as analyzed through this environmental review process, is the collection of CIP projects and programs proposed in the Engineer's Report. The proposed project identifies projects and programs needed to meet existing demands, future interim demands (2009-20 13), and future buildout demands (through 2030). This Notice of Preparation (NOP) presents general background information on the scoping process, the environmental issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and the anticipated uses of the EIR. It also describes the proposed project as currently envisioned. The project description is subject to refinement during the process of preparing the draft EIR, depending on, among other things, input received in comments responding to this NOP and revisions to the proposed CIP. The City has prepared this NOP pursuant to Section 15082 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Scope of the EIR The primary purpose of the EIR is to evaluate the short- and long-term impacts of implementation of the proposed project. This document will be prepared as a program EIR (PEIR). According to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15168(a), a program EIR is one type of environmental review document that may be used to evaluate a plan or program that has multiple components (projects and actions) or to address a series of actions that are related: Geographically As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions In connection with the issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Introduction As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects that can be mitigated in similar ways. The PEIR will provide a foundation for any necessary hture environmental review documents that focus on individual CIP projects or programs. As required by CEQA and where necessary, project-level CEQA review will be conducted separately for individual projects proposed under the CIP. The separate environmental review of individual projects will evaluate site-specific impacts and incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the PEIR as appropriate (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15 168[c]). Below is a preliminary listing of potential environmental issues to be addressed in the PEIR. The issues to be addressed will be finalized after comments on the NOP are received. It is not yet known for which environmental resource topics significant impacts would occur. The analysis in the draft PEIR ultimately will determine whether these impacts actually could occur, will determine their level of significance, and will propose feasible mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts. Thresholds for determining significant impacts will be based on applicable sections of the State CEQA Guidelines, regulatory agency standards, and the judgment of the City of Modesto. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology, Soils, and Minerals Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation and Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Cumulative Impacts Growth-Inducing Impacts Irreversible Impacts Alternatives 2008 Water System Engineeh Reporl Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Public Involvement Introduction The City is soliciting the views of interested persons and agencies on the scope and content of the environmental information that is germane to the proposed project. Agencies may use the PEIR prepared under the direction of the City when considering permits or other approvals for the proposed project. Because of the time limits mandated by state law, your written comments on the scope and content of the PEIR must be received no later than the 30-day reviewperiod ending at 5:OOp.m on October 24,2008. Please send written comments to the City of Modesto, to the attention of Jack Bond, Senior Civil Engineer, at the address provided on the title page of this document. Please include the name and phone number of the contact person for your agency, if applicable. The City will ensure that adequate public review and input will be available for the PEIR. Public input will be solicited at the following points in the process: w Scoping comment period: The City will receive public comments during the period from Wednesday, September 24,2008 to October 24,2008 to solicit public input on the scope of the PEIR. w Draft PEIR comment period: The City will provide a standard 45-day review and comment period for the draft PEIR. Final PEIR comment period: The City will certify the final PEIR at a public meeting, during which the public and agencies can provide additional comments. 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Flr Project Description Background The City of Modesto (City) provides domestic water service within its incorporated boundaries and to several other areas previously served by the Del Este Water Company (acquired by the City in the mid- 1990'~)~ including the City of Waterford, portions of the cities of Ceres and Turlock, the communities of Salida, Empire, Del Rio, Grayson, and Hickman. The Riverdale Park Tract (approximately 40 acres located southwest of the City) is physically connected to the City's water system to provide emergency backup supply, but service is only delivered when the Riverdale groundwater well is inoperable or cannot meet pressure requirements. As such, this area was not evaluated in the Engineer's Report or in this PEIR. A small portion of the City of Ceres (Walnut Manor) is included in the City's outlying service area. However, because this area is already built out and no improvements are recommended, this area was not evaluated in the Engineer's Report or this PEIR. The City reevaluates their water service system through development of an Engineer's Report every 4 years. The last Engineer's Report was completed in 2004. Project Location The proposed project is located in the City of Modesto and several nearby locations in Stanislaus County, California. Salida, portions of Ceres, and Empire are contiguous (interconnected) to the City's water system and are referred to in this PEIR as the "contiguous service area." The water service areas of Del Rio, Grayson, Waterford, Hickman, and portions of Turlock are non-contiguous to the City's water system and are referred to in this PEIR as the "outlying service areas." The City manages, operates, and maintains the outlying service areas as independent satellite systems, in addition to the contiguous service area. Together, the contiguous and outlying service areas constitute this PEIR's "study area." 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description Project Objectives and Need The City is in the process of preparing a 2008 Water System Engineer's Report (Engineer's Report) that will: Update water system's hydraulic model with current and projected build-out water demands, and recently added infrastructure, Identie and just@ the various capital improvements needed to provide and maintain reliable water service to existing and future customers, Develop cost estimates and prioritize the proposed improvements, and Determine the proportional fair share cost allocations of the needed improvements between the existing rate payers and future users. The Engineer's Report identifies major water supply infrastructure improvements needed to effectively meet water demand requirements under both existing and future developed conditions. The project, as analyzed through this environmental review process, is the collection of CIP projects and programs proposed in the Engineer's Report. Specifically, the following three primary types of improvements and associated studies are identified in the Engineer's Report as being needed to meet the City's objectives and accommodate the water demand anticipated under existing, interim, and build-out conditions within the study area: Project Improvements: CIP activities that will occur once or very infrequently construction of a corporation yard), Program Improvements: CIP activities that will occur more periodically and over time replacing old pipelines and water meters), and 2004 Engineer's Report Projects and Programs: CIP activities previously identified in the City's 2004 Engineer's Report that have not been implemented. Project- and Program-level improvements proposed in the Engineer's Report primarily relate to storage tanks, groundwater wells, and pipelines. The other activities identified in the 2004 Engineer's Report include special studies or security upgrades for the existing infrastructure. The Engineer's Report also includes recommendations for future planning efforts, such as updates to the City's groundwater, urban water, or water supply management plans. These planning efforts are either exempt from CEQA or will require a separate CEQA evaluation. As such, these plans are not evaluated in this PEIR. The Project- level, Program-level, and other CIP improvements will either occur within the City's contiguous or outlying service areas, as described below. For some areas, optional or alternative improvement projects have been identified. These are also discussed below. 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- sauyad!d Mau %an aquas snon%!)uo:, aw 'ean dpws ay) S J ~ ~ : , O W O J ~ ~e!:,~awwo:, pm le!)uap!saJ se seam padola~apun dl~uasa~d u! pallqsu! aq pInoM au!lad!d uo!)nq!qs!p ~ a u jo &!lo[ew a u .seam a:,!~.ras %u!dl]no pue snon%!)uo:, ay) )noy%noq) sau!lad!d ~ a u jo uo!)elle)su! s p m a palold ayL -uo)e~aua% jo uo!~ellqsu! %u!pnl:,u! 'slla~ %u!)s~a @JaAas 01 quawa~o~dw! Iyua plnofi pa[o.~d ay) 'pasodo~d a n sIIafi fiau aw 01 uo!yppe UI m a n aquas %u!dpno am q pm snon%!)uo:, ay) woq qy)!fi suo!)e:,o.[ sno!mA u! pasodo~d a n sl~afi fiaN .aAoqe paqpsap se 'sa!l!l!:,ej %uyspa pahas 01 sdurnd dn-qmq ppe 01 sasodold osp palold ayL -a:,!uas alenbape ap!~o~d 01 sa!y~qede:, pue saz!s snopAjo suo!~e~s dwnd 1a)sooq ~J!M paugano aq II!M syue) fiau 11y -1aaj osz 01 dn jo Jalam!p e pm Jaaj s 1 pue 0 1 u a a ~ a q jo @!ay umw~xew e aAey plnofi s m paunq d~p!lred 'wj osz 01 dn jo laaam!p e aAq pm Jaaj SE 01 dn aq p~nofi qw punoBa~oqe IIV .qw alanuo:, p a p q dlle!pd lo syrre) Iaals punod aAoqe aq law!a plnofi a u -sau!lad!d pm uo!p)s dumd Jalsooq pale!:,osse m alley pInoM syue) a%elo)s lalefi pasodold s,4!3 arl) uo pueurap rq saseamu! alwnj a)epowwo:,:,e pue 4!1!qe![al a%~o)s aho~dw! o) laplo u! man a:,!hlas %u!dl)no pm snon%!mo:, ay) pasodold a n syrrel a%lo)s fiau sno!mA 'laha1 :,!)ewmdo.~d e )e pauopad %qaq s! XIZJ s!w u! pa~uasald Mapal puamoJ!Aua pm 'alqep~e dly~a~m:, IOU s! s~uauodwo:, palold ~p Jnqe uo!~euuoju! :,g!:,ads 'dl%u!p~o:,:,y *alqel!eAe sauro:,aq %u!punj se pue srseq papaau-se m uo pa~:,nr)suo:, pm pau%!sap aq pInofi MoIaq pagyuap! sap!l!xj Ienp!A!puI 'Pag!luap! uaaq aAey s a p aA!)aua] auros JaAafioy paz!leug aq 01 lad aAey sa!yl!mj fiau asawjo suo!~e:,o~ Jxxa a u .seare a:,!hlas %qd~)no pue snon%!~uo:, 413 a q u!rl)!fi )uawdola~ap aJwq 0) paplo:,:,~ spmmap a:,!hlas lalefi a)epowwom~ pm sa!:,uapgap a)e!Aalp 01 pa[o~d ayljo p d se papeddn JO pallasu! aq 01 pasodo~d (saqad!d pm 'sllafi la~efipunoB 'syue) a%~o~s) s~uauodwo:, aJw:,tu)segu! lalefi awjo uo!~du:,sapjauq e s! %u!fiolloj a u ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description will be required to serve infill growth in addition to growth occurring in new developed areas. New pipelines would be sized to allow the system to meet the City's adopted standards for either Maximum Day plus fire flow or Peak Hour demand. The sizing of the pipelines would need to be verified by project-specific engineering as a part of the pipelines' final design, and possibly adjusted from that identified in the Engineer's Report. Pipelines would generally be constructed within the public right-of-way, following the alignment of existing or future planned streets and easements, wherever feasible. In addition to the project's new pipeline installation, many existing pipelines of smaller diameters would be upsized to allow for adequate pressure, effective system looping, and peak-time delivery. As with new pipelines, the final size will be determined by project-specific engineering as a part of final design, and may be adjusted from that identified in the Engineer's Report. Other CIP Projects In addition to the ClPs discussed above, the Engineer's Report identifies the need for a new corporation yard, system-wide security enhancements, and soil remediation at one site. These would all be located within the study area. New Corporation Yard The City identified plans to construct a new corporation yard. This project includes property acquisition (approximately 8 acres), construction of a new building (approximately 10,000 square feet), and site development (parking, landscaping, lighting, security measures, etc). The site would also be used to store soil, concrete, and asphalt removed during construction of water projects for later reuse as part of the City's recycling program. The location of the new corporation yard has not been finalized at this time. This CIP is expected to be completed by 2012. Security Enhancements This program is required to meet state and federal requirements and implement the recommendations presented in the 2003 Water System Vulnerability Assessment. The City completed this assessment as part of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act of 2001 in order to assess the security of the water distribution system. Security enhancements may include installation of a fence, door, tank hatch, and motion alarms at water tank and groundwater well sites. Soil Remediation The City identified a soil contamination problem during the construction of the Kansas-Needham Overcrossing. Hydrocarbon soil contamination was discovered immediately north of the bridge. Details for activities related to remediation of this site are unknown at this time. 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description ClPs by Location ClPs within the City's Contiguous Service Area To evaluate the City's ability to serve current and buildout demands, three system components were assessed in a hydraulic evaluation by West Yost Associates: groundwater pumping capacity; storage capacity; and distribution system needs. In addition, water supply requirements under existing, interim, and buildout situations were evaluated. The Engineer's Report identifies CIP improvements that are immediately recommended to improve the City's capability of meeting existing water demands, including that for fire flow. The Existing System CIPs are shown in Table 2-1, below. This list of CIP improvements is recommended under both Options (see discussion below). Table 2-1 : Contiguous Service Area Existing System CIPs Type Existing System CIP Storage Pipelines 6 MG North Tank and l8mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG West Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station 4 MG Industrial Tank and 12 mgd Booster Pump Station Backup Generators Approximately 23 miles of pipeline upsized fiom 8 or 10 inch in diameter to 12-inch diameter pipelines to improve transmission, Peak Hour, and fire flow conveyance. Other Improvements Installation of 15 Control Valves at MID Turnouts Full buildout of the study area is expected in the year 2030. Proposed system improvement projects to meet water demands in 2030 are referred to as Buildout System CIPs. Due to concerns over deficiencies in the existing system during the next five years (to 2013), the City is proposing to implement key improvement projects needed to meet water demands in the short-term. These are referred to as Interim System CIPs. The Interim System CIPs would not be replaced by or constructed in addition to the Buildout System CIPs; they are a subset of the Buildout System CIPs that would be constructed sooner. Water distribution in the City is divided by the Tuolurnne River. The area north of the Tuolumne River is referred to as North Modesto, and is within the service area of MID. The area south of the Tuolumne River is referred to as South Modesto, and is within the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) service area. The City is currently considering whether to participate in TID's Regional Surface Water Supply Project to provide surface water to South Modesto, in addition to the current groundwater supplies. The supplemental water supply fiom the to South Modesto would require additional facilities. Because the City has not determined at this time whether to participate in the the 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description City's contiguous service area CIPs are proposed in two options: Option A (with and Option B (without groundwater only). For each Option, Interim and Buildout CIPs have been identified. Option A This option assumes that the City would receive supplemental water supply from the TID The proposed Interim and Buildout System CIPs for Option A are shown in Table 2-2. Table 2-2: Contiguous Service Area Interim and Buildout CIPs for Option A Type Interim System CIP Buildout System CIP Storage 6.4 MG TID Terminal Tank near the 6.9 MG Storage Tank (location TBD) intersection of Whitmore Avenue and Morgan Avenue TID Tank Booster Pump Station with a minimum firm pumping capacity of 11.5 mgd Groundwater Kaiser Well (Well 61): 1,700 gpm Grogen Well: 1,500 gpm Wells Mildred Perkins Well (Well 63): 2,000 gpm Plasiipak well: 1,000 Shelter Cove Well: 1,000 gprn Tivoli Well: 1,500 gprn 1 New Well: 1,500 gprn FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable groundwater wells to increase the reliable fm firm pumping capacity pumping capacity Pipelines TID Transmission Pipeline Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure Proposed Development - 43 pipeline segments, 12 to 16 Proposed Interim System Inhtructure inches in diameter, ranging South Modesto Interim System Improvements between 600 to 35,000 linear - 37 pipeline segments, 8 to 24 inches feet in length in diameter, ranging between 60 to 22,000 linear feet in length Option B Option B assumes that supplemental supplies from the TID would not be included in the City's water system. Proposed Interim and Buildout System facilities in Option B are listed in Table 2-3. 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description Table 2-3: Contiguous Service Area Interim and Buildout CIPs for Option B Type Interim System CIP Buildout System CIP Storage Well with 1,500 gpm capacity will provide an additional 1.3mg of operational storage Groundwater Rehabilitate Well 53 Wells Kaiser Well (Well 61): 1,700 gpm Mildred Perkins Well (Well 63): 2,000 gpm Tivoli Well: 1,500 gpm FMC Well: 1,000 gpm Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Pipelines Proposed Development Infi-astructure Proposed Interim System Infrastructure South Modesto Interim System Improvements - 32 pipeline segments, 8 to 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 80 and 22,000 linear feet in length 10 MG Storage Tank 2 Wells 1,500 gpm capacity each Well Backup Generators 4 Booster Pumps at the following stations: - West Tank (2,778 gpm), Tank 4 (950 gpm), Tank 5 (950 gpm), and North Tank (4,167 gpm) Grogen Well: 1,500 gpm Plastipak Well: 1,000 gpm 7 Wells with 1,500 gpm capacity each Generators at certain existing and new groundwater wells to increase the reliable firm pumping capacity Proposed Buildout System Infrastructure Localized Pipeline Improvements - 46 pipeline segments, 12 or 16 inches in diameter, ranging between 150 on 35,000 linear feet in length ClPs within Outlying Service Areas As previously discussed, the City acquired the former Del Este Water Company, which included the communities of Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, a portion of the City of Turlock, and the City of Waterford. The City now manages, operates and maintains these five outlying water service areas. A separate hydraulic evaluation and Technical Memo (TM) was prepared for each of these service areas. The hydraulic assessment evaluated three system components and the ability to serve current and buildout demands: groundwater pumping capacity; storage capacity; and distribution system needs. Some TMs presented two capital improvement alternatives for a community and required on-going rehabilitation improvements. The alternatives for each community's CIPs are shown in Table 2-4 and discussed further below. Del Rio The Del Rio water system currently requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, replacement well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2008 Notice of Preparation 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- City of Modesto Project Description The future Del Rio service area will include additional acreage that will expand the service area to the north, east, and southwest. According to the Del Rio Community Plan, 'future planned development land use' is proposed for the northwest and eastern portions of the service area, while development in the southwestern area will be residential. Full buildout of the service area will require additional pipelines and pumping capacity, as recommended, to provide adequate water service to meet the anticipated demand. Grayson The Grayson water system currently requires a new production well, backup generators, and pipelines to correct existing supply deficiencies. Currently, the Grayson service area is nearly built out with approximately 4 acres of infill remaining to be developed. Accordingly, this area will support a population increase of approximately 100 individuals. The capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the buildout demand. Hickman Two potential alternatives are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Hickman water system. Under Alternative 1, Hickman would remain as an independent water service area. This alternative requires a new storage tank (and associated pump station), well, backup generators, and pipelines to adequately meet existing demands. Under Alternative 2, the Hickman service area would inter-connect with the City of Waterford service area. Instead of the storage tank described for Alternative 1, this alternative would require additional pipeline to connect the Hickman service area to the Waterford system. The remaining water system improvements would be similar. The Hickman service area is essentially built out, with limited infill areas remaining for development. Though the remaining area of planned development land use totals approximately 30 acres, the majority is existing road or railroad property. As such, the capital improvements recommended to address the current deficiencies would also adequately serve the build out demand. Turlock Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 are the two potential options are being considered to address the existing deficiencies in the Turlock water system. The differences between these options are total cost and level of inter-agency cooperation provided by the City of Turlock. Alternative 1 assumes that the City of Turlock would provide the City of Modesto with one additional emergency intertie connection point (to be located 2008 Water System Engineer's Report Program EIR September 2006 Notice of Preparation 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- .papuaururo:,al are sau!lad!d leuo!l!ppe se IIaM se '4!:,ede:, uo!lqs dumd pue yrre) a%e~ols Ieuop!ppe '11a~ JaleM punofi Mau e 'pueurap $no-ppq paledp!lue aw laaur 01 a:,!~as JapM almbap ap!ho~d 01 laplo UI .sread s u!~!M papadxa s! ueld pauaf) ~uaut-13 a q j o lno plinq 11ty pue 'lno q!nq d~reau s! earn a:,!~as plojlaleM aqL -sapuapyap d~ddns %u!ls!xa mauo:, 01 sau!lad!d pue 's~ole~aua% dny:,eq 'uo!)~s dumd pue yrre) a%aJols Mau e saqnba~ dlluam:, uralsds lalm pJopaleM a u .hssa:,au are ahoqe pay!Juap! sluauraho~dur! pqde:, aqlol suoyepuaururo3al @uop!ppe ou 'q:,ns s y .$no y!nq d[~ry aq 01 paumsse s! earn a:,!Nas y301m~ aqL 'rnl!ur!S aq ppoM auauraholdux! uralsds JaleM %u!upura~ a u .uxa)sXs ha~!lap au!lad!d pue uo!lels dumd pale!3osse arl) pue sap!I!mj a%eJols punoB ahoqe aql pnqsuo:, 01 olsapom JO 4!3 a q JOJ paau a q a)eu!uxga ayalu! Mau e JO uoyel@lsy aql pm qu!od uo!l3auuo:, d3ua%~aura %upsya OWJO apfidn a u 'seam a:,!,uas JaleM srolsapofiJO 4!3 aqljo q3ea y auo 'sa!valui d3ua%laura (lapump q:,u! paz!s 1lty E 30 I W l e ap!ho~d pInOM y:,olmL JO 4!3 aw 'Z aa!leuIallv lapun .spueurap %u!lsya paw d~almbape 01 saugad!d pue 's~ole~aua% dq3eq 'uo!lel!~!qeqa~ 10 ~uauramlda~ IIaM '(uo!lqs dumd pale!:,osse pue) quxg a%eJols Mau e saqnbal aa!leuIaqe s y ~ , '(em a:,!~as waqlnog s'olsapomjo 4!3 aql u! ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2-4. Outlying Service Area Capital Improvement Projects Outlying Area Del Rio Existing Requirements Build-out Requirements Grayson Existing Requirements Build-out Requirements Hickman* Alternative A Alternative B Turlock* Pipelines 4,710 linear feet of new pipeline 15,000 linear feet of new pipeline 4,600 linear feet of upsized pipeline Proposed Infrastructure Improvements Storage Tanks New 0.22MG storage tank with associated lmgd booster pump station and backup generator Additional 1 mgd pumping capacity (2mgd total) for the booster pump station at the new storage tank Recommendations for existing demands (above) would satisfy build-out needs. Groundwater Wells New 1,000gpm well with backup generator 1,000gpm replacement well and backup generator 3- backup generators at existing well sites New 400gpm well with backup generator 2-backup generators for existing well and booster pump 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines 9,400 linear feet of upsized pipelines 5,800 linear feet of new pipeline connecting to the Waterford service area Other New 0.38MG storage tank with 1.15mgd booster pump station and backup generator New 600gpm well with backup generator 1 - backup generator at existing well New 600gpm well with backup generator 1- backup generator at existing well ---PAGE BREAK--- pipeline 6,500 linear feet of new Outlying Area Alternative A Proposed Infrastructure Improvements booster pump station and backup generator Pipelines I Storage Tanks I Groundwater Wells Alternative B New emergency intertie with City of Turlock Upsize 2 existing emergency interties with City of Turlock Other 4- backup generators for existing wells Waterford a 10,400 linear feet of upsized I New 0.54MG storage tank with 1.62mgd I 1 - replacement well ( New emergency intertie with City of Turlock pipeline 10,400 linear feet of upsized pipeline Existing Requirements 1 -replacement well 4- backup generators for existing wells Build-out Requirements 13,s 10 linear feet of upsized pipeline these service areas are considered to be at full build-out and additional improvements to the recommended existing capital improvements are not necessary. 2,980 linear feet of new pipeline 9,180 linear feet of upsized pipeline New 0.58MG storage tank with 1.74mgd booster pump station and backup generator 4-backup generators for existing wells Additional 0.12 MG storage capacity (0.70MG total) and 0.36mgd pumping capacity (2.lmgd total) at the booster pump station New 800gpm well with backup generator ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix B Comments on the NOP ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---