Folsom City Council
March 28, 2023

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

VintaBe at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
into the area, including those involved with the Hudson's Bay Company in 1832 (Hoover et al. 2002:370).

ColonelJ. Warner is also known to have traveled with the Ewing-Young trapping expedition which passed through the CentralValley in 1832 and 1833 (Gilbert L879:11).

The American period in California began in 1848 with the end the Mexican American War (1846 - 1848), and the ensuing Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which officially made California a territory of the United States. Soon after, gold was discovered at Sutte/s Mill, located along the American River in Coloma. By 1849 over 80,000 people had emigrated to try and stake their claims and strike it rich in the California Gold Rush. Due to this population boom, and the industries that popped up as a result, California was made the 3lststate of the United States in 1850, and by 1854, the bustling town of Sacramento was made the state capital.

LocalHistory
The City of Folsom was named after Captain Joseph Libbey Folsom, a West Point graduate who arrived in California in 1847 to serve as Quartermaster in San Francisco. ln 1848 Captain Folsom purchased a 35,000-acre Mexican land grant located just to the east of John Sutter's land grant and hired Theodore Judah, a raihay engineer, and surveyor, to lay out a town initially named Granite City. After Captain Folsom's death in July 19, 1885, his executors changed the town name to Folsom (Gudde 1998). The history of the city is steeped in the development of the mining and transportation industries, and later was heavily influenced by the development of the Folsom Prison and hydroelectric dams.

Mormon Bar, located just a few miles east of Folsom, was the second major gold find within California and by the spring of 1848 a group of Mormons had developed mining operations in the area (Hoover et al. 1990, The Telegraph 1956:8). These efforts were soon followed by the exploration of the other gravel bars along the American River; by 1849 mining works were established between Mormon lsland and Mississippi Bar, including Alabama Bar, Slate Bar, Beam or Bean's Bar, and Sailor Bar. Other nearby mining camps included Texas Hill,.iust south of present-day Folsom and Big Gulch mining camp, north along the American River (Hoover et al. 1990:289), Negro Bar was also located on the American River, near present day Decatur and Reading streets, and was first mined by Afro-Americans in 1849. The community that sprang up around Negro Bar began within the current townsite of Folsom and extended almost a mile downstream. These works, camps, and residences housed some 700 inhabitants as of 1851, and the settlements included two general stores and two hotels (Gudde 1975:235, Hoover et al. 1990:289). ln 1852, however, a massive flood on the river forced a relocation of the community onto the bluffs above the bar (Gudde 1975).
ln 1851, check dams were built by the Natomas Water and Mining Company on the South Fork American River two miles above Salmon Falls to facilitate the supply of water for mining operations in the growing Folsom Mining District. By 1854 these dams diverted water across 20-miles of ditches and sluice gates that supplied the Folsom area, and included a main canalthat reached Prairie City to the south (Barrows 1965, Reed 1923:130, Thompson and West 1880). The area saw an infusion of Chinese immigrants around 1850, with many of them hired to help build the ditches and dams for the Natomas Company.

Some also established themselves in the Folsom area by reworking abandoned claims and tailings piles (Barrows 1966:70-7l,Thompson and West 1880). By the mid-1850s there were over 1,200 Chinese living in the area, primarily working as miners,
Mining in the area persisted through the 1960s, though to a far lesser extent than the mining boom in the 1850s. these efforts included placer and drift mining ventures near Alder Creek and Willow Springs, 45

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintase at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
at the Golden Treasure Mine close to Leidersdorff Street, at the White and Donnelly Gravel Mine between Leidesdorff and Sutter Street, and at Wool and Reading streets (Maniery and Syda 1991:25).

Dredge mining the American River was first attempted by W. P. Bonright and Company when they obtained title and rights to the Mississippi Bar (Barrows 1966:54-55). By the 1900s and 1910s several companies seeking to emulate the successes of the Bonright dredging endeavor moved into the region, with some working the gravels at Sailor Bar and Texas Hill {The Telegraph, May 30, 1903). Mining remained the primary focus on the Folsom economy until the 1940s, when the federal government placed a moratorium on the mining of non-essential metals as a result of the outbreak of World War ll.

Though mining/dredging operations resumed after the war in L945, the returns proved to be not nearly as profitable as they had in earlier years. The last mining enterprise in the region halted operations in 1962 (Barrows 1"966).
ln 1852 the Sacramento Valley Railroad Company (SVRR) was developed to build a rail line between Sacramento and Negro Bar. The route was surveyed and laid in 1854. Construction began in 1855 and completed by 1855, making it the first line completed in California (Barrows 1966:16, Reed 1923:130). A terminus for the SVRR was built in Folsom near already established hotels and stores. The railway opened on February 22, L856 and quickly made Folsom a transportation center for freight and passengers who needed to push further into the California interior, or to arrive in Sacramento for shipment by boat to San Francisco and then elsewhere. Many would arrive in Folsom to stage voyages to Sonora, Placerville, Auburn, and Marysville (Thompson and West 1.880:223). As a result Folsom grew along with the railroad traffic, with the years between 1856 and 1855 characterized by the development of hotels, houses, churches, an academy, and businesses including a flour mill, and the Folsom Telegraph building (Thompson and West 1880:223). A series of fires (two in 1871, one in 1872, and another in 1885) destroyed a tremendous amount of property in the area, but each time the city's business district found ways to quickly bounce back with the construction of larger and grander buildings. ln the 1870s Folsom also saw an increase in agricultural activity as the Natoma Water and Mining Company began renting out large swaths of their property for use as vineyards, gardens, and orchards (Reed 1923:130). Chinese, Native Americans, Portuguese, ltalians, and African Americans worked in these agricultural fields and took on the roles of cooks, laborers, and handymen in the Folsom area.

Growth in the area was also spurred in the 1870s and 1880s by the opening of Folsom State prison in 1878. This prison remains a major employer for the town through the present day.

Originally intended to house the surplus of criminals held at San Quentin prison, construction began on the Folsom Prison in 1874, with the efforts largely supplied by local Folsom businesses. The prison was built on land owned by the Natoma Water and Mining company. ln exchange for the state gaining possession of the land, convict labor was to be used to construct a dam for the company (Barrows L966:771. A railroad spur intended to supply the new prison facility was built along the south bank of the American River and extended to the intended dam site. The first cell block was completed in 1880 prompting the first transfer ol 44 convicts from San Quentin. These men were soon put to work building an additional cellhouse and the dam for the Natoma Company. These buildings were made with granite quarried from the prison grounds, and as the prison was expanded, so was the prisoner population. The prison was unique in that it had an electric power plant on the grounds to power interior lighting and the arc-lights that illuminated the boundaries of the prison grounds (Barrows 1966:78), Convict labor from the prison was used to build the Folsom dam as intended, which led to the development of the nearby hydroelectric plant.

The dam and the first half-mile of the associated canal were completed in 1893. Soon after log booms 46

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior,qpartments ISMND
were constructed so that logs could be floated through the power canal and to a milling pond and sawmill near Folsom. These logging businesses were operated by the American River Land and Lumber Company which were affiliated with the Natoma Company {Barrows 1966). By L895, a hydroelectric system consisting of a two-story powerhouse, intake gates, penstocks, McCormick turbines, and GE generators was completed. Once operational, this powerhouse brought electric current through transmission lines to Sacramento, forming the longest transmission line in the world at the time (Barrows 1965:23). This hydroelectric system was continuously upgraded and remained in use until 1952 when the Folsom Dam was demolished in anticipation of the construction of a new dam further upstream.
ln the latter half of the 20th century the City of Folsom continued to expand and grow. The new Folsom Dam project began in 1952 and was completed by 1955. This new dam was built to controlflooding in Sacramento and to provide hydroelectric power to nearby cities. ln the 1960s, musician Johnny Cash brought fame to the city and the Folsom Prison, with his hit single "Folsom Prison Blues" and the subsequent recording of an album on the prison grounds in 1968. ln 1982 lntel Corporation, the computer hardware company, made Folsom its home and purchased 234 acres to set up offices, warehouses and manufacturing center. Today the 1.5 million square foot lntel campus employs over 6,000 employees and is the single largest employer in the city. ln more recent decades, especially the 1990s, Folsom has been the site of rapid expansion, as the suburbs of Sacramento spread out into the Folsom city limits. As of the 2020 census, Folsom is home to some 80,454 residents. This recent growth has spurred the development of numerous residential neighborhoods, apartment complexes and shopping centers.

Culturol Resource Record Seorch
Previous Studies
On January 21,2022, a records search addressing the APE and a 0.50-mile radius beyond the APE boundaries was conducted by the North Central lnformation Center (NCIC) at California State University, Sacramento. The purpose of the records search was to: (1) identify prehistoric and historic resources previously documented in the APE and within 0.5-mile of APE boundaries; {2) determine which portions of the APE may have been previously studied, when those studies took place, and how the studies were conducted; and, (3) ascertain the potential for archaeological resources, historical resources, and human remains to be found in the APE. This search also included a review of the appropriate USGS topographic maps on which cultural resources are plotted, archaeological site records, building/structure/object records, and data from previous suneys and research reports. The California Points of Historical lnterest, the California Historical Landmarks, the NRHP, the CRHR, and the California State Historic Resources lnventory listings were also reviewed to ascertain the presence of designated, evaluated, andlor historic-era resources within the APE. Historical maps and historical aerialphotographs of the area were also examined (NETROnline2022l.

The cultural resources records search identified 1"0 studies that have previously been conducted within a

0.S-mile radius of the APE (Table 9). Of these, two studies overlapped with the current APE for at least part of their survey area; these include report numbers 004508 (Maniery 1993) and 004509 (Maniery and Syda 1991). Brief summaries of the reports pertaining to surueys that overlapped with the current APE are provided below Table 9.
47

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Table g.Previous Studies Conducted within 0.5-Mile of the APE Report
004s08
004509
000155
001837
003761
005933
011.288
011533
011755
Tltle
Determination of Effect, American
River Bridge Crossing Project, City of
Folsom, Sacramento County,
California
Cultural Resources lnvestigation for
the American River Bridge Crossing
Project, City of Folsom, Sacramento
Cou California
An Archaeological Survey of the Oak
Avenue Parkway, Ashland Water
Transmission Main and Storage, Blue
Ravine Water Transmission Main,
and the Lew Howard Memorial Park
for the City of Folsom, Sacramento
Cou California
Archaeological SurveY for the
Proposed Natoma PiPeline
Expansion, Folsom Dam to the CitY
of Folsom Water Treatment Plant
Nextel Commu nications {on-air} CA-
O2O5A I West Folsom Entrance Road
to Folsom State Prison
Cultural Resources lnvestigation for
the Folsom Sanitary Sewer
Rehabilitation Project- Phase 1
CA
Su pplemental Historic ProPertY
Survey Report for the JohnnY Cash
Class 1 Bicycle Trail, City of Folsom,
California Federal Project No. 5288
Cultural Resources Records Search
and Site Visit Results for T-Mobile
West, LLC Candidate SC 14633A (East
Natoma & Randall), 235 Marchant
Drive, Folsom, Sacramento County,
California
Cultural Resources Survey of Folsom
Zoo, Sacramento CountY, California
Oak Parkway Trail Undercrossing,
Draft lnitial Study & Environmental
Evaluation
lncludes
APE?AfillatlonYear Author(sI
Yes
PAR
Environmental
Services, lnc,
1993 Maniery,
Mary L.

Yes
PAR
Environmental
Services, lnc.

Maniery,
Mary L. and
Keith A. Syda
1991
No
6reenway,
Gregory
Archaeology
Study Center,
csu
Sacramento
L977
No
Sharon
Waechter
Waechter,
Sharon!997
No
EarthTouch, LLC200r. Billat, Lorna
Beth
No
PAR
Environmental
Services, lnc.

Maniery,
Mary L. and
Cindy Baker
1998
No
PAR
Environmental
Services, lnc.
2013
PAR
Environmental
Services, lnc.

No
Environmental
Assessment
Specialist, Inc.
20t4
Wills, Carrie
D. and
Kathleen A.

Crawford
NoPAR
Environmental
Services, lnc.

Allen, Josh2015
NoHELIX
Environmental
Planning lnc.
2015 Wills, Carrie013383
48

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Source: Helix 2022b.

Report oo450g - Determination of Effect, American River Brldge Crossing Proiect, City of Folsom, Sacromento County, Calilornia was written by Mary,L. Maniery in 1993' The American River Bridge Crossing project ApE consisted of four linear alignments or alternatives that extended {east to west} from near the current Folsom Dam, to downstream of the existing Rainbow Bridge. lntersection improvements and road widening activities were also planned as part of the project. The survey area covered for this effort encompassed four possible alignments (referred to in the report as "alternatives") for a bridge that would be built across the American River. The records searches and surveys conducted for these ilternative alignments encountered 1.0 historic period cultural resources including Folsom's ,'Chinatown" district {CA-SAC-426-H), the Sacramento Valley Railroad {CA-SAC-428-H), the Folsom Hydroelectric System (cA-SAc-429-H), the Folsom Powerhouses (National Historic Landmark/CHL #633), Rainbow Bridge {Bridge#245-67),and severalindividualbuilt resources on APNs 070-0113-00L,074- 0105-012,070-0010-019,070-0010-019 and 070-0091-007. However, none ofthe identified resources fall within the currently proposed APE, nor are any ofthese resources anticipated to be affected by the currently proPosed undertaking.

Report 004509 - Culturol Resources tnvestigation for the American River Bridge Crossing Proiect, City of Folsom, Socromento County, Callfornia,was written my Mary L. Maniery and Keith A' Syda in 1991' Similar to report 004508, this cultural resource investigation examined four linear alignments or alternatives for a proposed bridge that would cross the American River, as well as associated road improvements that extended (east to west) from nearthe current Folsom Dam to downstream of the existing Rainbow Bridge. The investigation identified 13 archaeologicalsites, five isolated artifacts, and 55 historic structures. None of the resources identified during the records searches or pedestrian surveys covered within this report fall within the currently proposed APE, and none of the resources mentioned in the report are anticipated to be affected by the current undertaking' Previously Recorded Searches
The records search revealed that elements of one cultural resource, the Folsom Mining District (P-34- 000335 I CA-SAC-00030gH! may be present within the APE, and that eight previously recorded cultural resources lie within O.S-mile of the ApE. A brief description of resource P-34-000335 (cA-sAc-000308H) is provided below Table 10'
p-34{@335 (CA-SAC-000308HI : Most recently updated by coleman, Talcott, and wolpert of Solano Archaeological Seruices, this resource, known as the Folsom Mining District, is comprised of a variety of elements from the region's historic mining period {spanning from the 1840s through the mid-twentieth century) including mines, quarries, tailings, mining equipment, habitation sites, roads, railroad grades, water conveyances, and structural foundations. The results of HELIX's records search indicated that elements of this historic district could be present within the currently proposed APE. NCIC records suggest that the Folsom Mining District taken as a unified entity has been determined to be ineligible for listing on the NRHp and cRHR, but that individual elements within the district may be eligible for listing and that they should be evaluated as eligible or ineli6ible on a case-by-case basis' 49

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
RecorderTdnomlal Year
cA-sAc-0 00308H 1969 K. G. S.
1990 Syda, K., and C.

Thomasn/a
1990 Syda, K., and C.

Thomasn/a
1990 Syda, K., and C.

Thomasala
cA-sAc-o00424 1990 Syda, K., and C,
Thomas
Syda, K., and C.

ThomascA-sAc-000425 1990
L989 Gerry, R., and M
PeakcA-sAc-000429H
nla 2014 Crawford, K. A.
2OLL Appleby, Richard
AllencA-sAc-000426
Table 10. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 0.S-Mile of the APE P-34-000335
P-34-0000,15
P-34-000017
P-34-000018
P-34-000451
P-34-000452
P-34-000456
P-34-005017
P-34-005119
Historic period district- Folsom
Mining District, several
incorporating elements including
foundations and structure pads, a
water conveyance system, mines,
and ta
Prehistoric period isolate - Mano
Prehistoric period isolate - Pestle
Historic period site- Concrete
rubble and 3 quarried granite
blocks
Historic period site - Water
conveyance system, associated
with Folsom Min District
Prehistoric period site - Lithic
scatter
Historic period site - Water
conveyance system,
roadsltrails/railroad grades,
and standi structures
Historic period site - 1960s PG&E
Tower constructed with bolted
steel L-shaped profiles and cross
arms
Historlc period site - Folsom State
Prison Railroad, no longer extant,
plotted route appears on 1892
USGS
Source: HELIX 2022b
Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs
Historic maps and aerial photographs examined for this review include plat maps from 1857 and 1855; Folsom USGS 7,5-minute quadrangle maps from 1914, L944,1954, and 1967; and a series of aerial photographs dating from 1952 through 2018 (NETROnline 2022!. The plat maps and USGS quadrangle maps reveal no signs of development of the APE through 1957. The aerial photograph serfes of the AP€ reveals the development of Natoma Street by 1952 and several dirt roads to the southwest of the APE.

By L964,the area adJacent south of the APE has been further developed with paved roads and the construction of a few residential houses. By 1993 development in the area increared considerably, with residential construction having taken place to the northeast, east, south, southwest. and northwest of the APE. Due north of the APE, however, the land remained undeveloped save for the paved road that leads to the Folsom prison located 2.5-miles north of the APE. Despite these developments in the 50

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
vicinity of the APE throughout the 20th century, the aerial photography analysis su8gests that no developments took place within the currently proposed APE (NETROnline 2022).

Nollve Americon Hedtoge Commirsion Sqcred Lqnds File Seqrch On January ZI, ZO22, HELIX requested that the NAHC conduct a search of their Sacred Lands File (SLF) for the presence of Native American sacred sites or human remains in the vicinity of the proposed project area. On February 9,2022 HELIX received a response from the NAHC that indicated the SLF search returned negative results but that the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not necessarily indicate the absence of cultural resources within the project area. As a result, the letter recommended that HELIX reach out to 10 Native American tribal representatives (Appendix E) who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. The recommended points of contact with Native American Tribes included:
. Dahlton Brown, Director of Administratiorl, Wilton Rancheria . Grayson Coney, Cultural Director, Tsi Akim Maidu
. Pamela Cubbler, Treasurer, Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe . Regina Cuellar, Chairperson, lone Band of Miwok lndians . Sara A. Dutschke, Chairperson, lone Band of Miwok lndians o Steven Hutchason, Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Wilton Rancheria . Rhonda Morningstar Pope, Chairperson, Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk lndians . Clyde Prout, Chairperson, Colfax-Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe . Jesus Tarango, Chairperson, Wilton Rancheria
. Gene Whitehouse, Chairperson, United Auburn lndian Community of the Auburn Rancheria
HELIX sent letters to these tribal representatives on February LO,2022. As of the date of this report no 'responses have been received.

Pedesldon Survey
HELIX Staff Archaeologist, Jentin Joe, surveyed the undertaking's APE on February 8,2022. The survey involved the systematic investigation of the APE's ground surface by walking in parallel 10-meter (m) transects, During the survey the ground surface was examined for artifacts {e'9., flaked stone tools, tool-making debris, stone milling tools, fire-affected rock, prehistoric ceramics), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a prehistoric cultural midden, soil depressions, and features indicative of the former presence of structures or buildings {e.g., standing exterior walls, postholes, foundations, wells) or historic debris (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics). Ground disturbances such as gopher holes, burrows, cut banks, and drainage banks were also visually inspected. Representative survey photographs are found in Appendix E.

The topography of the APE is largely flat, with small rises in elevation in the northeast which dip down to a small creek which lies along the north boundary of the property and runs east to west. The APE is bounded by residential neighborhoods to the south, and east, a small business centerto the west, and by Natoma Street to the north, with the Folsom Prison property just north of Natoma Street. The APE is mostly covered in oak trees and tall grasses, and the surveyor encountered fairly poor surface visibility (10 percent or less) with the exception of exposed patches ofthe ground surface that have been 51

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom senior ISMND
modified (photograph 1), These patches have clearly been disturbed and reveal light brown, loamy soils with few inclusions. The patches are signs of significant and recent ground disturbance in the form of excavations and earthen works that appear to have been designed to create an informal mountain biking trail/racing course (Photograph 2). The surveyor also found a Sreat deal of modern trash on the site, including planks of wood, scraps of plastic, and a discarded mattress {Photograph 3}. To the west is a walking trail that extends just outside the southern boundary of the APE.

No prehistoric or historic-era materials or features were observed during HELIX's intensive pedestrian survey ofthe APE.

Evqluqtlon of Cullulql Resources
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to $15064'5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to s1s064.s?
Less than significant impact with mitigation.

The results of this cultural Resources Assessment indicate that there are no known or newly discovered cultural resources within the ApE, prompting HELIX to recommend that the area is not likely to contain surface based archaeological deposits. Although the NCIC records search indicated that elements of district p-34-000335 (the Folsom Mining District) may potentially be located within the current APE, no traces of the district were found during HELIX's pedestrian survey of the proiect area. As a result, the current projec-t is anticipated to have no impacts on district P-34-000335.

Based on the results of HELIX's cultural resource assessment the APE can be assumed to have a low sensitivitv for surficial cultural resources and this project is anticipated to have no impacts to historical

1."rour."r'fo, the purposes of compliance with both section 106 of the NHPA and GEQA' The recommendations provided below are intended to minimize the potentialfor buried and undocumented cultural resources to be significantly impacted during project implementation' Consequently, HELIX recommends that there would be no effect on historic properties or historical resources, including archaeological and built-environment resources as a result of project implementation. No additional studies, archaeological work, or construction monitoring are recommended. However, in light of the presence of prehistoric resources within the study area (P-34- 0000016 and p-34-000017) and the potential presence of elements of district P-34-000335 to lie within the study area, HELIX recommends that the Mitigation Measure CUL-01 and CUL-02 outlined below be implemented in the unlikely event that cultural resources are encountered during construction. lf hisiorical or archaeological resources are discovered, implementation of Mitigation Measure cUL-01 and Mitigation Measure CUL-02 would reduce any potential impact to a less than significant levelfor questions a) and b).

Mitigatlon Measure CUL{11: lnadvertent Discovery
r ln the event that cultural resources are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities should be halted within 100-ft of the discovery. Cultural resources could consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including 52

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior APartments ISMND
hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. lf the resources cannot be avoided during the remainder of construction, an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the lnterior's professional eualifications Standards should then be retained, in coordination with USACE and the city, to assess the resource and provide appropriate management recommendations. lf the discovery proves to be NRHP- and/or CRHR-eligible, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted and should be discussed in consultation with USACE and the City' Mitigation Measure CUL'02: Worker Awareness Training Program r All construction personnel involved in ground disturbing activities shall be trained in the recognition of possible cultural resources and protection of such resources. The training will inform all construction personnel of the procedures to be followed upon the discovery of archaeological materials, including Native American burials. Construction personnel will be instructed that cultural resources must be avoided and that all travel and construction activity must be confined to designated roads and areas. The training will include a review of the local, state, and federal laws and regulations related to cultural resources, as well as instructions on the procedures to be implemented should unanticipated resources be encountered during construction, including stopping work in the vicinity of the find and contacting the appropriate environmental compliance specialist'
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less than significant impact with mitigation. No human remains are known to exist within the project area nor were there any indication, oihrmrn remains found during the field survey' However, there is always the possibility that subsurface construction activities associated with the proposed project, such as trenching and grading, could potentially damage or destroy previously undiscovered human remains' This is a poientially significant impact. However, if human remalns are discovered, implementation of Mitigation Measure cul-02 and Mitigation Measure cuL-03 would reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure CUL'03: Treatment of Human Remains
r Although considered highly unlikely, there is always the possibility that ground disturbing activities during construction may uncover previously unknown human remains' In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, Public Resource Code (PRC) Section 5097,9g must be followed. Once project-related earthmoving begins and if there is a discovery or recognition of human remains, the following steps shall be taken:

1. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the specific location or any nea rby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the County Coroner is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation of the cause of death is required. lf the coroner determines the remains are Native American, the coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the "most likely descendant" of the deceased Native American' The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible forthe excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98, or
53

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND

2. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity either in accordance with the recommendations of the most likely descendent or on the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance:
a. The NAHC is unable to identifu a most likely descendent or the most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being notified by the commission;
b. The descendent identlfied fails to make a recommendation; or c. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent,
54

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom senior Apartments IsMND
VI. ENERGY
&mhlly
Stntfrc!nt
llnp!ct
lereThrn
gCnncrmurdr
llElpdon
lncorporatrd
lcrsfhcn
Slgnlfrcam llo
lmpact lnp.€t
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources. during proiect
constructlon or operation?
nt*l r I tJ
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
r-1LJ f"I LI T
Environmentol Setling
California's electricity needs are satisfied by a variety of entities, including investor-owned utilities, publicly owned utilities, electric service providers and community choice aggregators. ln 2020, the California power mix totaled 272,576 gigawatt hours {GWh}. ln-state generation accounted for 51 percent of the state's power mix. The remaining electricity came from out-of-state imports (CEC 2021a), Table 11 provides a summary of California's electricity sources as of 2020.

Table 11. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within O.S-Mile of the APE
Fuel Type Pertent of Callfornia Power
Coal 2.74
Large Hydro 12.21
Natural Gas 37.06
Nuclear 9.33
oil 0.01
Other (Petroleum CokelWaste Heat) 0.19
Renewables 33.09
Source: CEC 2021a.

Natural gas provides the largest portion of the total in-state capacity and electricity generation in California, with nearly 45 percent of the natural gas burned in California used for electricity genemtion in a typical year. Much of the remainder is consumed in the residential, industrial, and commercial sectors for uses such as cooking, space heating, and as an alternative transportation fuel. ln 2012, total 55

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
natural gas demand in California for lndustrial, residential, commercial, and electric power generation was 2,31"3 billion cubic feet per year (bcf/year), up from 2,L96 bcf lyear in 2010 (CEC 2021b).

Transportation accounts for a major portlon of California's energy budget. Automobiles and trucks consume gasoline and diesel fuel, which are nonrenewable energy products derived from crude oil.

Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California, with 97 pe rcent of all gasoline being consumed hy light-duty cars, pickup trucks, and spo* utility vehicles (SUVs). ln 2015, 15,1 billion gallons of gasollne were sold in California {CEC 2021c}. Dieselfuel is the second most consumed fuel in California, used by heavy-duty trucks, delivery vehicles, buses, trains, ships, boats, and farm and construction equipment. ln 2015, 4.2 blllion gallons of dieselwere sold in California {CEC 2021d), Evoluollon of Energy
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than significent impact. Energy used for construction would primarily consist of fuels in the form of diesel and gasoline for the operation of construction equipment and construction worker vehicles.

While construction activities would consume petroleum-based fuels, consumption of such resources would be temporary and would cease upon the completion sf construction. The Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report estimated the proposed project's GHG emissions using CalEEMod (HELIX 2122cl, The construction energy calculations from the prepared for the proposed project is shown in Table 12.

Table 12. Construction Energy Summary
Sourco
Off-Road Construction Equipment 1,960,515
On-Road Construction Traffi c
Project Construction Total
Source: HELIX 2022c; kBtu = kilo-British thermal unit
The project's construction-related energy usage would not represent a significant demand on energy resources because it is temporary in nature. Additionally, with implementation of the low impact design features, project construction would avoid or reduce inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. Therefore, the project's construction-phase energy impacts would be less than significant.
t
Operation of the proposed project would increase the consumption of energy related to electricity, natural gas, waterr and wastewater. However, implementation of low impact design, energy efficient, and sustainable features would also reduce the energy usage. The project design incorporates sustainable features that would exceed the requirement of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), by 15 percent or more, The projeet would provide 1tt electric vehicle charging stations, as required under the City's General Plan GHG Reduction Measure T-8 and would provide 28 bicycle parking spaces, as required under the City's General Plan GHG Reduction Measure T-3 {Appendix 8).

Gallons Dlcsel Gallon: Gas
14,LO4

2.926 8.916
L7,O?7 8,916
56

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Hardscapes, such as ped€strian and bicycle pathways, outdoor seating and dining areas, and parking stalls/ trash apron would be constructed with cool paving rnaterials (e.g., slab concrete). Cool paving areas, including shaded areas. account for approximately 68,2 percent of the non-roof impervious area.

The operational energy calculations prepared for the proposed project are shown in Table 13.

Table 13. Operational enerty Summary
EnergyType kBtu
Gasoline {Gallons) 5,142,521
Diesel (Gallons) 430,744
Natural Gas (kBtu) 1,280,610
Electricity (kwh) 2,042,292
Source: HELIX 2022c; k8tu = kilo-British thermal unit
During operations, the rnajority of fuel consumption resulting from the proiect would involve the use of motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site, as well as fuels used for alternative modes of transportation that may be used by residents. lt should be noted that over the llfetime of the project, the fuel efficiency of vehieles is expeded to increa$e. A$ such, the amount of gasoline consumed as a result of vehicular trips to and from the project site during operation is expected to decrease over time.

Based on these considerations, implementation of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. lmpacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No impact. The proposed project would not conflict with or obslruct a stale or local plan for renewable energy efficienry. The project would conform to all applicable state, federal, and local laws and codes' Therefore, the proposed proiect would have no irnpact.

Quantlty
41,472
3,099
1,280.610
s98,s37
Total
57

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartm€nts ISMND
VII. GEOTOGY AND SOILS
Potentblly
Sltnlturnt
lmprct
lese Thrn
5lgnlflcrnt
wldr
riHfrdon
lnconor.ted
lffsTh.n
Slplfieltt ltlo
lmpscl lmprct
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse efferts, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:

Rupture of a knor,vn earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
il n n
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ft fJ I
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? n il I n
iv. Landslides? fl rIl
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? n ln c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
n I ilx
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1"8'1-8 of the Uniform Building Code {L994), creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
n
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
n I
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? x I tr
The Geology and Soils section of this document is based on the project-specific Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Youngdahl Consulting Group, lnc (Youngdahl2A2\. The environmental setting discussion below is largely from this geotechnicalstudy, which is included as Appendix F.

Environmenlol Setling
Surlqce Condilions
The project site is located on the southeastern side of East Natoma Street in Folsom, California and is bounded by East Natoma Street to the northwest, existing residential subdivisions to the northeast and 58

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom senior Apartments IsMND
south, and Folsom Prison to the north. A paved pedestrian path is present between the site and the subdivision to the west and south, along with transformer towers and overhead power lines. Seasonal drainage paths are present, extending from the east to the southwest along the northern property boundary. Topography at the site generally consists of the highest elevation at the southeast corner, sloping downward in various directions. The existing slopes within the site are generally 2H:1V (Horizontal: Vertical) or flatter. Vegetation throughout the project generally consisted of seasonal grasses and trees.

Geology
The project site is situated on the eastern edge of Sacramento County, located within the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada geomorphic province of California. According to the Geologic Map of the Sacramento Quadrangle, California (D.1. Wagner, et al., 1981), this portion of the foothills and the project site is underlain by Copper Hill Volcanic Rocks. The Copper Hillvolcanic are a seguence of Late Jurassic-age volcanic rock that overlies the Salt Spring Slate' Based upon the records currently available from the California Department of Conservation, the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Regulatory Review Zone and there are no known faults located at the project site.

Subsurloce Condllions
Subsurface explorations by Voungdahl Consulting Group, lnc., were conducted on November 5,202I, and included the excavation of eight exploratory test pits. Subsurface soil conditions at the project site primarily consisted of sands, silts, and clays overlying weathered bedrock. The site was generally observed to be surfdced with sand and silt layers in a medium dense/ stiff condition, that were present to depths of 1- to 2.5-ft below existing grade. Test pit 8 consisted of clays in stiff condition, and in Test pits 1-7, clay layers were in a medium to stiff condition. The clays were primarily present in layer thicknesses between approximately 0.5- to l-ft; however, 3-ft clay layers were encountered in Test pits L and 3. No clays were observed in Test pit 5. Bedrock was encountered at 1..5- to 4-ft below the ground surface and was completely to slightly weathered and soft to very hard condition range. A permanent groundwater table was not encountered at the project site with no impact to the development of the site. Due to shallow depth and low permeability of the underlying rock, perched water is common to the area and could be encountered during grading operations {Youngdahl 2021}.

CW Regulotion of Geology ond Soils
The City of Folsom regulates the effects of soils and geological constraints on urban development primarily through enforcement of the California Building Code, which requires the implementation of engineering solutions for constraints to urban development posed by slopes, soils, and geology. 59

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Additionally, the City adopted a Grading Code {Fslsom MunicipalCode Section 14.29) that regulates gradlng citywide to control erosion, storm water drainage, revegetation, and ground movement.

Evqluotlon of GeologY ond Solls
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineeted on the most recent Alguist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42?
Less than significant impact. According to the Geotechnical Engineering Survey, there are no known active faults crossing the property, and the project site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone (youngdahl 2021). Therefore, ground rupture is unlikely at the subject property, and impacts would be less than significant.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than significant impact. The site-specific Geotechnical Engineering Survey identified the project site as a Site Class C in accordance with the 2015 California Buiiding Code {Class A requires least earthquake resistant design and Class F the most earthguake resistant design). Seismic design parameters based on the 2016 California Building Code and site investigations were outlined in the Geotechnical Engineering Survey for use in structural design. Evaluation of seismicity for the project site included the review of existing fault maps and the implernentation of seismic design parameters from the United State Geofu:gical Survey (USGS) onllne calculator and databases (Youngdahl 2021). Conformance to the current bullding code would minimire potentlal ground shaking impacts to a less than significant level. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than significant impact. Liquefaction is the sudden loss of soil shear strength and sudden increase in porewater pressure caused by shear strains, which could result from an earthquake. Research has shorryn lhat saturated, loose to medium-dense sands with a sih conteni less than about 25 percent located within the top 40-ft are most susceptible to liquefaction and surface rupture or lateral spreading. Slope instability can occur as a result of seismic ground motions and/or in combination with weak soils and saturated conditions.

Due to the absence of a permanently elevated groundwater table, the relatively low seismicity of the area, and the relatively shallow depth to rock, the potentialfor seismically induced damage due to site liquefaction, surface rupture, and settlement was considered low {Youngdahl 2021"}. For the above- menttoned reasons, mitigatisn for these potential hazards is not considered necessary far the development of this project. Therefore, liquefaction is unlikely at the sublect property and impacts would be less than significant.
iv. Landslides?
Less than slgnificant impact. The existing slopes on the project site were observed to have adequate vegetation on the slope face, appropriate drainage away from the slope face, and no apparent tension 60

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
cracks or slip block in the slope face ar at the head of the slope. Additionally, due to the absence of permanently elevated groundwater table, the relatively low seismicity of the area, and the relatively shallow depth io bedrock, the potential for seismicity inducted slope instability for the existing slopes was considered low {Youngdahl 2021}. Therefore, landslides are unlikely at the subject property and impacts would be less than significant'
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant impact. The 2016 CBC (California Building Code) and the City's Grading Code and standard conditions for project approval contain requirements to minimize or avoid potential effects from water erosion hazards. As a condition of approval, prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the City would require the applicant to prepare a soils report, a detailed grading plan, and an erosion control plan by a qualified and licensed engineer.Ihe soils report would identify soil hazards, including potential impacts from erosion. The City would be required to review and approve the erosion control plan based on the California Department of Conservation's "EFosion and Control Handbook." The erosion control plan would identify protective measures to be implemented during excavation, temporary stockpiling, disposal, and revegetation activities. With the approval of a soils report, grading plan, and an erosion control plan, impacts relating to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant,
c) Be tocated on a geologic unit or soilthat is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than significant impact with mitigation. The proposed project is relatively long, irregular in shape, and anticipated to be supported by variable thicknesses of soil and or bedrock. Due to these features, the primary geotechnicalconcern associated witlr the planned development is the potentialfor excessive differential settlement, which can stress and damage foundations and other structural and architectural elements. Generally, foundations constructed within the planned cut areas of the building pad would bear a relatively thin section of native soils and or bedrock. However, foundations constructed within the planned fill areas could bear significantly thicker sections to fill, which have a much higher potential for settlement.

A Geotechnical Engineering Survey by Youngdahl Consuhing Group, lnc. prepared recommendations for the foundation, construction, and design of the proposed building in the project site (See Appendlx F for more detail on site reoommendalions). With the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-01, outlined below, the impacts relating to unstable soils in the project area would be less than significant with mitigation.

Mltigation Measure GEO-01: lmplementation of Recommendations an the Geotechnical Engineering Survey
A Geotechnical Engineering Survey was prepared by Youngdahl Consulting Group, lnc. in December 2021. The proposed projects' design plans and specifications outlined in the survey shall be reviewed and approved by a California-licensed geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist prior to contract bidding. A review shall be performed to determine whether the recommendations contained within the Geotechnical Engineering Survey are still applicable to the project. Modifications to the recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Engineering a
6L

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Survey prepared by YoungdahlConsulting Group, lnc. or to the design may be necessary at the time of review based on the proposed plans. The project applicant shall implement all applicable recommendations approved by a California-licensed geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist prior to issuance of a grading permit'
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-8 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creatlng substantial direct or indirect risk to life or property? Less than slgnificant impact with mitigation. Plastic materials (clay soils) were encountered in relatively thin layers at the project site. An expansion index test was performed on a sample of the clay, which resulted in a value of 40 (low expansion), The majority of the remaining materials encountered in the exploration were generally non-plastic (rock, sand, and non-plastic silt). The non-plastic materials are generally considered to be non-expansive. The Geotechnical Engineerlng Study provided recommendations relating to mitigation of expansive soils in the project site {See Appendix F for more detail). Due to the configuration of the proposed constructlon, the anticipated grading, and with implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-03., it is not anticapated that specialdesign considerations for expansive soils would be required. With these conditions, the impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No impact. The proposed sewer system would connect to the public sewer system and would not require septic systems or an alternative waste disposal system. No impact would occur' f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than significant impact with mitigation. No previous surueys conducted in the project area have identified the project site as sensitive for paleontological resources or other geologically sensitive resources, nor have testing or ground disturbing activities performed to date uncovered any paleontological resources or geologically sensitive resources. While the likelihood encountering paleontologital resources and other geologically sensitive resources is considered low, project-related graunddisturbing activities could affect the integrity of a previously unknown paleontological or other geologically sensitive resource, resultlng in a :ubstantial change in the significance of the resource' Therefore,the proposed project could result in potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-02 would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure GEO-02: ldentification of Paleontological Resource During Proiect Construction r ln the event a paleontological or other geologlcally sensitive resources {such as fossils or fossil formationslare ielentified during any phase of praiectconstruction, all excavations within 100-ft of the find shall be temporarily halted until the find is examined by a qualified paleontologist, in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate representative at the City of Folsom who shall coordinate with the paleantologist as to any necessary investigation of the find. lf the find is determined to be significant under CEQf,, the City shall implement those measures which may include avoidance, preservation in place, or other appropriate measures, as outlined in Public Resourees Code Section 2L083.2.
62

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Potenfi.$ly
$il0crnt
lmprct
tasslhrn
$gl*nc.nt
xrldr
Mld$don
lncorporatcd
lrlcfhan
$gnlficent t{o
lmprct lmprcl
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
n
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of tr I un greenhouse gases?
HELIX Environmental Planning conducted a greenhouse gas emissions assessment for the proposed project based primarily on the results of the City's Greenhous Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist as presented in Appendix B.

Environmenlol Setling
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Globaltemperatures are moderated by atmospheric gases.

These gases are commonly referred to as greenhouse gasses {GHG} because they function like a greenhouse by letting sunlight in but preventing heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth's atmosphere,
GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human (anthropogenic) activities. Anthropogenic GHG emissions are primarily associated with burning of fossil fuels during motorized transport; electricity generation; natural gas consumption; industrial activity; manufacturing; and other activities such as deforestation, agricultural activity, and solid waste decomposition.

The GHGs defined under California's Assembly Bill {AB) 32 include carbon dioxide (COz), methane (CHc), nitrous oxide (NzO), hydrofluorocarbons {HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC}, and sulfur hexafluoride {SFe)' Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Estimates of GHG emissions are commonly presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (COze), which weigh each gas by its global warming potential (GWP)' Expressing GHG emissions in COae takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only COzwere being emitted. GHG emissions quantities in this analysis are presented in metric tons (MT) of COze. For consistency with United Nations Standards, modeling, and reporting of GHGs in California and the U,S. use the GWPs defined in the lntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007): COr - 1; CHa - 25; NzO - 298.

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
GHG Reduction Regulollons ond Plons
The primary GHG reduction regulatory legislation and plans (applicable to the project) at the State, regional, and local levels are described below. lmplementation of California's GHG reduction mandates is under the authority of CARB at the state level, SMAQMD and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) at the regional level, and the city at the local level.

Executive Order S-3{5: On June L,2OO5, Executive Order (E0) 5-3-05 proclaimed that California is vulnerable to climate change impacts. lt declared that increased temperatures could reduce snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, further exacerbate California's air quality problems. and potentially cause a rise in sea levels. To avoid or reduce climate change impacts, EO 5-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 levels by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2O20, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Executive Orders are not laws and can only provide the governor's direction to state agencies to act within their authority to reinforce existing laws.

Assembly Bill 32 - Global Warming Solution Act of 2006: The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, widely known as AB 32, requires that CARB develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. CARB is directed by AB 32 to set a GHG emission limit, based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. The bill requires CARB to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions.

Executive Order 8-30-15: On April 29,2OL5, EO 8-30-15 established a California GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1.990 levels by 2030. The EO aligns California's GHG emission reduction targets with those of leading internationalgovernments, including the 28 nation European Union' California achieved the target of reducing GHGs emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as established in AB 32. California's new emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 will make it possible to reach the goal established by EO 5-3-05 of reducing emissions 80 percent under 1990 levels by 2050.

Senate Bill 32: Signed into law by Governor Brown on September 8,20L6, Senate Bill (SB)32 (Amendments to the California GlobalWarming Solutions Action of 2006) extends California's GHG reduction programs beyond 2020. SB 32 amended the Health and Safety Code to include Section 38565, which contains language to authorize CARB to achieve a statewide GHG emission reduction of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by no later than December 31, 2030. SB 32 codified the targets established by EO 8-30-15 for 2030, which set the next interim step in the State's continuing efforts to pursue the long-term target expressed in EO 8-30-15 of 80 percent below 1990 emissions levels by 2050' California Air Resources Board: On December LI,2008, the CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping plan (scoping plan) as directed by AB 32. The Scoping Plan proposes a set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in California to the levels required by AB 32. Measures applicable to development projects include those related to energy-efficiency building and appliance standards, the use of renewable sources for electricity generation, regionaltransportation targets, and green building strategy. Relative to transportation, the Scoping Plan includes nine measures or recommended actions related to reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and vehicle GHGs through fuel and efficiency measures' These measures would be implemented statewide rather than on a project-by'project basis (cARB 2008).
64

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
ln response to EO 8-30-15 and SB 32, all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. The mid-term target is criticalto help frame the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure needed to continue driving down emissions (CARB 2014). ln December 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update, the Strategy for Achieving California's 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target, to reflect the 2030 target set by EO 8-30-15 and codified by SB 32 (CARB 2017)'
Sacramento Area Council of Governments: As required by the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), SACOG has developed the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. This plan seeks to reduce GHG and other mobile source emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning to reduce VMT.

City of Folsom: As part of the 2035 General Plan, the City prepared an integrated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy (Appendix A to the 2035 General Plan; adopted August 28, 2018), The purpose of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategy (GHG Strategy) is to identify and reduce current and future community GHG emissions and those associated with the City's municipal operations The GHG Strategy includes GHG reduction targets to reduce GHG emissions (with a 2005 baseline year) by 15 percent in 2020, 51 percent in 2035, and 80 percent in 2050. The GHG Strategy identifies policies within the City of Folsom General Plan that would decrease the City's emissions of greenhouse gases.

The GHG Strategy also satisfies the requirements of CEQA to identifo and mitigate GHG emissions associated with the General Plan Update as part of the environmental review process and serves as the City's "plan for the reduction of greenhouse gases", per Section 15183.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, which provides the opportunity for tiering and streamlining of project-level emissions for certain types of discretionary projects subject to CEQA review that are consistent with the General Plan (City 2018).

Melhodology ond Assumplions
Criteria pollutant, precursor, and GHG emissions for project construction and operation were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model {CalEEMod), Version 2020.4.0. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. The model was developed for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in collaboration with the California air districts. CalEEMod allows for the use of default data (e.9., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory) provided by the various California air districts to account for local requirements and conditions, and/or user-defined inputs. The calculation methodology and default data used in the model are available in the CalEEMod User's Guide, Appendices A, D, and E {CAPCOA 2021). The CalEEMod output files are included in Appendix B.

Construction of the projec't is anticipated to begin as early as January 2023 and be completed in April 2024. Construction modeling assumes the following anticipated schedule: site preparation 10 working days; grading 87 working days; building construction 207 working days; paving 2l working days; and architectural coating 22 working days. Construction equipment assumptions were based on estimates from CalEEMod defaults. The project would not require an import or export of soilduring construction activities. Construction emissions modeling assumes implementation of basic dust control practices (watering exposed areas twice per day) to comply with the requirements of: SMAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust.
65

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior APartments ISMND
Operational mobile emissions were modeled using the proiect trip generation of 441 average daily trips from the project Transportation lmpact study (T. Kear Transportation Planning and Management, lnc' 2022), Operational emissions resulting from energy use, water use, and solid waste generation were modeled using CalEEMod defaults with an added 20 percent reduction in water use to account for the requirements of the 2019 CALGreen, and an additional 25 percent solid waste diversion to account for AB 341 requirements.

Stondords of Slgnificonce
The final determination of whether or not a project has a significant effect is within the purview of the lead agency pursuant to CEoA Guidelihes Section 15064(b). The City's GHG Strategy, described above, is a qualiiied pian for the reduction of greenhouse gases pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5' Consistency with the GHG Strategy may be used to determine the significance of the project's GHG emissions.

The city,s 2035 General plan policy NcR 3.2.8 and GHG strategy include criteria to determine whether the potential greenhouse gas emissions of a proposed project are significant (City 2018)' NCR 3.2,8 Streamlined GHG Analysis for Projects Consistent with the General Plan projects subject to environmental review under CEQA may be eligible for tiering and streamlining the anaiysis of GHG emissions, provided they are consistent with the GHG reduction measures included in the General plan and ElR. The City may review such proiects to determine whether the following criteria are met:
. proposed project js consistent with the current general plan land use designation for the project site;
r proposed project incorporates all applicable GHG reduction measures (as documented in the climate change Technical Appendix to the General Plan EIR) as mitigation measures in the CEQA document prepared for the project; and
"
proposed project clearly demonstrates the method, timing and process for which the project will comply with applicable GHG reduction measures and/or conditions of approval, (e.g', using a CAp/GHG reduction measures consistency checklist, mitigation monitoring and reporting plan, or other mechanism for monitoring and enforcement as appropriate)' Evoluollon of Greenhouse Gos Emlrsions
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant lmpact with Mitigation. GHG emissions would be generated by the project during construction (vehicle engine exhaust from construction equipment, vendor trips, and worker commuting trips) and during long-term operation (electricity and natural gas use, electricity resulting from water consumption; solid waste disposal, and vehicle engine exhaust). GHG emissions were calculated used CalEEMod, as described in Methodology and Assumptions'
66

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
The calculated GHG emissions anticipated to be generated during construction of the project are shown below in Table 14. Due to the cumulative nature of GHGs, SMAQMD recommends amortizing a project's construction emissions over the operational lifetime of the project. Therefore, the construction emissions are amortized (i.e., averaged) over 30 years and added to operational emissions in this analysis.

Table 14. Construction GHG Emisslons
Year Emlsslons
2023 396.1
2024 92.4
Totall 488.5
Amoft ized Co nstruction E m iss io ns 16.s
Source; CalEEMod (output data is provided in Attachment A) 1 Totals may notsum due to rounding'
GHG = Breenhouse gas; MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent The results of the 2025 Operational GHG Emissions are provided below in Table 15.

Table 15. Operational GHG Emissions
2025 EmlsslonsEmlsslon Sources
Area 2.3
118.2
Mobile 370,0
Waste 23.6
Water 9.1
subtotalr 523.3
Am orti ze d Co nstruc t io n E m i ss ions 16,3
Total 539.6
Source: CalEEMod (output data is provided in Attachment A) 1 Totals may notsum dueto rounding.

GHG = greenhouse gas; MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent To determine significance of the project's GHG emissions, the Ci!y's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist was completed (City of Folsom 2021; included in Appendix B).

Part L: Land Use Consistency
The proposed project is consistent with the City's 2035 General Plan land use and zoning designations? The project parcel is designated as Professional Office (PO) in the Folsom 2035 General Plan, which provides for low-intensity business and professional offices that are compatible with higher-intensity residential uses. The zoning designation of the project site is Business and Professional {BP) District. ln accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist, if the project would require a change in land use designation or a rezone, consistency would be determined by calculating the estimated the GHG emissions resulting from maximum buildout of the project site allowed using the current zoning and using the 67

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
proposed zoning change. If the land use designation/zoning change would not result in an increase in annual GHG emissions, the project would be coflsistent (City 202tal' However, the project would not result in a land use designationlzoning change and therefore, there would be no change in GHG emissions.

A senior housing development would be an allowable use for the BP zoning district. Entitlement requests for this project include a Planned Development Permit (PD Permit) and a Conditional Use permit. The purpose of the PD Permit is to allow for greater flexlbility in the design of integrated developments than otherwise possible through strlct application of land use ' regulations. With the PD Permit, the project's site plan, elevations, and overall project design would be evaluated, and specific development standards would be defined. Ihe proiect is consistent with applicable development standards for the BP zoning district, As shown in Table 15 above, the proposed project is anticipated to result in approximately 539.6 MT COze per year.

Part 2: GHG Reduction Measures Consistency (only applicable measures shown):

E-l Building energy Sector: The project will exceed the requirements of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards tTitle 24, Part 5) by 15 percent or more? Consistent. The project would exceed the requirement of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), by L5 percent or more.

T-1 project Locatiorl and Density: The project is a mixed-use building with two or more uses {i"e., residential, commercial, offlce, etc.f or if the site is 5 acres or larger ther* are two or rnore uses on the site connected by protected pedestrlan paths (e.g., sidewalks, elevated walkways) excluding driveways?
Consistent. The project is less than 5 acres and is located within an existing empty lot. lmplemenlation of the proposed development would include a rnix of uses includlng residential units, community center, and leasing office. The proiect would include a concrete sidewalk that would extend around the southern parking area and cotnect to the existing Oak Parkway Trail section located south of the site boundary. Additional proposed concrete sidewalks would be located at the frontage of the project site and would connect to internal sidewalks proposed around the building.

T-3 Bicycle Parking; Project provides 5 percent more bicycle parking spaces than required in the City's MunicipalCode?
Consistent with mitigation. With 136 residential units, the project requires 27 bicycle parking spaces. Bike racks would accommodate 28 bicycle parking spaces on ths eastern side of the project site, exceeding the number of bicycle parking $paces required by flve percent. Mitigation Mea$ure GHG-01 would require the installatlon of bicycle parking 5 pereent or more hiSher than the requirements of City Code section 17.57.090'
T-6 High-perforffance Oiesel (Construction only): Use high-performance diesel (also known as Diesel- HPR or Reg-9000/RHD) for construction equipment?
68

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

VintaBe at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Consistent with mitigation. Mitigation Measure GHG-02 would require the use of high- performance diesel for all project construction activities.

T-8 Electric Vehicle Charging {Residential): For multifamily projects with 17 or more dwelling units, provide electric vehicle charging in 5 percent of total parking spaces? Consistent with mitigation. Mitigation Measure GHG-03 would require installation of 14 electrical vehicle charging stations based on the 136 total parking spaces proposed for the project.

SW-L Enhanced Construction Waste Diversion: Project diverts to recycle or salvage at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste generated at the project site in accordance with Appendix A4 (Residential) of CALGreen?
Consistent with mitigation. Mitigation Measure GHG-04 would require a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste to be diverted, recycled or salvaged.

W-l Water Efficiency: For new residential and non-residential projects, the project will comply with all applicable indoor and outdoor water efficiency and conservation measures required under CALGreen Tier 1.?
Consistent with mitigation. Mitigation Measure GHG-05 would require implementation of all 2019 CALGreen Tier 1. applicable indoor and outdoor water efficiency and conservation measures.

With implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-01. through GHG-05, the project would be consistent with the City's GHG Strategy. Therefore, the project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, and the impact would be less than significant with mitigation'
Mitigation Measure GHG{II: Bicycle Parking
r ln accordance with the City General Plan GHG Reduction Measure T-3, the project shall provide a minimum of 5 percent more bicycle parking than required in the City's Municipal Code Section 17,57.090.

Mitigation Measure GHG{2: High'Performance Diesel
r ln accordance with the City General Plan GHG Reduction Measure T-5, the project shall use high- performance diesel (also known as Diesel-HPR or Reg-9000lRHD) for all diesel-powered equipment utilized in construction of the project'
Mitigation Measure GHG{13: Electric Vehicle Charging
r ln accordance with the City General Plan GHG Reduction Measure T-8, the project shall provide 14 electric vehicle charging stations based on the 136 total parking spaces proposed for the project.

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Mitigation Measure GHG{4: Enhanced Construction Waste Diversion e ln accordance with the City General Plan GHG Reduction Measure SW-1, the project shall divert to recycle or salvage a minimum 65 of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste generated at the project site in accordance with Appendix A4 (Residential) of the as outlined in the California Green Building Standards Code (2019 CALGreen).

Mitigataon Measure GHG45: Water Efficiency
ln accordance with the City General Plan GHG Reduction Measure W-1, the project shall comply with all applicable indoor and outdoor water efficiency and conservation measures required under 2019 CALGreen Tier 1, as outlined in the California Green Building Standards Code. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
less than Significant lmpact with Mitigation. There are numerous State plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The principal overall State plan and policy is AB 32, the Galifornia Global Warming Solutions Act of 2005. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. SB 32 woutd require further reductions of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The mandates of AB 32 and SB 32 are implanted at the state level by the CARB's Scoping plan. Because the project's operationalyear is post-2020, the project aims to reach the quantitative goals set by SB 32. Statewide plans and regulations such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles (AB 1493), the LCFS, and regulations requiring an increasing fraction of electricity to be generated from renewable sources are being implemented at the statewide level; as such, compliance at the project level is not addressed. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with those plans and regulations.

The Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy {MTP/SCS)for Sacramento county is the 2020 MTP/SCS adopted by the sacramento Area council of Governments (sAcoc) on November L8,2OLg. The 2020 MTP/SCS lays out a transportation investment and land use strategy to support a prosperous region, with access to jobs and economic opportunity, transportation options, and affordable housing that works for all residents. The plan also lays out a path for improving our air quality, preserving open space and natural resources, and helping California achieve its goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (SACOG 2019). The transportation sector is the largest source of GHG emissions in the state. A project's GHG emissions from cars and light trucks are directly correlated to the project's VMT. According to the Transportation lmpact Study prepared for the project, the project is anticipated to generate at least 15 percent less VMT per capita than the regional average (T. Kear Transportation Planning and Management, lnc. 2022). This VMT reduction meets the 15 percent reduction required by 58 743. ln addition to regionalVMT proiections, SACOG utilizes localgrowth projections to develop the strategies and measures in the 2020 MTPISCS. As discussbd in question a), above, there would be no change in land use and zoning, and no change in GHG emissions would result, Therefore, the regional VMT and population growth resulting from implementation of the project would be consistent with the assumptions used in the 2020 MTP/SCS' As discussed in question a|, above, with implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-OI through GHG-05, the project would be consistent with the city's GHG StrateSy, a qualified plan for the reduction of greenhouse gases pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. Therefore, the project would not a
70

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

VintaSe at Folsom Senlor Alartments ISMND
confllct wlth CARB's 2017 Scoping Plan, the SACOG's 2020 MTP/SCS, or the Clty's GHG Strategy, and the impact would be less than slgnificanl with mltigation.
71

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIATS
Potcills[y
Sllntfrcrnt
lnp.c
legsftrn
$$ncam
sldt
Mlthndon
lncorpontrd
tcrsllun
Slgnlf,ornt ilo
lmp.ct lrnptct
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
n I n
b) create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
n
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
n r
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962,5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
U n I
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where ssch a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety harard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
tr T
f) lmpair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
tr n I n
gl Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
LJ
Envlronmenlol Setllng
The project site is currently undeveloped has no past land uses associated with potentially hazardous sites. The schools nearest to the project site are St. John's Notre Dame School, approximately 0.2-miles east of the site, Theodore Judah Elementary School, approximately 0.5-miles southwest of the site, Blanche Sprentz Elementary School, approximately 0.7-miles southeast of the site and Folsom Middle School, approximately 1.5-miles southeast of the site'
The following databases were reviewed for the project site and surrounding area to identify potential hazardous contamination sites: the SWRCB Geotracker (SWRCB 2020); California Department of Toxic Substance Control's EnviroStor online tool {DTSC 2020}; and the US EPA's Superfund National Priorities 72

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
List (EpA 2019). Based on the results of the databases reviewed, no hazardous waste sites are located on the project site.

Federal and state laws include provisions for the safe handling of hazardous substances. The federal OccupationalSafety and Health Administralion (OSHA) administers requirements to ensure worker safety. Construction activity must also be in compliance wlth the California OSHA regulations {Occrpational Safety and Health Aet of *7A}.

Evoluqlion of Hozords ond Hqzordous Molerlqls
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than significant impact. The site has no known history of past land uses associated with potentially hazardous sites. Construction of the proposed project would result in an increase in the generation, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes. During project construction oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, paints, solvents, and other hazardous materials may be usetl. lf spilled, these substances could pose a risk to the environment and to human health.

Following construction, household haeardous materials such as various cleaners, paints, solvents, pestieides, pool chemicals, and automobile fluids would be expected to be used. The routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials are subject to local, state, and federal regulations to minimize risk and exposure.

Further, the City has set forth its hazardous materials goals and policies in the Hazardou.s Materials Element of the General Plan. The preventative policies protect the health and wElfare of residents of Folsom through manageme nt and regufation of hazardous materials. Consequectly, use of the listed materials above for their intended purpose would not pose a significant risk to the public or environment and would therefore cause a less than significant impact. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the proposed project site has no known history of past land uses associated with potentially hazardous sites and construction of the proposed groject would follow all local. state, and federal regulations. These regulations protect the health and welfare of residents of Folsom through management and regulation of hazardous materials in a manner that focus' on prevenling problems. With the implementation of these regulations, the potential for a foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be low, and therefore would cause a less than significant impact. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? less than significant impact. The nearest school is St. John's Notre Dame School, approximately 0.2- miles east of the site, During project construction, oil, gasoline, diesel fuel, paints, solvents, and other hazardous materials may be used, but they would be used accordingly to local, state, and federal regulations. With these regulations in place, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact.
73

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior APartments ISMND
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No impact. The site is not included on any list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 55962.5. No hazardous materlals sites are located at the pro,iect slte based on review of the FnviroStor (DTSC 20201, Geatracker {SWRCB 2020}, and EPA Superfund Priority Lrst (EPA 2019). Therefore, project implementation would have no impact on hazards to the public or environment.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The nearest public or public use airport is Cameron Airpark, approximately ll-miles east of the project site. At this distance, the project is not within the airport land use plan area and the project would have no impact on safety hazards or excessive noise related to airports. f) lmpair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergensy response plan or emergency evacuation Plan?
Less than significant impact. The City of Folsom maintains pre-designated emergency evacuation routes as identified in the Clry of Fakom Evocustion Plon {CitY af Folsom 2010a). The praposed pmject is located in evacuation plan area #lO-Cimmaron Hill/ Rancho Diablo, which identifies East Natoma Street as a major evacuation route and Cimmaron Circle as a minor evacuation route. The proposed project would not modify any pre-designated emergency evacuation route or preclude their continued use as an emergency evacuation route. Emergency vehicle access would be malntained throughout fhe project Fite to meet the Fire Department standards for fire truck maneuvering location of fire truck to fight a fire, rescue access to the units, and fire hose access to all sides ofthe building. Therefore, grolect impacts to the Citt's adopted evacuation plan and emergency plans would be less than significant.

S) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less than significant impact. The project site is located in an urbanized area in the City of Folsom and is provided urban levels of fire protection by the City. The site is designed for clear fire laneffire truck access and fire hose access to all parts of the buildings, The proiect would include fire hydrants, exterior Fire Department Connection assemblies, and fire riser rooms. Emergency vehicle access would be maintained on the site to meet the Fire Department standards forfire truck maneuvering, location of fire truck to fight a fire, rescue access to the units, and fire hose access to all sides of the building. The fire lane would be 27-ft minimum, with an inner turning radius of 25-ft and an outer turning radius of 50-ft. All curbs adjacent to the fire lane would be painted red for emergency fire services, Therefore, the proposed proiect would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss due to wildland fires, and impacts would be less than significant.
74

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
X. HYDROTOGY AND WATER QUATITY
Potentlrlly
SEnlf,crnt
lmFtCt
tesoftrn
Sltntfio.nt
wllh
Mltlgrdon
Incorporeted
lascrhtn
Sltltlficint No
lmp.ct lmpsct
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
t1tt L-J l:}
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
I L]
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration ofthe course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site?
u tf I {_i
ii, Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off- site?
l-:l r n
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional resources of polluted runoff?
n L]
iv. lmpede or redirect flood flows? il I r L]
d) ln flood hazard,tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release oi pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
A preliminary Drainage and Stormwater Quality Report was prepared by TSD Engineering lnc' on August 19,2022, and is included as Appendix G.

Environmenlol Setling
A preliminary Drainage and Storm Water Quality Report was prepared for the proposed project by TSD Engineering and is included as Appendix G. This memo was used when analyzing potential impads to hydrology and water quality resources. The project site is vacant and undeveloped with a fairly dense oak tree canopy and a drainage channel traversing the site adjacent to East Natoma Street. The Oak parkway Trailseparated the project site from residential properties to the south. The Cimmaron Hill Sub-division is located east of the project site and the entrance to Folsom State Prison (Prison) and the Johnny Cash Trail are located on the northwest side of E. Natoma Street. The project is proposing 2.318 I
75

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
acres of landscape {pervious area), 0.05-acres of bioretention (pervious area), l.3-acres of parking lots (impervious surface), 0.4-ares of hardscape (impervious surface), and 0.9-acres of building {impervious surface).

The existing channel conveys runoff from a portion of the Cimmaron Hill Subdivision as well as runofffrom a portion ofthe Prison open space. Runofffrom the Prison property is conveyed to the existing channel through a 24-inch culvert that crosses E. Natoma Street. The channel conveys runoff to a 48-inch culvert that crosses and discharges on the northwest side of E. Natoma Street, ultimately discharging into the American River approximately 2,500-ft west of E. Natoma street.

The existing 24-inch culvert that conveys runoff from the Prison site limits the contribution of runoff to the existing channel from the prison site. The 24-inch culvert has a maximum flow rate of 23.3-cubic feet per second (c'fs) based on the size, slope and maximum headwater elevation. lt is assumed that once the ponding area upstream of the 24-inch culvert if full, runoff will release overland, following the bike trailto trench drains located under the Prison Road bridge, ultimately reaching the American River through Robbers Ravine'
Precipitation is the source of surface water for the project site. Because the area is currently undeveloped, implementation of the project would result in an increase of impervious surface area and channelization of storm water runoff, the rates and volumes of which would increase. As the proposed project would create more than one acre of impervious area, the project is reguired to implement source control measures, low impact development measures, storm impact treatment and full trash captures measures in accordance with the Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region, dated July 20L8 (SWq Manual).

Federal Emergency Management Agency TFEMA) flood insurance rate maps were reviewed for the project's proximity to a 100-year floodplain. The proposed project is on FEMA panel 06057COLL7H, effective August L6,2072. The project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain {FEMA 2012}.

The site is not located in an area of important groundwater recharge. Domestic water in the City is provided solely by surface water sources. The City is the purveyor of water for the site.

Regulolory Fromework Relcilng lo Hydrology ond Woter Quollty The City is a signatory to the Sacramento Countywide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Program {NPDES) permit for the control of pollutants in urban stormwater. Since 199O the City has been a partner in the Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership, along with the County of Sacramento and the Cities of Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Galt, and Rancho Cordova. These agencies are implementing a comprehensive program involving public outreach, construction and industrial controls {i.e., BMPs), water quality monitoring, and other activities designed to protect area creeks and rivers, This program would be unchanged by the proposed project, and the project would be required to implement all appropriate program requirements
ln addition to these activities, the city maintains the following requirements and programs to reduce the potential impacts of urban development on stormwater quality and quantity, erosion and sediment 76

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments TSMND
control, flood protection, and water use. These regulations and requirements would be unchanged by the proposed project.

Standard construction conditions required by the City include:

Water Pollution - requires compliance with City water pollution regulations, including NPDES provisions.

Ctearing and Grubbing - specifies protection standards for signs, mailboxes, underground structures, drainage facilities, sprinklers and lights, trees and shrubbery, and fencing' Also requires the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to control erosion and siltation of receiving waters.

Reseeding - specifies seed mixes and methods for reseeding of graded areas.

Additionally, the City enforces the following requirements of the Folsom Municipal Code as presented in Table 16.

Table 16. City of Folsom Municipal Code Sections Regulating the Effects on Hydrology and Water Quality from Urban DeveloPment
a
Code
Section Code Name Effect ofCode

8.70 Stormwater
Management
and Discharge
Control
Establishes conditions and requirements for the discharge of urban pollutants and sediments to the storm-drainage system; requires preparation and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans' t3,26 Water
Conservation
Prohibits the wasteful use of water; establishes sustainable landscape requi water use restrictions.

L4.20
Green Building
Standards
Code
Adopts the California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen Code), 2010 Edition, excluding Appendix Chapters A4 and A5, published as Part 11, Title 24, C.C.R. to promote and require the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouriging sustainable construction
L4.29 Grading Code
Requires a grading permit prior to the initiation of any grading, excavation, fill or dredging; establishes standards, conditions, and requirements for erosion contro stormwater and
t4.32 Flood Damage
Prevention
Restricts or prohibits uses that cause water or erosion hazards, or that result in damaging increases in erosion or in flood heights; requires that uses vulnerable to floods be protected against flood damage; controls the modification of floodways; regulates activities that may increase flood or that could divert floodwaters.

14.33 Hillside
Development
Regulates urban development on hillsides and ridges to protect property against losses from erosion, ground movement and flooding; to protect significant naturalfeatures; and to provide for functional and visually pteasing development of the city's hillsides by establishing procedures and standards for the siting and design of physical improvements and site grading.

Source: City of Folsom 2020b
77

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
EvoluEllon of Hydrology ond Wqter Quollty
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would;
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii. Substantiatly increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional resources of polluted runoff? iv. lmpede or redirect flood flows?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than significant impact. The project site consists of open space with a fairly dense oak tree canopy and a drainage channel traversing the site adjacent to E. Natoma Street. The Oak Parkway Trail separates the project site from residential properties to the south. The Cimmaron Hill Sub-division is located east of the project site and the entrance to Folsom State Prison is located northwest of East Natoma Street. The existing channel conveys runoff from a portion of the Cimmaron Hill Subdivision as well as runoff from a portion of the Prison open space. lmplementation of the proposed project would alter the existing drainage patterns on the proJect site. The site conditions would be replaced with impervious surfaces from the three-story building, associated parkln6 and drive aisles, and fandscaping.

The existing drainage channel will remain and will be required to maintain the existing drainage patterns, conveying the runoff generated onsite and offsite, as is tbe case under existing conditions.

Modifications to the existing drainage patterns may result in localized flooding, and an increase in impervious surfaces may result in an increase in the total volume and peak discharges of the proposed project has the potentialto degrade water quality associated with urban runoff. Ground disturbing activities would expose soil to erosion and may result in the transport of sediments which could adversely affect water quality. A 36-inch culvert is proposed to be installed under the southernmost driveway to allow runoff to continue to flow through the existing channel. The 36-inch culvert will restrict the developed flows, causing water to back up in the existing channel. The existing channel will function as a detention basin in high intensity storm events. The preliminary analysis considered the worst possible scenario under a lO-year, 24-hour storm event, and under a 100-year, 24-hour storm event.

Sacramento Method within SacCalc software was used to estimate runoff, employing the same methods used to determine the runoff under existing conditions, as outlined in the Preliminary Drainage and Stormwater Quality Report. Comparison of the runoff rates under existing and developed conditions during the 10-year, 24-hour storm event show equal flow rates under existing and developed conditions 78

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
during the L0-year, 24-hour storm event. Therefore, the development of the site would maintain existing drainage paths and would not have a negative effect on the existing storm system. preliminary hydrologic and hydraulic analysis estimates a decrease of 5.84 cfs during 100-year, 24-hour storm event due tc the development of the slte as proposed. Table 17 shows the peak discharge rates under existing conditions and developed condltions. The hydrologic estimations neglect losses due to friction, travel time and proposed onsite storage and should be considered conservative.

Tabte 17. Peak Discharge Rates (Downstream from the Proiect sitel gxisting {cfs) Mitigated Devsloped tcfsl
10-Year 7s.3 75.3
100-Year L72.3 106.46
The preliminary analysis determined the development site would not increase the flow rate through the existing channel during the 10-year, 24-hour storm event, and flow rates through the existing channel are estimated to decrease during the 100-year, 24-hrrur storm event. The existing channel has the capacity, upstream from the proposed 36-inch culvert, to detain flows exceeding the capacity of the culvert while maintain at least l-foot of freeboard. The offsite areas draining through the existing channel and associated underground system will not be negatively affected by the development of this project. lmpacts would be less than significant.

Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with varieus State and local water quality standards which would ensure the proposecl project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge permits, or otherwise substantially degrade r^/ater quality. As the pmJect is greater than one acre, the proposed project would be subject to NPDES permit conditions which include the prep*ration of a SWPPP for implementation during construction. The proposed project would also be subject to all of the City's standard Code requirements, includlng conditions for the discharge of urban pollutants and sediments to the storm drainage system, and restrictions on uses that cause water or erosion hazards.

As outlined previously, the preliminary analysis concluded flow rates with the development site would be equal to or decrease under the L0-year and 100-year storm events. Additionally, compliance with these requirernents would ensure that water guality standards and discharge requirements are not violated, and water qualitV is protected. Therefore, mpacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be necessary for questions a), c), d), e), and f), b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less than significant impa*, lmplementation of the proposed proiect would not result in the use of groundwater supplies beeause domestir urater in the City is provided solely from surface water sources from the Folsom Reservoir. While development of the proposed project would increase the percentage of irnpervious surface on the site that could affect groutdwater recharge, the site is not previously known to be important to groundwater reeharge. turther, because the proposed project would not rely on groundwater for domestic water and irrigation purpoies, and because the site is not an important area of groundwater recharge, the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge that would result in a net deficit in aquifer volume or 79

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
a lowering of the local groundwater table. Therefore, impacts to groundwater supplies and recharge would be less than significant.
d) ln flood hazard,tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than significant impact. The project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain and is not subject to flood hazard. The project site is also approximately 7o-miles northeast of the nearest tsunami inundation area near Benicla, CA (California Emergency Management Agency 2009). The nearest body of water is the American River, which is approximately 0.5-miles west, and Folsom Lake, which is approximately 1.-mlle north of the project site. Based on the site's location awry from the 100-year floodplain, distance from tsunami inundation area, and distance to Folsom Lake, the project site is not subject to release of pollutants due to inundation'
The City of Folscm is located approximately 95-miles from the Pacific Ocean, at elevations ranging from approximately 140- to 828-ft amsl. Because of this, there would be no possibility of lnundation by tsunami. The City is located adjacent to Folsom lake, a reseruoir of the American River impounded by a main dam on the river channel and wing dikes. Areas of the City adjacent to the wing dikes could be adversely affected by a seiche as a result of an earthquake, either through sloshing within a full reseloir or by a massive landslide or earth movement into the lake. Although historic seismic activity has been minor, the potential for strong ground shaking is present and the possibility exists of a strong eartfiquake accurringwhen lake leyels are high. This could create a large enough wave to overtop or breach the wing dikes although this is considered to be a remote possibility.

Mudslides and other forms of mass wasting occur on steep slopes in areas having susceptible soils or geology, typically as a result of an earthquake or high rainfall event. Slopes associated with the edges of the building pads are located on the prolect site; however, City grading standards, including requirements to evaluate slope stability and implement slope stablliaing measures as nQcessary, would prsv€nt this potential effect. |n summary there would be no potentially slgnificant effect from inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow and no mitigation would be necessary. 80

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XI. IAND USE AND PTANNING
tot mhlhgtnncrnt
Irnprct
tterrlrrn
Sfinncrni
ulilr
MlillrUon
tncorpor.fed
trssThrn
Sknlicrnt to
lmplct Fn9tct
Would the project:
a! Physically divide an established community? LJ tf I
b) Cause significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
n l-r n I
Environmenlol Setllng
Land use in the project area is regulated by the City of Folsom through the various plans and ordinances adopted by the City. These include the City of Folsom General Plan and the City of Folsom Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code" The project slte is designated in the General Plan as ProfessionalOffice (pO) which provldes low-intensity business and professional offices that are compatible with higher- intensity residential uses.

The zoning designation of the site is in the Business and Professional (BP) District. According to the Folsom City Municipal Code, the BP zoning district Eenerally permits office building and related uses such as banks, doctor's offices, general business office, and general uses. The purpose of a BP zoning district is to provide an area for business and professional office and compatible related uses. This zoning district is intended to promote a harmonious development of buslnes$ and professional office areas with adjacent commercialor residential development. A senior citiuens residentialcomplex is allowed in the BP zoning district with approval of a minor Conditional Use Permit.

Entitlement requests for this project include a Planned Development Permit (PD Permit) and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The purpose of the PD Permit is to allow for greater flexibility in the design of integrated developments than otherwise possible through strict application of land use regulations. Wfh the PD Pernri| the projecl's site plan, elevations, and overall proiect design would be evaluated, and specific development standards would be defined. The Conditional Use Permit is required to allow development of a senior citizens residential complex within the BP zoning district' Evqluolion of lond Use ond Plonning
a) Physically divide an established community?
Less than significant impact. The proposed project would develop a vacant, undeveloped lot, surrounded by residential, commercial, and institutional land uses. The construction would not barricade or reduce access to East Natoma Street, Fargo Way, Cimmaron Circle, or Prison Road. The community would not be gated, and the main access driveway would be on East Natoma Street, across from Prison Road. Oak Parkway Trail surrounds the project site and would enter into the southwestern corner of the site boundary. Within the site boundary, the Oak Parkway Trail would be realigned and 81

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
vintage at Folsom S€nior Apartments ISMND
connected to a concrete sidewalk proposed for the project site. The concrete sidewalk would extend around the southern parking area and connect to the existing Oak Parkway Trail section located south of the site boundary. The realilnment would add a pedestrian connection to oak Parkway Trail. Although the proposed project would realign the Oak Parkway Trall for a pedestrian connection, the existing trail surrounding the site would not be physically impacted. The proposed project would not divide an established community and therefore impacts would be less than significant. b) Cause significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No irhpact. The proposed project is consistent with both the General Plan land use and zoning designations forthe site, as affordable senior housing is identified as a permiRed land use with a minor conditional use permit. A CUp is a required approvalfor the implementation of the proposed proje*' The denslty of the proposed project would be 0.32 FAR which is consistent with the maximum 0.5 FAR densities permitted under the BP zoning district and Po land use designation' The proposed projea would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation and, therefore, would have no impact' 82

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Xll. l,llNERAIRESOURCES
Pot ntl.lly
Slgnlflcant
lmpect
LcrsThrn
Sl3nlficant
$rldr
Mhla.tion
lncorporatcd
lesrThln
Slgnlficar* No
lnp.ct lmF Cl
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be ofvalue to the region and the
residents of the state?
fr
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
L] L] I
Envlronmenlol Setting
The Folsom area regional geologic structure is defined by the predominantly nofthwest to southeast trending belt of metamorphic rocks and the strike-slip faults that bound them. The structural trend influences the orientation of the feeder canyons into the main canyons of the North and South Forks of the American River. This trend is interrupted where the granodiorite plutons outcrop (north and west of Folsom [ake) and where the metamorphic rocks are blanketed by younger sedimentary layers (west of Folsom Dam) (Geotechnical Consultants, lnc. 2013). The four primary rock divisions found in the area are: ultramafic intrusive, metamorphic, granodiorite intrusive, and volcanic mud flows.

The presence of mineral resources within the City has led to a long history of gold extraction, primarily placer gold. No areas of the City are currently designated for mineral resource extraction. Based on a review of the Mineral Land Classification of the Folsom 75' Quadrongle, Socramento, El Dorodo, Plocer, ond Amador Counties, Colifornio (Department of Conservation 1984), no known mineral resources are mapped in the project area.

Evoluolion of Mlnerql Resources
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents ofthe state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No impact, The proposed project is not located in a zone of known mineral or aggregate resources, No active mining operations are present on or near the site. lmplementation of the project would not interfere w1h the extraction of any known mineral resources. Thus, no impacts would result, and no mitigation would be necessary for questions a) and b).
83

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
xnt. NolsE
Pottntlslly
Sltnncrm
lmprct
lltcfh.n
Sfi{f,crnt
elth
Mhlg!lbn
lncorroratcd
hssiltrn
sltnlftctnt ilo
lmprct lmprct
Would the project result in
a) Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the proiect in excess of standards established in the Folsom General
Plan or noise ordinance?
T1U I nn
b) Generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground
borne noise levels?
n I Itl
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public use
airport or private airstrip, expose people residing or
ft
working in the proJect area to excessive noise.

A Noise and Vibration Assessment was prepared by HELIX on May 5,2022, and is included as Appendix H. The components of the report are summarized below.

Nolse Metrics
All noise-level and sound-levelvalues presented herein are expressed in terms of decibels (dB), with A weighting, abbreviated 'dBA," to approximate the hearing sensitivity of humans. Time averaged noise levels of one hour are expressed by the symbol "Lre" unless a different time period is specified.

Maximum noise levels are expressed by the symbol "LMAX'" Some of the data also may be presented as octave-band-filtered and/or A-octave band-flltered data, which are a series of sound spectra centered on each stated frequency, with half of the bandwidth above and half of the bandwidth below, the stated frequency. These data are typically used for machinery noise analysis and barrier-effectiveness calculations. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour average, where noise levels during the evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. have an added 5 dBA weighting, and sound levels durinl the nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. have an added 10 dBA weighting' This is similar to the Diy Night sound level (Lon), which is a 24-hour average with an added 10 dBA weighting on the sarne nighttime hours but no added weighting on the evening hours' Because decibels are logarithmic units, Spr conoot be added or subtracted through standard arithmetic.

Underthe decibel scale, a doubling ofsound energy corresponds to a 3 dBA increase' ln otherwords, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dBA higher than from one source under the same conditions. For example, if one automobile produces an Spr- of 70 dBA when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140 dBA-rather, they would combine to produce 73 dBA. Under the decibel scale, three sources ofequal loudness together produce a sound level 5 dBA louderthan one source.

I n
84

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern 1 dBA changes in sound levels, when exposed to steady, single-frequenry ("pure-tone") signals in the mid-frequency (1,000 Hertz [Hzl-8,000 Hz) range. ln typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1to 2 dBA are generally not perceptible. lt is widely accepted, however, that people begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments. Further, a 5 dBA increase is generally perceived as a distinctty noticeabte increase, and a 10 dBA increase is generally perceived as a doubling of loudness,
Vibrollon Mettlcs
Groundborne vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or utaves transmitted through the ground with an average motion of zero. Sources of groundborne vibrations include natural phenomena and anthropogenic causes {e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment}. Vibration sources rnay be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or transient {e.g., explosions}. Peak particle velocity (PPV) is commonly used to quantify vibration amplitude. The PPV, with units of lnches per second {inlsec}, is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave' Decibels are also used cornpress the range of numbers required ts describe vibration. Vlbration velocity level {LV) with units of VdB are commonly used in evaluating human reactions to vibrations.

Envlronmentql Setllng
Existing Noise Environment
The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. Surrounding land uses include Folsom State Prison to the north; single-family residences to the northeas$ Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) powerlines and a bicycle trailto the south; single- and multi-family residences to the south; and office space and the City of Folsom Police Department to the west. Noise sources in the project vicinity are dominated by traffic noise from East Natoma Street. Additional noise sources in the area include typical suburban residential noise (e.g., landscape maintenance equipment; building heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; dogs) and occasional noise from operation of the Folsom State prison, approximately 2,500-ft (O.S-mile)to the north.

Noise Sensitive land Uses
Noise-sensitive land uses tNSLUs) are land uses that may be subject to stress andlor interference from excessive noise, including residences, hospitals, schools, hotels, resorts, libraries, sensitive wildlife habitat, or similar facilities where quiet is an important attribute of the environment, Noise receptors (receiverslare individual locations that may be affected by noise. The closest existing NSLUs to the prolect site are five single-farnily resirlences adjacent to the proiect's northeast property line. Addftional single-family and multi-family residence are located approximately 120'ft south of the project site. The closest school to the project slte is the Ssini John's Notre Dame Schoolapproximately 320-ft to the southeast. The closest hospital to the project site is the Vibra Hospital of Sacramento, approximately 350-ft to the south.

Noise Survey
A site visit/noise survey was on conducted on March 29,2022, which included two short-term (10 minute) ambient noise measurements. Measurement M1 was conducted on the northeast side of 85

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
the project site approximately 150-ft from the residences along Cimmaron Drive and approximately 300- ft from East Natoma Street. Measurement M2 was conducted the northwest side of the project site approximately 40-ft from East Natoma Street and approximately 300-ft northeast of the Folsom Prison Road intersection. Traffic counts were conducted during measurement M2. The noise measurement survey notes are included as Attachrnenf A to this report. The noise rnetsurement locations are shown on Figure 2 in Appendix H. The measured noise levels are shown on Table 18.

Table 18. Noise Measurement Results
M1
Date March 2022
Time 7:57 m.-2:47 m.

Location Northeast side of the project site, approximately 150 feet from resi dences on Cimmaron Drive
Noise Level 56.7 dBA Lr:a
Notes Noise primarily from vehicular traffic on East Natoma Street and residential maintenance
Date March 2022
Time 2:10 .-2t2Q
Location Northwest side of the project site, approximate 40 feet from East Natoma Street.

Noise Level 65.5 dBA Leq
Notes Noise primarily from traffic on East Natoma Street' Traffic count: l7Acars, 1 medium truck.

Regulotory Fromework
City of Folsom General Plan Noise Element
The Safety and Noise Element of the City of Folsom General Plan regulates noise emissions from public roadway traffic on new development of residential or other noise sensitive land uses. Policy SN 6.1.2 and Table SN-1 from the General Plan provide noise compatibility standards for land uses. For multi- family housing, noise due to traffic on pubtic roadways, railroad line operations, and aircraft shall be reduced to or below 65 CNEL for outdoor activity areas and reduced to or below 45 CNEL for interior use areas. For other land uses that may be affected by project-generated traffic noise, the exterior noise compatibility limit is: 50 CNEL for single-fimily residential uses and 70 CNEL for commercial uses (City zlzrbl.
policy sN 6.1.g requireg construction proiectr and new development anticipated to generate a significant amount of vibration to ensure acceptable interior vibration levels at nearby vlbtation- sensitive uses based on FederalTransit Administration criteria. Table $N-3 from the General Plan provides vibration impact criteria. For construction with infrequent vibration events (deffned as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same source per day), impacts would be significant if nearby residences are subject to ground borne vibrations in excess of 80 vdB (city 2021b).

M2
85

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
City of Folsom MunicipalCode
For stationary noise sources, the City has adopted a Noise Ordinance as Section 8.42 of the City Municipal Code (City 1993). The Noise Ordinance establishes hourly noise level performance standards that are most commonly quantified in terms of the one-hour average noise level {Lsq). Using the limits specified in Section 8.42.A40 of the Noise Ordinance, noise levels generated on the project site (other than noise from HVAC systems) for 30 or more minutes in any hour would be significant if they exceed S0 dBA Leq from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA Lrqfrom 10:00 p.m' to 7:00 a.m., measured at off-site residential property boundaries. Section 8.42.060 exempts construction noise from these standards provided that construction does not occur before 7:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on weekdays, or before 8:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on Saturday or Sunday. Noise from the project's HVAC would be significant if exterior noise levels exceed 50 dBA, per Section 8.42.A7O of the City Municipal Code measured at off-site residential property boundaries'
Methodology ond AssumPilons
Noise Modeling Software
project construction noise was analyzed using the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) Roadway Construction Noise Model tIRCNMl; USDOT 2008), which utilizes estimates of sound levels from standard construction equipment'
Modeling of the exterior noise environment for this report was accomplished using the Computer Aided Noise Abatement (CadnaA) model versio n 2O21. Traffic noise was evaluated within CadnaA using the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 (USDOT 2004). The noise models used in this analysis were developed from the site plan provided by the project architect. lnput variables included building mechanicalequipment reference noise levels, road alignment, lane configuration, projected traffic volumes, estimated truck composition percentages, and vehicle sPeeds
Off-Site Traffic Noise
The one-hour Lrq traffic noise level is calculated utilizing peak-hour traffic. The model-calculated one- hour Leo noise output is the equivalent to the CNEL (Caltrans 2009). The off-site traffic noise modeling includes does not account buildings, structures or terrain. The project Transportation lmpact Study (TlS) included an intersection analysis with data for calculation of peak hour traffic volumes on streets in the project vicinity (T. Kear 2022). Existing traffic for East Natoma Street was estimated from intersection turning counts included in the TlS. The PM peak hour fiaffic volumes used in the analysis is shown in Table 19. The noise modeling input and output are included in Appendlx H. Traffic was assurned to be comprised of a typical mix of vehicles for suburban streets in California: 95 percent cars and light trucks; 3 percent medium trucks and buses; and 1" percent heavytrucks.

Table 19. PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
+
East Natoma Street - Street to Folsom Prison Road
East Natoma Street - Folsom Prison Road to Cimmaron Circle Crlrdnr(20l2l Exlctln8 I
1,060
943
Source: T. Keat 2022
87 969

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
The project would use one residential-sized HVAC units for each apartment, with the air conditioning condenser located on the rooftop of the building. The condensers would be located behind a parapet wall of equal or greater height to the HVAC unit, which would provide substantial noise attenuation.

Specific detaits on planned HVAC units were not available at the time of this analysis. A typical system for apartments in multi-story buildings would be a Carrier model 38BRC-O24-34 2-ton split system for, which has a sound rating of 76 dBA SwL (Carrier 2005). The manufacturer's noise data for the HVAC units is provided below in Table 20.

Table 20. HVAC Condenser Noise Data (SWt dBAl
Overall llolse tevel

76.0 Source: Carrier 2005
Swr = sound power level; Hz = Hertz; kHz = kilohertz
Slondords of Signillconce
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the project would result in a significant adverse impact if it would:
t. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the City of Folsom General Plan or noise ordinance;
Z. Generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels; or 3, For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public use airport or private airstrip, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise. per the C1y General Plan, impacts related to the generation of noise on the project site would be significant if noise levels generated by the project site HVAC systems would be significant if it would exceed 50 dBA Lrq residential property boundaries. For traffic-related noise, impacts would be considered significant if the project would cause ambient noise levels at nearby NSLUs to exceed the noise compatibility limits defined in the City General Plan or would increase noise levels by 1.5 CNEL or more in areas with exiting ambient noise levels exceeding the noise compatibility limits. ln accordance with the City Municipal Code, any noise from project construction activity would be considered significant for construction occurring before 7:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m. on weekdays, or before 8:00 a.m. or after 5:00 p.m' on Saturday or Sunday. ln accordance with the City General Plan, excessive ground-borne vibration would occur if construction- related ground-borne vibration exceeds 80 VdB at nearby residential properties' 2 kHz 4lHz 8 kHz5{t0Hr 1 kHr125 Hz 250llr

51.5 58.558,0 70.0 67.O55.5 62.5
88

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom senior Apartments ISMND
Evoluolion of Nolse
al Generote o substontial temporory or permanent increase in amblent noise levels in the vicinity ol the project in excess of standards established in the Falsom General Plon or noise ordinonce? Less than significant with mitigation
Construction Noise
The nearest NSLUs to the project site area are single-family residences approximately adjacent to the project's northeast property line. HeaW earthmoving equipment would have the potentialto be as close as 15-ft from the residential property line, including rubber-tired dozers and graders. Over the course of one hour, it is anticipated that the average distance of heavy earthmoving equipment from residential property lines would be approximately 50-ft. Modeling shows that the combined one-hour noise from a dozer and grader would result in 82J dBA Leo at the closest residential property. Because construction equipment would be mobile as it moves across the project site, the noise level experienced by the neighboring uses would vary throughout the day. The modeling output for the anticipated construction equipment is included in Attachment B, within Appendix H.

According to the City Code Section 8.42.060, noise sources associated with construction of the project which are conducted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday, are exempt from the City noise standard (City 1993). Nighttime construction noise is not anticipated for the project. However, nighttime construction is not exempt from the City Noise Ordinance and would exceed the nighttime standard of 45 dBA if it were to occur, resulting in a potentially significant noise irnpact. Mitigation measure NOI-01would prohibit construction activities outside the above daytime hours.

Operation Noise
Aff-Site Traffic Noise
As described above, modeling of the exterior noise environment for this report was accomplished using CadnaA and the TNM. According to the TlS, the project is expected to generate approximately 504 daily trips and 41 trips during the PM peak hour (T. Kear 20221. Fulure fiaffic noise levels presented in this analysis are based on traffic volumes (as described above) for the existing (2022) and existing plus project scenarios. The modeling does not account for intervening terrain or structures (e,9., sound walls, buildings).

The calculated off-site traffic noise levels are shown in Table 2!, Off-Site Trolfic Noise Levels.ln typical outdoor environments, a 3 dBA increase in ambient noise level is considered just perceptible and a 5 dBA increase is considered distinctly perceptible. ln areas where existing or'future ambient noise exceeds the land use compatibility standards, an individual project's contribution to increases in ambient noise level could be considered significant if it exceeds 1,5 dBA. Because areas along the analyzed road segments already exceed the residential land use noise compatibility standard listed in the City General Plan (60 CNEL for low density residential; 65 CNEL for multi-family residential), this analysis uses a threshold of a 1.5 CNEL increase to determine significance of the impact.

As shown in Table 21, the maximum change in CNEL as a result of project-generated traffic would be

0.1 CNEL, a change in ambient noise level that is lower than the threshold and is not discernable. 89

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Therefore, impacts related to the project generating a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of General Plan standards from project-generated traffic would be less than significant.

Table 21. Off-Site Traffic Noise Levels
f,oadwayScgment Change ln CNEL
East Natoma Street - Fargo Street to 0.1
Folsom Prison Road
East Natoma Street - Folsom Prison Road 0.1
to Cimmaron Circle
Source: TNM version 2,5
Heating, Ventilatian, ond Air Conditioning Noise
The primary potential noise sources on the project site would be roof-top mounted HVAC systems, as described in the Methodology and Assumptions section, above. HVAC systems were analyzed using the CadnaA software, assuming 140 condenser units (one per apartment plus additional for common areas) as shown on the project roof plan. Modeling assumed one hour of continuous operation of all equipment. Modeled noise levels were analyzed at receivers placed at the property line of nearby NSLUs (see Figure 2 for NSLU areas) at a height of S-ft above the ground. The modeled L-hour (L6q) noise level at the adjacent property lines is compared with the City standard in Table 22, Operational HVAC Noise- As shown in Table 22, noise from the project's HVAC systems would not exceed the City's noise ordinance standard of 50 dBA Leq, and impacts from project HVAC noise would be less than significant' Table 22. Operational HVAC Noise
Rec€ptor
Exceed
Standadr?
Source: CadnaA; City Noise Ordinance Sections 8'42.O5O
Off-site Traffic Noise
Modeling of the exterior noise environment on the project site was accomplished using the CadnaA model and the road segment traffic volumes, as described above' No
No
No
No
No
No
No
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
No
No
R7
s1
H1
Exldng 2021
{cilEu
Exlsrlng + Protsct
(ctrtEtl

63.563.4
67,667.5
inrAc
Standard
{dB lml
Modeled
Irlobe ldBA L:qlDescrlptlon
s028.5residence
5029,7residence

29.7 50residence

28.5 50Sinele-familv residence

26.2 s0Sinele-familv residence

28.8 50Multi-familv residence
5028.6Sinele-familv residence

20.3 50School
5024.5Hosoital
90

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Exterior Noise
As discussed above, the City General Plan Safety and Noise Element has established an exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL for multi-famif residential outdoor activity areas, defined as "[...] the patios or common areas where people generally congregate for multifamily development" (City 2021b). The patio/outdoor kitchenlbocce ball and seatlng areas on the west side of the project building would be the outdoor activity areas for the project. The modellng shows ground level noise for the outdoor common areas would range from approximately 55.5 CNEI to 58,6 CNEL, This noise levelwould not exceed the C1y exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL and the impact would be less than significant' lnterior Noise
Standard building design and construction using current building codes provides approximately 20 dBA of exterior to interior noise reduction with the windows and doors closed. The noise at the exterior facades for the project end units facing East Natoma Street was modeled for apartments on the first through third floors, and is shown in Table 23.

Table 23. Building Exterior Noise Levels
Floor west Arm (CNELI

62.7 Second 62.5
Third 62,0
Source: CadnaA version 2021
Buildings with exterior nolse levels exceeding 65 dBA could result in interior noise levels in excess of the City General Plan Safety and Noise Element standard of 45 CNEL. Noise levels for the end unit apartments on the pmject building north arm would exceed 65 CNEt. Therefore, interior noise levels were calculated based on the architectural plans for the project. The calculation sheets are included in Attachment B. The calculations show, with construction meeting minimum code requirements, interior noise levels would not exceed the City standard of 45 CNEI. and the impact would be less than significant.
lmpact Conclusion
lf project cons$uction activities were to occur outside the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m' Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, construction noise generated by the project would not be exempt for the City's noise ordinance nighttime exterior standard of 45 dBA, and the impact would be potentially significant. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-01would restrict construction hours.

The addition of permanent project-generated traffic vicinity on roadways would not result in a discernable increase in ambient noise levels. The project would not expose future project residents to noise levels that exceed compatibility guidelines in the General Plan.

First
ilorthArm lcilEtf

66.3 66.0
6s.7
91

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Long-term operation of project would not result in noise levels from an-site sources, including HVAC systems, exceeding the City noise ordinance standards, measured at the property line of the closest NSLUs to the prorect site.

Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-01, the proieet would not generate a substantialtemporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinlty of the proiect in excess of standards established in the Folsom General Plan or noise ordinance and the impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure NOI-01: Construction Hours/Scheduling r The City shall specify on allgrading; and construction permits that construction activities for all phases of construction, including servlcing of construction equipment shall only be permitted duringthe hours af 7:A}a.rn. and 6:OAp.m, Mondaythrough Fridayand between 8:00a'm'to 5r00 p.m. on Sa'turdays. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays and on all holidays.

Delpery of materials or equipment to the site and truck traffic coming to and from the site shall be restricted to the same construction hours specified above. b) Generation ol excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Less than significant with mitigation.

An on-site source of vibration during project construction would be a vibratory roller. A vibratory roller would primarily be used to achieve soil compaction as part of the foundation and paving construction, and for aggregate and asphatt compaction as part of project drirreway and parking lot constructionl.

Vibratory rollers could be used within approximately 55-ft of the single-family residences to the northwest. A large vibratory roller creates approximately 0.2L in/sec PPV at a distance of 25-ft or 94 VdB {Caltrans 2O2O}, At a distance of 55-ft, a vibratory roller would create a PPV of 0.073 in/sec, or 85 VdB.x This would exceed the City General Plan resldentialstandard of 80 VdB, and the impact would be potentially significant. Once operational, the project would not be a source of groundborne vibrations. A large vibratory roller would result in approximately 80 VdB or Sreater at distances less than 120-ft' Mitigation measure NOl.02 would require the contactor demonstrate that the rollers to be used on the project site would produce less than 80 VdB at nearby occupied residences, or use vibratory rollers in static mode only (no vibrations) when operated within 120-ft of occupied residences. Therefore, with implernentation of Mitigation Measure NOI-02, the project would not generate excessive ground-borne vibration levels and the impact would be less than significant' Mitigatlon Measure NOI{2: Vibratory Roller
. The applicant or designated contractor shall provide evidence to the City (via testing data or calculations from a qualified expert), demons*ating that vibratory rollers to be used on the proje* site would produce less than S0 VdB at nearby occupied residences, or allvibratory rollers shall be used in static mode only (no vibrations) when operating within 120'ft of an occupied residence. The City shallspecify r,ibratory roller model, size, or operating mode restrictions on all demolition, grading, and construction permits' 1 Equipment ppV = Reference pPV t (25/D)"{in/sec), where Reference PPV is PPV at 25 feet, D is distance from equipment to the receptor in feet, and n= 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through the ground); formula from Caltrans 2020' vdB = 20 t Log(PPV / 4 /L0"61.
92

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
c) For o project locsted wtthln the vicinity af o prlvate alrctrip or an alrport land use plan, or where such a plon has not been adopted, within wa miles of a public use si(port or private olrstrlp, a(Nse peopte residing or working in the proiect orea to sxcessive notse' The closest airports to the project site are the Cameron Park Airport, approximately 9-miles to the east, and Mather Airport, approximately 10.7-miles to the southwest. The project site is not located within the influence area or noise contours for the Cameron Park Airport (El Dorado County 2012). The project site is located within the influence area and is identified as a review area in the Mather Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan {ALUCP), The proJect site is beneath the approach paths for runways 22 Left and 22 Right, however, the project site is not with the 60 dBA noise contour for the airport {sacramento County Association of Governments 2020). Therefore, although the proiect slte is sublect to overflight by aircraft approaching and departing Mather Airport, residents of the proposed proiect or people working in the project area would not be exposed to excessive levels of noise due to aircraft or airport operations, and the impact would be less than significant' 93

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XIV. POPUTATION AND HOUSING
Potcnftlly
Slgnl0crnt
lmpt3t
[l$fhrr
58nlic.nt
s'llh
ttlldt tlon
lncorporatcd
lccsThan
Sltdficent tto
lmpa.t |tnp.ct
Would the project:
a) lnduce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly {for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly {for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
u I U
b) Displace substantial numbers of existlng people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
I tl
Environmentol Setting
Folsom's estimated population in 2019 was 81,328 people (U.S. Census Bureau 2019). The population is projected to increase to 97,485 by 2035 (City of Folsom 2018a). The proposed project would construct 136 affordable one- and two-bedroom senior apartment units within an estimated 109,608-sf building.

Evoluolion of Populolion qnd Houslng
a) lnduce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than significant impact. lmplementation of the proposed project would result in the construction of 13G affordable one- and two-bedroom units for seniors aged 60 and older. Existing backbone infrastructure and roads in the area would not need to be expanded or extended as a result ofthe project. A signal would need to be added to the existing stoplight at the intersection of East Natoma Street and Prison Road for the proposed main access driveway.

The proposed project would accommodate the demand for housing and would not induce substantial growth in the City of Folsom. Although it is anticipated that the majority of individuals relocating to the apartment community would be from the area, it is possible that the apartment units could draw in between 135 to 358 new residents (assuming 2.63 people per unit, based on projected household size in 2035 [City of Folsom 20].Sal). The projected household size is for single family homes, which is larger than the predicted unit size of a senior housing complex proposed forthe project.The project would be restricted to residents 60 years and older and units would be one- or two- bedroom. The population generated by the project is within the projected incfease in population from planned growth as projected in the City's Housing Element. Therefore, impacts from proiect implernentation would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
94

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senlor Agartments ISMND
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement houslng elsewhere?
No lmpact. The project site is currently vacant. Therefore, there would be no lmpact on displacement of existing peoirle or housing.
95

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XV. PUBTIC SERVICES
Potcntl.lly
9lgnlflcrnt
lmpact
tcsc Than
Sljnlf,crnt
wldt
Mltl3rllon
lncorgoratcd
lesslhan
$gnlic.nt l[o
lmpact lmp.ct
Would the pro.iect result in substantlal adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physicallY altered governmentaf facilities. the con$tructaon of which coulcl cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rstios, responie tirnes or ather performance objectives for any of the public seryices:
a) Fire protection? {:l n I
b) Police protection? n I T
c) Schools? r-1 n n
d) Parks? D tr tr
e) Other public facilities? n I LI
Environmenlol Setling
The proposed project is in an area currently served hy urban levels of all utilities and services, Public services provided by the City of Folsom in the project area include fire, police, school, library, and park services. The site is served by all public utilities including domestic water, wastewater treatment, and storm water utilities.

The City of Folsom Fire Department provides fire protection services. There are five fire stations providing fire/rescue and emergency medical services within the City of Folsom. Staiion 38 is nearest to the project site and is located at 1300 Blue Ravine Road, approximately 2.5-miles southeast of the project site. The Fire Department responds to over 6,000 requests for service annually with an average of 16.4 per day (City of Folsom 201Sb). The City of Folsom Police Department is located at 46 Natoma Street, approximately 1-mile southwest of the project site' The proiect site is located within the Folsom Cordova Unified School District and is within the attendance area for St. John's Notre Dame School, Blanche Sprentz Ilementary School, Folsom Middle School, and Folsom Lake High School. There are several park: near the project site, including the Folsom City Lions Park, Granite Mini Park, Castle Park, Elvie Perazzo Briggs Park, and Econome Family Park.

The Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) would supply electricity to the project site. Pacific Gas & Electric {PG&E} provides naturalgas to the area and would provide naturalgas to the project site.

The City of Folsorn has a program of maintaining and upgrading existing utility and public services within the City. Sinnilarly, all private utilities maintain and upgrade their systems as necessary for public convenience and necessitV, and as technology changes.
96

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Evoluolion of Publlc Servlces
a) Fire protection?
Less than significant impact. On-site water for fire services would be privately owned and managed but would connect to the City of Folsom's water supply in Zone 3 Cimmaron Pressure Zone. The project would include fire hydrants, exterior Fire Department Connection assemblies, and fire riser rooms.

Emergenry vehicle access would be maintained on the site to meet the Fire Department standards for fire truck maneuvering, location of fire truck to fight a fire, rescue access to the units, and fire hose access to all sides of the building. The fire lane would be 27-ft minimum, wlth an inner turning radius of 25-ft and an outer turning radius of 50-ft. All curbs adjacent to the fire lane would be painted red for emergency fire services. The proposed project would not significantly increase fire service demands or render the current service levelto be inadequate, and impacts would be less than significant' b) Police Protection? T
Less than significant impact. The project site is within an urbanized area of Folsom and would increase the residential population requiring police protection services. The project would be required to pay the City's Capital lmprovement New Construc(ion Fee (Folsom Municipal Code Chapter 3, Title 3.80) to fund police services and facllities. The project includes features that reduce opportunities for crime such as adequate lighting on East Natoma Street, the proposed building, and parking areas (refer to 8.0 l.

Aesthetics for more detail on liehting). Additionally, there would be on-site management services, visibility of common areas from adjacent units, and no dead-end low-visibility areas' Potential impacts from implementation of the proposed project woutd therefore be less than significant. c) Schools?
Less than significant impact. The proposed project is age-restricted to residents aged 60 years and older and would not generate students in grades K-12 or create demand for schoolfacilities, Pursuant to Government Section 55995.1, the project would be required to pay development impact fees to the Folsom Cordova Unified School District. No new schoolfacilities would be necessary to serve the proposed project. Potential impacts from implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant.
d) Parks?
Less than significant impact. The 136-unit project would accommodate residents who would create additional demand for park and recreation facilities. The nearest park is Folsom City Lions Park, 403 Stafford Street, approximately O.S-miles from the project site. Since the park is not adjacent to the progosed aparlment carnmunity. a substantial increase in usage of the park is not anticipated. The proposed project would lnclude on-site indoor and outdoor recreational amenities to rcrve residents that would reduce the need for park dennand. The project would be required to pay park fees to mitigate the project's irnpact on existing park facilities and fund new park and rereation facilities. The potential impacts from the proposed project would be less than significant. el Other Facilities?
Less than significant impact. The project site is within the urban area of Folsom served by adequate police, fire, and emergency services. The senior housing apartment complex would include on-site 97

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senlor Apartments ISMND
recreational amenities to serve resldents. Construction and operatlon of the proposed proiect would not requlre the construction or expansion of parks and other public facilitles or result in the degradation of those facilities. Potential impacts would be less than slgniflcant, and mitigation would not be necessary. 98

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apadments ISMND
XVI. RECREATION
Potcntlrlly
Sllnlfrant
lmprct
tcrelh:n
tlgnlicrnt
utldt
Mlt[tlloa
lncorpotltcd
lcrslhrn
Sllnlfrclnt llo
lnpsct finpect
Would the projectr
a) lncrease the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facitity would occur or be accelerated?
t_l lf
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or reguire the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
tr fl r n
Envlronmentol Setllng
The Folsom Parks and Recreation Department provides and maintains a full range of recreational activities and park facilities for the community. There are several recreational amenities and parks near the project site, including the Johnny Cash RecreationalTrail and Oak Parkway Trail, Folsom City Lion's Park, Granite Mini Park, Castle Park, Elvie Perazzo Briggs Park, and Econome Family Park.

Evoluqlion of Recreolion
a) lncrease 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? Less than significant impact. Some additional use of community parks and trails is anticipated, however, on-site recreational facilities at the apartment complex would reduce park and trail demand, lmplementation of the proposed project would enhance existing and planned recreation facilities in the project area. The project would be requlred to pay park fees to mitigate the project's impact on existing park facilities and fund new park and recreation facilities. Potential lmpacts to existing parks would be less than significant.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant impact. The proposed project would result in a 2,500-sf community center on the ground floor of the proposed building. Additional amenities on the project site would include outdoot seating and dining areas, perimeter walkways, a boece ball court, bike racks, picnic tables with umbrellas, outdoor barbeques/ kitchens, and 6-ft benches. On-site facilities and existing neighborhood parks are antlcipated to adequately serve the recreation demands of proJect residents' The amenities associated with the prOposed project are analyzed in this ls/MND. Potential impacts on recreational facilities would be less than significant'
99

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XVII. IRANSPORTAIION
Potendrlly
Sltnlfrclnt
lmptct
hee fftrn
tEnlflcent
wldr
Mltl&don
lncorpo]!ted
lerrThen
$lnmcsil No
ldpact lmpact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a progtam plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including tlansit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
n n I il
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064,3, subdivision {b)?
n n I
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
{:l
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? I
The discussion below is based on a Transportation lmpact Study (TlS) prepared by T. Kear Transportation Planning & Management, lnc. (T. Kear 2O22l.The report is included in Appendix l.

Environmentol Setling
Study Scenarios
Four scenarios were identified for inclusion in this TIS through consultation with City staff' These study scenarios were used to evaluate Project impacts relevant to General Plan Policy M4'1'3 relative to level of service. This study determines the weekday AM peak-hour, PM peak-hour, and Sunday peak-hour level-of-service at study intersections under the following scenarios:
r Existing 2022 without Project condition
r Existing 2022 with Project condition
Analysis of the existing condition reflects the traffic volumes and roadway geometry at the time the study began. This scenario quantifies performance measures for the existing condition and serves as a known reference point for those familiar with the study area. These scenarios, with and without the project, identify Project related impacts anticipated to occur if the Project opened in 2020' Roodwoy Syslem
Brief descriptions of the key roadways serving the project site are provided below:
r Natoma St/East Natoma St is a two-lane minor arterial connecting frorn Folsom Blvd, past Folsom City Hall, and connecting through Green Valley Rd and onto Empire Ranch Rd. From Folsom Blvd to Fargo Way, just east of City Hall, there are sidewalks, curb, and gutter with striped class 2 bike lanes. From Fargo Way to the east, fronting the Project site and Folsom State prison, there are dirt shoutders without sidewalks until Folsom Crossing Rd, where East Natoma 100

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom senior Apartments IsMND
Street becomes a four-lane arterial with sidewalk, curb, Sutter, and striped class 2 bike lanes to Empire Ranch Rd. At Coloma Street, near City Hall, Natoma 5t caries about 11.000 vehicles per day, A volume which drops to about 10,000 vehicles per day near the Project $ite. prison Rd is a two-lane north-south access road from East Natoma St to Folsom State Prison. lt has unpaved shoulders without bike lanes or sidewalks. Prison Road is signed to prohibit stopping or turning within the prison's property.

Sludy lnlerseclions
The traffic impact study analyzed the following three study intersections:
1) East Natoma St/ Prison Road: Signal
2't East Natoma Street/ Eastern Project Driveway: Side-Street-Stop-Control{SSSC) Level ol Servlcc MethodologY
Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative indication of the level of delay and congestion experienced by motorists using an intersection. LOS are designated by the letters A through F, with A being the best conditions and F being the worst (high delay and congestion). Calculation methodologies, measures of performance, and thresholds for each letter grade differ for road segments, signalized intersections, and unsignalized intersections.

Based on guidance from City staff, the following procedures described below for intersection traffic operations analysis were utilized for this TIS'
lntersection Troffic Operations Anolysis
Siqnalized lnterseetiqn{
The methodology from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition2, are used to analyze signalized intersections. LOS can be characterized forthe entire intersection, each approach, or by lane 8roup.

Control delay alone (the weighted average delay for all vehicles entering the intersection) is used to characterize LOS for the entire intersection or an approach. Control delay and volume to capacity ratio are used to characterize level-of-service for lane groups. The average delay criteria used to determine the LOS at signatized intersections is presented in Table 24. The HCM 2010 methodology is used as the primary method. HCM 2000 methods are only utilized where the signal phasing is incompatible with HCM 2010 methods.

Table 24. Level-of$ervice Criteria for Signalized lntersections a
level -of-
Servlce Desc?iption
Average Delayl
{Sec.lVehicle.}
A Very Low Delay: This level-of-service occurs when progression is extremely S 10,0 favorable, and most vehicles arrive during a green phase. Most vehicles do not stoo at all.
2 Transportation Research Board (2015) Highway Capacity Manual, Washington, D.C' 101

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
vintaBe at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
B Minimal Delays; This level-of-service generally occurs with goodprogression, 10.1-20.0 short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than at LOS A, causing higher levels of delav
c Acceptable Delay; Delay increases due to only fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. lndividual cycle failures {to service oll woiting veil'cles} may begin to appear at this level of service, The number of vehicles stopping is

20.1-3s.0
significant, thoueh manv still eass through the intersection without stoooins.

D Approaching Unstable/Tolerable Delays: The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios, Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines' lndividual

35.1-55.0
cycle failures are not,ceable.

E Unstable Operation/Significant Delays: This is considered by many agencies the upper limit of acceptable delays. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios' lndividual

55.1-80.0
cycle failures are frequent occurrences.

F Excessive Delays: This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation {i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection). lt may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures, Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also contribute to such delay levels.
> 80.0
or v/c >1.0
Note l: Weighted average of delay on all approaches. This is the measure used by the Highway Capacity Manual to determine level-of-service. Any movement with a volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c) greaterthan 1.0 is considered to be level-of-service F.

Source: Transportation Research Board (2016) Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, Washington D.C.

Unsisna lized lnterssgtiQls
The methodology from HCM 6th Edition is used for the analysis of unsignalized intersections. At an unsignalized intersection, most of the main street traffic is un-delayed and, by definition, have acceptable conditions. The maln street left-turn movements and the minor street movementi are all susceptible to delay of varying degrees. Generally, the higher the rnain streel traffic volurnes, the higher the delay for the minor movements. Separate methods are utilized for Two-Way Stop-Controlted (TWSC) intersections and All-Way Stop-Controlled (AWSC) intersections. a TWSC: The methodology for analysis of two-way stop-controlled intersections calculates an average total delay per vehicle for each minor street movement and for the major street left- turn movements, based on the availability of adequate gaps in the main street through traffic. A LOS designation is assigned to individual movements or combinations of movements (in the case of shared lanes) based upon delay, it is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Unsignalized intersection LOS is for each movement {or group of movements} based upon the respective average delay per vehicle presents the average delay criteria used to determine the LOS at TWSC and AWSC intersections.

AWSC: At all-way stop-controlled intersections, the LOS is determined by the weighted average delay for allvehicles entering the intersection. The methodologies for these types of intersections calculate a single wei8hted average delay and LOS for the intersection as a whole.

The average delay criteria used to determine the LOS at all-way stop intersections is the same as a
LOz

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
that presented in Table 25. LOS for specific movements can also be determined based on the TWSC methodology.

It is not unusual for some of the minor street movements at unsignalized intersections to have LOS D, E, or F conditions while the major street movements have LOS A, B, or C conditions. ln such a case, the minor street traffic experiences delays that can be substantial for individual minor street vehicles, but the majority of vehicles using the intersection have very little delay. Usually in such cases, the minor street traffic volumes are relatively low, lf the minor street volume is large enough, improvements to reduce the minor street delay may be justified, such as channelization, widening, or signalization' Table 25. level-of-Seruice Criteria for Unsignalized lntersections Level of Descriptlon
Service
(ros)
Tr,5g'
Average Delay
by Movement
(seconds I vehicle)
al rsg'
lnte.section Wide
Average Delay
(seconds / vehlcle)
A Little or no delav <10 <10
B Short traffic delav >10and<15 >10and<15
c Average traffic delays >15and<25 >15and<25
D Long traffic delavs >25and<35 >25and<35
E Very long traffic delavs >35and<50 >35and<50
F Extreme delays potentially affecting other
traffic movements in the intersection
> 50 (or, v/c >1,0) >50
Note 1: Two-Way Stop-Control (TWSC) level-of-service is ca lculated separately for each minor street movement (or shared movement) as well as major street left turns using these criteria. Any movement with a volume to capacity ratio (v/c) greater than 1,0 is considered to be level-of- service F.

Note 2: All-Way Stop-Control (AWSC) assessment of level-of-service at the approach and intersection levels is based solely on control delay.

Source: Transportation Research Board (2016) Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition, Washington D.C.

Generol Plon Thresholds
Level af Service
Consistency with General Plan LOS policies for the proposed project were determined based on the methods described above and identified as either "conforming" or "non-conforming". General Plan Policy M 4.1.3 addresses LOS:

Strive to achleve at teast traJfic Level of Service "D" (ar better) for local streets and roodwoys thrcughout the city. ln designing tronsportation improvements, the City will prioritize use of smart technolagies and innovotive solutions thot moximize efficiencies and sofety while minimizing the physicalfootprint. During the coutse of Plon buildout, it mdy occut thot temparaily hiqher LOS result where roodwoy improvements have not been adequotely phosed as development proceeds. However, this situatian will be minimized based on onnuoltrafltc studies and monitoring programs. City Staff will repart to the City Council at regulor intervols vio the Copital lmprovement Progrom process for the Council to prioritize Wojects integrol to ochieving LAS D or better. 103

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
The General Plan EIR includes a criterion addressing potential impacts at locations that operate at LOS E or F under no-project conditions. Under this standard, a non-conforming situation would occur if the proposed project would:
lncrease the averoge delay by five seconds ar more of an intersection thot currently operotes (or is projected to operate) ot on unacceptable Los under "no-proiect" conditions.

For the purposes of this analysis, LOS is considered potentially non-conforming if implementation of the project would result in any of the following;
o Cause an intersection in Folsom that currently operates {or is projected to operate) at LOS D or better to degrade to LOS E or worse.
o lncrease the average delay by five seconds or more at an intersection in Folsom that currently operates (or is projected to operate) at an unacceptable LOS E or F.

B i cycle/Pe destria n/Tra nsit Fo ci I ities
An impact is considered significant if implementation of the project would:
r lnhibit the use of bicycle, pedestrian, or transit facilities. r Eliminate existing bicycle, pedestrian, or transit facilities. r Prevent the implementation of planned bicycle, pedestrian, or transit facilities' Vehlcle Mlles Troveled SlondErds of Slgnlllconce
Under State law (SB 743), on July 1,2020, vehicle miles traveled {VMT)will become the only metric for evaluating rignificant transportation impacts in environmental impact analyses required under the Califor.nia Environmental Quality Act {CEQA). Without specific General Plan Suidance for VMT thresholds, this analysis uses a qualitative screening against The Governors' Office of Planning and Research (OpR) guidance of a 15 percent per capita VMT reduction and utilizes OPR's suggested exemption for affordable housing projects.

Folsom General Plan policy NCR 3.1".3 addresses VMT, as stated below:
policy NCR 3.1.3 "Encourage efforts to reduce the amount of VMT. These efforts could include encouraging mixed-use development promoting a Jobs/housing balance, and encouraging alternative transportation such as walking, cycling, and public transit." OpR has published guidance recommending a CEQA threshold for transportation impacts of land use proJects of a 15 percent VMT reduction per capita, relative to either city or regional averages based on to4

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom seniof Apartments IsMND
the California's Climate Scoping Plan3. Qualitative assessment of VMT reduction is acceptable to screen projectsa. Based on these criteria, a project will be considered to have a potentially significant impact if:
r Per capita VMT from residential projects is anticipated to be greater than 85 percent of the regional average Per caPita VMT.
o The project is anticipated to inhibit implementation of planned pedestrian, bicycle, or transit improvements.

Anolysis Tools
LOS
Control delays and level-of-service for study intersections were calculated using the Synchro 11s analysis software (Version 11..1, build 1, revision 6). Synchro implements the methodologies of the 5th Edition of the Highway Capacity Manualto modeltraffic controls and vehicle delay' The software requires data on road characteristics (geometric), traffic counts, and the signaltiming data for each analysis intersection. ln general, default parameters were used, except in locations where specific field data are available. Heavy vehicle percentages of 2 percent were assumed during the peak hour.

VMT
To support jurisdictions' 58743 implementation, The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) staff developed thresholds and screening maps for residential and office projects, using outputs from the 2015 base year travel demand model run for the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS), SACOG travel demand model is activity/tour based and is designed to estimate an individual's daily travel, accounting for land use, transportation and demographics that influence peoples' travel behaviors.

For residential projects, the threshold is defined as total household VMT per capita achieving 15 percent of reduction comparing to regional (or any appropriate sub-area) average. The SACOG screening map uses "hex" geography, with each hex being about 1,000-ft on edge. ResidentialVMT per capita per hex is calculated by tallying all household VMTs, including VMT traveling outside the region, generated by the residents living at the hex and divided by the total population in the hex. Hexes are then color coded with green and blue hexes depicting neighborhoods with at least a 15 percent reduction in residential VMT relative to the SACOG region. Yellow, orange, pink and red hexes have less than a 15 percent VMT reduction.

Exisling 2022 Condillon
Table 26 presents a summary of level-of-service results for the study intersections under Existing Conditions, along with 95 percent queue lengths for left turns. All study intersections operate at LOS A r opB {2018} Technical Advisory on EvaluatingTransportation lmpacts ln GEQA, httnllwww..9qr.ca.eovlrlgcsl20l90122-IS3 Technical &dvisqrv.pdf. o oPR's webinar on 58 743 implementation,4ll6/2oza.
s https;/Agyw.trgfficware.com/svnchr.o-studia'htrnl
105

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
or better during the AM, PM, and Sunday peak hours. Left turn queues are adequately accommodated by the existing left turn storage pockets.

Table 25. Existing 2022 lntersection Delay and Level'of-Service lnt€rsection fantrol
No ProJec (Delay end
Level-of-Serylcel
AMIPM
E Natoma St/Prison Rd Sisnal 9.3 A 9.1 A
Eastern Project
Drivewav sssc nla nla
lntersectlon Approach
ttto Prolect
95% Queues lFeet|
AMIpn
E Natoma St/Prison Rd
EB teft 173' 30'
WB Left nla nla
58 Left 22 49'
NB Left nla n/a
Eastern Project
Driveway NB nla nla
'SSSC = Side Street Stop Control
Projecled Trip Generolion
projected traffic generated by the proposed Project was calculated using trip generation factors from the ,nsritute of Transportation Engineers {lTE) Trlp Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021), and is provided in Table 27.

Table 27. Project Trip Generation
Lsnd U3s m
Crtarorv Quan0ty Datt Dally AM Perkhosr PM Perk hour
Total lnbound Outbound Total lnbotrnd Outbound
Senior Adult Housing
{Multifamily}
252
135
dwelling
units
Rate 3.24 0.29 45% 55% 0.3 s4% 46%
Trips 441 39 I7 22 41 22 19
Source: ITE {2021) Trip Generation Manual, lnstitute of Transportation Engineers, Washington DC, (Higher value of either the average rate or the fitted equation-based rate for peak hour of generator) Trip Distribution
Trip distribution was based on observed traffic counts and select zone analysis within the travel demand model. New Project trips were distributed as follows:
: 48 percent to/from the west on East Natoma Street
r 48 percent tolfrom the east on East Natoma Street
. 4 percent to/from the north via Prison Road
106

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
SignalTiming Geometry
With the addition of a fourth leg to the East Natorna St/Prison Rd intersection, the signal timing and lane geometry was assumed to be configured as follows:

Eastbound: An eastbound right turn pocket was assumed with 150-ft of storage and a 60-foot taper; for a total of one left, one through, and one right turn lane' Westbound: A westbound left turn lane with 100-foot pocket plus 50-foot taper for a total of one left and one shared through-right lane.

Southbound: The existing exclusive right-turn lane is assumed to be restriped as a through-right turn lane {for a totalof one left and one shared through-right).

Northbound: The northbound approach is assumed to provide one left and one shared through- right lane. The northbound through-right lane is assumed to be in a 70-foot turn pocket plus 60- feet taper,
Timing: Eastbound and westbound protected left turn phasing, northbound and southbound split phasing. 150 second cycle length, with 34 second northbound southbound split phases and 20 second eastbound and westbound protected phases, and 62 second eastbound and westbound through phases. Crosswalks are assumed across all legs of the intersection with flashing don't walk phases set to 22 seconds to accommodate a 3-feet per seconding walking speed.

Exlsling 2022 wllh Proiecl Condilions
Project peak,hour traffic was added to the Existing 2022 turning volumes at each intersection. Delay and LOS were determined at the study intersections. Table 28 presents a summary of LOS results for the study intersections under Existing Conditions. All study intersections operate at LOS B or better during the AM, PM, and Sunday peak hours. Left turn queues are adequately accommodated by the existing left turn storage pockets.

Table 28. Baseline 2022 lntersection Delay and Level-of-Servicg with and without Project lnter:ecllon Control
No Prolect (Delay and
[evel-of-Servlce)
AM I pna
Wtth Prolec (Delayand
LeveFof-Servlcel
AM I pnn
E Natoma st/Prison Rd Signal 9,3 A 9.1 A 15.9 B 16.7 B
Eastern Project
Driveway sssc n/a nla

10.6 B
{NB) 12.3 B (NB)
lntersectlon Approach
Ito Prolect
9396 Queues (Feetl
AM I prr,r
wlth ProJoct
9596 Queues {Feet)
AM I Pr,rr
E Natoma St/Prison Rd
EB Left 773' 30' 166' 37'
WB Left nla n/a 22 23'
58 Left 22', 49' 23 73'
NB Left n/a n/a 27' 27
Eastern Project
Driveway NS nla n/a 0 0
a
t
a
a
a
707

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
'SSSC = Side Street StoP Control
Projecl VMI lmpocts ond Generol Plon IOS Conlormity
Conforma*ce whh €eEeigl Plan IOS Policv
All study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS B or better under allstudy scenarios, both with and without the addition of project traffic. The project is not anticipated to create new LOS deficiencies, or to or worsen any existing deficiencies, based on General Plan Policy M4.1,3.

Evoluollon of Trqnsporlqlion
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than significant impact. The project is anticipated to generate 441 daily vehicle trips including 39 AM peak-hour vehicle trips, and 41 PM peak-hour vehicle trips. Fewer than 50 peak-hour project trips are projected to pass through any intersection. All study intersections are anticipated to operate dt LOS B or better under allstudy scenarios, both with and without the addition of project trafflc. The project is not anticipated to create new LOS deficiencies, or to or worsen any existing deficiencies, based on General Plan Policy M4.1.3. All intersection LOS impacts are considered less than significant.

The project does not inhibit the use of bicycle or pedestrian facilities; eliminate existing birycle, or pedestrian facilities; or prevent the implementation of planned bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. The project includes accessible pathways around the building to provide a walking path for residents. Path connections are planned to paths internal to the project site, south to the Oak Parkway Trail, and west to the East Natoma St underpass to the Johnny Cash Trail. The project has a less than significant impact on pedestrians and bicycles. With relocation of the effected bus stop, transit impacts will be less than significant.

The City does not have an adopted parking standard for age-restricted (senior) multi-family housing.

With a planned Development Permit (PD), parking supply is established through the PD permit process The project is proposing 135 spaces (1.(X) parking spaces per unit). This exceeds that of many other recently approved age restricted multi-family projects in and around Folsom. The 135 spaces include eight accessible spaces (i.e., with the adjacent space sUiped out to provide vehicle access for wheelchairs and/or mobility scooters) and 14 spaces with electric vehicle charging.

The ITE Parking 6eneration Manual6 lists an average peak parking demand of 0.59 vehicles per dwelling unit for Land Use 252 {senior Adult Housing-Attached}, with a standard deviation of 0.12. The ITE sample size is small (three observations), yet the proposed parking ratio of 1.05 is greater than 3'5 standard deviations greater than the mean parking demand. Consequently, the proposed parking for the project is sufficient to meet the anticipated parking demand with a parking ratio of 1'00.

For comparison, Revel Senior Living, a similar project approved by Folsom in 2018 had a parking ratio of

0.81 spaces per dwelling unit, The Revel project conducted a parking survey of six similar Sacramento 6 ITE {ZO1O} parking Generation 4th Edition, lnstitute of Transportation Engineers, Washington DC' 108

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Aoartments ISMND
area facilities. All six facilities were found to use less than 0.60 spaces per dwelling unit during peak parking demand hours (consistent with the ITE parking demand data referenced above.)A second parking review for the Revel Senior Living project surveyed localjurisdictions parking requirements for senior housing. Only two jurisdictions in the vicinity of Folsom were found to directly address the issue of the parking needs of senior independent living facilities. Both of those zoning code requirements from other jurisdictions are lower than the proposed parking supply for the Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments Project. Therefore, the proposed parking supply of 135 parking spaces is adequate for the 136 multi-family units proposed in the project.

The project would have a less than significant impact on program plans, ordinances, or policies addressing the circulation system.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision {b)? Less than significant impact. 5u-743, passed in 2013, required OPR to develop new CEQA Guidelines that address traffic metrics under CEQA. As stated in the legislation (and Section 21099[bl[2] of CEQA), upon adoption of the new CEQA guidelines, "automobile delay, as described solely by LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the CEQA guidelines, if any." The Office of Administrative Law approved the updated CEQA Guidelines on December 28,20L8, and the changes are reflected in new CEQA Guidelines (Section 15064.3). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15054,3 was added December 28,2A78,to address the determination of significance for transportation impacts. Pursuant to the new CEQA Guidelines VMT replaced congestion as the metric for determining transportation impacts.

The Governors'Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has published guidance recommending a CEQA threshold for transportation impacts of land use projects of a 15 percent VMT reduction per capita, relative to either city or regional averages, based on the California's Climate Scoping Plan7. Qualitative assessment of VMT reduction is acceptable to screen projects8' Under State Law (SB 743), VMT became the only CEQA threshold of significance for transportation impacts on July t,2O2O. Without specific General Plan guidance for VMT thresholds, this analysis uses qualitative screening against OPR's guidance of a 15 percent per capita VMT reduction.

To support jurisdictions' 58743 implementation, SACOG developed thresholds and screening maps for residential projectse, using outputs from the 2015 base year travel demand model run for the 2020 MTP/SCS. SACOG's traveldemand model is activity/tour based and is designed to estimate an individual's daily travel, accounting for land use, transportation and demographics that influence peoples'travel behaviors. For residential projects, the threshold is defined as total household VMT per capita achieving 15 percent of reduction compared to regional {or any appropriate sub-area} average VMT. The map uses HEX geography. Residential VMT per capita per HEX is calculated by tallying all household VMTs, including VMT traveling outside the region, generated by the residents living at the HEX and divided by the total population in the HEX. Green hexagons denote areas where residential ? oPR (20181 lechnical Advisory on [valuating Transportatlon lmpacts tn CEQA, http:ll!v!rrE opr.qa.sov{qlocr/20190122"?43 Telhnisal Adyisqry.pd!. 8 OPR'5 webinar on SB 743 implen'rentation,4[16/7A2a.
e sAco6 {2021} httosillsbT4S:sacos'orendata.a.csis'cqm/ 109

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
VMT is 50 to 85 percent of the regional average and yellow hexagons denote areas where residential VMT is 85 to 100 percent of the regional average.

The project is located within one of the green hexagons with average residential VMT of 17 miles per capita (per day). The Project is anticipated to generate less than 82 percent of the regional per capita residential daily VMT of 2Q.82 miles. The project is therefore anticipated to have a less than significant impact on VMT.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g', sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g', farm equipment)? Less than significant impact with mitigation. Access to the project site would be provided by two driveways on East Natoma Street. City standards requires a 50-ft right turn taper in conditions with ten or more peak-hour right turns into a driveway, and a 150-ft pocket plus 60-ft taper, with 50 or more peak-hour right turns. Neither project driveway is anticipated to have ten or more right turning vehicles into the project during the AM or PM peak-hours. The main driveway at the signalized East Natoma Street/prison Rd intersection includes an eastbound right turn pocket and a westbound left turn pocket accessing the project, these are adequate to safely accommodate project traffic without hinderin6 existing traffic.

The secondary (eastern) driveway is restricted to right-in-right-out movements and is anticipated to only have fewer than ten eastbound right-turns into the project during either the AM or PM peak hours' No turn pockets are necessary. ln order to limit the secondary (eastern) driveway to right-in-right-out access, the applicant would implement Mitigation Measure TRA-01. With Mitigation Measure TRA-01 implemented, impacts relating to process access design would be less than significant' For an 81-160-unit apartment complex, the standard for the Minimum Required Throat Depth {MRTD) is 50 feetlo. This 50-ft length represents vehicle stora8e equivalents, which means the total required length may be achieved by summing the throat depths for several access points if more than one access point is to serve the $ite. The throat depths forthe primary and second drlveways exceed 50-ft and 25- ft, respectively. Therefore, MRTD of the project driveways meet the standard because the primary driveway throat depth meets the minimum standard cf 50-ft' potential geometric constraints and safety issues were evaluated, including driveway spacing, sight triangles, and Statewide lntegrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) collision data' Driveway spacing, throat depth, and corner sight distance are all adequate. ln the last five years, there have been three accidents proximate to the project site including:
r One eastbound rear-end collection at the existing traffic light, r Two driving under the influence (DUl) accidents (one a sideswipe, and the other a single vehicle overturn,)
These are not accident varieties that would be anticipated to be worsened by the project, and the project does not require any proiect specific traffic safety treatments. 10 Folsom {2020} Design and Procedures Manual and lmprovement Standards, site access Table 12-1, https:l/www.Lolsgln,ca.trslcfvicax/filebagUblobdtood.asox?t=65!.83.99&BloblD-98340' 110

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior APartments ISMND
lmplementation of Mitigation Measures TRA{I would reduce all potential impacts regarding hazards due to geometric design to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure TRA-01: Limit Access to the Secondary (Eastern) Driveway During construction of the project, the applicant shall ensure the eastern driveway is channelized to restrict left turns from entering or exiting the project via the eastern driveway Such channelization shall be accomplished during construction by either a triangular island located within the driveway, or by extending the raised median at the East Natoma St/Cimmaron Cir intersection west-word across the eastern project driveway. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The project proposes two access points connected by a fire lane which circles the back of the proposed apartments. All internal radii have at least a 25-feet inner radius and 50-feet outer radius per City requirements. Emergency vehicle access is available to the site from East Natoma Street.

Emergency vehicle access is designed consistent with standards and is adequate. There would be no impact.
a
111

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments IsMND
XVIII. TRIBAI. CULTURAI RESOURCES
Pot ilhlly
Slgnncant
lmp.ct
trrc Thrn
Slgnlfcrnt
wldt
MlSgatlon
lncorporated
trssThen
Sltllhcant llo
lmprct lnpact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 27074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is Seographically defined in terms of the size and scope ofthe landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
l. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code Section 5020.1(k), or
tr
ii, A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision {c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, ln applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.\, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
il I LI LI
The discussion below is based on a tribal cultural resources memorandum prepared by ECORP Consulting, lnc. (ECORP 2022L atlached to this lnitial Study as Appendix J.

Envlronmentol Setllng
CEqA, as amended in 2014 by Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), requires that the City of Folsom (City) provide notice to any California Native American tribes that have requested notice of projects subject to CEQA review, and consult with tribes that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation. Sestion 21073 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) defines California Native American tribes as "a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2OO4." This includes both federally and non- federally recognized tribes. For the City, these include the following tribes that previously submitted general request letters, requesting such noticing:
. Wilton Rancheria (letter dated January 13,2O20|;
. lone Band of Miwok lndians (letter dated March 2,2OL6li and, . United Auburn lndian Community (UAIC) of the Auburn Rancheria (letter dated November 23, 2015 and updated per UAIC via email on September 29,2O21\' 112

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
The purpose of consultation is to identifo Tribal Cultural Resources {TCR) that may be significantly impacted by the proposed project, and to allow the City to avoid or mitigate significant ampacts prior to project approval and implementation. Section 21074(al of the PRC defines TCRs for the purpose of CEQA as:

Sites, features, ploces, culturol londscopes (geogrophically defined in terms of the size and scope), socred places, ond abjects with culturolvolue to a California Native Americon tribe thot ore either of the following:
a) included or determined to be eligible lor inclusion in the Cdlifornia Register of H i sto rica I Reso u rces; o nd/or,
b) included in a lacol register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k)of Section 5020.1; and/or,
c) o resottrce determined by the lead agency, in its discretion ond supported by substantiol evidence, to be significont pursuont to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. ln applying the giteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5O24.7 for the purposes of this paragraph, the leod ogency sholl consider the signilicance of the resource to a California Native American tibe, Because the first two criteria also meet the definition of a Historical Resource under CEQA, a TCR may also require additional consideration as an Historical Resource. TCRs may or may not exhibit archaeological, cultural, or physical indicators and can only be identified by a culturally affiliated tribe, which has been determined under State law to be the subject matter expert for TCRs.

CEeA requires that the City initiate consultation with tribes at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify TCRs. Furthermore, because a significant effect on a TCR is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQ.A, consultation is required to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures. Therefore, in accordance with the requirements summarized above, the City carried out, or attempted to carry out, tribal consultation for the project.

Within 14 days of initiating CEQI ygrl.u, for the project, on November 19,202L, the City sent project notification letters to the three California Native American tribes named above, which had previously submitted general consultation request letters pursuant to 21080.3.1(d)of the Public Resources Code (PRC). Each tribe was provided a brief description of the pro|ect and its location, the contact information for the City's authorized representative, and a notification that the tribe has 30 days to request consultation.

The lone Band of Miwok lndians did not respond to the City's notification letter, and therefore, the threshold for carrying out tribal consultation with that tribe under PRC 21080.3.1{e}was not met, and no further consultation is warranted.

On December LA,2027, and within the 30-day response timeframe, the City received an emailfrom Anna Starkey that acknowledged receipt of the City's notification letter and accepted consultation under AB 52 for the project. She indicated that the project area is potentially sensitive for unrecorded cultural and tribat cultural resources based on the presence of a known and recorded resource in the vicinity.

She inquired whether a cuhural resources survey has been conducted and ifso, requested a copy.

On Decembe r L3,202!, the City formally initiated consultation with United Auburn lndian Community 113

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
and acknowledged Ms. Starkey's inquiry of a cultural report. The City confirmed that a survey had been conducted and that preparation of a cultural resources report was underway and welcomed the cpportunity to further discuss the proiect. Accordingly, the Ctty pravided a copY of the report to Ms.

Starkey for her review on March 8,2022. Ms. Starkey responded the same day indicating that the report aligns with their findings and inquired whether an arborirt report had been prepared and if so, requested to review it. Additionally, Ms. Starkey questioned if any heritage trees had been identified' On March 23,2022, fhe city transrnitted the arborist report to Ms. Starkey. As of the date of this memorandum, there has been no further correspondence received from Ms. Starkey or any other representative from UAIC. The City did not receive any specific information ahout TCRs that meet the definitions in PRC Sectio n 2LO7 4 within the project area. Therefore, on June 3,2022, the City formally concluded consuttation with UAIC pursuant to PRC Sections 21080.3.2(b){1) and 21082.3(dX1).

Wilton Rancheria did not respond to the City's notification letter, and therefore, the threshold for carrying out tribal consultation with that tribe under PRC 21080.3.1(e) was not met. However, separately, as part of the cultural resources inventory, HELIX contacted the Native American Heritage Commission {NAHC) on January 2I,2022 to request a search of the Sacred Lands File. On February 9, 2O22, the NAHC contacted HELIX to report that no sacred lands are recorded inside the project area and provided a list of culturally affiliated tribes and their contact inforrnaticn. On February 70,2022, lrELtX contacted all of the named tribes, which included Wilton Rancheria, UAIC, Tsi Akim Maidu, the Colfax- Todds Valley Consolidated Tribe, the lone Band of Miwok lndians, and the Suena Vista Rancheria of Me- Wuk lndians. While none of the other tribes responded, on March 3L,2022, an unnamed representative of the Cultural Preservation Department from Wilton Rancheria replied by email and stated that the tribe had requested consultation on December 2 for this project, and that the tribe was requesting monitoring because of three sensitive sites in the vicinity. No specific information about TCRs was provided in the March 31 email.

After an exhaustive search of the consultation record, City staff emails, and physical mail, none of the City staff or its consultants could locate any correspondence from Wilton on this project. Su$pecting that the tribal representative might have been mistaklng this as a dlfferent project, on April 8,2A22, HELIX replied to the tribe to report that the City is not in possession of any correspondence regarding this project and requested a copy of the Docember 2 correspondence. Wilton Rancheria did not respond to the request for information, and as of the date of this memorandum, there has been no further communication received from the tribe. Therefore, because the City: 1.) is not in possession of a written request for consultation on this project; and 2) did not receive any specific informatlon ahout TCRs that meet the definitions in PRC Section 21074 within the project arca; and, farther, because Willon Rancheria failed to engage in consultation pursuant to PRC 21S02.3(dX2), the City closed the matter and drew from other lines of evidence to make a determination of impacts to TCRs.

Evoluolion of ltlbol Cullurol Resourcel
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 2L074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with culturalvalue to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1{k)? 114

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Less than significant impact with mitigation. As discussed in Section V., Cultural Resources, the results of this Cultural Resources Assessment indicate that there are no known or newly discovered cultural resources within the APE, prompting HELIX to recommend that the area is not likely to contain surface based archaeological deposits. Although the NCIC records search indicated that elements of district P-34-000335 (the Folsom Mining District) may potentially be located within the current APE, no traces of the district were found during HELIX's pedestrian survey of the project area, As a result, the current project is anticipated to have no impacts on district P-34-000335' Based on the results of HELIX's cultural resource assessment the APE can be assumed to have a low sensitivity for surficial cultural resources and this project is anticipated to have no impacts to historical resources for the purposes of compliance with both Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. Consequently, HEgX recommends that there would be no effect on historic properties or historical resources, including archaeological and built-environment resources as a result of project implementation. No additional studies, archaeological work, or construction monitoring are recommended. However, in light of the presence of prehistoric r€sources within the study area {P-34-0000016 and P-J4-000017) and the potential plesence of elements of district P-34-000335 to lie within the study area, HELIX recomrnends that the Mltigation Measure CUL-01and CUL-02 outlined below be implemented in the unlikely event that cultural resources are encountered during construction lf historical or archaeological resources are discovered, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL'01 and Mitigation Measure CUL-02 (section V)would reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level.
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set fonh in subdivision {c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.1n applying the criteria set forth in subdivision {c) of Public Resources Code Section 5O24.L, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Less than significant impact with mitigation. lnformation about potential impacts to TCRs was drawn from information provided by consulting and culturally affiliated tribes, the ethnographic context, the results of a search of the Sacred Lands File by the NAHC, and the results of a cultural resources inventory prepared by HELTX {Appendix E}. Based on the information provlded, the pro.iect would not have any impact on known'l-CRs. lmpacts to unanticipated tribal cultural resourqes, if encountered during construction, would be potentially significant. Based on the consultation record sumrnarized above and included in Appendix J, the City concludes that there would be a less than significant impact on TCR's with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure TCR-01 regarding unanticipated discoveries.

Mitigation Measure TCR-01: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources. o lf potentially significant Tribal Cultural Resources (TCR) are discovered during ground disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 50-ft of the find, or an agreed upon distance based on the nature of the find. A Native American Representative from traditionally and culturally affiliated Native American Tribes that requested consultation on the project shall be immediately contacted and invited to assess the significance of the find and make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment, as necessary. lf deemed necessary by the City, a qualified cultural resources specialist meeting the Secretary of lnterio/s Standards and Qualifications for Archaeology, may also assess the significance of the find in joint 11s

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senlor Apartments ISMND
consultation with Native American Representatives to ensure that Tribalvalues are considered.

Work at the discovery locatlon cannot resume until the City, in consultation as appropriate and in good faith, determines thatthe discovery is either not a TcR, or has been subiected to culturally appropriate treatm€nt, if avoidance and preservatlon cannot be accommodated. 116

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XIX. UTITITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Putcndllly
Slgrlfrcent
lmptCt
lrcsThrn
g3nmc.nt
uf,fi
Mltl3atlon
lncorporoted
trce llrrn
fJtnlfisnt No
lmpsct lilPact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or conltruction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
n n t_t
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
rt T
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the proiect that it has adeguate capacity to serve the proiect's proiected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
n tr I
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
ti {f t rlt_l
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? tf I tr Environmentol Setling
The pro.iect site is currently vacant and does not contain any existing utilities. Existing powerfines are located on East Naloma Street and south of the project boundary. The City of Folsom employs a design process that includes coordination with potentially affected utilities as part of proiect development' ldentifying and accomrnodating existing utilities is part of the design process, and utilities are considered when finalizing Fublic project plans. The City of Folsom coordinates with the appropriate utility companies to plan and implement any needed accotnmodation of exilting utilities, including water and sewer utility lines. Based on the resutts of an initial request for comments from the utility providers, all utility services are able to accommodate the proposed project.

Evoluolion of Utilllies ond Service Systems
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? 177

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's proiected demand in addition to the provider/s existing commitments?
Less than significant impact. Discussion of the project's impact on watet wastewater treatment o. storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities follows:

Water Sunolv
The City's public water supply is from the Folsom Reservoir and Folsom South Canal. The City's Urban Water Management Plan calculated supply and demand at buildout of the 2035 General Plan and determined that that there was sufficient supply available for normal, single dry, and multi-dry years scenarios (City of Folsom 2018a). Folsom's Water Treatment Plant has a capacity of 50 million gallons per day. According to the Urban Water Management Plan and General Plan ElR, water demand is not anticipated to exceed the City's current water rights to 38,970 acre-feet annually (City of Folsom 2018a).

All on slte water (fire, domestic, and irrigation) are to be privately owned, operated, maintained as a condition of approval. All public water within the site boundary shall be constructed in accordance with the City of Folsom water design standards and water construction details as a condition of apprwal. The on-site water supply would be connected to the Zone 3 Cimmaron pressure Zone located off-site. The proposed project would provide houslng for less than 400 residents and would not result in a substantial increase in water demand. Because sufficient supplies are available for build out of land uses in the General Plan (including development at the proposed project site) no additionalfacilities would need to be constructed or expanded and impacts would be less than significant.

Water Conseruation Effortg
The City actively implements water conservation actions in response to the drought. Standards and regulations issued by the State Water Resources Control Board that came into effect June \ 2AL5, require the City to reduce water consumption by 32 percent. ln response, the City developed a water reduction plan to reduce water consumption, and conserve water in the City' City actions include reducing watering in parks by one third, removing turf and retrofitting irrigation in more than 30 medians citywide, turn off irrigation in ornamental streetscapes that do not have trees, prohibiting new homes and buildings from irrigating with potable water unless water-efficient drip systems are used, replacing and upgrading sprinklers and irrigation systems with water-efficient systems, suspending operation of water features throughout the City. The City also implemented water restrictions and rebate programs for residents of the City. Folsom residents successfully reduced water consumption by 21 percent in 2014. The City reduced water consumption in parks by 27 percent, and 31 percent in Landscape and Lighting Districts. This was among the highest conservation rates statewide (Brainerd 2015).

Wastewater (Sanharv Sewerl
The City of Folsom is responsible for managing and maintaining its wastewater collection system, including 275-miles of pipeline and nine pump stations. This system ultimately discharges into the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District interceptor sewer system. Wastewater is treated at the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, located in Elk Grove. 118

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMNO
ln compliance with the 2006 State Water Resources ControlBoard (SWfiCB|General Waste Oischarge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systerns. the City of Folsom adopted a Sewer System Management plan on July 28, 2009 which was updated and adopted on August 26,2074. fhe plan outlines how the municipalityoperatesandmaintainsthecollectionsystem,andthereportingofallSanitarySewer Overflows (SSO) to the SWRCB's online 5SO database. All on site sewer utltities are to be privately owned, operated, maintained as a condition of approval, and would connect with an existing public sewer collectlon system off.site. Because the City has sufficient capacity to accommodate any additional demand that could result from implementation of the proposed project, and because the City is in compliance with statutes and regulations related to wastewater collectlon and treatment, there would be no impact and mitigation would not be necessary.

Stormu{ltter
Folsom's Public Works Department handles stormwater management for the City, from design and construction of the storm drain system to operation and maintenance, and urban runoff pollution prevention.

Under existing conditions, runoff from residential properties located east of the property flows onto the property site, This offsite runoff would be intercepted by proposed landscaped swales within the 15- foot landscape planters along the eastern boundary of the property. This runoff would then redirect the flow towards East Natoma Street and enter the public storm drain system. Additionally, eight {8) bio- retention planters are proposed throughout the project site to manage stormwater runoff. The curb, gutter, and sidewalk are proposed to be extended to Cimmaron Circle. which requires storm drain improvements at the frontage of the project site. Stormwater drains would be installed throughout the concrete parking lot areas and would be designed to prevent flooding or ponding. The on-site storm drain would conform to City of Folsom standards. Environmental impacts from these stormwater features would be less than significant and no mitigation would be necessary' .Ekrctricitv, 9rs, and felePhqrne
primary and secondary electric lines, gas lines, and telephone/cable lines are proposed within the project. These proposed utility lines would connect wlth existing utilities in the same vicinity of the project site, on East Natoma Street. Through the City's coordinatio* with utility providen including SMUD for electricity, PG&E for underground 6as lines, AT&T for underground telephone lines, utility providers are able to accommodate the proposed pro,iect' Based on the details above, the pro.iect would have less than significant impact on water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities' No mitigation is needed for questions a), b), and c)'
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than significant impact. The City of Folsom provides solid waste, recycling, and hazardous materials collection services to its residential and business communities. ln order to meet the State mandated 50 percent landfill diversion requirements stipulated under AB 939, the City has instituted several 119

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
community-based programs. The City offers a door-to-door collection program for household hazardous and electronic waste, in addition to six "drop off" rerycling locations within the City.

After processing solid waste is taken to the Kiefer Landfill, the primary municipal solid waste disposal facility in Sacramento County. The landfillfacility slts on a site of 1,084-acres in the community of Sloughhouse. Currently 250-acres, the State permitted landfill is 650-acres in size, and is of sufficient capacity to accommodate the solid waste disposal needs of the City of Folsom, Because the landfill serving the project area is of sufficient capacity to accommodate solid waste needs, there is less than significant impact and no mitigation would be necessary for questions d) and e). \20

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XX. WILDFIRE
Potcnthlly
Slldfic.nt
lmpect
l.esslhan
Sltnlfionr
wlth
Mltlt tlon
lnco.po.ltcd
lrrclten
slgntficant lto
lmp.6 lmPtct
lf located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Plan?
tr tr I
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
T-1U n I
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure {such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
I-J I
d) Expose pesple or structures lo significant risks, including downslope or downstream floocJing or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage tr fl I changes?
Environmenlol Setling
The project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area and it is not in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2OO7)' Evoluolion of Wlldfire
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the instatlation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the envlrcnment? d) Expose people or structures to significant rlsks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? 121

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior ADartments ISMND
No impact. Questions "a' through "d" are not applicable because the proiect site ls in a Local Responsibility Area and the site ls not in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Callfornia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2OO7l.
122

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
XXI. NNANDATORY TINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Polendally
Sl3nl0cant
lmFCt
tcasft n
$3nncrnt
$llh
Mhl3adon
lncorp6atGd
LcceThrn
Slgnl0crnt ilo
lmptct lmptct
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environm€nt, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
n I
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the increrrenfal elfects ol a
project are signiflcant when vlewed in conneclion with
the effects of past projects, the eff€{ts af other current projects, and the effects of past, present and probable future projects)?
LJ tr I IJ
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
fl I n
Evoluolion ol Mondotory Findings of Signlficonce
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, sub$tantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop betow self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than significant impact. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed project has the potential to adversely affect biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, tran$portation, andtribal cultural resources. See Sections 8.|V, LV, 8.Vll. LVlll, LXlll,

8.XVll, and 8.XVlll of this lnitial Study for discussion of the proposed project's potential impacts on the$e environmental issue areas. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified in those Sections, and compliance with City programs and requirements identified in this report, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. No significant or potentially significant impacts would remain. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? {"Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a prolect are significant when 123

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartfienlj ISMND
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of past, present and probable future projects)? Less Than Significant lmpact. While the project would indirectly contribute to cumulative lmpacts associated with increased urban develognent in the City and region, these impacts have previously been evaluated by the City and considered in development of the City's General Plan as set forth in this lnitiat Study. Key areas of concern are discussed in detail below' €vgluation af cumulative biolagical resoutces i&wcE: The trees and understory graslland areas wlthin the project site provide suitable nesting habhat for white-tailed kite and other raptors as well as other native birds and large trees adjacent to the site provide nesting habitat for raptors. Pre'constructisn surveys should bs conducted prior to project implernentation to determine if nesting birds are present on or adiacent to the site. so that measures could be implemented if needed to avoid harming nesting birds. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-0:" lltrould reduce impacts to white-tailed kite and other nesting birds to a less than significant level.

The 0.04-acre of aquatic features located on the projeet site ars potentially regulated by the USACE, CVRWqCB, and CDFW under the Clean Water Act, Porter-Cologne Act. and Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code. Therefore, removal or fill of the aquatic fea.tures would likely require a permit from these age ncies, ln order to avoid impacts to jurisdictional wetland and waters, Mitigation Measure BIO-02 would be implemented, mitigating impacts to a less than significant level.

Of the 111 trees on the project site,77 trees are considered protected by Folsom City Code. lf protected trees will be removed by the proposed project mitigation will be required per Section 12'16'150. Of the 7l trees protected by Folsom City Code, only 65 trees require mitigation based on having a health rating of S, 4,3, or 2. Based on the DSH equivalency ratio, mhigation for a total of 935.6-inches is required if all protecled trees subject to mitigation requirements are impacted. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 8lO-03, impacts to protected trees would be less than significant.

With implementationof Mitigation Measures BIO{1, BIO-02, and BIO-03 the impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and the proiect would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts'
EvaluotioT of cufiulatiye cultural resources lnnact$: The results of the Cultural Resources Assessment indicate that there are no known or newly discovered cultulal resources within the APE, prompting HELIX to recommend that the area is not likely to contain surface based archaeologicaldeposits.

Although the NCIC records search indicated that elements of district P-34-000335 {the Folsom Mining District) may potentially be located within the current APE. no traces of the district were found during HELIX's pedestrian survey ofthe project area. As a result, the current proJect is anticipated to have no impacts on dlstrict P-34-000335. No additional studies, archaeolagicalwork, or construction monitorlng are reeommended. However, in light of the presence of prehistoric resources within the study area (P- 34-0000016 and P-34-000017) and the potential presence of alernents of district P-34-000335 to lie within the study area, HELIX recommends that the Mitigation Measure CUL-01 and CUL-02 outlined below be implemented in the unlikely event that cultural resources are encountered during construction. lf historical or archaeological resources are discovered, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-01 and Mitigation Measure CUL-02 would reduce any potential impact to a less than significant level.
124

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Aoartments lSMND
No human remains are known to exist within the project area nor were there any indications of human remains found during the field survey. Hourever, there is always the possibility that subsurface construction activities associated with the proposed project. However, if human remains are discovered, implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-02 and Mitigation Measure CUL-03 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

With lmplementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-01 and CUI-02, and CUL-03, the impacts would be reduced to a le*s than significant level and the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts.

Evaluatian of cumulative qgalogy and soils imnacts: A Geotechnical Engineering Survey was written by YoungdahlConsulting Group,lnc, on December 3'd,ZO71.ln the survey, Youngdahl prepared recommendations for the foundation, construction, and desi8n of the proposad buildlng in the project site (See Appendix F for more detail on site recornmendations). With the implernentation of Mitigation Measure 6EO-01, outlined below, the impacts relating to unstable soils in the project area would be less than significant.

No previous surveys conducted in the project area have identified the project site as sensitive for paleontological resourees or other geologically sensitive resources, nor have testing or ground disturbing activities performed to date uncovered any paleontological resources or geologically sensitive resources. While the likelihood encountering paleontological resources and othergeologically sensitive resources is considered low, project-related ground disturbing activities could affect the integrity of a previously unknown paleontological or other geologically sensitive resourc€, resulting in a substantial change in the significance of the resource. Therefore, the proposed project could result in potentially signlficant impacls to paleontological resources. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-02 would redtce potentially significant irnpacls to a less than significant level.

With implementation of Miti6ation Measure GEO-01and GEO-02, the impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contrlbution to any significant cumulative impacts.

Evalustion af W!fttllttive areenhou{€Jlas emislFlns imptcts: The project must mrnply with the City's Greenhouse Gas Beduction Strateglr Consistency Checklist. The Checklist ls part of the City's 2035 General Plan GHG Reduction Strategy which outlines the policies and programs that the City will undertake to achieve its proportional share of State GHG emissions reductions. Per the Checklist, the GHG reduction measures included in the Checklist that are applicable to a project are to be incorporated into the project's CEQA documents as mitigataon rfieasures. The GHG reduction measures applicable to the proposed project are therefora included as Mitigation Measure 6HG-01. through GHG-05. With implementation of this mitigation measure and compliance with SMAQMO's recommendations, the 2017 kopingPtan, and the MTP/SCS, the project's impacts would be reduced to a less than signlficant level and the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts.

Fvabstion.af cumulalive a.oise impacts:-The proiect would be subject to noise from construction and operation conditions. lf project construction activities were to occur outside the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9:00 a,m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday, construction noise generated by the project would not be exempt for the City's noise ordinance nighttime exterior standard of 45 125

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
dBA, and the impact would be potentially significant. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-01 would restrict construction hours and reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

An on-site source of vibration during project construction would be a vibratory roller' A vibratory roller would primarily be used to achleve soil compaction as part of the foundalion and paving construction, and for aggregate and asphalt compaction as part of project driveway and parking lot construction).

Vibratory rollers could be used within approximately 65-ft of the single-family residences to the nofthwest. A large vibratory roller creates approximately O,2L in/sec PPV at a distance of 25-ft, or 94 VdB (Caltrans 2020). At a distance of 55-ft, a vibratory roller would create a PPV of 0.073 in/sec, or 85 VdB.1r This would exceed the City General Plan residential standard of 80 VdB, and the impact would be potentially significant. Once operational, the proiect would not be a source of groundborrte vibrations' A large vibratory roller would result in apgroximately 80 VdB or greater at distances less than 120-ft.

Mi{igation measure HOI-02 would require the contactor demonsftate that the rollers to be used on the project site would produce less than 80 VdB at nearby occupied residences, or use vibratory rollers in static mode only (no vibrations) when operated within 120-ft of occupied residences.

With the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-01and NOI-02, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts related to noise.

Eusrluotion of cumulatlve tron, gortqtian lmpagls: Access to the proiect site would be provided by two driveways on East Natoma Street. City standards requires a 60-ft right turn taper in conditions with ten or more peak-hour right turns into a driveway, and a 750-ft pocket plus 50-ft taper, wilh 50 or rnore peak-hour right turns. Neither project driveway is anticipated to have ten or more right turning vehicles into the project during the AM or PM peak-hours. The main driveway at the signalized East Natoma Street/prison Rd intersection includes an eastbound right turn pocket and a westbound left turn pocket accessing the project, these are adequate to safely accommodate project traffic without hindering existing traffic. The secondary {eastern} drlveway is restricted to right-in-right-out movements *nd ,s anticipated to only have fewer than ten eastbsund right-turns into the Project during either the AM or pM peak hours. No turn pcckets are necessary. ln order to limit the secondary {eastern) driveway to right-in-right-out access, the applicant would implement Mitigation Measure TRA-01' Thus, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts related to transportation.

E{oluotien of cumulative tribal cu-ltural lesources impacts: The City of Folsom sent project notification letters to three California Native American trihes. Although there is no evidence of TCRs occurring or having the potential to occur on the project site, the City recognizes that sensitive and/or protected resources could be unintentionally discovered during project demolition and construction. With implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-01, the impacts would be reduced to a less than significant leveland potentially significant cumulative impacts would be avoided. Thus, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant cumulative impacts related to tribal cultural resources.
11 Equipment ppV = Reference ppV r {25lD}"{inlsec), where Reference PPV is PPv at 25 feet, D i5 distance from equipment to the receptor in fee! and n= 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate throuBh the ground); formula from Caltrans 2020.

VdB = 20 * tog(PPv/4/10'6).
126

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than significant impact. Because of site conditions, existing City regulations, and regulation of potential environmental impacts by other agencies, the proposed proiect would not have the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings as demonstrated in the detailed evaluation contained in this lnitial Study.

9.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared by the City per Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines and is presented in Appendix K. 1O.O INITIAT STUDY PREPARERS
CiUr of Folsom
Steve Banks, PrinciPal Planner
HELIX Envlrsnmental Plann'ine. Uc,
Robert Edgerton, AICP CEP, Project Manager
Julia Pano, Environmental Planner
Jason Runyan, Noise SPecialist
Stephen Stringer, Senior Biologist
Stephanie Mclaughlin, Staff Biologist
Victor Ortiz, Air Quality Specialist
Kristin Garcia, Air Quality Technician
Clarus Backes, Cultural Resource Group Manager
Jentin Joe, Staff Archeologist
127

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments |SMND
1 I.O REFERENCES
Barrows, Wray, 1956. A History of Folsom, Colifornia: 1850-1900. Folsom HistoricalSociety Museum, Folsom, California.

Beck, W. A. and y. D. Hasse, 1974. HistoricalAtlas of California, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Beardsley, R. K. i^g54. Temporal and Areal Relationships in Central California. University of California Archaeological Survey Reports 24-25. Serkeley Press.
1g4g. culture Sequences in central california Archeology. Americon Antiqurty 14(1):1-28.

Bennyhoff, J. Lg77. The Ethnogeography of the Plains Mlwok. Center for Archaeological Research at Davis Publications 5. University of California Davis.
1954. Temporal and Areal Relationships in Central California Archaeology' UniversiA ol Cotifornia Archoeotogical Survey Reports 25. Berkeley.
1950. Californian Fish Spears and Harpoons. University of California Anthropological Records 9{a):29s-338.

Bolster, 8.C., editor. 1998. Terrestrial Mammalspecies of Special Concern in California, Draft Final Report prepared by P.V. Brylski, P.W. Collins, E.D. Pierson, W.E. Rainey and T'8. Kucera. Report submltted to California Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Management Division, Nongame Bird and Mammal Conservation Program for Contract No. FG3146WM' Brainerd, C.2eL5, May 5. News Release: City of Folsom Releases Water Reduction Plan. Accessed on December 6,2}21at httpUl/wuu.folsom.ca.us/civica/press/disnlq[.asn?f?vouFl&Entrv:271.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2021.' User's 6uide for CalEEMod Version 2a2o'4.o. Available at: http:1/www'cgleernod'cor!,/'
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022. Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health. Available at:
https:llww2.arb.ca.Rovlresources/ov€rview-diesel-exhau.st-and-health' Accessed April2022' 2017. The 2017 Climate change scoping Plan Update. January. Available at:
httpg:lvlrw' arb. ca.gov lcclscopinsplgl/2030so pp fl$a l' p{I' 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Planr Building on the Framework, Available at:
httgrywJvw.arb.ca.eovlcclscogi$eolenl2013 uqdgte{h;t updatL clinlglg chanee scosinq oJq n.odf.
2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan - A Framework for Change. December. Available at:
httns:/1Ul
olgg-documents.
2005. Air euality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Available atr https:/lwwlty.arb'c.a.sov/ch/haSdbook' odf .
128

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
California Emergency Management Agency. 2009. Tsunami lnundation Map for Emergency Planning, Benicia Quadrangle, July 31, 2009' Accessed on August 18,2022' at:
httos r#www.conservatio&ca.Eov/ceslDocuft entsl8ublications/fsuqemi- Maps/Tsunami lnundqtiQn Benicia Quad ConfaQggta.pdf
California Energy Commission (CEC), 2021a. 2020 Total System Electric Generation. Accessed June 29, 2O22 at https:/lwww.energy.ca.gov/data-reportslenergy-almanac/california-electricity- data/2019-tota l-system-electric-gen eration.

ZOZlb. Supply and Demand of NaturalGas in California. Accessed on June 29,2O22from:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas- market/supply-a nd-dema nd-natu ral-gas-ca lifornia
2O2Ic. California Gasoline Data, Facts, and Statistics, Accessed on June 29,2O22from https:/lwww.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac,/transportation- energy/californ ia-gasoline-data-facts-and-statistics
2O23.d. DieselFuelData, Facts, and statistics. Accessed on June 29,2O22trom https:/lwww.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation- energy/diesel-fuel-data-facts-a nd-statistics
California Depaftment of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 1994. Staff report regarding mitigation for impacts to Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) in the CentralValley of California. November 1' 2020. RareFind 5.0, california Natural Diversity Database. sacramento, california, Accessed October 7, 2A20. I nformatio n expires 2128 |IOZL.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. Accessed on December L,2OZLat: https:#osfit.fire.ca.gov/lnedia/67561fhszs map34.pdf California Department of Transportation. 2017. List of Eligible and Officially Designated State Scenic Highways. Accessed on Decembe r 8,202! at: https:/ldot,ca.sovlprEf(amsldesiEnllao- landscape-architectu re-AId-comm u nitv-liva bilitvl!ep-liv'.i-scenic-hishwavs California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. lnventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org [Accessed 1 October 2O2Ol.

CALGreen. 2019 California Green Building Standards Code. California Code of Regulations Title 24, part 11, Available 61: httrs:llcodes.lFcsafe.orq/content/CAGBC20J.9JUL2lSlcover.

City of Folsom. ZQZLa.€reenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Consistency Checklist. Updated March 24.

Available at: bttps:/l,www.folsgF.ca'Us/home/
showpu bliqlteddocument/1.581"637 5?267773357Q000.
202Ib.2035 General Plan Safety and Noise Element. Available at:
htlpdlw-uLw.{oj:ofl,ca.rr-llhort}rlsLQwpuhfihed-dqcunrerV-756t/*}!W9245MJ!9\}8' Amended August 24.
129

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
2O2Oa. Evacuation Plan. Accessed December 6,2021and available at:
httos://lUww.folsoF.ca.us/homershowpubllsheddoqument/22?9/537478591337570000 2020b,Folsom Municipal Code. Available at httnl//www.codepublishine,com/CA/Folsornl Accessed December 2, 2O2L
2018a. Folsom General Plan 2035 Environmental lmpact Report. Amended May 2020. 2018b. City of Folsom Fire Department webpage. Accessed December 2,202t and available at:
htt os ://www.folsgln.ca, us/govern me nt/f ire
California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Mines and Geology. 1984. Mineral Land Classification of the Folsom 15-Minute Quadrangle Sacramento, El Dorado, Placer, and Amador Counties, California, Open-File Report 84-50SAC' Available at:
httpsl//maos.corlgervation.pa.sov/cgglinforma-tionwaretlouse/index.hlml?map=mlc. Accessed December L,2O2L,
2015. Farmlands Map for Sacramento County. Available at:

Itttpsl/lmaos.conservation.ca.eov/DLRPIClFF{. Accessed November 30,2A2I California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration , GuidanceManual.April.Availableat:httPs://glot'ca.sov1-lmedia/dot' nedialprggramslerlvir qtgbnvltSvzun-apr?020-jt11v.gjf.
2009. Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS). November.

Carrier. 2005. Product Data 38BRC (50 Hz) 12 SEER Alr Conditioner. Available at:
httss:l&vww.sho.redclocr.conr/hvacldocs/1009/PubljelOZ138BRQ-,L4PO"pdJ.

ChartkoffJ.L. and K.K. Chartkoff. L984. The Archoeology of Colifornio. Menlo Park. Stanford University Press,
Department of Toxic Substances congol. 2020. EnviroStor. Available at:
https://www.envlrostgr.dtsc.ca.eov/rublic/ Accessed December 6, 2o2l' Dickel, D.N., p. D. Schulz, and H.M. McHenry. 1984. "Central California: Prehistoric Subsistence Changes and Health." ln Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture, edited by Mark Nathan Cohen and George J. Armelagos, pp.439462. Academic Press, lnc', Orlandq FL.

ECORp Consulting, tnc. (ECORP). 2O22.-fribal Consultation Record for Compliance with Assembly Bill52 and CEQA for the Vintage at Folsom Project, City of Folsom, Eriksen, C. H. and D. Belk. 1999. Fairy shrimps of California's puddles, pools, and playas. Mad River Press, Eureka, California.

El Dorado, County of .20L2. El Dorado County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan: Cameron Airpark Airporu Georgetown AirporU Placerville Airport. Available at: httns://www,edgtc"olrrlai-l]:gIL I a n el * u se-co m pa! g bi I it v- pl3 ns -a nd -Lee :sc lr e d u le, 130

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2012. FEMA Flood Map: Folsom, CA Map 06067C0117H. Available from:
https:l/msc.fema.govlnoilallsearch?AddressQuerv=Scholar%20Wav%20Folsom%20CaSsearchr esultsanchor
Fredrickson, D.A. 1974. Cultural Diversity in Early Central California: A View from the North Coast Ranges. Journsl ol Colilornia Anthropology 1{1):41-53.
1973, Early Cultures of the North Coast Ranges, California. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.

Geotechnical Consultants, lnc.2003. Environmental Conditions Geology: Folsom Lake State Recreation Area. Available at httnsllwww.parks.ca4ovlpaqes/500/files/6eolop.odf. Accessed on December 2,2O2]'
Gerow Lgl4. "Comments on Fredrickson's Cultural Diversity." The Journal of California Anthropology L(21:239-246.
1954. The Problem of Cultural Sequences in Central California Archaeology. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, Gerow, 8.A., and R. Force. 1968. An Analysis of the University Village Complex with a Reappraisal of Cenral California Archaeology. Stanford University Press. Stanford, California.

Gervais, J, A., Rosenberg, D. K., and Anthony, R. G. 2003. Space use and pesticide exposure risk of male Burrowing Owls in an agricultural landscape' J. Wildl. Mgmt. 57:156-165.

Gitbert, t,f ., t879. History of San Joaquin County, California, Thompson and West, Oakland.

Grunsky, F. R., 1989. Pathfinders of the Sacramento Region, Elk Grove Library, California.

Gudde, Erwin G., 1998. California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names. University of California Press, Berkeley.
1975. Colifornia 6old Camps. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Heizer, R. F., and A. J. Almquisl, t97L. The Other Californians: Prejudice and Discrimination Under Spain, Mexico and the United States to 1920. University of California Press, Berkeley.

HELTX Environmental Planning, lnc (HELIX). 2O22a. Arborist lnventory Report for 102 Natoma Street, City of Folsom, CA.
2A22b.Cultural Resource Assessilent for Vintage at Folsom Project, 2022c. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Vintage at Folsom Project' 2020. Biological Resources and Wetland Evaluation Letter Report for 102 Natoma Street, City of Folsom, CA.
131

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Hoover, Mildred 8., Hero E, Rensch, and Ethel G. Rensch, 1990. Historic Spots in California. Third Edition by William N. Abeloe. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

Hoover, Mildred 8., Hero E. Rensch, Ethel G. Rensch, and William N. Abeloe, 2002. Historic Spots in California, 5th edition, revised by Douglas E. Kyle, Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Hughes, R.E. (editor). 1994. Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology:

Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson. Assembled and edited by Richard E.

Hughes. Contributions of the University of California No. 52, Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley, CA.
lntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the lntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. February. Available at:
httos:/lwww. i pcg.qh/reportla r4lw&!/.

Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California Final Report submitted to the California Department of Fish and [Wildlife], lnland Fisheries Division.

Johnson, J.J.1976. Archaeological lnvestigations at the Blodgett Site {CA-5AC-267}, Sloughhouse Locality, California. Report to the U.S. National Parks Service, Western Regional Office, Tucson, AZ. 1982. Chapter 2: Summary of the Prehistory of the Lower Sacramento Valley and Adjacent Mountains. Ms. On file, North Central lnformation Center, California State University, Sacramento.

Kroeber, A. 1., 1925. Handbook of the lndians of California. Smithsonian lnstitution Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin No. 78,
Levy, Richard ,1978. Eastern Miwok. ln Handbook of North American lndians, California, Volume 8, edited by Robert F, Heizer, pp. 398-413. William G. Sturtevant, generaleditor. Smithsonian lnstitute, Washington, D.C.

Lichvar, Robert W, and Shawn McColley. 2008. A Field Guide to the ldentificotion of the Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United Stafes. Vicksburg, MS:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center.

Lillard, J.8., R.F. Heizer, and F. Fenenga. 1939. An lntroduction to the Archaeology of Central California.

Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology, Bulletin 2. Sacramento.

Lillard, J.B, and W.K. Purves. 1936. "The Archaeology of the Deer Creek-Cosumnes Area, Sacramento Co., California." Sacramento. Sacramento Junior College, Department of Anthropology Bulletin 1.

Maniery Mary L, and Keith A. Syda, 1991. Cultural Resources lnvestigation for the Americna River Bridge Crossing Project, City of Folsom, Sacramento County, California. Cultural Resources Report on file with the North Central lnformation Center at California State University, Sacramento. 132

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments IsMND
Moratto, M.J. 1984. California Archaeology. San Diego. Academic Press.

McGruder, G. K. 1950. The Upper San Joaquin Valley, L772-L87A, Bakersfield.

Napton, Kyle 1., 1997. Archaeologicaland HistoricalCulturalResources lnvestigations of the proposed Alpine Natural Gas Operating Company, Calaveras County Natural Gas Distribution Project A. 96- 08-015 {Phase l: La Contenta/Rancho Calaveras}'
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2015. California Central Valley Steelhead Distinct Population Segment: 5-year Review. California CentralValley Area Office.

National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2020. SoilWeb Survey. Available at:
https:l/webgoilgurvev.sc€gov.Ulida,eov/Aon/HomePage.htm. Accessed on November 30, 2021.. 2015. 2016 National Hydric Soils List' December 2015.

Available on-line at: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wpslportaUnrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/ NETROnline, 2022. Historic aerial photographs and USGS quadrangle maps: 1940-2018. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC' Available from: NETR0nline'com.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment {OEHHA}. 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Available at:
httCIs/rloehlgjca.Rovl.ailfcrnr/ptlce-adoptig!-air-toxics-hgt-sPg!g-nt98ram-FUidance-manu?li oreoa ratior!:heallbrisk*Q"
powers, Stephen, 1975. Tribes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Ragir, S.R. 1972. The Early Horizon in CentralCalifornia Prehistory. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 15. Berkeley, CA.

Reed, G. Walter, 1923. History of Socromento County, Colifornia. Historic Record Company, Los Angeles.

Richmond, O.W., Chen, S.K., Risk, B.8., Tecklin, J., and S. R. Beissinger. 20L0, California Black Rails Depend on lrrigation-fed Wetlands in the Sierra Nevada Foothills. California Agriculture: Volume 2, Number 2.

Rogers, D.C. 2001. Sevision of the North American Lepidurus (Notostraca: Crustacea) with a description of a new species previously confused with two other species. Journal of Crustacean Eiology' Sacramento Area Council of Governments {SACOG). 2OL9.2O2O MTP/SCS. November 18. Available at:
httpglfww.sacggors&02$metrooolltan-tran;@rtqtion-plansustainable-comqglities:

Stratesf.

Sacramento County Association of Governments. 2020. Mather Airport - Airport Land Use Compatibility PIan. September. Available at: !r!1pf:/lwww,sa(.ogq&5ilgllrncilt{filesl att,strhmerlts&-u!hr.r. rliif L {klqp,Adll,l 6i}j-05%7l. 133

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMND
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District {SMAQMD). 2020. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County. Revised April' Available at:
htto://www.airqualitv.olslResidgC.ts/CEQA-[and-Use-Plannine/CEQA-Guilhncg:Tooll.

Shuford, W.D., and T. Gardali, editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and dlstinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds L. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

State Water Resources Control Board. 2020. Available at: httos:/leeotracker.waterboards.ca.sov/.

Accessed December 6, 2021.

Schenck, W.E., and E.J. Dawson, 1929. "Archaeology of the Northern San Joaquin Valley." American Archaeology Ethnology 25.

T. Kear Transportation Planning and Management, lnc. 2A22.Yintage at Folsom Transportation lmpact Study,
The Telegraph, t966.110 Anniversary Edition: 1856-1966. The Telegraph, Folsom, California.

Thompson and West, !88O. History of Sacramento County, California. Thompson and West Company, Oakland, California.

Transportation Research Board. 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 5th Edition, Washington D.C.

TSD Engineering.2O22. Preliminary Drainage and Storm Water Quality Report. Vintage at Folsom August 15.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wettand Delineation Manuat: Arid West Region {Version 2.0). J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble, eds., Technical Report prepared for the U.5. Army Engineer Research and Development center, vicksburg MS.

United States Census Bureau. 2018. QuickFacts, Folsom City, California, population estimates, July 1, 2019 (V2019). Available at: httns:/lwww.census.sov/quickfpcts/fqlsomcitvcalifornla. Accessed December 2,2AZ1-.

United States Department of Transportation TUSDOT). 2019, Superfund National Priority List Accessed on Decembe r 7,202L at httos://www3.eoa-gov/eqyiro/..
2008. Roadway Construction Noise Modelversion 1.1. Available at:
hgpdsrwru,{hwa, clot,eQv{enUirq irner t/to-FelssltsltrjElsllislie&qut'. 2004. Traffic Noise ModelVersion 2.5. Available at:
htlpg://!/ww.f hwa{lS'}.qov/envilonment/rroisg/traffiq-!loisg moelel/tn*r-v2V. 134

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments ISMNO
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Seruice (USFWS). 2020. lnformation for Planning and Consultation (lPaC). List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed projed location and/or be affected by your proposed project.

Youngdahl Consulting Group, lnc (Youngdahl). 2021. Geotechnical engineering Study for Vintage at Folsom.

Wilson, N,, and A. Towne 1978. Nisenan. tn California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 387-397' Handbook of the North American lndians, vol. 8, W. C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian lnstitution, Washington, D.C.

Williams, D.F. 1986, California Mammal Species of Special Concern in California. Department of Biological Sciences California State University, Stanislaus and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K.E. Mayer, and M. White, eds. 1988. California's Wildlife. Vol' l-lll.

California Depart. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. 13s

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Planning Gommlssion
Vintage $enior APartmente
January 18,2023
(PN 21-15e)
Athchment 26
Comment Letters from Public Agencies

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

SACNAMENTO METROPOTITAN
'Ezb

AIR RUALITYNT DISTRICTMAN AC E
November 3A,2A22
Steven Banks
City of Folsom Planning Department
50 Natoma Street
Folsom Cordova, CA 95630
Subject: Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments MitlSated Negative Declaration (SAC2021026331 Dear Steven Banks:

Thank you for the opportunity to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments project. The project includes the construction of a 136-unit affordable senior rental apartments in a three-story building on 4.86 acres at 103 East Natoma Street. Sac Metro Air District commends the project for providing high density, affordable, senior housing with access to a trail network and within a half mile of a transit stop. We also commend the projea for including cool roofing and solar arrays as sustainability features. The following comments are intended to further improve air quality and health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

CECIA comments
Although the MND determined the project is consistent with the City's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Stratejy, and therefore not significant for greenhouse gas emission impacts, Sac Metro Air District recommends the proponent clnsider building the project wlthout naturalgas infrastructure. Not only does removing naturalgas reduce the cost of infrastructure, operating buildings without burning natural gas provides substantial public health benefits. Homes in which gas stoves are used have nitrogen dioxide concentrations 50 to 400% higher than homes with electric stovesl. using a 8as stove and oven for just an hour often leads to indoor air pollutant levels that exceed California's ambient air quality standards. This exposure to nitrogen dioxide can cause respiratory effects. lf the project is built with natural gas infrastructure, Sac Metro Air District recommends the proiect be pr"-*ir"d to allow for the future conversion to all-electric (space heating, water heating, cooking) to support the State's goal of carbon neutrality by 2045'
Since greenhouse gas emissions from equipment during proiect construction do not exceed Sac Metro Air District,s recommended thresholds of significance, the emissions do not need to be amortized in the analysis.

The calEEMod report in Appendix A includes pG&E as the utility provider for electricity. The proJect is in SMUD territory, therefore SMUD electricity intensity factors should be lncluded' 1 Rocky Mountain lnsfltute, Basalt, co. Heatth Effects fmm Gas stove Pottution (2020) tlthrs l/rlxi.oroirn$iqhugas:9lgye5io,olll]lillj:
777 LzIhstreet, Ste' 300 ' Sacramento' CA95814
Tel: 279-2O7 -1122' Toll Free: 800'880-9025
AlrQualitY.org
health/

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage at Folsom Senior Apartments MitiSated Negative Declaration Page2
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy consistency
Mitigation Measure GHG-03 requires the project to comply with Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy Measure T-g {page 69). Measure T-8 requires multi-famifi residential projects with 17 or more units to provide EV charging in 5% of total parking spaces. To comply with GHG Reduction Strategy Measure T-8, ihe project would need at least 7 EV charging stations (5% of the 136 stalls). Sac Metro Air District recommends installing Level 2 EV charging stations.

Mitigation Measure GHG-03 indicates the project will provide 14 EV charging stations. For clarity and convenience, \fle recommend updating GHG-03 to specify the actual number of EV charging stations that the project proponent must installto comply with Measure T-8. We recommend that GHG-03 specifo that at least 7 EV charging stations are required to comply with Measure T-8.

Finally, please note that the MND appears to reference CalGreen incorrectly' The MND indicates (page ) the project will provide "12 standard electric vehicle charging station (EVCS) stalls, and two loadin8 EVCS stalti." And further states that "The electric vehicle charging spaces would be approximately 10'3 percent of the total parking spaces, which meets the electric vehicle charging station requirement outlined by CalGreen (Title 24, Part 11)." This text appears to reference the 2019 CalGreen Code, which requires that 10% EV capable spaces be installed, but does not require that actual EV charging stations be installed.

Design comments
to piomote the use of bicycles by residents, Sac Metro Air District recommends the proponent cover the bicycle parking areas for weather protection and install outdoor electricaloutlets to allow charging of E-biies, which are becoming more common. Bicycle parking areas should be sized to accommodate larger bicycle types that seniors may use, including tricycles, cargo bikes, and reclined bikes, consistent wii'tr the iity oi iolsom's Active Transportation Plan Design Guide, Chapter Vl, and the APBP Bicycle Parking Guide2,
There is a statement on page 108 regarding that "relocation of the effected bus stop" would reduce transit impacts to less than significant. No additional details are included in the MND' lf a bus stop will be relocated, Sac Metro Air District recommends adding a shelter to provide shade and weather protection to further encourage transit use'
Construction
The MND notes that Folsom's Community Development Department Standard Construction Conditions include air pollution control and naturally occurring asbestos provisions. Sac Metro Air District recommends all projects implement the attached Basic Construction Emission Control Practices3. A listing of the most common air district rules that apply during constructiona is also attached. 2 Association of pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, Essentiols of Bike Porking (2A751 lrtlJs://wWw.aobn.ore/a:sets/docs/[slqrliialsqfBiLeParkine Ill\l-A oe.lf 3 Sac Metro Air District Basic Construction Emission Control Practices, CEQA Guide Chapter 3 (2019) l,!!n,//*ww.airguitlity"orslLandUsel-Fttgrortatiorr/tjocurttglrtr/ChJBasicFnrissiarrControlPrqlctieetBMPSFinalT:
2019.pdf
4 Sac Metro Air District Rules Statement (2020)
5fqp:/yUW1y.aUgjJell-ly.g{S&djfzu1gfr. {rlport".ltior $r.desAttachnrentl.0-20l0Firtsl.rrdf

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vlntage at Folsom Senior Apartments Mitigated Negatlve Declaratlon

please contact me at 279-207-1131 or [email protected] if you have any questions reSarding these comments.

Sincerely,
(""-,1'd
Karen Huss
Associate Air Quallty Pla nner/Analyst
cc: PaulPhilley, AICP, Program Supervlsor
Attachments

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (Best Management Practices) Bnsrc CoNsrRucnoN EMIssIoN CoNTRoL PRAcTIcES
(Besr MRmRcemENr PRAcncEs)
The following Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices are considered feasible for controlling fugitive dust from a construction site. The practices also serve as best managemenfpractices (BMPs), allowing the use of the non-zero particulate matter signifiiance thresholds. Lead agencies should add these emission control practices as C6nditions of Approval (COA) or include in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prograrn (MMRP).
. Control of fugitive dust is required by District Rule 403 and enforced by District staff. , Water all exposed surfaces two times daily. Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to soil piles, graded areas, unpaved parking areas, staging areas, and access roads.
. Cover or maintain at least two feet of free board space on haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material on the site. Any haul trucks that would be traveling along freeways or major roadways should be covered.
. Use wet power vacuum street sweepers to remove any visible trackout mud or dirt onto a_djacent public roads at least once a day. Use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. ' Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph). , All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, parking lots to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. ln addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

The following practices describe exhaust cmission controlfrom diesel powered fleets. working at alonstruction site. California regulations_limit idling from both on-road and off- road diisel-powered equipment. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) enforces idling limitations and compliance with diesel fleet reg ulations. . Minimize idling time either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the time of idling to 5 minutes [California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449(dX3) and 24831. Provide clear signage that posts this requirement for workers at the entrances to the site.
. provide current certificate(s) of compliance for CARB's ln-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation [California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449 and 2449'11- For more information contact CARB at 877-593-6677, [email protected], or www. a rb. ca.ggvldoorslcomglia nce ced 1 . html'
Although not required by local or state regulation, many construction companies have equiprient inspection and maintenance programs to ensure work and fuel efficiencies. . Maintain all construction equipment in proper working condition according to manufacturer's specifications. The equipment must be checked by a certified mechanic and determine to be running in proper condition before it is operated.

Vb

AIR QUALITY
sActArEtTO iltItOPOlllAff
MANAGEilTNI OISTgIC'
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quatity Management District CEQA Guide December 2009, Revised September 2010, May 2017, July2019 Page I I

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN
,Ea
AIR
MANACE
UALITY
NT DISTRICTaME
Sac Metro Alr District Rules & Regulations Statement (revised 1012020\ The following statement is rccommended as standad condition of approval or construction ioiuiint nlnguage for att devetopment prcjects within the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management Distrtct (Sac Metrc Air District):

All projects are subject to Sac Metro Air District rules in effect at the time of construction. A rorpii,i" listing of 6urrent rules is available at Www..airquality,grq or by calling 916-874-4800. speiitic rules ilrat may relate to construction activities or building design may include, but are not limited to:

Rule 201: General Permit Reouirgments" Any project thatincludes the use of equipment phere may require permit(s) from Sac Metro Air
OiJtn"t piior to equipment operation. The applicant, developer,.or operator of a project that includes an emergency generator, boiler, oi heater should contact the Sac Metro Air District l"ify to O"tominiit ab|rmit is required, and to begin the permit application process. Other g;#r*ltypes of ure" ihrt require a permit include, but are not limited to, dry cleaners' gasoline Itltions, ibray booths, and operations that generate airborne particulate emissions. portable construction equipm'ent (e.g. geneiators, compressors, pile drivers, lighting equipment, etc.iwitn an internal comoustion ingine over 50 horsepower is required to havg a Sac Metro Air oi"irict petmit or a California Air Resources Board portable equipment registration (PERP) (see Other Regulations below).

Rule 402: Nuisance. The developer or contractor is required to prevent dust.or any emissions ffimcausinginjury,nuisance,orannoyancetothepublic'
Rule 403: Fuqitive Dust. The developer.or contractor is required to control dust emissions from ffirageoranyotherconstructionactivitytopreventairbornedustfrom leaving the project site'
PER Hour. developer or
water heaters),
rule.
contractor is required to water heaters residence
boilers or process heaters that comply with the emission limits specified in the Rule 4il: Wood Burnlnq Applianc.es. This rule prohibits the installation of any new, , uncontrolled fireplaces in new or existing
developments.

Rule 442: Architectural coatinqs. The developer or contractor is required to use coatings that a pound content limits specifiBd in the rule'
R-ute 453: Gutback and Emuls[i.e-d dsphalt,Bavino.M?teriaJs. This rule prohibits the use of haft for paving, road construction or road
maintenance activities.
777 L2th Street, Ste.300 ' Sacramento, CA95814
T elt 279-2O7 -tt22' f oll Free: 80G880-9025
AirQuality.org

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Rule 460: Adhesives and Sealants, The developer or contractor is required to gsg adhesives and sealants tnat conffinEvolatile organic compound content limits specified in the rule' Rule 902: Asbestos. The developer or contractor is required to notiff the Sac Melro Air District @ationordemolitionactivity.Rule902co.ntainsspecificrequirementsfor surveying-, notification, removal, and disposal of asbestos containing material' Other Regulations (Galifornia Code of Regulations (CCR)) Sac Metro Air District Rules & Regulations Statement

The
developer or contrac,tor required to the Sac Metro Air of earth moving projects, greater than 'l acre in size in areas "Moderately Likely to Contain Asbestos" within eastern Sacramento County. The develoPer or contractor is required to comply with specific requirements for surveying, notificati on, and handling soil that contains naturally occurring asbestos.
{3 CCR, Division 3. chapter 9. Article 5. Po44blg Eqqipngnt ReFistratipn qroqrqm: The p$withallregistrationandoperationalre9uirements
of the portable equipment registration program such as recordkeeping and notification. 13 CCR. D-ivision 3. Chaeter 9. Article LF..Q?{49(d}{2} and ll cqR' PlYision 3. ie idling time either by shutting equipment off
wnen not in gse or reOucin-g the time oi iOllng to 5 minutes. These apply to diesel powered off- road equipment and on-road vehicles, respectively.

03/28/2023 Item No.13.
ffisv
Glvw Newsou
Water Boards
€!vlnoRMrNT,\! f ,i()Iarirrltr
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
14 December2022
Steven Banks
City of Folsom
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
[email protected]

GOMMENTS TO REQUEST FOR REVIEW FOR THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DEC LARATION, VI NTAGE S E NIOR APARTIT,IENTS P ROJ ECT, SC H#2022110187,

SACRAMENTO COUNTY
pursuant to the State Clearinghouse's 10 November 2O22 request, the CentralValley RegionalWater Quality Control Board (CentralValley Water Board) has reviewed the Reguesf for Review fo,r the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Vintage Senior Apartments Project, located in Sacramento County'
Our agency is delegated with the responsibility of protecting the quali$ of surface and groundwatbrs of the state; therefore, our @mments will address concerns surrounding those issues.
l. Regulatory Setting
Basin Plan
The CentraiValley Water Board is required to formulate and adopt Basin Plans for all areas within the Central Valley region under Section fi24} of the Porter-Cologne Water eualig ControlAct. Each Basin Plan must contaln water quali$ objectives to ensure the reasonable protection of beneficial uses, as well as a program of implementation for achieving water quality objectives with the Basin Plans. Federal regulations require each state to adopt water quality standards to protect the public ne?nn or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the Clean Water Act. ln California, the beneficial uses, water quality objectives, and the Antidegradation Policy are the State's water quality standards. Water quality standaids are also contained in the NationalToxics Rule,40 CFR Section 131.36, and the California Toxics Rule, 40 CFR Section 131.38.

The Basin Plan is subject to modification as necessary, considering applicable laws, policies, technologies, water quality conditions and priorities. The original Basin irlans were adopted in 1975, and have been updated and revised periodically as required, using
'Basin
Plan amendments. Once the Central Valley Water Board has adopted a gaJin Plan amendment in noticed public hearings, it must be approved by the btate Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), Office of Mrnx BRloroFD, cHAIR I Pnrnrcr Puluee, EsQ', execultvF oFFlcER .f1020 Sun Canter Drive d200, Rancho Cordov6, CA 95670 I www.waterboards.ca.gov/canlralvalloy

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage Senior Apartments Project - 2' 14 December 2022 Sacramento Coun$
Administrative Law (OAL) and in some cases, the United States Environmental protection Agency (USEPA). Basin Plan amendments only become effective after they have beLn approved by the OAL and in some cases, the USEPA. Every three (3) years, a review'of the Basin Plan is completed that assesses the appropriateness of'existing standards and evaluates and prioritizes Basin Planning issues. For more information on the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Easrns, please visit our website:
http://ranrnrr.waierboa rds. ca. gov/cenlra lva lleylwatet " issueslbasi-!-plans/
mp[withtheAntidegradationPolicy(StateWater
Board Resolution 6S-16) and the Antidegradation lmplementation Policy contained in the Basin Plan. The Antidegradation lmplementation Policy is available on page74 at:
httpa:/lwww.waterboards.ca.qovlcentralvallevlwater issues/basin plan$/sacsir 2018

05.pdf
ln part it states:

Any discharge of wasfe to high quality waters must apply best practicable treatment orbontrot not only to preveni a condition of pollution or nuisance from occuning, but also to maintain ine nignest water quality possible consisfent with the maximum benefit to the PeoPle of the Sfafe.

This information must be presented as an analysis of the impacts and potential impacts of the discharge on water quality, as measured by background concentrations and applicable water quality obiectives' The antidegradation analysis is a mandatory element in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and land discharge Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRsfpermitting processes. The environmental review document should evaluate potential impacts to both surface and groundwater quality' ll. Permitting Requirements
Constructlon $torm Water General Permit
@iojectdisturboneormoreacreSofsoilorwhereprojects
disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the General permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit), Construction General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, grubbing, disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling, or excavaiion, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requiris the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention plan (SWppP). For more information on the Construction General Permit, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:
httpll/www.waterboards,ca,oov/water issues/nroorarns/stormwaterlconstpermit$.sht ml

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage Senior Apartments Project
Sacramento CountY
-3- 14 December2022
Glean Water Act Sectlon 404 Permit
@edischargeofdredgedorfillmaterialinnavi9ablewaters
or wetlands, a permit pursuant to Section 4Q4 of the Clean Water Act may be needed from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). lf a Section 404 permit is required by the USACE, the CentralValley Water Board will review the permit application to ensure that discharge will not violate water quality standards' lf ine proldit requires surface water drainage realignment, the applicant is advised to coniaci the Department of Fish and Game for information on Streambed Alteration permit requirements. lf you have any questions regarding the Clean Water Act Section 404 permits, please contact the Regulatory Division of the Sacramento District of USACE at (916) 557-5250.

Clean V\fater Act Sqctlon 401 Pormit - Wator Qgpllbt 9eftification @.,Non-ReportingNationwidePermit,NationwidePermit,
Letter of Permission, lndividual Permit, Regional General Permit, Programmatic General Permit), or any other federal permit (e.9., Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act or Section 9 from the United States Coast Guard), is required for this project due to the disturbance of waters of the United States (such as streams and welands), then a Water Quality Certification must be obtained from the Central Valley Water Board prior to initiation of project activities. There are no waivers for 401 Water euality Certifications. For more information on the Water Quality Certification, visit the CentralValley Water Board website at:
https:l/www.waterboards.ca.qovlcentralvalleylwater igsueslwater quality certificatio nl
Waste Discharse Requlrements - Dissharoes to Waters of the $tate ffiihatonlynon-jurisdictionalwatersoftheState(i'e',.,non- federal" waters of the State) are present in the proposed project area, the proposed project may require a Waste Discharge Requiremert (WDR) permit to be issued by bentrat Vailey Water Board. Under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quali$ Control Act, discharges to all waters of the State, including all wetlands and other waters of the State including, but not limited to, isolated wetlands, are subject to State regulation. For more information on the Waste Discharges to Surface Water NpDES program and WDR processes, visit the CentralValley Water Board website s1;[ttLs://www.wqlerboards.ca.qov{centralvalley/water issueslwaste to surface wat erl
projects involving excavation or fill activities impacting less than 0.2 acre or 400 linear feet of nonJurisdictional waters of the state and projects involving dredging activities impacting less than 50 cubic yards of non-jurisdictional waters of the state may be eligibte foicoverage under the State Water Resources Control Board Water Ouitity Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ (GeneralOrder 2004-0004)' For more information on the General Order 2004-0004, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:
https:/lwww.watetboards,ca.oovlbgard decisionslqdqpted o.rders/water qualitvl20O 4/wqo/wqo2004-0004. nd{

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage Senior Apartments Project - 4 - 14 December 2A22 Sacramento CountY
Dewaterlns Permit
@ctincludesconstructionorgroundwaterdewateringtobe
discharged to land, the proponent may apply for coverage under S!1te Water Board GeneraiWater Quality Order (Low Threat General Order) 2003-0003 orJhe Central Valley Water Board's-Waiver of Report of Waste Discharge and Waste Discharge Requirements (Low Threat Waiver) R5-2018-0085. Small temporary construction dewatering projects are projects that discharge groundwater to land from excavation activities or dewatering of underground utility vaults. Dischargers seeking coverage under the General Order or Waiver must file a Notice of lntent with the Central Valley Water Board prior to beginning discharge'
For more information regarding the Low Threat General Order and the application process, visit the CentralValley Water Board website at:
irttp:llwww.waterboards.ca.govlboard decisionsladopted orders/water q.ualitU?003/ wqo/wqe20!3-0003,8d1
For more information regarding the Low Threat Waiver and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https:l/unilw.watgrbolrds.ca.oovlcentralvalleylboard -decisionsladopted ord.ers/waiv ersl.5-2018-0085.Pdf
Limited Threat General iIPDEL Permit
@desconstructiondewateringanditisnecessaryto
discharge tne giounOwater to waters of the United States, the proposed project,wtll requireloverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) peimit. Dewatering discharges are typically considered a low or limited threat to water qualig and may be covered under the General Order for Limited Threat Discharges'to Sufiaie Water (Limited Threat GeneralOrder). A complete Notice of lntent rnust be submitted to the CentralValley Water Board to obtain coverage under the Limited Threat General Order. For more information regarding the Llmited Threat General Order and the application process, visit the CentralValley Water Board website at:
https:/lranilw.waterboards.ca.qov/centralvallev/bogrd decisionsladooted orderslaene ral orderslrS-201 6-0076-01 .odf
NPIES Permit
if the proposed project discharges waste that could affect the quality of surface waters oi tne St;te, other than into a community sewer system, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NpDES) permit. A=complete Report of Waste Discharge must be submitted with the bentralViltey Water Board to obtain a NPDES Permit. For more information regarding the NPDES Permit and the application process, visit the CentralValley Wlter Board website s1; httpsl/lwww"waterboards..$"qov/centralvallev/helplpermitl

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Vintage Senior Apartments Project
Sacramento CountY
lf you have questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (916) 4644684 or Peter. [email protected]
Pnn^?/rr/t/
Peter Minkel
Engineering Geologist
cc: State Clearinghouse unit, Governor's Office of Planning and Research, Sacramento
-5- 1!December2022

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Powering forward. Together.

OstvluD
Sent Via E-Mail
December 14,2022
Steven Banks
City of Folsom Planning Department
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
[email protected]
Subject: Vintage Senior Apartments, MND I 2022110187
Dear Mr. Banks:

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Mitigated Negative_ Dec_laration (MND) for the Vintage Senior Ajartments (project, SCH 2022110187). SMUD is the primary energy provider for Sacramento borinty and a portion of the proposed Project area, SMUD's vision is to empower our customers with solutions and options that increase energy efficiency, proiect the environment, reduce globat warming, and lower the cost to serve our i-egion. As a Responsible Agency, SMUD aims to ensure that the proposed Project lim-its the potential for significint environmental effects on SMUD facilities, employees, and customers.

We have no comments to offer at this time but would appreciate if the Ci$ of Folsom would continue to keep SMUD facilities in mind as environmental review of the Project moves forward. Please reroute the Project analysis for SMUD's review if there are any changes to the scope of the Project'
lf you have any questions regarding this tetter, please do not hesitate to contact me at gia.l zz.z a66, or by email at Am mon. Rice@sm ud. ors.

Sincerely,
Ammon Rice
Environmental Services Supervisor
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
6201 S Street
Sacramento, CA 95817
cc: Entitlements
SMUDHO i6201 SStreet lP.O.Box15830 iSacramento,CA95852-1830 11.88A.742.7683 lsmud'org

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:

Suhiect:

Boyd, Alexa <[email protected]>
Friday, December 23,202212:15 PM
Steven Banks
Vintage Senior APartments
CAUTTON: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Classification: Pu blic
Hello Steve,
This project is under review by pG&E's transmission engineering group for the associated grading and improvements (retaining wall) before an approval letter can be issued. ln the meantime, I wanted to provide the followinB comments:
a Retaining Wall: Walls, fences, and other structures must be installed at locations that do not affect the safe operation of pG&'s facilities. Heavy equipment access to our facilities must be maintained at alltimes. Metal fences are to be grounded to pG&E specifications. No wall, fence or other like structure is to be installed within 10 feet of tower footings. please provide distances from proposed retaining wall to tower footings.

Landscaping: On overhead electric transmission easements, trees and shrubs are limited to those varieties that do not exceed 10 feet in height at maturity. PG&E must have access to its facilities at all times, including access by heavy equipment. No planting is to occur within the footprint of the tower legs. Greenbelts are encouraged.

No buildings or other structures are permitted within transmission easement areas; this included signage. a
a
Respectfully,
il Alexa Boyd I Land Agent
Pacific Gas and Electric ComPanY
Land Management, Land RiShts Services
2730 Gateway Oaks Drive, Ste 220 | Sacramento, CA 95833 Phone: (916) 760-5738
E mai I : gjeIg,Eald3S@Ptr !g n!
I

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Planning Commission
Vintage Senior Apartments (PN 21-1 59)
January 18,2A23
a
Attachment 27
Comment Leffers from Residents

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:
[email protected]
Thursday, June 30, 2A223:42PM
Steven Banks
Vintage project at 103 E Natoma St
You don't often get email from [email protected]. l-earn whv thif is i&DoltEnt originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the content is safe.

Dear Steve Banks,
I am a resident of the Gimmaron Hills neighborhood directly next to 103 E Natoma Street. We have aftended two meetings with the owner/developer that wanis to put a three story 136 unit senior (55 and up) apartment building..on that prop"r[. This property is zoned Bp and while the proposed use is allowed it needs an issuance of a minor conditional ierhrit io have i ttrreeitory building. l, as well as my neighbors, are requesting that this conditional use permit be denied.

A three story building at this locatation is unacceptable. There are no three story buildings in this area. This property borders residential nlighborhoods that have single or two story homes, and one story office buildings. Changing this small plot of land from-RZ to R4 high density is egregious. Not only will it be an eyesore, but it does not fil in with the adjoining neighborhoods. Those nlignUors along its border lose the privacy and peaceful enjoyment of their pr6perty.. lmlgine the occupants of ihe third story looking directly into your backyard and back windows. This is not one bt thos6 neighb'orhoods that have homes close together and look down into each other's back yards. We hgye larger lot sizes and thb homes are built so that we have that privacy. That is why people have chosen to live here. Please do not allow the third story, a one story would be more appropriate for this space.

Another main concern is parking. The developer has indicated to us that there are not parking spaces fol every unit. yikeslll Their response is that not every occupant will have a vehicle. Maybe so, but the reality is that most units will have more than one occupant and all occupants in those units will have vehicles. Then if you factor in building staff, caregivers, and vistitors there is not ample parking spaces. This means that their cars will be lining the streets of the adjoiiring neighborhoods, once again unacceptable, Please require that all units have parking spaces as well as additional parking for staff, caregivers, and visitors' It is also our understanding that there will be two entrance/exits. One is proposed to be a right in, right out pasTge. !
would ask that this be maJe accessible to service vehicles only. Police, EMT, Fire Dept. The traffic issue is going to be a nightmare. Natoma has become a very busy street. The additional entrance/exits will put three entrance/exits within a vjry short distance from each other. dnce igain that is a traffic_ nightmare. Residents in our neighborhood have a hard enough time gefting in and out as it is. There are already visibility problems as well as a pedestrian crosswalk. This will be a very dangerous situation.
\Mrat a shame to lose all the beautiful trees and wildlife on this lot, as well as, the minimal undeveloped green space left in Folsom. This project does not align with the Distinctive by Nature image in appearance or location.

Please take these issues into consideration and not issue this conditional permit.

Yours respectfully,
Dreama Pacheco
d rea masplac-e@aol. com
916496-6536
1

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:

Elaine Andersen
Friday, July 8,20227:14 AM
Steven Banks
FW:Vintage project at 103 E Natoma StSubject:

From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 30,2022 3:40 PM
To: Elaine Andersen <eandersen@folsom'ca.us>
Subiect: Vintage project at 103 E Natoma St
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn whv ihil.jslrnportant CAU?ION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Oo not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Elaine Andersen,
I am a resident of the Cimmaron Hills neighborhood directly next to 103 E Natoma Street. We have attended two meetings with the owner/developer that wants to put a three story. 136 unit senior (55 and up) apartment building..on that prop"r[. This property ir .on",i Bp and while thi proposed useis allowed it needs an issuance of a minor conditional permit to have a three story nuiroing. l, as well as my heighbors, are requesting that this conditional use permit be denied' A three story building at this locatation is unacceptable. There are no three story buiHings in this area' This property borders residential neighborhoods that have single or two story homes, and one story office buildings. Changing this smal plot of tand iromhi to il trigh denstty is Jgregious, N,ol onf will it be an eyesore, but it does not fit in with the adjoining neighborhoods. Those ieighborsalong its OorOer.lose.the privacy and peaceful gnjoymenJ of their . . pr6pertvl lm?gine the occupants of itre third sto-ry looking o,ipclV into your backyard and back windows. This is not one bt ti,os6 neighSorhoods that have homes close together ind lookdown into each other's back yards. we haye larger lot sizes and the homes are built so that we have thal privacy. That is why people have chosen to live here. Please do not allow the third story, a one story would be more appropriate for this space' Another main concern is parking. The developer has indicated to us that there are not parking spages. fol eYery .
unit. yikesl!l Their r"rpon.e is-that not every occupant will have a vehicle. Maybe so, but the reality is that most units will have more than ond o""rp"nt and all occupants in those units will have vehicles. Then if you factor in bu.ilding staff, caregivers, and vistitors tnlt'"'ii not ample pari<ing sp€ces. This means that their cars will be lining the streets of the "oloiiing
neighborhoods, once again unacieptabie. Please require that all units have parking spaces as well as aAAitionat parking for staff, caregivers, and visitors.

It is also our understanding that there will be two entrance/exits. One is propos_ed to be a right in, right out.pasqage' ! would ask that this be made accessible to service vehicles only. Police, EMT, Fire Dept. The traffic issue is going to be a nilntr"re, Natoma nas ulcome a very busy street. The addiiional entrance/exits will put three entrance/exits within a ,"1v ino,t distance from each other. dnce again that is.a traffic.nightmare. Residents in our neighborhood have a hard endugn time getting in and out as it is. Theriare already visibility problems as well as a pedestrian crosswalk. This will be a very dangerous situation.
\Mrat a shame to lose all the beautiful trees and wildlife on this lot, as well as, the minimal undeveloped green space left in Folsom. This projact does not align with the Distinctive by Nature image in appearance or location. please take these issues into consideration and not issue this conditional permit.

I

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:

Kandi Jones < kandis5T@yahoo'com>
Thursday, July 7, 2022 7:43 PM
Steven Banks
103 E. Natoma StreetSubiect:

You don't often get emall from [email protected]. Lsa$ whv this i5 imooftant CAUTTON: This email origlnated from outslde of the organization. Do not -click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I reside on Cimmaron Circle. I am vehemently opposed to the proposed project at the above referenced address for reasons too many to list here, but are well known to the builder/developers'

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:
eprkeeperS <[email protected] >
Thursday, July7,2O22 8:00 PM
Steven Bank
103 E. Natoma StreetSubject:

You don,t often get email from [email protected]. Learn whv this is importg{t! GAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe'
I reside on Cimmaron Circle and I am vehemently opposed to the proposed project at the above referenced address for too many reasons to list here. but which are well known to the owner/developers.

Sent via the 5amsung GaiaxY 522+ 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone 1

03/28/2023 Item No.13.

Steven Banks
From:

Sent:

To:
[email protected]
Thursday, july 14, 20222:11PM
Steven Banks
Vintage Housing proposal questionSubject:

CAUT|0N: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good afternoon,
My name is Erin Sargent. We met at the first neighborhood meeting regarding the Vintage Housing senior living proposal. I was also in attendance for the second meeting, but did not see you there. I have also tried reachinB out to you earlier, but we were not able to connect.
l, along with my neighbors on Cimmaron Circle, have some valid concerns with this development. Obviously, anytime there is a new development, the loss of beautiful open space is mourned, and concerns about noise, traffic, & parking are all negatives compared to the open space that currently exists. And neighbors who have lived with that open space behind them for over 30 years are rightfully dismayed. One of the very reasons we purchased our home here six months ago was because of the amazing trail access and quiet, open feel. our home abuts the trail access from Cimmaron Circle and therefore, overflow parking for those seeking access to the apartment complex from the Oak Parkway trail is of considerable concern to me.

However, I understand that this is developable land per the zoning map, and that all the studaes that need to be done regarding noise, traffic, tree removal, etc. have all been done or are in process.

I have read the zoning code and also understand that there are significant developer incentives or bonuses involved when considering low income and senior living facilities.

My question is regarding a specific part of the code, namely section L7.LO2.O3A where density bonuses are concerned, as pasted below:

A. Density Bonus.

1. The city shall grant a density bonus to an applicant or developer of a housing development, consisting of five or more dwelling units, who agrees to provide the following:
a. At least ten percent of the total units of a housing development for low income households; or b. At least five percent of the total units of a housing development for very low income households; or
c. A senior citizen housing development.

All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number'

2. ln determining the number of target units to be provided pursuant to this section, the maximum residentialdensity shall be multiplied by 0,05 where very low income households are tarSeted, or by 0.10 where low income households are targeted. The density bonus units shall not be included when determining the total number of target units in the housing development. When calculating the required number of target units, any fractions of units shall be rounded to the next larger number.

3. Amount of DensitY Bonus,
1