A G E N D A. 1. Roll Call and Introductions: 2. Public Comments:

Transcription

1 SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Executive Committee SJCOG Conference Room 555 East Weber Avenue Stockton Friday, September 19, :00 p.m. The San Joaquin Council of Governments is in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and will make all reasonable accommodations for the disabled to participate in employment, programs and facilities. Persons requiring assistance or auxiliary aid in order to participate should contact Rebecca Calija at (209) at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. PARKING: For your convenience, parking is available at the COG Regional Center off of American marked Visitor on the North Side Of the Parking Lot. 1. Roll Call and Introductions: 2. Public Comments: A G E N D A 3. Approve Minutes of May 16, 2014: Additional Material: Minutes of May 16, 2014 Recommended Action: Action Active Transportation Program (ATP) Funding Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2014/15 and 2015/16: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action: Action 5. Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Program: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action Discussion SJMSCP Development Fees: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action: Discussion 7. River Oaks Orchards Project Review: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action: Discussion 8. Fiscal Year State Transit Assistance (STA) Revenue and Apportionment Schedule: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action: Action

2 9. Fiscal Year State Transit Assistance (STA) Revenue and Apportionment Schedule: Additional Material: Staff Report Recommended Action: Action 10. Executive Director s Report: 11. Adjournment: Adjourn the meeting to Friday, October 17, 2014 SJCOG fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. For more information, or to file a Title VI related complaint see or call (209)

3 SAN JOAQUIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Executive Committee SJCOG Conference Room 555 E. Weber Avenue Stockton, CA Friday, May 16, 2014 M I N U T E S 1. The meeting was called to order by Chair Steve Dresser at 12:10 p.m. Present Mayor Pro Tem Steve DeBrum, City of Manteca; Councilmember Steve Dresser, City of Lathrop; Mayor Chuck Winn, City of Ripon; Supervisor Ken Vogel, San Joaquin County. Committee Members Not Present Mayor Anthony Silva, City of Stockton; Councilmember Jeff Laugero, City of Escalon. Others Present Andrew Chesley, SJCOG Executive Director; Steve Dial, SJCOG Deputy Executive Director/CFO; Diane Nguyen, SJCOG Deputy Director; Kim Anderson, Associate Regional Planner; Katy Castro, Office Assistant; Rod Attebery, Counsel. 2. Public Comments: None. 3. Approve Minutes of April 18, 2014 It was moved/seconded (Debrum/Winn) to approve the minutes of April 18, Motion passed unanimously by voice vote. 4. Route 99 Bond Update Mr. Chesley commented that the Highway 99 bond program is coming to an end and there is still pending projects. There will be some cost savings that can go back to the Highway 99 bond program. Nobody knows how much funding will be left SJCOG staff is estimating $20 to $30 million. The MPO s will be competing for that money. SJCOG staff is suggesting that whatever money is left should be invested in operational capacity improvement projects. This item was for information only, no action was taken.

4 5. Reclassify Senior Habitat Planner to Program Manager Mr. Dial stated the proposed action formalizes the reclassification of the Senior Habitat Planner to Program Manager and moves that position from Group C on the Classification and Salary Schedule to Group B. Mayor Winn asked if there will be additional responsibilities added to his job description and if he will have staff under him. Mr. Dial stated as the development increases, SJCOG will create another Planner position. Councilmember Dresser asked if SJCOG staff is going to do a new classification study. Mr. Dial stated yes next fiscal year. It was moved/seconded (Debrum/Winn) to approve the reclassification of Senior Habitat Planner Group C to Project Manager Group B and amend staff allocation schedule. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote. 6. Merit Compensation for Proposal Mr. Dial stated that staff is asking for approval for this year only, the proposal authorizing the Executive Director to allocate vacation hours to staff in lieu of salary adjustments for staff at the top of their salary range. The request is to authorize a onetime allocation of from 8 hours to 40 hours of vacation based upon the evaluation process. It was moved/seconded (Vogel/Winn) to recommend to Board approval of one-time Merit Compensation for staff at top of salary range. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote. 7. Americans with Disability Act Policy Mr. Dial stated for the first time Caltrans has asked SJCOG to complete an Annual ADA (American with Disability Act) Certification. While SJCOG has been in compliance with ADA, no written policy has existed. It was moved/seconded (Vogel/Winn) recommendation to the Board for approval of Americans with Disability Act Policy. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote Measure K Renewal Ordinance and Expenditure Plan Amendment Mr. Chesley stated staff has received an amendment request from San Joaquin County s Stockton Metropolitan Airport and the Board of Supervisors for terminal capital improvements in the amount of $9.7 million. SJCOG staff is recommending an amendment to the Measure K Expenditure Plan which adds San Joaquin County s Stockton Metropolitan Airport improvements within the regional arterial program of Measure K. Exhibit A identifies the precise language amendment to the Measure K Expenditure Plan. There are no changes proposed to the Measure K Ordinance. Mr. Chesley stated the County of San Joaquin staff has not been supportive of the SJCOG staff recommendation to place the airport project in the regional arterial category. The

5 County of San Joaquin has pointed out that the airport is a regional facility that serves all jurisdictions in San Joaquin County and even beyond. Supervisor Vogel stated that the airport is in need of repairs and is in need of a federal inspection in order to be able to fly internationally. Mayor Pro Tem Debrum and Mayor Winn both agree that the Stockton Airport has potential to grow and the airport should move forward with the project. Councilmember Dresser agrees with tabling this item to June so staff can provide additional information. It was moved/seconded (Vogel/Debrum) to amend the Measure K Expenditure Plan to add Stockton Metropolitan Airport Improvements into the Measure K Regional Arterial Category. Technical Advisory Committee recommends tabling item for one month so SJCOG staff can provide more data. Motion passed unanimously by voice vote. 9. Next Steps on Initial Draft 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) Mr. Chesley gave an update on the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). He stated one of the challenges is that SJCOG needs to adopt the Regional Transportation Plan in the Environmental Document by the end of September. Mr. Chesley continues stating that if SJCOG staff makes modifications to the environmental document and sends it out for comment it will take time and miss the deadline. 10. Executive Director s Report Mr. Dial commented on the Bond Issuance. The factor preventing SJCOG from getting an A+ is that it s not specify in the expenditure plan that SJCOG will not go over the 35%. Mr. Chesley stated that Executive Directors from Fresno, Kern, Stanislaus and San Joaquin will be making a presentation to the Air Resource Board regarding the gas emissions. 11. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m. to Friday, June 20, 2014.

6 September 2014 Executive Committee STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: RECOMMENDED ACTION: DISCUSSION: 2014 Active Transportation Program (ATP) Funding Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2014/2015 and 2015/16 Approve the 2014 Active Transportation Program (ATP) Project Funding Recommendations OVERVIEW: The San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) has completed the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Project Selection Process. An Active Transportation Multidisciplinary Committee was established, per state guidelines, which reviewed the projects and developed a programming recommendation for the $4.47 million in available funds. Of that amount, $1.5 million is from SJCOG s Regional Share of the Surface Transportation Program (STP) which served to augment the ATP funds in order to fund more project applications. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the SJCOG Board approve the Scoring Committee s 2014 ATP funding recommendations for Fiscal Years 2014/2015 and 2015/2016, as identified in Attachment A. Included in the funding recommendation is also a recommendation of priority projects in the event of cost savings or non-deliverable projects from the funded list. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the 2014 ATP funding will result in $4.47 million in projects to be programmed in the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). BACKGROUND: What is the Active Transportation Program? The Active Transportation Program (ATP) was created in 2013 by Senate Bill 99 and Assembly Bill 101 to promote the increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking & walking. The ATP consolidates funding from the federal Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), the federal Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program, the state Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program,

7 and the state Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA). Consistent with the federal TAP requirements, the ATP Guidelines distribute the total annual funding capacity between three separate programs with 10% going to small urban/rural areas with populations of 200,000 or less, 40% going to Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) in urban areas with populations greater than 200,000 and 50% going to a statewide program. All funding must be competitively awarded with the requirement that 25% of the funds in each program benefit disadvantaged communities. Why are there two calls for projects in this program? The ATP has two separate grant processes one led by the State and the other led by the MPO. As shown in Exhibit A, 29 applications from the region made up the approximately 770 applications statewide which competed for approximately $180 million in statewide ATP funds. On August 20 th, the California Transportation Commission awarded $3,022,000 in ATP funding for four projects from the City of Stockton, as shown in Attachment E. The remaining 25 applications not funded in the State level competitive process were considered for the supplemental regional funding opportunity. SJCOG also held a supplemental call for projects for the regional funding pool of $2.97 million in June 2014; no additional project applications (not previously submitted to the state process) were received.

8 Exhibit A: Active Transportation Program Process

9 Regional ATP Funding Recommendation As required by the State ATP Guidelines, the remaining 25 projects were scored by a multi-disciplinary committee on Tuesday September 2 nd to assist in the project selection process. The list of committee members is included in Attachment B. The committee evaluated projects in accordance with the State ATP Guidelines. The Scoring committee evaluated project merits by examining the following: Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking; Increase the safety and mobility of non-motorized users; Advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals as established pursuant to SB 375; Enhance public health, including reduction of childhood obesity, through the use of programs including but not limited to projects eligible for Safe Routes to School Program funding; Projects that are either in large urban, small urban or rural areas. Ensure that disadvantaged communities fully share in the benefits of the program; and Provide a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of active transportation users. Increase walking and bicycling through targeted strategies: increasing access to transit services, increasing access to schools, eliminating gaps or removing barriers in the bicycle/pedestrian network, and completing facilities Reduce the number and/or rate of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities and injuries Identification of the community-based public participation process that culminated in the project proposal, which may include noticed meetings and consultation with local stakeholders. Improve public health through the targeting of populations with high risk factors for obesity, physical inactivity, asthma or other health issues Provides benefit to a disadvantaged community and includes project features that provide benefit for members of this community (one quarter of the region s ATP funds must be spent in a disadvantaged community). Use of the California Conservation Corps Applicant s performance on past grants The Scoring Committee ranked the projects and then made a programming recommendation. Please refer to Attachment A for the details of the recommendation which includes a recommendation for a back up list of projects should cost savings or non-delivery issues arise. The Scoring Committee used their discretion in emphasizing geographic equity and bang for the buck in making the programming recommendation. In doing so, eight projects were recommended for funding that enabled every jurisdiction who applied to get some funding. Strong considerations by the Scoring Committee also included projects which would be constructed in this grant cycle, projects which benefitted disadvantaged communities and/or provided safe routes to schools. There was recognition that several applications did not include construction funding requests and, in two cases, the Scoring Committee recommended funding to jumpstart the environmental phase of those projects as the project applicants sought funding from other future grant opportunities.

10 Attachment A ATP Multidisciplinary Scoring Committee Recommended Regional Funding Jurisdiction Project Name Recommended Request Total Project Cost Notes Lathrop Lodi Ripon San Joaquin County Stockton Stockton Stockton Tracy 5th Street Sidewalk Improvements Century Blvd/UPRR Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing River Road Sidewalk and Intersection Improvements New Hope Elementary School LED Radar Speed Feedback Devices McKinley Elementary Safe Routes to School Miner Avenue Complete Street Calaveras River Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Rehabilitation Mt Diablo/Mt Oso/ C St. Improvements Total Recommended: $640,000 $640,000 $640,000 $186,000 $1,062,360 $7,761,000 $550,000 $550,000 $1,227,000 $93,000 $93,000 $93,000 $453,000 $453,000 $453,000 $861,000 $2,811,000 $21,492,000 $720,000 $720,000 $720,000 $966,000 $966,000 $1,166,000 $4,469,000 Project is fully funded through Construction Funding for E&P Phase. PS&E Phase not funded. Funds for Construction Phase not requested. Project is fully funded through Construction Project is fully funded through Construction Project is fully funded through Construction Funding for E&P Phase. PS&E Phase not funded. Funds for Construction Phase not requested. Project is fully funded through Construction Project is fully funded through Construction Jurisdiction Project Name Recommended Request Total Project Cost Notes Stockton ATP Multidisciplinary Scoring Committee Recommended ATP Contingency Project List (in priority order) in the event of cost savings or non-deliverable projects Sidewalks to School Installation - $1,368,000 $1,368,000 Stockton Ryde Bridge - $599,000 $629,000 Funding for costs related to only Washington Elementary improvements

11 2014 Active Transportation Advisory Committee Membership Attachment B As required by the State ATP Guidelines, the remaining 25 projects were scored by a multi-disciplinary advisory committee on Tuesday September 2 nd to assist in the project selection process. Name Organization Title Expertise Director of The Cort Group Community Development David Garcia Katelyn Roedner Sutter Nou Hendricks William Mitchell Kristine Williams Catholic Charities San Joaquin County Office of Education San Joaquin County Public Health Services San Joaquin County Bike Coalition Environmental Justice Program Manager Research and Grant Development Program Manager Director Executive Director Infill Development, Bike/Ped Advocacy Disadvantaged Communities SRTS Grants Public Health Bicycle Transportation/Advocacy The Committee members were advised by SJCOG staff familiar with active transportation, land use, and project programming and delivery. Diane Nguyen SJCOG Deputy Director for Planning, Programming, Project Delivery Kim Anderson SJCOG Senior Regional Planner David Ripperda SJCOG Regional Planner The Advisory Committee was charged with developing a funding recommendation to SJCOG staff. The resulting recommendation includes a variety of active transportation projects totaling $4.47 million. The committee s final funding recommendations are summarized in Attachment A.

12 Attachment C Jurisdiction Name Score Rank Request Recommended Stockton Stockton Stockton ATP Projects Ranked by Average Score McKinley Elementary Safe Routes to School Calaveras River Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Rehabilitation Miner Avenue Complete Street $453,000 $453, $720,000 $720, $2,811,000 $861,000 Stockton March Lane EBMUD Bicycle & Ped Path Rehabilitation $1,681,000 - Stockton Stockton Stockton El Dorado Street Pedestrian Access Rehabilitation Complete Streets Plan Ped Improvements at Five Downtown Crosswalks $3,240, $396, $914,000 - Stockton March Lane EBMUD Trail Greenscape Phase $2,288,000 - Stockton Stockton Pedestrian Master Plan & ADA Accessible Bridge Improvements Sidewalks to School Installation $749, $1,368,000 - Stockton Robinhood Drive and Claremont Ave Bike Lane $683,000 - Installation Stockton Ryde Bridge $599,000 -

13 Jurisdiction Name Score Rank Request Recommended Lodi Century Blvd/UPRR Pedestrian and Bicycle Overcrossing $1,062,360 $186,000 Stockton Bike Pushbutton $456,000 - Tracy Ripon San Joaquin County Mt Diablo/Mt Oso/ C St. Improvements River Road Sidewalk and Intersection Improvements New Hope Elementary School LED Radar Speed Feedback Devices $966,000 $966, $550,000 $550, $93,000 $93,000 Lathrop Stockton San Joaquin County Stockton 5th Street Sidewalk Improvements Pacific Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure Woodbridge School Access Improvements Neighborhood Traffic Management Program and Five Raised Crosswalks $640,000 $640, $400, $266, $548,000 - San Joaquin County San Joaquin County Lincoln Elementary School LED Radar Speed Feedback Devices Peltier Road Bike/Wine Trail $93, $1,483,000 -

14 Jurisdiction Name Score Rank Request Recommended San Joaquin County Colony Oak Elementary LED Radar Speed Feedback Devices $93,000 - San Joaquin County New Haven Elementary School LED Radar Speed Feedback Devices $93,000 - Total Recommended: $4,469,000

15 Attachment D Stockton ATP Projects awarded Statewide Funding Jurisdiction Project Name Description Awarded Total Cost Stockton San Joaquin Trail Rehab portions of existing bikeway, install in-ground bike racks, ADA accessibility improvements, install exercise equipment, drinking fountains, irrigation, landscaping $1,394,000 $1,479,000 Stockton Stockton Stockton Bicycle Master Plan Update Fremont Square Sidewalk Reconstruction Safe Routes to School Plan Perform public outreach and redesign the Stockton Bicycle Network. Rewrite the Bicycle Master Plan. $550,000 $550,000 Remove 1,200 lineal feet of existing broken curb, gutter, and sidewalks. Replace with rubberized asphalt sidewalks $728,000 $728,000 and concrete curb ramps. Install bike racks. Coordinate with four school districts, perform public outreach, create a Safe Routes to $350,000 $350,000 School Plan for all schools within the city. Totals: $3,022,000 $3,107,000 Note: These projects are fully funded

16 September 2014 Executive STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Program Discussion SUMMARY: OVERVIEW: There are several administrative items that will be occurring with the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) in the month of September. This staff report provides the status of the effort of the RTIF Nexus Study update and related Operating Agreement Amendment. Both of these steps are outcomes of previous TAC meetings regarding the formula for the RTIF annual adjustment. Separate from this effort are Third Party Cost calculations, detailed in this report, which is required to be done annually. RECOMMENDATION: Discussion. SJCOG staff will transmit the update to the RTIF Nexus Study and related operating agreement for review. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the RTIF Next Study Update will result in $3,500 in third party costs to the RTIF program during the 14/15 fiscal year. At the end of the 13/14 fiscal year, a balance of $8,766 was available to offset to offset 3 rd party costs for FY 14/15. BACKGROUND: Proposed Nexus Study Update and related Operating Agreement Amendment Status Following last month s Technical Advisory Committee recommendation to enact the new formula for the RTIF annual adjustment immediately, it was determined that an update to the RTIF Nexus Study and a related amendment to the Operating Agreement needed to occur. The Operating Agreement was last executed in 2005 and had not been amended. It requires recirculation to all member agencies (signatories on the Operating Agreement).

17 SJCOG also determined this process would be an opportune time to include administrative clarifications/changes on a few other items. The Nexus Study update will include the following: Clarify language for the RTIF annual fee adjustment to specify use of a simple threeyear rolling average based on the California Construction Cost Index (CCCI). Clarify the definition of the Warehouse and Industrial land-use categories. Add the previously approved Navy Drive / BNSF project to the RTIF capital project list, including the RTIF fair share analysis and amend the RTIF roadway network to include the segment of Navy Drive from SR 4 (Crosstown Freeway) to Washington Street. Review of the technical documentation and nexus analysis to insure conformity with the Mitigation Fee Act requirements and update of the analysis if indicated. The above items that are underlined would be specific changes from the Nexus Study update that have to be reflected in the amendment to the Operating Agreement. Staff is also bringing forward the following items in the amendment to the Operating Agreement: Clarification of language related to consistency with Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Change in timing of program fee payments from quarterly to semi-annual, to be accompanied by semi-annual reporting by April 15 th and October 15 th of each year. Change in required reporting to SJCOG Board from semi-annual to annual, by October 15 th of every year. If approved by the SJCOG Board, the amended operating agreement will be circulated to each member agency for review and potential adoption by the individual governing boards/city councils. Because this is an SJCOG effort, SJCOG staff will take the lead in reaching out to the local jurisdictions to get this calendared on the respective agendas and SJCOG staff will be presenting the item (if requested by the jurisdiction). 3 rd Party Costs Section 6 of the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) Operating Agreement establishes the guidelines regarding the program s administrative costs. Per Section 6.4, each participating agency and SJCOG is responsible for the 3 rd party costs to regionally implement the RTIF program which must be approved by the SJCOG Board of Directors. The 3 rd party costs to implement the RTIF Program are paid to SJCOG by each Participating Agency and SJCOG. The RTIF Operating agreement indicates that the amount of on-going 3 rd party costs each participating agency and SJCOG shall pay is based on the percentage of the total county wide RTIF Program Fees retained by each participating agency and SJCOG. That which is retained is the amount of RTIF funds remaining after 10% of the RTIF funds are distributed by each city to San Joaquin County and 15% of the RTIF funds to SJCOG from each city and San Joaquin County. The following chart shows the process of collecting and forwarding RTIF between participating agencies in order to arrive at the net retained to calculate the percentage of the 3 rd party cost each participating agency is required to offset:

18 SJCOG Receives 15% of RTIF Collected by each City & the County of San Joaquin RTIF is Levied by each City & the County of San Joaquin Each City Forwards 10% of RTIF Collected to the County of San Joaquin SJCOG SJ County All Cities Net RTIF Retained by each Participating Agency Retains 15% of Total RTIF Collected Regionally Retains 75% of RTIF Collected plus 10% of RTIF Collected from each City Retains 75% of RTIF Collected During the first two years of the RTIF program implementation (FY 2006 and 2007), SJCOG member agencies were invoiced for third party costs based on estimates of those costs in order for SJCOG to avoid being in arrears. The total invoiced over those two years was $155,362. Because actual costs have been less than the amount collected there has been no further invoicing of the member agencies for 3 rd party costs. Annually since Fiscal Year (FY) 2008, the actual amount of 3 rd party costs has been deducted from that pool. The total expended through Fiscal Year 12/13 was $123,596. In Fiscal Year 13/14, the 3 rd party expenses totaled $3,000; this was a single expenditure for the annual audit. The total available after actual expenses, $28,766, is encumbered by $20,000 to be used toward the next AB 1600 update to occur in Thus, $8,766 is available to offset future 3 rd party expenses. The table below (Table 1) provides a summary of 3 rd party costs incurred to the total amount of RTIF available to account for these costs since program inception through fiscal year 13/14. Table 1: REMAINING BALANCE TO OFFSET 3 rd PARTY COSTS Total RTIF Received to Offset 3 rd Party Costs $ 155,362 Cumulative 3 rd Party Costs through FY 12/13 (123,596) Balance Sub Total $31,766 FY 13/14 3 rd Party Expenses: Annual Audit (3,000) Balance Sub Total $28,766 Reserve for Future AB 1600 Audit (2016) (20,000) Balance Remaining to Offset Future 3 rd Party Expenses $8,766

19 It is necessary to ensure that the RTIF collected during FY 2007 and 2008 and used to offset 3 rd party costs for FY 13/14 are applied accordingly to each jurisdiction per the guidelines from the RTIF Operating Agreement. This is accomplished by using the average percentage of 3 rd party billing invoiced for fiscal years 2007 and 2008 for each jurisdiction and applying the results to the FY 2013/14 3 rd party costs. Table 2 includes the results of the FY 2012 and rd party cost distributions by participating agency: Table 2: 3rd Party Costs by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction FY 07 & 08 Average Percentages Cumulative 3rd Party Costs through FY 13/14 Future 3rd Party Costs Reserve Total Cumulative & Future Reserve City of Escalon 0.11% $139 $22 $161 City of Lathrop 10.23% $12,951 $2,046 $14,997 City of Lodi 2.80% $3,545 $560 $4,105 City of Manteca 20.49% $25,940 $4,098 $30,038 City of Ripon 0.17% $215 $34 $249 City of Stockton 26.47% $33,510 $5,294 $38,804 City of Tracy 3.25% $4,114 $650 $4,764 San Joaquin County 21.41% $27,104 $4,282 $31,386 SJCOG 15.07% $19,078 $3,014 $22,092 TOTALS 100% $126,596 $20,000 $146,596 NEXT STEPS: 1. The Amendment to the 2011 RTIF Update and the revised Operating Agreement had not been completed at the time this staff report was prepared. These items will be circulated prior the meeting on September Following any input from committees on the operating agreement amendment, SJCOG will bring forward the proposed amendments to the Board of Directors for their review and consideration of approval. 3. Should the SJCOG Board approve the changes, the addendum to Nexus Study Update and related amendments to the RTIF Operating Agreement will be circulated to member agency governing boards/city councils for approval. 4. Upon approval by all member agencies, changes to the annual fee adjustment and operating agreement will take effect immediately. Staff Report prepared by: Kim Anderson, Senior Regional Planner

20 9/2014 Executive Committee STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: RECOMMENDED ACTION: 2015 SJMSCP Development Fees Discussion DISCUSSION: SUMMARY: Following the procedures in the SJCOG, Inc. Board-adopted financial analysis for establishing the SJMSCP development fees for the various habitat categories, SJCOG, Inc. staff and the Habitat Technical Advisory Committee (HTAC) Financial Subcommittee completed the 2015 SJMSCP Fee Analysis. The outcome is an increase of 9.38% to the habitat development fees from the prior year. The result was an increase in the fees from 2014 to 2015 as shown in the table 1 and 2 below. Table SJMSCP Development Fees Habitat Type Category A Category B Category C Total Fee Rounded Fee Open Space $4, $1, $ $7, $7,281 AG/Natural $9, $3, $1, $14, $14,543 Vernal Pool (grasslands) $35, $ $6, $42, $42,784 Vernal Pool (wetted) $35, $43, $6, $85, $85,631 Table SJMSCP Development Fees Habitat Type Category A Category B Category C Total Fee Rounded Fee Open Space $4, $1, $ $6, $6,656 AG/Natural $8, $3, $1, $13, $13,295 Vernal Pool (grasslands) Vernal Pool (wetted) $31, $ $6, $39, $39,047 $31, $42, $6, $80, $80,972 Projects which participate under the SJMSCP benefit from a pre-determined streamlined processing of the project rather than navigating through a very long and cumbersome regulatory process led by local jurisdiction staff outside the habitat plan. By opting for participation, the

21 project can choose any number of ways to provide mitigation for the impacts of the project through the plan: 1. Pay a fee; 2. Redesign the project to avoid/minimize impacts; 3. Provide land in lieu of the SJMSCP fee which the project will negotiate the easement/fee title costs; or 4. Any combination of the above options. Or, the project proponent can chose to not participate in the plan and fulfill mitigation requirements on their own with state and federal permitting agencies. RECOMMENDATION: The HTAC Financial Subcommittee, HTAC and SJCOG, Inc. staff recommend the SJCOG, Inc. Board adopt the 2015 SJMSCP Development Fees, as adjusted pursuant to the land sale comparables and consumer price index. FISCAL IMPACT: Development fees will provide funding for SJCOG, Inc. to mitigate project impacts covered under the SJMSCP permits. BACKGROUND: In accordance with the SJMSCP and the updated financial analysis model adopted by the SJCOG, Inc. Board for current and future fee updates, SJCOG, Inc. staff shall notify each local jurisdiction regarding proposed annual adjustments to the SJMSCP development fees. The development fees are calculated using a formula method which will be adjusted annually as shown in the table below [FEE = Category A (acquisition) + Category B (assessment & enhancement) + Category C (management & admin)]. Each component of the formula is adjusted using a specific mechanism which relates to the individual component in the fees. The development fees established must be adopted by each of the jurisdictions and would become effective on January 1 st of the subsequent year for projects using the SJMSCP. Category A (acquisition) - Comparables This category is directly related to land valuation based on comparables which occur in specific zones of the plan. This category is evaluated on a yearly basis by taking all qualified comparables in each zone, including SJCOG, Inc. easements, to set a weighted cost per acre using the same methodology as in the 2006 Financial Analysis Update created by EPS and recently updated in 2013 by the Habitat Technical Advisory Financial Sub-Committee, HTAC and SJCOG, Inc. approval. The SJCOG, Inc. easements are evaluated using the appraised value of the property in the before condition to be included with the fee title sales of other property occurring in San Joaquin County meeting specific criteria below. The final weighted cost per

22 acre of each zone is calculated into a blended rate under SJMSCP Fee Category A (acquisition) figure for each habitat type (Attachment 1-Tables A-D). The criteria to determine valid comparables used in the weighted calculation are: 1. All SJCOG, Inc. transactions (fee title and appraised value of unencumbered property) 2. Sales not less than 40 acres 3. Sales not greater than 500 acres 4. No parcels with vineyard or orchard (except SJCOG, Inc. transactions for special needs) 5. Must be land which would fulfill mitigation under the plan 6. Comparable sales reviewed by Habitat Technical Advisory Financial Sub-committee 7. Not greater than 2 years old from the date of June 30 th of each year with all acceptable comparables included (criteria 1-5). A minimum of 10 acceptable comparables are required for analysis. If the minimum of 10 transactions are not available, the time period will extend at 3 month intervals prior to the beginning date until 10 comparables are gathered. The calculation results in a 13.74% increase to the Agricultural/Natural Habitat type of Category A (acquisition) component to be $9, Category B (assessment & enhancement) - Consumer Price Index This category is a straight forward use of an average of the California Consumer Price Index (CPI) calculator, as reported by the California Department of Finance, for a 12 month period following a fiscal year (June June) to keep up with inflation on a yearly basis. The California CPI calculation was an increase of 2.2%. The calculation results in an increase of the Agricultural/Natural Habitat type Category B (Assessment & Enhancement) component to be $3, Category C (management & administration) - Consumer Price Index This category is a straight forward use of an average of the California Consumer Price Index (CPI) calculator, as reported by the California Department of Finance, for a 12 month period following a fiscal year (June June) to keep up with inflation on a yearly basis. The California CPI calculation was an increase of 2.2%. The calculation results in an increase of the Agricultural/Natural Habitat type Category C (Management & Administration) component to be $1, SJCOG, Inc. staff calculated the fees using the SJMSCP Financial Analysis formula model [FEE = Category A (acquisition) + Category B (assessment & enhancement) + Category C (management & admin)] which is shown in Table 1-8 and final fee table in attachment 2. The overall result in the calculations is a 9.38% increase in the fees for 2015 shown in the table below.

23 2015 SJMSCP Development Fees Habitat Type Category A Category B Category C Total Fee Rounded Fee Open Space $4, $1, $ $7, $7,281 AG/Natural $9, $3, $1, $14, $14,543 Vernal Pool (grasslands) $35, $ $6, $42, $42,784 Vernal Pool (wetted) $35, $43, $6, $85, $85,631 The SJMSCP process allows projects which participate under the county-wide habitat plan to realize pre-determined streamlined processing of the project through an otherwise cumbersome regulatory process in a much shorter period of time and cost then navigating outside the plan. By opting for participation and realizing the benefits of the SJMSCP, the project can choose any number of ways to mitigate the impacts of the project through the plan. The SJMSCP allows projects to chose one or multiple mitigation options like simply pay a fee, redesign the project to avoid/minimize impacts, provide land in lieu of the SJMSCP fee which the project will negotiate the costs on their own, or a combination of the options. COMMITTEE ACTIONS: HTAC FINANICAL SUB-COMMITTEE: Recommended John Beckman, BIA Dave Stagnaro, Stockton Jane Humes, Conservation Ray Hoo, County Josh Emery, USFWS Todd Gardner, CDFW HTAC: Recommended Approval M&F: Discussion Exec Committee: Discussion SJCOG, Inc. Board: September 25 th Action Required Prepared by: Steven Mayo, Program Manager

24 DRAFT MATERIAL ONLY Attachment 1 - SJMSCP Comparable Land Sales Table A. Central Zone Properties Address APN Zone Sale Date Price Acres Price/Acre Hab Type Appreciated Price Appreciated Price/Acre CTT PRIOR Skiff Rd, Escalon, CA / Central 07/03/2012 $5,688, $18, C34 $6,353, $21, ORT 42 -PRIOR Paradise Rd, Tracy, CA Central 07/20/2012 $537, $10, C34 $600, $11, CTT 81 -PRIOR S. Chrisman Rd, Tracy, CA Central/SW 07/26/2012 $720, $11, C34 $804, $13, Souza 1 -PRIOR S. Chrisman Rd, Tracy, CA Central/SW 08/16/2012 $850, $17, C34 $945, $19, ORT PRIOR Kasson Rd, Tracy, CA /50/51/52 Central 08/28/2012 $1,168, $5, C34 $1,298, $6, ORT 3 -PRIOR 3498 E. Bill Rd, Acampo, CA Central 09/07/2012 $975, $8, G3 $1,079, $9, ORT 56 -PRIOR S. Ahearn Rd, Tracy, CA Central 10/17/2012 $645, $13, C34 $710, $14, UND 225 -PRIOR E. Hwy 4, Stoctkon, CA Central 10/25/2012 $2,829, $18, C34 $3,116, $19, CTT 2 -PRIOR 6701 W. Forest Lake Rd, Acampo, CA Central 11/19/2012 $2,441, $6, C34 $2,677, $7, ORT 60 -PRIOR Kasson Rd, Tracy, CA Central 11/27/2012 $250, $6, C34 $274, $6, UND 390 -PRIOR S. Koster Rd, Tracy, CA Central 11/30/2012 $1,560, $11, C34 $1,711, $12, Souza 3 -PRIOR S. Chrisman Rd, Tracy, CA Central/SW 12/20/2012 $1,746, $12, C34 $1,906, $13, Souza 2 -PRIOR 3262 W. Linne Rd, Tracy, CA /60 Central 12/21/2012 $901, $19, C34 $983, $21, ORT 28 -PRIOR 601 N. Jack Tone Rd, Stockton, CA Central 12/27/2012 $1,970, $20, C34 $2,150, $21, ORT 9 -PRIOR Jack Tone Rd, Galt, CA Central 12/31/2012 $340, $8, C34/G $371, $9, ORT 10 -PRIOR Jack Tone Rd, Galt, CA Central 01/09/2013 $325, $7, G $353, $8, ORT 58 -PRIOR S. Ahearn Rd, Tracy, CA Central 01/18/2013 $2,609, $13, C34 $2,834, $14, Souza 4 -PRIOR 550 W. Wright Rd, Tracy, CA /03/05 / Central 02/07/2013 $1,858, $11, C34 $2,009, $11, ORT PRIOR S. MacArthur Rd, Tracy, CA /18 Central/SW 03/08/2013 $906, $9, C34 $975, $10, ORT 43 -PRIOR Victory Ave, Oakdale, CA Central 03/08/2013 $683, $16, C34 $735, $18, UND 34 -PRIOR Sowles Rd, Galt, CA Central 03/22/2013 $3,674, $24, C34/G $3,954, $26, ORT 55 -PRIOR S. Chrisman Rd, Tracy, CA Central/SW 05/15/2013 $900, $13, C34 $960, $14, ORT 44 -PRIOR Kasson Rd, Tracy, CA Central 05/20/2013 $1,160, $17, C34 $1,237, $18, MLS PRIOR E. St Rt 88 Hwy, Lockeford, CA / Central 05/29/2013 $625, $14, G $666, $15, CTT E. Collier Rd, Acampo, CA Central 09/07/2012 $1,860, $14, G $2,059, $15, UND ORT W. Forest Lake Rd, Acampo, CA /09 Central 11/13/2012 $1,500, $13, C34 $1,644, $14, UND ORT E. Linne Rd, Tracy, CA Central 11/30/2012 $1,560, $18, C34 $1,711, $20, UND ORT Pezzi Rd, Stockton, CA Central 12/05/2012 $800, $17, C2 $873, $18, UND CTT N. Jack Tone Rd, Acampo, CA Central 05/31/2013 $255, $6, C34 $271, $6, UND ORT E. Nichols Rd, Galt, CA Central 06/05/2013 $1,600, $20, C34 $1,697, $21, ORT Guard Rd, Lodi, CA Central 06/18/2013 $4,125, $10, C34 $4,376, $11, ORT Destination Dr, Tracy, CA Central 07/01/2013 $920, $22, C34 $971, $23, CTT S. Greenwood Rd, Tracy, CA Central 07/12/2013 $850, $8, C34 $897, $9, ORT E. Acampo Rd, Clements, CA Central 07/30/2013 $744, $18, OG $785, $19, CTT S. Manteca Rd, Manteca, CA Central 08/16/2013 $800, $9, C34 $840, $10, CTT E. Gawne Rd, Stockton, CA Central 09/12/2013 $300, $3, C34 $313, $3, CTT Kasson Rd, Tracy, CA Central 09/18/2013 $1,520, $17, C34 $1,590, $17, ORT S. Kasson Rd, Tracy, CA / /12 Central 10/03/2013 $2,162, $7, C34 $2,250, $7, ORT Wagner Rd, Stockton /08/12 Central 10/25/2013 $3,500, $16, C34 $3,642, $16, UND CTT Lucerne Ave, Tracy, CA Central 11/08/2013 $768, $9, C34 $795, $9, UND CTT Pezzi Rd, Stockton, CA Central 11/25/2013 $2,100, $30, C34 $2,174, $31, CTT Henry Rd, Acampo, CA Central 12/03/2013 $661, $16, C34 $681, $16, UND CTT N. St Rt 88 Hwy, Acampo, CA /25 Central 12/16/2013 $4,612, $22, C34 $4,753, $23, CTT W. Lovely Rd, Tracy, CA Central 12/17/2013 $878, $12, C34 $904, $12, UND ORT S. Austin Rd, Manteca, CA Central 12/23/2013 $1,487, $19, C34 $1,532, $19, UND CTT N. Sowles Rd, Galt, CA Central 01/13/2014 $1,395, $15, C34 $1,430, $15, ORT Lemon Ave, Escalon, CA Central 01/15/2014 $2,500, $19, C34/U $2,563, $19, UND CTT S. Due Rd, Ripon, CA Central 02/13/2014 $1,015, $15, C34 $1,035, $16, ORT Tredway Rd, Lodi, CA Central 02/28/2014 $2,750, $17, C34 $2,805, $18, UND ORT N. Jack Tone Rd, Lodi, CA Central 03/21/2014 $780, $18, C34 $791, $18, UND ORT Elliot Rd, Galt, CA Central 05/08/2014 $1,500, $4, G $1,507, $4, ORT E. St Rt Hwy 4, Farmington, CA Central 05/09/2014 $1,926, $11, C34 $1,936, $11, ORT Bacchetti Rd, Tracy, CA Central 05/14/2014 $3,592, $28, C34 $3,610, $28, ORT Whitehall Rd, Tracy, CA /5/8/9/10/12/14 Central 05/14/2014 $3,108, $16, C34/W5/W6 $3,124, $16, SJCOG, Inc. Jaques Family - Alder Ave* Central 08/15/2012 $1,296, $9, C34 $1,441, $10, SJCOG, Inc. Jaques Family - Delta Ave* Central 08/15/2012 $1,122, $9, C34 $1,248, $10, SJCOG, Inc. Jaques Family - Tom Paigne* Central 08/15/2012 $841, $9, C34 $935, $10, SJCOG, Inc. Los Acres - Gyr* Central 12/31/2012 $523, $10, C34 $570, $10, SJCOG, Inc. Pellegri Family Central 12/31/2013 $2,420, $10, C34 $2,641, $11, SJCOG, Inc. Pombo Alder Central 01/14/2014 $1,049, $9, C34 $1,075, $9, * SJCOG, Inc. Preserves TOTAL $94,189, $13, $100,194, $14, Table B. Delta Properties Address APN Zone Sale Date Price Acres Price/Acre Hab Type Appreciated Price Appreciatedd Price/Acre UND PRIOR 7520 W. Howard Rd, Stockton, CA /21 Delta 08/08/2012 $1,210, $7, C34 $1,345, $8, ORT 35 -PRIOR 1700 W. Undine Rd, Stockton, CA Delta 12/04/2012 $700, $7, C34 $764, $7, CTT Undine Rd, Stockton, CA Delta 06/28/2013 $1,060, $10, C34 $1,124, $10, UND CTT W. Woodbridge Rd, Lodi, CA /05 Delta 07/05/2013 $1,793, $6, C34 $1,893, $6, CTT Finck Rd, Tracy, CA Delta 02/18/2014 $2,200, $8, C34 $2,244, $8, UND ORT W. Undine Rd, Tracy, CA Delta 04/16/2014 $911, $13, C34 $920, $13, UND CTT Undine Rd, Stockton, CA /16 Delta 04/18/2014 $845, $9, C34 $853, $9, TOTAL $8,720, $8, $9,147, $8, Table C. Southwest Zone Properties Address APN Zone Sale Date Price Acres Price/Acre Hab Type Appreciated Price Appreciatedd Price/Acre SJCOG, Inc. Connolly Ranch Phase 1* SW 12/31/2013 $510, $1, G $535, $1, * SJCOG, Inc. Preserves TOTAL $510, $1, $535, $1, Table D. Encumbered Properties* Address APN Zone Sale Date Price Acres Price/Acre Hab Type Appreciated Price Appreciatedd Price/Acre Caffese Trust / Leventini Delta 10/17/2003 $550, $3, C34 $742, $4, Rurup Trust / Supprenant Delta 01/09/2004 $425, $2, C34 $570, $2, Hammer Trust / Morais Delta 06/25/2004 $854, $2, C34 $1,135, $2, Nature Conservancy Delta 07/22/2004 $658, $2, C34 $873, $2, Heritage Land Co. / Olagaray Bros PTP Delta 04/13/2005 $712, $3, C34 $929, $4, Wing Levee Propety** Delta 11/09/2007 $2,200, $6, C34 $2,755, $7, ** SJCOG, Inc. Preserve TOTAL $5,399, , $3, $7,007, $4, comparables required for Study

25 DRAFT ONLY_July Fees Acquisition Costs Assessment & Enhancement Management and Administration Total Total Rounded Other Open Space $4, $1, $ $7, $7,281 Natural/Ag Lands $9, $3, $1, $14, $14,543 Vernal Pool Grasslands $35, $ $6, $42, $42,784 Vernal Pool Wetted $35, $43, $6, $85, $85,631 Calculations: Table 1 Per-Acre Land Value Summary SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Land Use Central Zone Primary Zone of the Delta Southwest Zone*** Fee Title a* $14,058 $8,632 $0 Row Crops/Grazing b** $4,197 $3,947 $0 Easement Costs a-b $9,861 $4,685 $1,000 *based off of 7/01/11-6/30/13 Applicable Ag Sale Comparables (Table A & B) **based off of SJMSCP Fin. Anal. Proxy Properties (Table C) Estimate for encumbered land in the Delta Zone is $250 lower than that of the Central Zone Based on lower market rents for row crop land. ***based on standard easement cost of Southwest Zone of $1,000/ac. Table 2 Per Acre Acquisition Cost Summary SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation SJMSCP Zone Total Weighted Central Zone Primary Zone of the Delta Southwest Zone Acquisition Cost Land Use Category A B C A+B+C Easement Cost by Zone (1) d $9,861 $4,685 $1,000 Natural Lands Riparian Percent in Zone (2) e 89% 11% 0% Weighted Costs (3) d*e $8, $ $0.00 $9, Delta Submerged Aquatic Percent in Zone (2) f 0% 100% 0% Weighted Costs (3) d*f $0 $4,685 $0 $4,685 Other Water's Edge Percent in Zone (2) g 100% 0% 0% Weighted Costs (3) d*g $9,861 $0 $0 $9,861 Southwest Grasslands Percent in Zone (2) h 0% 0% 100% Weighted Costs (3) d*h $0 $0 $1,000 $1,000 Vernal Pool Wetted (4) n/a n/a n/a $11,246 Vernal Pool Grasslands (4) n/a n/a n/a $11,246 Agricultural Lands Percent in Zone (2) i 97% 3% 0% Weighted Costs (3) d*i $9, $ $0.00 $9, (1) See Table 2. (2) Percent of total lands in each category assumed to be in a given zone. Based on 1996 Economic Analysis (3) Weighted average cost based on proportion of total land in each zone. Assumes easement acquisition for lands categorized as agriculture, riparian, delta submerged, other's waters edge, and southwest grasslands. (4) Assumes fee title acquisition for vernal pool lands. Vernal pools fee title land costs assumed to be about 80% of average Central Zone fee title costs.

26 DRAFT ONLY_July 2014 Table 3 Total Acquisition Costs SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Preserve Types Cost per Acre (1) Transaction Costs (2) 5% Total Land Acquisition Costs Agricultural Lands $9, $ $10, Natural Lands Riparian $9, $ $9, Delta Submerged Aquatic $4, $ $4, Other Water's Edge $9, $ $10, Southwest Grasslands $1, $50.00 $1, Vernal Pool Wetted $11, $ $11, Vernal Pool Grasslands $11, $ $11, (1) See Table 3. Assumes easement purchases in all cases except fee title purchases for vernal pool lands. (2) Transaction costs include biological baseline, apprasial, escrow, and survey costs. Table 4 Total Per-Acre Costs SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Preserve Type Land Acquisition % of Total Preserve Lands Total Preserve Acres Total Costs of Acquisition Agricultural Lands $10, % 57,635 $587,358, Natual Lands Riparian $9, % 19,185 $187,173, Delta $4, % 10 $49, Other Water's Edge $10, % 1,584 $16,400, Southwest Grasslands $1, % 4,146 $4,353, Average of Natural/Ag Lands $9, % 82,560 $795,335, Vernal Pool Wetted $11, % 354 $4,180, Vernal Pool Grasslands $11, % $204,621, Table 5 Total Preserve Costs, Breakdown by Category SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Acquisition Costs Preserve Type Total Preserve Acres Per Acre Total Vernal Pool Wetted 2,121 $11, $25,046, Vernal Pool Grasslands 15,561 $11, $183,755, Nat/Ag Lands 82,860 $9, $798,225, Total 100,542 $1,007,026, Table 6 Vernal Pool Surface and Grasslands / Acquisition Component SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Preserve Type Acres Converted Acquisition Costs Vernal Pool Wetted 707 Total Cost $25,046,295.12

27 DRAFT ONLY_July 2014 Fee per Acre $35, Vernal Pool Grasslands 5,187 Total Cost $183,755, Fee per Acre $35, Table 7 Nat/Ag Land and Open Space / Acqisition Component SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Land Acquisition Preserve Type Land Acqusition Transaction Total Cost associated with Nat/Ag Lands Conversion $758,313, $39,911, $798,225, Nat/Ag Land Conversion 65,940 65,940 65,940 Other Open Space Conversion 37,465 37,465 37,465 Multiplier for Nat/Ag Land Conversion Multiplier for Other Open Space Land Acquisition Component of Nat/Ag Lands Fee $8, $ $9, Table 8 Cat B & C Fee Component Calcs SJMSCP 2015 Fee Evaluation Cal CPI 2.20% Assessment & Enhancement Management and Adminstration Fee % of Land Preser. B C Other Open Space $1, $ Natural/Ag Lands 82% $3, $1, Vernal Pool Grasslands 16% $ $6, Vernal Pool Wetted 2% $43, $6,743.86

28 9/2014 Executive Committee STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: RECOMMENDED ACTION: River Oak Orchards Project Review Discussion DISCUSSION: SUMMARY: The County project PA was presented in April 2014 to HTAC and SJCOG, Inc. Board for coverage because the site is in the unmapped area of the plan (attachment 1 and 2). The site plan provided by the SJ County Community Development (attachment 3) included the full area of activity and disturbance by the project. After approval for coverage under the SJMSCP and mitigation being required at ground disturbance, the project proponent is disputing the habitat classification and amount of acreage. The project applicant, Chris Van Groningen, is requesting revisions to the coverage already provided under the San Joaquin Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) for the project. RECOMMENDATION: HTAC recommended SJCOG, Inc. approve coverage for approximately 1.3 acres of impacts associated with the PA project. FISCAL IMPACT: SJCOG, Inc. to be provided mitigation for the appropriate impacts as required under the SJMSCP per HTAC and SJCOG, Inc. Board approval. BACKGROUND: The project sought a site approval (PA ) through application to SJ County for a project creating an agricultural processing facility. The project referral for the site application called for the project to be built in 4 phases over 10 years. Phase 1, to be constructed within 18 months, to include construction of a 12,000 square foot warehouse building and a 30,000 gallon propane tank, and the use of the existing facility, which includes a 7,500 square foot warehouse, a 12,000 square foot agricultural processing building, an 1,120 square foot fumigation building, a 29,688 square foot agricultural building, a 128 square foot agricultural processing building, propane tank, a 250 gallon propane tank and a truck scale. Phase 2, to be constructed in 4 years to include the construction of a 12,000 square foot warehouse building. Phase 3, to be constructed in 5 years, to include the construction of a 1,120 square foot fumigation building. Phase 4, to be

29 constructed in 10 years, to include the construction of a 12,000 square foot warehouse building and a 7,500 square foot expansion to an existing 12,000 square foot agricultural processing building. The applicant is requesting to modify the parking requirement from 95 parking spaces to 15 parking spaces based on the proposed number of employees. Prior Action: April 2014 As required for unmapped projects under the SJMSCP and at the direction of the project proponent, the project sought coverage under the SJMSCP by way of the HTAC making recommendation to the SJCOG, Inc. Board for participation in the county-wide plan. Based on SJMSCP GIS vegetation layers, the habitat layer classifies the project site as Multi-Purpose Open Space (C2) per 2001 issuance of the federal and state permits. As allowed to participate in the SJMSCP, the total disturbed area of approximately 6 acres consisted of Multi-Purpose Open Space (C2) habitat impacts as laid out in agreement with the project proponent (attachment 4). The project applicant was responsible for mitigating the habitat impacts caused by this project by either paying the appropriate fees at time of ground disturbance or dedicating land in lieu of a fee at appropriate the SJMSCP ratio. Appeal: The project proponent is appealing for HTAC to require only the new disturbance area of approximately 1.3 +/- acres which is outside what the County had issued as multiple agricultural building permits over the prior years depicted in aerial images from 2001 to present (attachment 5) and the release of Agricultural Building Permits detailed below: BP Accessories Permit (February 2006) Detached Ag Building BP Commercial Permit (August 2006) Four 5,000 Gallon Propane Tank Foundations to Walnut Dehydrator BP Commercial Permit (September 2006) Electricals for Walnut Huller Building BP Accessories Permit (March 2011) Ag Building with Plumbing Stub Out Only BP Commercial Permit (August 2011) Fumigation Building BP Addition Remodel (February 2012) Addition to Existing Ag Building BP Accessories Permit (August 2012) Detached Garage for SFR with Electrical BP Accessories Permit (April 2013) Ag Storage Building (Roof Only) BP Commercial Permit (August 2013) Detached Restroom Building/Attached Patio Cover PA Site Approval (February 2014) see attachment 3 Referral to SJCOG, Inc PC Plan Check Commercial (June 2014) Plan Check Only Ag Warehouse (BP ) BP Commercial Permit (August 2014) Ag Warehouse (see PC Plan Check Only) After lengthy discussion between the project proponent, SJCOG, Inc. staff and the HTAC members, the HTAC with concurrence of permitting recommended the project site plan be revised by the San Joaquin County Community Development Department (SJCCDD) to accurately depict the activities and area which would be provided coverage under the SJMSCP. The area requiring coverage would not include any area under the prior agricultural permit which would reduce the impacts from the 6+/- acres to approximately 1.3 acres.

30 COMMITTEE ACTIONS: Habitat Technical Advisory Committee: Recommended Approval of Revised Concept Executive Committee: Discussion SJCOG, Inc. Board: September 25 th Action Required ATTACHMENTS: 1. General Location Map 2. Project Location Map 3. Project PA Referral/Site Map 4. PA Coverage Calculations w/project Proponent 5. Aerial Imagery (2001 Current) Prepared by: Steven Mayo, Program Manager

31 ATTACHMENT 1

32 ATTACHMENT 2

33 ATTACHMENT 3

34

35 ATTACHMENT 4

36 ATTACHMENT 5

37

38

39

40