Patterson sues Stanislaus County over business park that would employ thousands

The city of Patterson filed a lawsuit Thursday challenging the environmental studies for the Crows Landing Industrial Business Park, an ambitious county project that aims to boost employment in western Stanislaus County.

Patterson, a chief partner in the county-led development, filed the suit just days before the Board of Supervisors is slated to consider approval for the 1,528-acre center, which is planned at the former Crows Landing military airfield, west of Highway 33 near Fink and Bell roads.

Keith Boggs, county assistant executive officer, said the city served notice to the county Friday. The legal action won’t stop supervisors from holding a hearing Tuesday on a rezone and specific plan for the business center, Boggs said.

The lawsuit claims the county’s environmental impact report has not addressed Patterson’s concerns about the project that were raised four years ago. It says the county, in a rush to promote job creation, approved environmental studies that improperly analyzed and failed to implement mitigation measures for impacts to groundwater and water supply, city utilities, public services and traffic.

“In addition, the EIR relies on a faulty assumption that the surrounding cities of Patterson and Newman have already planned for and taken into account the massive amount of growth that would be needed to support the (Crows Landing) project,” the lawsuit states.

The 35-page lawsuit also refers to growth-inducing impacts on schools in the Patterson Joint Unified School District and Newman-Crows Landing Unified School District, suggesting the districts would need to double capacity of school facilities.

In the past few years, county officials held numerous meetings with their counterparts in Patterson to hash over wastewater service, water service and traffic impacts stemming from the Crows Landing project. The city was still citing concerns about utilities, groundwater impacts and greenhouse gas emissions days before county supervisors approved the environmental review Oct. 30.

County officials say more than $1 million was spent on the environmental analysis.

In a press release dated Thursday, Patterson said the lawsuit will preserve its right to have the unresolved issues addressed.

“The city has been engaged with the county in discussions about the project throughout its development and continues to work with the county to address the city’s concerns with the project and the EIR,” the city’s news release said.

In an email Friday, City Manager Ken Irwin said the city had no additional comment, other than saying it seeks an amicable outcome through negotiations with the county outside the courtroom. To explain the timing of the lawsuit, the city was facing legal time limits for challenging the EIR, the email says.

Boggs said the county will set up meetings with Patterson’s staff to discuss the remaining issues. “I think we can work those out,” said Boggs, who was not surprised by the suit.

The proposed business center and general aviation airport would develop over 30 years, providing up to 15,000 jobs. The county, which took possession of the former Navy air station in 2004, would offer long-term leases to companies wishing to operate manufacturing plants, distribution centers and aviation-related businesses.

The former base, situated a mile and a half from Interstate 5, could be attractive to employers wanting to ship products from distribution centers.

The plans include a 370-acre public airport using one of the former military runways in a northwest-southeast direction; about 14 million square feet of business park facilities could emerge adjacent to the airport. The county has plans for commuter shuttles and public transit stops serving the center.

For several years, the county worked with developer Gerry Kamilos on the controversial West Park project, at the same site, before pulling the plug on that effort in August 2012. Initial plans for the most recent reuse project were released in 2014. The county has worked on completing the environmental analysis before seeking a project developer.

The county Planning Commission recommended approval of the airport and business park at an uneventful hearing Nov. 15, recognizing the airport would slowly develop in the middle of the next decade. No Patterson representatives commented at the hearing.

The county would rely on Patterson for wastewater service for the complex. The city is also a candidate for providing water service, though another option for water is expanding the community services district in the nearby town of Crows Landing.

Among the unresolved issues between the city and county is a possible out-of-boundary agreement for Patterson to accept wastewater from the airport and business park, unless the city’s “sphere of influence” or ultimate service boundary is extended to include the center.

But the big issue, according to the lawsuit, is a projection that 15,000 jobs would translate into a population increase of 34,270 residents. Patterson’s lawsuit assumes that 11,200 dwellings would be needed to house those people in Newman, Patterson, Turlock and the unincorporated county area.

County leaders expect that companies at the center would hire many local residents who are commuting to Bay Area job sites. So there’s disagreement about how many homes would be needed.

County Board Chairman Jim DeMartini, whose district includes the West Side, said that Patterson’s concerns about housing impacts are based on false assumptions. He said the county does not need to use the city’s sewer system for the Crows Landing development but could build its own treatment facilities.

DeMartini has criticized the city for proposing a deal in which the county would endorse a 1,200-acre northwest Patterson annexation in exchange for city support for the Crows Landing center.

The Board of Supervisors meets at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the basement chamber of Tenth Street Place, at 1010 10th St., Modesto.

This story was originally published November 30, 2018 at 5:44 PM.