Agenda packet — Folsom City Council, October 10, 2023 (part 2 of 5)

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
603 SUTTER STREET
CEDRUS HOLDINGS LLP.
603 SUTTER ST. FOLSOM, CA DATE OF REVISION: 02/08/23
2237 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 160
Roseville, CA 95661
916.786.8178
1715 R Street, Ste. 200
Sacramento, CA 95811
wp-architects.com
A-111
FLOOR PLANS - LEVEL 1 & 2
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 12
SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST .

SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST.

SHEET NOTES A-111
1 PROPERTY LINE
2 LANDSCAPE PLANTER
3 CORRUGATED METAL ROOF
4 RETAINING WALL
5 LINE OF ROOF AND/OR DECK OVERHEAD
6 ROLL-UP DOOR ACCESS TO TRASH ROOM
7 4FT WIDE ORNAMENTAL IRON GATE
8 POTENTIAL DEMISING WALL LOCATION
9 POTENTIAL DINING PATIO
10 (E) SIDEWALK AND ON STREET PARKING TO REMAIN
11 (N) SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’ 0
SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
2 2102 5
8 2
11 3
4 4
6 7
1 TYP. 1 TYP.
9 4

Page 174 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
603 SUTTER STREET
CEDRUS HOLDINGS LLP.
603 SUTTER ST. FOLSOM, CA DATE OF REVISION: 02/08/23
2237 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 160
Roseville, CA 95661
916.786.8178
1715 R Street, Ste. 200
Sacramento, CA 95811
wp-architects.com
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3ROOF PLAN 12
A-112
FLOOR PLANS - LEVEL 3 & ROOF
SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST .

SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST.
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’ 0
SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
SHEET NOTES A-112
1 PROPERTY LINE
2 LINE OF ROOF OVERHEAD
3 CORRUGATED METAL ROOF
4 DECK BELOW
5 FLAT ROOF AREA
6 ARCHITECTURAL ROOF PARAPET
2 1 TYP. 1 TYP.
5 3
6 3
44

Page 175 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 11

Building Sections, dated August 24, 2023

Page 176 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
(E) BUILDING
(E) BUILDING

PRIVATE DRIVEWAY

SUTTER STREET SCO

TT STRE
ET
6'-0"
89'-5"
4'-10"
3'-9"
65'-3"
5'-0"
5'-1"
6'-5"
30'-2"
4'-8"
58'-11"
6'-4"
2'-2"5'-8"
31'-2"
31'-7"
3'-5"
603 SUTTER STREET
CEDRUS HOLDINGS LLP.
603 SUTTER ST. FOLSOM, CA DATE OF REVISION: 02/08/23
2237 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 160
Roseville, CA 95661
916.786.8178
1715 R Street, Ste. 200
Sacramento, CA 95811
wp-architects.com
A-311

BUILDING SECTIONS
BUILDING SECTION 1
BUILDING SECTION 4
BUILDING SECTION 2
BUILDING SECTION 3

KEY PLAN
1 4
2 3
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
SHEET NOTES A-211
1 APPROX. LOCATION OF EXISTING NATURAL GRADE
2 APPROX. LOCATION OF BEDROCK
2 2
1 1
TYP.

TYP.

TYP.
2 1
3 4

Page 177 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 12

Illustrative Building Renderings
Dated February 8, 2023

Page 178 ends

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERINGS

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - LOOKING SOUTHWEST

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - AREIAL LOOKING SOUTHWEST

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - LOOKING SOUTH

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - LOOKING EAST
1 3
2 4

Page 179 ends

ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERINGS
ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - POTENTIAL PATIO DINING AREA ILLUSTRATIVE RENDERING - SCOTT ST. OFFICE ENTRANCE1 2

Page 180 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 13

Streetview Building Renderings
Dated February 6, 2023

Page 181 ends

STREETVIEW RENDERINGS

STREET VIEW RENDERING - VIEW FROM SUTTER STREET LOOKING SOUTH

STREET VIEW RENDERING - VIEW FROM SUTTER STREET LOOKING SOUTH 1 2

Page 182 ends

STREETVIEW RENDERINGS
STREET VIEW RENDERING - VIEW FROM SCOTT ST. / RILEY ST. INTERSECTIONSTREET VIEW RENDERING - VIEW FROM SUTTER ST. LOOKING SOUTHWEST 21

Page 183 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 14

Historic Building References
Dated February 8, 2023

Page 184 ends

HISTORICAL REFERENCES
HISTORIC SUTTER STREET (700 BLOCK) - 1914
SUTTER ST. COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE - HISTORICAL PHOTOS
SUTTER ST. COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE - CURRENT REFERENCE

REFERENCE - CORNER EMPHASIS

REFERENCE - UPPER WINDOWS

CALIFORNIA GOLD RUSH
COMMERCIAL ARCHITECTURE (circa 1850-1900)

REFERENCE - CORNICE DETAILS
REFERENCE - 3 STORY BLDG. - OLD SACRAMENTO
SUTTER STREET STOREFRONT - 1880 ENTERPRISE HOTEL (SUTTER ST) - 1893

PARAPET

FRIEZE OR BRACKETS

CORNICE

TRANSOM WINDOWS,

CURVED OR RECTANGULAR
BRICK DENTILS @ CORNICE

DENTILS OR BRACKETS

TRANSOM

HANGING BLADE SIGN

WINDOW W/

SIGN PAINTING

BASE PANEL

DEEP SET AWNING OR

COVERED WALKWAY

UPPER STORY WINDOWS

WITH SOLDIER COURSE
LINTEL

PILASTER - BRICK OR
WOOD

BRACKETS AT CORNICE

GOOSE-NECK

DOWN LIGHT

EXPRESSED SCUPPER

BOX AND DOWN SPOUT

Page 185 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 15

Building Lighting Details
Dated August 24, 2023

Page 186 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 1
1 603 SUTTER STREET
CEDRUS HOLDINGS LLP.
603 SUTTER ST. FOLSOM, CA DATE OF REVISION: 08/24/23
2237 Douglas Blvd., Ste. 160
Roseville, CA 95661
916.786.8178
1715 R Street, Ste. 200
Sacramento, CA 95811
wp-architects.com
A-212

LIGHTING PLAN
LIGHTING PLAN - LEVEL 1 LIGHTING PLAN - LEVEL 2 LIGHTING PLAN - LEVEL 3

NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
1 2 3
4 5
6 0
SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’ 0
SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
3 33333
LIGHTING LOCATION:

LIGHTING 1:

COPPER GROVE KRAN AGED

COPPER WALL MOUNT
Dimensions: 10.5”W x 13”D x 22”H
Finish:Copper
Color: Brown
Light Direction: Downlight
LIGHTING 2:

INTAGE BARN OUTDOOR SCONCE
Dimensions: 18”W x 25”D x 17¾”H
Finish:Steel and Aluminum
Color: Weathered Rust
Light Direction: Downlight
LIGHTING 3:

COPPER GROVE KRAN AGED COPPER

HANGING LANTERN
Dimensions: 27.5”W x 29.5”H
Finish:Copper
Color: Brown
Light Direction: Downlight
LIGHTING 4:

LED CAN LIGHT
Dimensions: 8” Diameter
Finish:Bronze
Color: Brown
Light Direction: Downlight
2 2 111 1
1 LIGHTING 1
LIGHTING 2
LIGHTING 3
LIGHTING 4
2

Page 187 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 16

Uniform Sign Criteria
Dated August 9, 2022

Page 188 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

1.0 INTENT AND PURPOSE
This Uniform Sign Program is established for the purpose of assuring high quality tenant signage. All signage shall be designed and constructed to compliment the project architecture.

This document describes the acceptable types of signs, materials, localizations, and sizes. Signs are non-illuminated. Renderings, drawings, and shop drawings contained in these guidelines are included for illustrative purpose only and are intended to aid the Tenant in complying with the Design Criteria.

1.1 Interpretation and Compliance: As administrators of the tenant sign criteria, the Owner/Landlord is the final arbitrator of criteria compliance. These guidelines are to be approved by the City of Folsom and all signage must receive appropriate City issued signage permits before being fabricated or installed.

If ownership should change for all or part of the project and/or the retail tenant spaces, the guidelines herein established shall remain applicable and in force under new ownership. Should the new owner wish to amend these guidelines, it shall submit such proposal to the Planning Department of the City of Folsom for approval.

2.0 DEFINITION OF TERMS

2.1 Area or Sign Area: Sign area shall include the entire area with a single continuous perimeter composed of squares or rectangles that enclose the extreme limits of all signs elements, including, but not limited to, sign structures or borders, written copy, and color. Supporting structures such as sign brackets are not included in sign area provided that they contain no lettering or graphics.

2.2 Logo/Logotype: No logos are allowed per City of Folsom.

2.3 Tenant Identification: Shall consist of a Tenant’s name. No telephone numbers or URLs are allowed.

2.4 Temporary Identification: A sign placed for a limited duration of time.

3.0 SUBMITTAL, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Prior to construction of any sign or application for City sign permits, the tenant or tenant’s representative must obtain the Owner/Landlord’s written approval of the proposed sign design. The review and approval process shall be as follows:

3.1 Tenant to submit drawings showing sizes and location to Owner/Landlord.

3.2 Owner/Landlord shall review designs and either approve, approve with corrections, or deny application within 21 calendar days of receipt of application.

3.3 If application is denied, tenant shall review reasons for denial and then revise their application to address the Owner/Landlord’s concerns and resubmit the application.

Uniform Sign Program (USP)
Project: 603 Sutter Street, Folsom, CA
CLIENT
ZGlobal
Attn: Zlad Alaywan, P.E.
604 Sutter Street
Folsom, CA 95630
5410 Warehouse Way
Sacramento, CA 95826

PROJECT

GRAPHIC CONSULTANT

DRAWING SUBMITTALS

DRAWING TITLE

PAGE NUMBER
1 of
603 Sutter Street

3.4 Once approval is granted by the Owner/Landlord, tenant may then proceed with their sign permit application to the City.

3.5 Signage installed without Owner/Landlord and City approval will result in the removal of signage at Tenant’s sole expense.

4.0 GENERAL CRITERIA FOR ALL SIGNAGE

4.1 Code Compliance: All signage shall comply with local building codes and ordinances.

4.2 Maintenance: Maintenance of installed signs is the tenant’s sole responsibility. It is expected that dam- aged or deteriorated signs or non-functioning signage lighting will be repaired promptly and restored to a like-new condition. Within ten days after receiving written notice from the Owner or the City, Tenant will complete all repairs requested. If repairs and remedies are not made within this time period, the Owner may undertake repairs at the Tenant’s expense.

4.3 Allowable Messages: Sign messages shall be limited to the project/tenant name.

4.4 Allowable Sign Types: The sign types outlined in these guidelines are the only signs permitted on the building or property.

4.5 Preferred Materials: Sign design and construction should include the use of high quality materials such as architectural grade metals.

4.6 Sign Locations: Signs shall be permitted only within the sign areas shown.

4.7 License Required: Sign installers are to be State of California licensed contractors and are required to provide contractor’s license number(s), classifications, and expiration date; proof of liability insurance and evidence of Worker’s Compensation Insurance to the Owner prior to conducting any work. Tenants are advised to consult with the City of Sacramento for additional permit requirements.

4.8 Removal at Move-Out: When vacating a retail space, the tenant, at their expense, shall remove all signage, patch and repair all damage and leave the building surfaces in as-new condition.

Contents
08/09/2022
7

Page 189 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

CLIENT
5410 Warehouse Way
Sacramento, CA 95826

PROJECT

GRAPHIC CONSULTANT

DRAWING SUBMITTALS

DRAWING TITLE

PAGE NUMBER

ZGlobal
Attn: Zlad Alaywan, P.E.
604 Sutter Street
Folsom, CA 95630
603 Sutter Street
Hanging Tenant
Sign Type A
2 of
Letters would be 1" thick fabrication
with stainless steel painted. Each
tentant would have name.

D/F- Both faces will slide out
2" Outer
3" Depth typical aluminum tubing
Side view access to
change Face
Corten Face
This would have black,
either all around as shown, or
just a top bar. We would use bar
for hanging, not chain.

Copy Color: Medium Bronze
Copy Type:

Option A: Trajan
OR
Option B: Benecarlo Medium
Case: Upper OR Upper & lower
Hanger 2” x 3”
2” Long (Distance from
top of sign to bottom of
2nd Floor Landing)
Framing
3” Deep x 2”
Corten Backer
18"
4'6"
5"
2"x3" D
Screws, opens hereScrews
Screws, opens hereScrews
ABC Company
08/09/2022
7

Page 190 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
/09/2022
12 7

Page 191 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Page 192 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
/09/2022
FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 12
SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST .

SUTTER ST .

SCOTT ST.
0 SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’ 0
SCALE: 1/8” = 1’-0”
4’ 8’ 16’
2 2102 5
8 2
11 3
4 4
6 7
1 TYP. 1 TYP.
9 4
12 7

Page 193 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Page 194 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

CLIENT
5410 Warehouse Way
Sacramento, CA 95826

PROJECT

GRAPHIC CONSULTANT

DRAWING SUBMITTALS

DRAWING TITLE

PAGE NUMBER

ZGlobal
Attn: Zlad Alaywan, P.E.
604 Sutter Street
Folsom, CA 95630
603 Sutter Street
Sign Directory
7 of
1-3/4” X 17”
1-3/4” X 17”
1-3/4” X 17”
1-3/4” X 17”
1-3/4” X 17”
1-3/4” X 17”
30"
18"
1/2”
6 Strips Magnet System Directory
603 SUTTER
08/09/2022
7

Page 195 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 17

Project Narrative, dated August 23, 2023

Page 196 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

1 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001

Project Narrative
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project
Design Review Application (PN 17-145)
603 Sutter Street (APN: 070-0111-010)

SITE: The proposed 603 Sutter Street project (“Project”) is a mixed-use building to be located on the corner of Sutter and Scott Streets within the commercial portion of the Folsom Historic District. The Project is located on a 0.19 acre, approximately 74 by100 foot (7,400 sq. ft.) parcel (APN# 070-0111-010). The lot is zoned as HD/C-2 within the Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic Commercial Primary Area of the Historic District, with an underlying zoning of C-2, Central Business District. The proposed Project is located on the south side of Sutter Street, west of Scott Street. The parcel is a corner lot on the upper end of Sutter Street. To the north is Sutter Street with the Folsom Electric and Lighting Company Building (604 Sutter Street) directly across the street. To the east is a commercial zoned lot with two residential structures (Cohn Mansion). To the south of the parcel, on Scott Street, is a residence located on a commercial zoned lot, situated directly across Scott Street from the Cohn Mansion. To the west is the original historic library that is now Studio 605 Salon. The site drops approximately 24 feet from the back side to Sutter Street and approximately nine feet along Sutter Street from the lower to upper end traveling from west to east.

ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING:

North: Sutter Street and Folsom Electric and Lighting Company Building HD-C2.

South: Residential use with HD/C-2 Zoning.

East: Scott Street Residential use (Cohn Mansion) with HD/C-2 Zoning. West: 605 Sutter Street (Salon) HD/C-2 Zoning.

Page 197 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

2 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
APPLICANT/OWNER: The applicants and the owners are Ziad and Deborah Alaywan, through their company, Cedrus Holdings (the Applicant). Ziad and Deborah own three properties on Sutter Street: 510 A & B Sutter, 512 Sutter and the proposed 603 Sutter Street.

The owners have strong ties and a deep respect for Folsom, particularly the Historic District and Sutter Street. Not only is their business located at 604 Sutter Street, but their two other Sutter Street properties are also located in the Historic District and one of their children owns his house on Wool Street.

Ziad and Deborah are the owners of ZGlobal Inc., an engineering firm located at 604 Sutter Street which employs over thirty professionals between two office locations, one on Sutter Street and the second office in Southern California. It is their hope to eventually occupy office space at the proposed 603 Sutter Street location.

ZGlobal currently manages the electricity needs for Marin, Contra Costa, Placer, El Dorado, Santa Clara, Solano, and Napa Counties in addition to twenty-eight city agencies throughout California1, and various generating facilities across California, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, and New Mexico.

BACKGROUND: After several initial feasibility studies dating back to 2012, the 603 Sutter Street building, as originally proposed, was formally submitted to the City in May of 2017. The Applicant’s submission included an application for approval of Variances (a building height variance and parking variance) and Design Review for development of a three-story, 23,486 square foot mixed-use building with underground parking. The Project, as initially proposed, was informally evaluated by the Historic District Commission at the September 6, 2017 meeting as an informational item only. At this meeting, the Commission, representatives of the Heritage Preservation League, and members of the public provided comments and feedback regarding the proposed project.

In addition to the feedback received from the Historic District Commission in September of 2017, the Applicant received a letter from the Heritage Preservation League noting their concerns. The Applicant also solicited feedback from neighboring residents by hosting several meetings between August and September of 2017.

1 This includes the cities of Anaheim, Campbell, Cupertino, Corona, Concord, Danville, Benicia, El Cerrito, Lafayette, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Martinez, Moraga, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hills, Mountain View, Oakley, Richmond, San Ramon, San Pablo, Pinole, Pittsburg, Saratoga, Sunnyvale, and Walnut Creek.

Page 198 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

3 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
Listed below are some of the most notable comments from the Historic District Commission, the Heritage Preservation League, and residents:
• Concern regarding building height (originally proposed at 57 feet, 6 inches tall) • Concern regarding the size and scale of building.
• Concerning architecture and design of the building – recommended to redesign the plans to be more reflective of buildings constructed prior to 1900.
• Concern regarding limited on-site parking provided for the building (15 parking spaces were proposed).
• Concern regarding pedestrian safety in the underground parking garage. • Concern regarding building encroachment into Scott Street right-of-way.

On March 14, 2019, the Applicant submitted a revised development application to the City in response to the above-stated concerns. The most significant changes to the proposed project included reducing the size of the building from 23,486 square feet to 14,811 square feet, reducing the height of the building from 57 feet, 6 inches to 50 feet, 6 inches, modifying the building footprint to avoid encroachment into the Scott Street right-of-way, eliminating the underground parking garage, and updating the architecture and design of the building.

Leading up to the scheduled Historic District Commission hearing on August 19, 2020 on the revised Project design, the Applicant received several written comments from neighbors and members of the public. To better understand these concerns, the Applicant hosted two public outreach sessions on August 12th and 13th of 2020. After the public outreach meetings, the Applicant requested a continuance of the Commission hearing to provide the design team additional time to consider comments and feedback. Still with concerns to address, the Applicant prepared two alternative solutions to solicit feedback from the Historic District Commission via an informal workshop hearing on October 21st of 2020.

Notable feedback from the Historic District Commissioners and members of public included:
• Regarding architecture and design of building – references to pre-1900 architecture were improved.
• Concern regarding building height (42-feet, 0-inches tall) – suggested proposing a solution with no height variance required. • Concern regarding limited or no parking provided for the Project (0-7 parking spaces) – suggested proposing a solution that did not require a parking variance.

Page 199 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

4 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001

REVISED PROJECT DESIGN
The Applicant and their design team heavily considered the suggestions of the City, Historic District Commission, Heritage Preservation League, and neighbors. The proposed responses are summarized as follows:

BUILDING HEIGHT: The building height has been reduced from the previously proposed heights of 56 feet, 6 inches and 50 feet, 6 inches to 35 feet, 0 inches. The Project now conforms to the Historic District’s height limitation for buildings fronting Sutter Street and no variance is required.

PARKING: Due to site constraints and subsurface conditions, on-site parking is not provided. The enactment of Government Code Section 65863.2 (Assembly Bill 2097 (2022 Friedman)) prohibits public agencies from imposing or enforcing minimum automobile parking requirements for residential, commercial, and other developments if the project is located within one-half mile of public transit. Under Government Code Section 65863.2, the definition of public transit is a major transit stop as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. • Public Resources Code Section 21155 defines a major transit stop to include (1) as major transit stop is defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3, and (2) major transit stops that are included in the applicable regional plan.

• Public Resources Code Section 21064.3 defines “major transit stops” as a site containing, an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.

The Project is served by an existing rail station within one-half mile of the site, and thus is exempt from providing on-site parking requirements. The Applicant will work with the City public work to have one street level parking stall as an ADA compliance. The Applicant will be responsible for all improvement needed to the satisfaction of the city requirements. .

INFILL EXEMPTION: Height and parking variances are not required for the Project, as currently proposed. Since no variances are requested, the Project, given its site and other characteristics, meets the criteria for an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as an infill project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 identifies the Class 32 categorical exemption for in-fill development projects:

Page 200 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

5 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described in this section.
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. (c) The project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. (e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
(14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15332.) This exemption is intended to promote infill development within urbanized areas, such as the proposed Project.

HISTORIC CONTEXT: The Historic Preservation League challenged the Applicant to justify the building design relative to pre-1900’s architecture. “California Gold Rush Commercial” was the chosen precedent. This style is found throughout the District and is characterized mostly by brick masonry buildings.

The Project design team also drew references from regional architecture built during the same period. The resulting proposed solution incorporates characteristic brick detailing, cornice work, storefront, and window design.

In addition, the highly respected historic preservation firm, Page & Turnbull reviewed the building design. The building design was found to comply with, and meet, the design requirements for projects located within the Historic District. The resultant design is appropriate in both its use and size providing added character to the beautiful existing fabric of the Historic District. Both the scale and attention to detail evoke a timeless architectural character underscored by high quality materials.

DESIGN SOLUTION: The revised design proposes a building mass which has been broken into two sections along the length adhering to the scale and proportion of other buildings along Sutter Street. In consideration of height and massing, the building is also stepped back to the third level. Given the subsurface conditions and steep terrain of the site, the building is stepped into sections to avoid excessive need for excavation. No blasting is necessary with this Project design. There is a small retail footprint which allows for multiple tenant divisions along Sutter Street to promote a pedestrian-friendly walkable experience.

The applicant voluntarily agreed to fund a third-party review by an independent

Page 201 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

6 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
historic architect specialist. We understand that the independent review of the proposed design was positive.

After much thought regarding building use, the Applicant came to the decision that the addition of residential loft space would fit nicely within the adjacent residential neighborhood. The entire third floor incorporates two, 2-bedroom loft spaces, approximately 3,630 square feet of the occupied conditioned 12,177 square feet, making the Project a true live-work space. In providing residential loft space, while decreasing office and retail space, it is the Applicant’s intention to respect the relationship between the building location and the adjacent residential neighborhood.

PRE-CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The Project’s building permit application will be submitted under the 2019 Code cycle. The Applicant will update the Project’s existing Geotechnical Engineering Report and conduct grading in accordance with design and construction measures contained in the Report and City standards and requirements.

PROTECTION OF RESOURCES DURING CONSTRUCTION: Prior to
initiation of construction on the Project site, all construction personnel that are involved in ground-disturbing activity on the Project site will be provided with a training program on cultural and tribal cultural resources provided by a qualified professional archaeologist either in person or via DVD. The United Auburn Indian Community may attend the initial in-person training or provide a video segment for inclusion in the DVD training. The program will include information regarding cultural resources, and their recognition, avoidance, and treatment in the event of discovery; federal and state regulations pertaining to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, including enforcement and penalties for non-compliance; the subsurface indicators of tribal cultural resources that require a work stoppage; and procedures for notifying the City of any occurrences of cultural resources or tribal cultural resources.

The Project plans will also contain a notation requiring that if any archaeological, cultural, historical resources, artifacts, or other features are discovered on the Project site during construction, or if there is a discovery of human skeletal remains on the Project site, work will immediately be suspended in that location. In the event that undiscovered cultural resources are found on the Project site during construction, all construction activities will stop and the construction manager at the site, or the Applicant, will notify the Folsom Historical Society, Heritage Preservation League, and City staff regarding the find. The Applicant will work with a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with all interested parties, including Native Americans, to develop a recovery or mitigation plan that will be

Page 202 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

7 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
implemented by the City. In the event that human skeletal remains are found on the Project site during construction, the Applicant and all contractors will act in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code section 5097.98.

Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant will obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Folsom for construction within the Sutter and Scott Street rights of way and prepare a Traffic Control Plan according to the City’s requirements. The Applicant will publicly disseminate construction-related information through notices to adjacent neighbors, press releases, and/or the use of changeable message signs. The Applicant, or its construction manager, will notify all affected residences and businesses and post the construction impact schedule.

The Applicant will avoid construction or tree removal during nesting season or if construction activities will occur during the nesting season and trees on the site have not been removed, the Applicant will conduct pre-construction surveys for the presence of special-status bird species or any nesting bird species 30 days or less prior to the start of construction. These surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist within a 500-foot radius of the construction area. If active nests are identified in these areas, construction will be delayed until the young have fledged or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has been consulted to develop measures to avoid the take of active nests prior to the initiation of any construction activities.

The Project will comply with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance, obtaining a Tree Removal Permit and implementing a City-approved Tree Protection and Mitigation Plan, as required.

ENSURING MINIMAL IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS: The 603 Sutter Street property is surrounded by commercially zoned properties on all sides. The Applicant has made every effort to significantly modify their design to accommodate requests from their neighbors. These modifications are summarized below:
a) Reduced building height to avoid the need for a height variance. b) Reduced the building mass from approximately 23,486 square feet to 12,177 conditioned square feet.
c) Reduced noise impact to the neighborhood by making the upper two floors office and residential loft space.
d) Eliminated the roof top deck area.
e) Relocated the trash area away from a residence to the south. f) Raise the retaining wall facing at the back (south side) of the parcel,

Page 203 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

8 | P a g e

118539956.1 0073120-00001
parallel to Sutter Street, so that complete privacy can be enjoyed by the neighbors to the south.

To minimize any disturbance to the neighbors, the Applicant will limit construction activities, delivery of materials or equipment, and servicing of construction equipment to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activities are not proposed on Sundays and on all holidays. The Applicant will also abide by best construction practices, including:
• Ensuring that motorized equipment is outfitted with proper mufflers in good working order and selecting quiet equipment, such as air compressors, whenever possible.
• Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines and turning off all equipment and vehicles when not in use. • Locating all stationary noise-generating construction equipment, such as air compressors, as far as practical from adjacent homes and acoustically shielding such equipment when it must be located near adjacent residences.
• Siting equipment storage as far as possible from nearby sensitive receptors.

PROJECT TIMELINE: Once approved, the hope is to immediately work on finalizing plans and submit building permit applications with an estimated timeline for submission by early 2023. Building plan approval is anticipated by Spring/Summer of 2023, with construction starting early 2024.

Prepared by: Ziad and Deborah Alaywan
Allison Smith, Stoel Rives LLP
August 23, 2023

Page 204 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 18

CEQA Categorical Exemption Analysis
Dated August 2023

Page 205 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR THE 603 SUTTER STREET MIXED-USE BUILDING PROJECT CITY OF FOLSOM 50 Natoma Street Folsom, CA 95630 Prepared with the Technical Assistance of:
2934 Gold Pan Court, Ste. 3 Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 August 2023 8 = 2

Page 206 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

This page intentionally left blank.

Page 207 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption i City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................1 2. Project Description .....................................................................................................................................1 3. Entitlements ..................................................................................................................................................6 4. State Laws and Regulations ........................................................................................................................7 5. City Regulation of Urban Development ...................................................................................................8 6. Why the Project is Exempt ...................................................................................................................... 13 7. Exceptions to Categorical Exclusions .................................................................................................... 31 8. Literature Cited .......................................................................................................................................... 58 Appendix A - Project Figures Figure 1 Regional Location Figure 2 Project Vicinity Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan Figure 4 Proposed Project Figure 5 North and East Exterior Elevations Figure 6 South and West Exterior Elevations Figure 7 First and Second Level Floor Plans Figure 8 Roof and Third Level Floor Plans Figure 9 Building Sections – 1 and 2 Figure 10 Building Sections – 3 and 4 Figure 11 Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan Figure 12 Retaining Wall Details List of Tables Table 1 Project Site and Surrounding Developed Uses – 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building ...2 Table 2 Proposed Uses and Areas – 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building ......................................3 Table 3 City of Folsom Municipal Code Sections Regulating Urban Development within the City .............................................................................................................................. 13 Table 4 Sutter Street Subarea Development Standards Table ............................................................ 16 Table 5 FTA Vibration Damage Criteria ............................................................................................... 24 Table 6 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment .......................................................... 24 Table 7 Unmitigated Construction Related Emissions ........................................................................ 26 Table 8 Unmitigated Operation Related Emissions ............................................................................. 27 Table 9 City of Folsom Municipal Code Sections Regulating the Effects on Hydrology and Water Quality from Urban Development within the City ............................................. 30 Table 10 Citywide Cumulative Effects Identified in Folsom 2035 General Plan Program EIR ..... 34 Table 11 Potential Citywide Impacts Determined to be Less than significant or No Impact by the 2035 General Plan EIR ................................................................................................... 36 Table 12 Definition of Protected Trees Pursuant to FMC §12.16 ....................................................... 41

Page 208 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption ii City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project This page intentionally left blank.

Page 209 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 1 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION AND SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS Project Title: 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (aka Folsom Power & Light Building) Application Number: PN 17-145 Entitlement Requested: Design Review Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Folsom Community Development Department 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630 Contact Person and Phone Number: Steven Banks, Principal Planner City of Folsom Community Development Department Phone: (916) 461-6207 [email protected] General Plan Designation: Historic Folsom Mixed Use (HF) Zoning: Historic District (HD) Historic District Designation: Historic Commercial Primary Area - Sutter Street Subarea 1. INTRODUCTION The City of Folsom (City) is the lead agency implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project located at 603 Sutter Street. Cedrus Holdings Limited Partnership, the project applicant, is seeking City approval of Commercial Design Review for development of the proposed project. The proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project would include development of a three-story, 12,177-square-foot building (conditioned area) at 603 Sutter Street that would feature a mixture of retail/restaurant, residential, and office uses. The Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project site is located within the Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District Commercial Primary Area. The parcel has a General Plan land use designation of HF (Historic Folsom Mixed Use) and a zoning designation of HD (Historic District). 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The mixed-use building project site is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Sutter Street and Scott Street in the City of Folsom (see Figures 1, 2 and 3). The mixed-use building project site consists of an undeveloped rectangular plot of land with a measured area of 0.17 acres (7,400 square feet). The parcel is identified as Sacramento County Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 070-0111-010 (Sacramento County 2022). It is located in an unsurveyed portion of the Rancho de Los Americanos land grant, at latitude/longitude 38°40’41.88”N, 121°10’30.66”W.

Page 210 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 2 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

2.1 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The vegetation community present on site is a mix of ruderal (weedy) grassland, mainly consisting of bamboo, vinca, non-native annual grasses, and woodland composed of a mixture of native and horticultural trees. The parcel contains 20 trees, 11 native oak trees and 9 non-native ornamental trees. The eleven native oak trees meet the definition of “Protected Trees” under the Folsom Tree Preservation Ordinance. (Planning Partners 2023, CalTLC 2022) Subsurface soil conditions include silty sand overlaying silty sands, underlain by bedrock as shallow as eight feet below the ground surface. Bedrock underlying the site can be characterized as highly to moderately weathered, and soft to moderately hard. (Youngdahl 2017, 2022) The site slopes from southeast to northwest, with the lowest elevations located adjacent to Sutter Street. Existing elevations on the project site range from 252 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to 228 feet MSL. From south to north along the west side of the project site, the slope is approximately 19 percent. Public utilities (domestic water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, natural gas, and electricity) are available from existing service lines within Sutter and Scott Streets or their adjacent public rights-of-way. The site is an infill parcel surrounded by developed land uses as indicated in Table 1. Table 1 Project Site and Surrounding Developed Uses – 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Existing Use General Plan Designation Zoning Designation Historic District Designation Project Site Vacant Historic Folsom Mixed Use - HF Historic District - HD Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area North Sutter Street; Fire & Rain Building Mixed-use (restaurant/office) 3-story building with parking below Historic Folsom Mixed Use - HF Historic District - HD Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area East Scott Street; Cohn House (National Register of Historic Places listed) Historic Folsom Mixed Use - HF Historic District - HD Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area South Single-family residence; Additional single family residences Historic Folsom Mixed Use - HF Historic District - HD Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area West Commercial, currently vacant (historic library building) 2 -3 story commercial buildings Historic Folsom Mixed Use - HF Historic District - HD Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area Source: Planning Partners 2023.

Page 211 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 3 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The following discussion is based upon a plan set submitted by the applicant to the City of Folsom in February 2023. The applicant, Cedrus Holdings, LP, proposes to construct and operate a three-story, 12,177-square-foot building (conditioned area) at 603 Sutter Street on the southwest corner of Sutter Street and Scott Street within the Folsom Historic District. Figures 4, 5 and 6 illustrate the proposed structure and building elevations. The proposed project would be constructed on an undeveloped 0.17-acre parcel, and would feature a mixture of retail/restaurant, residential, and office uses. The first floor of the building would include an area for retail/restaurant uses (2,716 square feet) and a small area for building maintenance. An outdoor dining area of five tables would be provided. The second floor of the building would include 5,246 square feet dedicated to office-related uses. The third floor would consist of two 2-bedroom apartments (3,630 square feet). Rooftop decks on the second and third floors would total 700 square-feet and 1,430-square-feet respectively. Proposed uses and the area of each floor are set forth in Table 2. Table 2 Proposed Uses and Areas – 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Use Floor 1: Retail/Restaurant (sq ft) Floor 2: Office (sq ft) Floor 3: Residential (sq ft) Primary Conditioned Area 2,716 5,246 3,630 Conditioned Lobby n/a 420 165 Stairwells, fire risers, electric boxes, elevator n/a 420 220 Trash Room 200 n/a n/a Outdoor Dining Patio 5 tables n/a n/a Deck Area n/a 700 1,430 Patio n/a 100 n/a Residences (Number) n/a n/a 2 x 2 bedroom Building Square Footage - Conditioned 12,177 square feet Building Square Footage - Unconditioned 840 square feet Outdoor Decks and Patios 2,230 square feet Lot Area 7,400 square feet Source: Williams + Paddon 2023. In order to minimize the removal of bedrock underlying the project site, the proposed building has been designed to stairstep up the slope from north to south. As illustrated in Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10, the first floor of the building extends 32+ feet from the front façade on Sutter Street toward the rear of the site. Floor 2 extends 74+ feet from its front building façade to the rear of the building. Floor 3 extends 67+ feet from its front building façade to the rear of the building.

Page 212 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 4 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Additionally, the third floor on the west side of the building has been set back 29+ feet from the front façade to approximate the height of the historic library building to the west. See Figures 6 and 8. An outdoor dining patio with a capacity of 20+ persons would be located on the proposed building’s first floor, adjacent to the Sutter Street/Scott Street intersection. The building would feature a 700-square-foot deck on floor 2 fronting on Sutter Street. A 1,000-square-foot third floor deck would be anchored to the northwest corner of the building. Also on the third floor, a narrow deck (totaling 430 square feet) would wrap around the Sutter Street and a portion of the Scott Street elevations of the building. There would be no roof deck. See Figures 5 through 8. Individual access doorways to the first floor retail and restaurant uses would be provided along the Sutter Street façade of the building. The main entrance to the second and third flood office and residences would be provided by a common entrance on Scott Street. See Figures 5 through 8. As proposed, the building height would be a maximum of 35 feet, 0 inches from the ground (building pad) to the roof surface, the maximum allowed by FMC §17.52.510.C within the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District. Parapets would be constructed along the Sutter Street and Scott Street frontages of the roof, but would be no higher than 39 feet, 0 inches from the building pad. See Figures 9 and 10. All building-attached mechanical equipment would be screened from public view, either within a mechanical equipment well to reduce operational noise and visibility from surrounding areas and streets, or hidden by parapets on the north and east sides of the building. See Figures 5, 6 and 8. The front of the building would be constructed approximately two feet from the Sutter Street property line. The building’s east side would have varying setbacks from the property line ranging from no setback to incursion into the public right of way (ROW) as discussed below. Building setbacks from the west side would be 6 feet, although a patio serving the second floor apartment would extend to the property line. The rear property line setback to the proposed building would be 3 feet, 9 inches. The enclosed trash room along the west side of the building would be constructed within the building envelope. The distance from the rear of the building to the nearest structure would be approximately 27 feet. The distance from the westerly building facade to the nearest structure, a small single-story commercial building, would be approximately 5 feet. Portions of the proposed project would encroach into the ROW of both Sutter and Scott Streets. The proposed outdoor seating area on the first floor would extend into the ROW of both Sutter and Scott Streets. A second floor deck facing Sutter Street would encroach into the air rights above the City’s ROW. Planters, steps, and a building entrance plaza along the buildings east side would encroach into the Scott Street ROW. No vehicle parking at the 603 Sutter Street location would be provided1; five bicycle parking racks would be located on the Scott Street frontage of the project adjacent to the lobby entrance. Pedestrian circulation improvements would include the installation of a public sidewalk on the Scott Street frontage of the project site. The existing sidewalk on Sutter Street would be retained in its current configuration with the exception of the removal of an existing retaining wall. 1 For more information regarding the application of State standards to local agency parking requirements, see Section 4.4 and Table 4 of this document.

Page 213 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 5 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project With respect to energy efficiency, the building would be compliant with the Energy Code and Green Building Standards Code adopted by the City. The applicant’s intent is that the proposed building would appear similar to other commercial projects recently developed on the 600 block of Sutter Street, and elsewhere within the Historic District, consistent with Historic District Design and Development Guidelines. 2.3 GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION As indicated on Figure 11, the existing 603 Sutter Street site slopes from its southeast corner to the northwest corner, with elevations ranging from 252 feet MSL at the site’s southeast corner adjacent to Scott Street to 228 feet MSL at the northwest corner adjacent to Sutter Street. With implementation of the project, the front 30 feet of the site would be excavated and levelled approximately 12 inches below the finished floor elevations to permit the construction of footings, foundations, and subgrades. The first-floor finished floor elevation would be 229 feet MSL for the trash room and 232 feet MSL for the retail/commercial space. The back 40 feet of the second floor would be graded to slightly below a finished floor elevation of 245 feet MSL. Establishment of foundations, subgrade, and the building pad at these first and second floor elevations would require some cutting back into the hillside. See Figures 9 and 10. Preliminary calculations indicate that approximately 2,000 cubic yards of fill would be removed from the site for disposal for use at regional landfills. As estimated by the applicant, transport of this amount of fill would require filling 200+ large dump trucks (400 trips including return trips). Grading of the project site to establish the foundations, subgrades, and building pads would require cuts on the project site ranging up to 14 feet at the southeast corner of the first floor. As currently designed, small amounts of bedrock would be encountered (see Figures 9 and 10). Because bedrock would likely be encountered below the ground surface, special construction techniques that could include ripping with large bulldozers may be used depending upon the condition of the bedrock. Exposed cut slopes would be protected by temporary shoring and soil nails. In addition to the dump trucks cited above, equipment used during the grading phase could include dozers, backhoes, frontloaders, and smooth wheeled rollers; the precise mix of equipment would be determined by the building contractor. To permanently maintain the stability of the cut slopes, retaining walls would be constructed along the western site boundary, at the rear of the first floor, adjacent to Sutter Street to the northeast corner of the building, along the easterly face of the building adjacent to the first floor adjacent to the outdoor seating area, and adjacent to the building entrance plaza on the second floor. See Figure 12. Retaining walls would act to prevent collapse or settlement of existing structures both south and west of the site, in addition to protecting the proposed building from the potential failure of surrounding slopes. Retaining walls would be incorporated into the rear of the first floor of the building. A portion of the rear of the building’s second floor would also be used to retain the slope. Excavation and construction activities associated with incorporated retaining walls on the west side and the rear of the building could encroach into the planned building setbacks. However, these areas would be backfilled and leveled at the completion of construction.

Page 214 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 6 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Freestanding retaining walls would be constructed along the west edge of the project parcel, near the northeast corner of the project site adjacent to the intersection of Sutter and Scott Streets, along a portion of the Scott Street frontage, and at the rear of the proposed second floor entry plaza. Retaining walls along the Scott Street frontage, on the west property line, and near the intersection of Sutter and Scott Streets, would be separated from the building to provide an outdoor seating area and walkways. See Figures 3, 5, and 6. The 20 trees growing on the 603 Sutter site would be removed to allow building construction. Three newly planted trees would be placed in planters along the Scott Street frontage of the project site. One tree would be planted in a tree well on Sutter Street near its intersection with Scott Street. 2.4 PROJECT PHASING Construction of the proposed project is scheduled to begin three to four months following project approval. Based on the applicant’s proposed schedule, the project would be constructed in a continuous period lasting approximately 18 months. The initial phases of project development are expected to be complete within 4-6 weeks from initiation (bedrock removal) followed by 2 months of construction of underground and civil improvement. 3. ENTITLEMENTS Because the proposed project’s height would meet Folsom Zoning Code requirements, and due to changes in State law and regulations, the only discretionary entitlement to be issued by the City to permit construction and occupancy of the proposed project would be Commercial Design Review, as described below. No variances or exceptions to Municipal Code requirements or regulations, including those involving height or on-site parking, would be necessary for the current project. Design Review: The Historic District Commission shall have final authority relating to the design and architecture of the following structures within the Historic District boundaries as set forth in MFC §17.52.300: A. All new office, industrial, commercial and residential structures; and B. All exterior renovations, remodeling, modification or addition to existing structures. Pursuant to FMC §17.52.330, in reviewing projects, the Historic District Commission shall consider the following criteria: A. Project compliance with the General Plan and any applicable zoning ordinances; B. Conformance with any city-wide design guidelines and historic district design and development guidelines adopted by the City Council; C. Conformance with any project-specific design standards approved through the planned development permit process or similar review process; and D. Compatibility of building materials, textures and colors with surrounding development and consistency with the general design theme of the neighborhood.

Page 215 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 7 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

4. STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS Following is a listing of State regulations guiding land use and environmental assessments and permitting for the proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project. 4.1.1 STATE REGULATION - CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS FOR QUALIFYING PROJECT TYPES AND ACTIVITIES Section15300 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that: Section21084 of the Public Resources Code requires these Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. In response to that mandate, the Secretary for Resources has found that the following classes of projects listed in this article do not have a significant effect on the environment, and they are declared to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents. Pursuant to PRC 21084, the State has established a list of 33 project types and activities that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Whether CEQA applies to projects identified as “categorically exempt” requires an evaluation of the immediate situation of a project to determine whether any exceptions to the categorical exemptions exist. 4.1.2 STATE REGULATION - CEQA EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS The State CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(a) through (f) lists exceptions to the applicability of a Categorical Exemption. The discussion below identifies each exception that may apply to the proposed project. 15300.2(a): Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. 15300.2(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. 15300.2(c) Significant Effects Under Unusual Circumstances. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. 15300.2(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

Page 216 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 8 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project 15300.2(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to §65962.5 of the Government Code. 15300.2(f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. 4.1.3 STATE REGULATION - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32, INFILL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the following conditions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines. a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The City has identified that Categorical Exemption Class 32, Infill Development Projects, as set forth in §15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines, may apply to the proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project. 4.1.4 STATE LAW - PROHIBITION ON PARKING REQUIREMENTS State Law – Prohibition on Parking Requirements - Government Code, §65863.2: (a) A public agency shall not impose or enforce any minimum automobile parking requirement on a residential, commercial, or other development project if the project is located within one-half mile of public transit, defined as a major transit stop. State Law – Definition of Major Transit Stop – Public Resources Code, §21155(b)(3): (3) (The proposed project must) be within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor included in a Regional Transportation Plan. A major transit stop is as defined in §21064.3, except that, for purposes of this section, it also includes major transit stops that are included in the applicable Regional Transportation Plan. State Law – Definition of Major Transit Stop – Public Resources Code, §21064.3: “Major transit stop” means a site containing any of the following: (a) An existing rail or bus rapid transit station. 5. CITY REGULATION OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT In addition to implementing State laws and regulation, the City of Folsom regulates both the construction and operational aspects of urban development through enforcement of the General Plan, Zoning Code, Folsom Historic District Design and Development Guidelines, Community

Page 217 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 9 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Development Department Standard Construction Specifications (CDD Specifications), and Design and Procedures Manual and Improvement Standards, Standard Construction Specifications and Details (City Design Standards) as set forth in Sections 5.1 through 5.4 of this document. These regulations apply equally to all proposed and approved development projects within the City, and not solely to the proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project. The implementation of these requirements and regulations act to avoid or reduce potential land use inconsistencies and environmental effects and are applied throughout the City, with the exception of the Historic District Design and Development Guidelines, which apply solely to projects and activities within the Historic District. 5.1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND POLICIES The City of Folsom updated and adopted its current 2035 General Plan in August 2018, and approved amendments to the 2035 General Plan in August 2021. The General Plan is a long-term planning document that guides growth and land development in the City. It provides the foundation for establishing community goals and supporting policies, and directs appropriate land uses for all land parcels within the city. The General Plan land use designation for the proposed project is Historic Folsom Mixed Use (HF). According to the 2035 General Plan, the HF designation provides for a mixture of commercial and residential uses designed to preserve and enhance the historic character of Folsom’s old town center. As set forth in the 2035 General Plan, the floor area ratio2 (FAR) for uses within the HF designation should range from 0.5 to 2.0. 5.2 ZONING DISTRICTS AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Developed land uses in the City of Folsom are regulated by the City’s Zoning Code (Title 17 of the Folsom Municipal Code (FMC), in addition to the other adopted regulations and programs that apply to all proposed development within the City. In more detail than the General Plan, the Zoning Code regulates land uses on a parcel-by-parcel basis throughout the City. In order to achieve this regulation, the City assigns each parcel within the City to a zoning district: for example, a district for single-family homes. Regulations for each district apply equally to all properties within the district. The City of Folsom updated and adopted its current Zoning Code in 2018. FMC Chapter 17.52 regulates land uses within the Historic District (H-D) zoning district. The 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project is located within the H-D zoning district, and specifically the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic commercial primary area (FMC 17.52.150 and 17.52.160). Specific regulations for this area are set forth in FMC §17.52.510, Sutter Street Subarea Special Use and Design Standards. With exceptions, §17.52.510.A.1 and .A.3 permit a mixture of retail, service, office, and residential uses in a single building, such as those proposed by the 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project. 2 Floor Area-Ratio (FAR). Standards of building intensity for nonresidential uses, such as mixed-use development, are stated as a range (i.e., minimum and maximum) of FARs. A FAR is the gross building area on a site, excluding structured parking, compared to the net developable area of the site. The net developable area is the total area of a site excluding portions that cannot be developed (e.g., right-of-way). For example, on a lot with 25,000 square feet of land area, a FAR of 0.50 will allow 12,500 square feet of useable building floor area to be built, regardless of the number of stories in the building (e.g., 6,250 square feet per floor on two floors or 12,500 square feet on one floor). On the same 25,000- square-foot lot, a FAR of 1.00 would allow 25,000 square feet of useable floor area, and a FAR of 2.00 would allow 50,000 square feet of useable floor area. While FAR provides for the overall development size and intensity, it does not specify the form or character of the building.

Page 218 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 10 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Land uses developed within the H-D zoning district must meet a limitation on building height as set forth in FMC §17.52.510.C: Building heights shall not exceed 35 feet adjacent to the sidewalk area on Sutter or Leidesdorff Street and 50 feet in other sections of the subarea. Towers, spires, or other similar architectural features may extend up to 15 feet above the building height. FMC §17.52.510.F requires that retail, offices, restaurants, museum, and similar uses must provide one parking space per 350 square feet of building space. However, as noted above, State law prohibits the imposition of parking requirements for specified projects within a half-mile of a major transit stop such as the Historic Folsom light rail station. The proposed project site is located approximately 0.3 mile from the light rail station. FMC Chapter 17.52.510 regulates the types of land uses that would be allowed in the HD zoning district, including permitted uses. FMC 17.52.510 A.1 specifically allows retail, service, public/quasi-public and office uses as permitted in Folsom’s modern central business district (C-2 zone). Allowable commercial uses within the C-2 zone and any special condition requirements are established in FMC 17.22.030.E, the commercial use table, and FMC 17.22.040. Additionally, FMC 17.52.510 C explicitly permits residential uses in the HD zoning district. 5.3 FOLSOM HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES The City of Folsom adopted the Historic District Design and Development Guidelines (Guidelines) in 1998. In more detail than the General Plan, the Guidelines provide policies for design and development within the Folsom Historic District. The Guidelines establish community goals and supporting policies at a local level in response to community and environmental concerns, and direct appropriate land uses for all parcels within the Historic District area. The Guidelines’ designation of the proposed project is Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area. According to §5.02.01(d)(1) of the Guidelines, there are no requirements that regulate lot area, lot width, or lot coverage within the Historic Commercial Primary Area. Appendix D of the Guidelines sets forth Design Criteria for all areas of the Historic District, including the Sutter Street Subarea of Historic Commercial Primary Area. Section B of this Appendix regulates many aspects of building design. Compliance with the design requirements of the Design Criteria are subject to review by the Historic District Commission in its consideration of the Design Review application submitted by the project applicant. Within the Historic District, the Guidelines work in tandem with the City of Folsom Zoning Code as discussed above. 5.4 OTHER CITY REGULATION OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT The City of Folsom further regulates urban development through standard construction conditions and through evaluation, building, and construction requirements set forth in the FMC. Required of all projects constructed throughout the City, compliance with the requirements of the City’s standard conditions and the provisions of the Municipal Code avoid or reduce many potential environmental effects. City procedures to minimize negative environmental effects and disruptions include analysis of existing features, responsible agency and public input to the design process, engineering and design standards, and construction controls. The activities that mitigate typical environmental impacts to be implemented by the City during the project review, design, and construction phases are described in greater detail below.

Page 219 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 11 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

5.4.1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS The requirements are set forth in the City of Folsom, Community Development Standard Construction Specifications as amended through July 2020. A summary of these requirements is set forth below, and hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Copies of these documents may be reviewed at the City of Folsom; Community Development Department; 50 Natoma Street; Folsom, California 95630. (City of Folsom 2020) Any contractor constructing a public or private project within the City must comply with the CDD Specifications. Standards that regulate aspects of the environment are summarized below: Section 6.01 J - Use of Pesticides – Requires contractors to store, use, and apply a wide range of chemicals in a manner that is consistent with all local, state, and federal rules and regulations. Section 6.07, Air Pollution Control - Requires compliance with all Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) and City air pollution regulations. Section 6.08 - Water Pollution - Requires compliance with City water pollution regulations, including National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) provisions. Also requires the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to control erosion and the siltation of receiving waters. Section 6.09 - Noise Control – Requires that all construction work comply with the Folsom Noise Ordinance (discussed further below), and that all construction vehicles be equipped with a muffler to control sound levels. Section 7.23 - Weekend, Holiday, and Night Work – Prohibits construction work during evening hours, or on Sunday or holidays, to reduce noise and other construction nuisance effects. Section 8.2 - Reseeding - Specifies seed mixes and methods for the reseeding of graded areas. Section 9.1 - Clearing and Grubbing - Specifies construction specifications for signs, mailboxes, underground structures, survey monuments, drainage facilities, sprinklers and lights, trees and shrubbery, fencing, and concrete. Also requires the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to control erosion and the siltation of receiving waters. Section 10.05 - Public Convenience - Regulates automobile, bicyclist, and pedestrian traffic and access through the work area, the operation of existing traffic signals, roadway cuts for pipelines and cable installation, and the notification of adjacent property owners and businesses. Section 10.06 - Public Safety and Traffic Control - Regulates signage and other traffic safety devices through work zones. Section 10.08 - Existing Utilities - Regulates the location, relocation, and protection of utilities, both underground and overhead. Section 10.10 - Preservation of Property - Requires the preservation of trees and shrubbery, and prohibits adverse effects to adjacent property and fixtures. Section 11.01 - Cultural Resources - Requires contractors to stop work upon the discovery of unknown cultural or historic resources until such time that a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the significance of the resource and make recommendations to the State Historic Preservation Officer for further direction.

Page 220 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 12 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Section 12.01 - Protection of Existing Trees - Specifies measures necessary to protect both ornamental trees and native oak trees. 5.4.2 DESIGN AND PROCEDURES MANUAL AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, STANDARD CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS These requirements are set forth in the City Design Standards, as amended through July 2020. A summary of these requirements is set forth below, and hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Copies of these documents may be reviewed at the City of Folsom; Community Development Department; 50 Natoma Street; Folsom, California 95630. (City of Folsom 2020) Any contractor constructing a public or private project within the City must comply with these design standards. Standards that regulate aspects of the environment are summarized below: 4.19 Grading Permit Requirements – Defines requirements for obtaining a Grading Permit, including completion of a geotechnical/soils report, arborist’s report, engineering geology report (if necessary), and construction details for any needed retaining walls. As applicable, prior to issuance of a Grading permit, applicants are required to obtain a Tree permit from the City, any environmental permits issued by State or federal agencies for the purposes of protecting environmental resources, evidence of coordination with the SMAQMD regarding naturally occurring asbestos, and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. 10.3 Grading Plan Requirements – Identifies additional Grading Plan requirements including information regarding existing trees and trees to be taken. 10.4 Erosion and Sedimentation Control – Requires a site specific erosion and sedimentation control plan of all construction projects within the City, including those that would result in the less of 1 acre in disturbed area. Section 13 Traffic Studies – Sets forth requirements for traffic studies necessary to assess the impacts of a development on the existing and/or planned street system. Section 19 Storm Drainage Requirements and Policies – Defines City policies, standards, master plans, and requirements that apply to stormwater and flooding. 5.4.3 CITY OF FOLSOM MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS The City regulates many aspects of construction and development through requirements and ordinances established in the FMC. These requirements are set forth below, and hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Copies of these documents may be reviewed at the City of Folsom; City Clerk; 50 Natoma Street; Folsom, California 95630.

Page 221 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 13 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 3 City of Folsom Municipal Code Sections Regulating Urban Development within the City Code Section Code Name Effect of Code 8.42 Noise Control Establishes interior and exterior noise standards that may not be exceeded within structures, including residences; establishes time periods for construction operations. 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 SWPPPs. 9.34 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Defines hazardous materials; requires filing of a Hazardous Material Disclosure Form by businesses that manufacture, use, or store such materials. 9.35 Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances Establishes standards for the construction and monitoring of facilities used for the underground storage of hazardous substances, and establishes a procedure for issuance of permits for the use of these facilities. 12.16 Tree Preservation Regulates the cutting or modification of trees, including oaks and specified other trees; requires a Tree Permit prior to cutting or modification; establishes mitigation requirements for cut or damaged trees. 13.26 Water Conservation Prohibits the wasteful use of water; establishes sustainable landscape requirements; defines water use restrictions; regulates the use of water for construction. 14.19 Energy Code Adopts the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, published as Part 6, Title 24, C.C.R. to require energy efficiency standards for structures. 14.20 Green Building Standards Code Adopts the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code), 2019 Edition, excluding Appendix Chapters A4, A5 and A.6.1, 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 encouraging sustainable construction practices. 14.29 Grading Code Requires a grading permit prior to the initiation of any grading, excavation, fill or dredging; establishes standards, conditions, and requirements for grading, erosion control, stormwater drainage, and revegetation. 14.32 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 damage or that could divert floodwaters. Source: Folsom Municipal Code 2023. 6. WHY THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT CEQA provides “categorical exemptions” that are applicable to categories of projects and activities that the California Natural Resources Agency has determined generally do not pose a risk of significant impacts on the environment. As noted in Section 4 of this document, the Class 32 categorical exemption is for “in-fill development” projects that meet the following criteria: a) The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations; b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species;

Page 222 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 14 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The proposed project meets all of the foregoing criteria to claim the application of the infill exemption, as explained below. 6.1 CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS 6.1.1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND POLICIES As previously indicated, the project site is designated HF (Historic Folsom Mixed Use) in the 2035 General Plan. The HF designation is applied to an area that “… provides for a mixture of commercial and residential uses designed to preserve and enhance the historic character of Folsom’s old town center.” Within areas designated HF, the 2035 General Plan allows a FAR range of 0.5 to 2.0. The proposed project includes a mix of uses, including commercial uses, office uses, and residential uses. Thus, the project is consistent with mixed-use developments emphasized in the 2035 General Plan. The project’s FAR is 1.95, which is within the allowed FAR established in the 2035 General Plan for the Sutter Street area. Thus, the proposed mixed-use project land uses and FAR are consistent with the 2035 General Plan HF land use designation. The proposed project also is consistent with the policies of the 2035 General Plan, including the Housing Element. The City of Folsom 2035 General Plan outlines a number of goals, policies, and implementation programs designed to guide the physical, economic, and environmental growth of the City. Staff has determined that the proposed project is consistent with the applicable General Plan, and in turn, the broader goals and policies as outlined and discussed below: Applicable General Plan Goals and Policies GP Goal LU 1.1 (Land Use/Growth and Change) Retain and enhance Folsom’s quality of life, unique identity, and sense of community while continuing to grow and change. GP Policy LU 1.1.12-1 (Infill Development) Respect the local context: New development should improve the character and connectivity of the neighborhood in which it occurs. Physical design should respond to the scale and features of the surrounding community, while improving critical elements such as transparency and permeability. The proposed project is consistent with this policy in that the project features significant site and design improvements which will enhance the overall character of the area including development of a mixed-use building designed to complement the architecture and design of existing commercial buildings in the vicinity.

Page 223 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 15 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project GP Policy LU 1.1.12-2 (Infill Development) Work with neighbors: Infill development requires neighborhood consultation to understand the concerns, goals, and needs of existing neighborhoods. Ensure the planning and design process provides proper avenues for neighborhood input while fulfilling the community’s larger goals for walkability and compact development. The proposed project is consistent with this policy in that the project applicant solicited feedback from the public on a number of occasions including at the Historic District Commission meeting held on September 6, 2017, where the project was discussed as an informational item only. The applicant also sponsored several neighborhood outreach meetings that occurred between August 2, 2017 and September 6, 2017, at which the public was provided the opportunity to comment on the proposed project. The applicant subsequently met with various stakeholders over the course of the next few years to discuss the merits of the proposed project and solicit additional feedback. The proposed project was also presented to the Historic District Commission on August 19, 2020 and October 21, 2020, during which time the public and the Commission had the opportunity to provide comments on the mixed-use project. GP Policy LU 1.1.15 (SACOG Blueprint Principles) Strive to adhere to the Sacramento Regional Blueprint Growth Principles. The proposed project is consistent with this policy in that the project has been designed to adhere to the primary SACOG Blueprint Principles including Compact Development and Quality Design. Compact Development involves creating environments that are more compactly built, and that use space in an efficient but attractive manner and help to encourage more walking, biking, and transit use and shorter auto trips. Quality Design focuses on the design details of any land development (such as relationship to the street, placement of buildings, sidewalks, street widths, landscaping, etc.), which are all factors that influence the attractiveness of living in a compact development and facilitate the ease of walking within and in and out of a community. Consistent with SACOG principles, the project is sited near the Historic Folsom Light Rail Station, a major transit stop. Additionally, the project is compactly built and incorporates residential, retail, and office uses on the parcel while adhering to maximum height restrictions in the Sutter Street subarea. The project has incorporated various design elements to increase the visual quality of the project, to incorporate the building into the walkable environment of the commercial area, and to complement existing structures in the Historic District. 6.1.2 ZONING DISTRICT USES AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The zoning designation of the project site is SUT/HD (Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District). The land uses proposed by the project are consistent with the site’s zoning designation that allows retail, service, office, and residential uses as permitted in Folsom’s modern central business district pursuant to FMC §17.52.510 A of the Folsom Municipal Code. The project also meets building setback and height requirements. Table 4 lists the existing and proposed development standards for the proposed project.

Page 224 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 16 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 4 Sutter Street Subarea Development Standards Table Front Yard Setback Rear Yard Width Side Yard Setbacks Maximum Building Height Minimum Parking Required Sutter Street Subarea 0 Feet Property Line NA NA 35 feet 0 Spaces Proposed Project 0 Feet Property Line 3.75 Feet 0/6 Feet 35 feet 0 Spaces Note: State law (Government Code §65863.2) enacted after adoption of the City’s 2035 General Plan and applicable Zoning Code provisions prohibits the imposition of parking requirements for many types of urban development that are located within ½ mile of a major transit stop. The proposed project meets the requirements of this prohibition; therefore, to the extent that the City’s General Plan or Zoning Code would otherwise require minimum parking for the project, these policies are determined to be inapplicable to this site. For more information regarding the definition of these requirements, refer to Section 4.1.4. Absent Government Code §65863,2, the City’s Zoning Code would have required that the proposed project include 25 parking spaces. Source: City of Folsom 2023, Planning Partners 2023. In terms of land use compatibility, the project site is located at the southwest corner of Sutter Street and Scott Street within the Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District. The project is bounded by Sutter Street to the north with the three-story Folsom Electric Building beyond; a single-family residence to the south with Peddlers Lane beyond; commercial development up to three stories to the west with Riley Street beyond, and Scott Street to the east with the Cohn House and single-family residential development beyond. All of the adjacent land uses, including the single-family residence to the south and the Cohn House across Scott Street to the east, are situated within the Sutter Street Subarea and have a zoning designation of HD (Historic District). As described above, the project site is located within an area that is predominantly commercial in nature. The Sutter Street Subarea is an area in which the most intensive commercial development within the Historic District is located, including restaurants, bars, retail shops, and offices. The proposed three-story, mixed-use building is compatible with existing land uses, building massing and scale with other commercial and mixed-use buildings along Sutter Street in the project vicinity. 6.1.3 HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES The proposed project meets the development standards established by the Sutter Street Subarea Special Use and Design Standards. For additional information regarding the project’s consistency with Design Guidelines, refer to Section 7.7 of this document. 6.2 PROJECT SITE SIZE AND SURROUNDINGS The 0.17-acre site is entirely located within City limits. The size of the parcel (0.17 acre) allows the project to be considered as exempt because it is less than the threshold of five acres as set forth in §15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project would encompass the entire site. In terms of land use compatibility, the project site is located at the southwest corner of Sutter Street and Scott Street within the Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District.

Page 225 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 17 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project As described above, the project site is located within an area that is predominantly commercial in nature. The Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District is an area in which the most intensive commercial development within the Historic District is located including restaurants, bars, retail shops, and offices. As noted above, the proposed three-story mixed-use building is compatible with existing land uses, building massing and scale with other commercial and mixed-use buildings along Sutter Street in the project vicinity. CEQA does not provide a definition of “urban uses” that must be found to substantially surround a project in order to qualify for the exemption in CEQA Guidelines §15332. However, the project site is within the Historic District of the city, and both the Historic District and the adjacent area of the city are characteristic of a densely populated area. The United States Census Bureau delineates urban and rural areas of the United States based on information obtained during each decennial3 census, including the 2020 census. According to the Census Bureau, the City of Folsom, including the project area, is located within the larger Sacramento, CA Urbanized Area. This large urban area stretches from West Sacramento to El Dorado Hills, and from Elk Grove to Lincoln. The population of this 471.2 square mile urbanized area is 1,919,826, representing an average density of 4,074.6 persons per acre (Census Reporter 2023). Additionally, at a local level, the project site is completely surrounded by other urban uses, including offices, commercial and fraternal uses, restaurants, and residences. 6.3 HABITAT FOR RARE, THREATENED, AND/OR ENDANGERED SPECIES The previously disturbed project site is characterized as a small sloping ruderal area within an otherwise urban setting. The vegetation community present on site is a mix of ruderal grassland, mainly consisting of non-native annual grasses, and woodland that is a mixture of native and horticultural trees. The surrounding land uses are developed commercial and residential uses within the context of a densely developed urban area (LSA 2017, ECORP 2019). The nearest undeveloped habitat is located within the American River Parkway, approximately 425 feet west/northwest of the project site, separated from the project by buildings, parking lots, and multi-lane roadways. The nearest point on the American River (Lake Natoma) is approximately 1,000 feet northwest of the site, again separated by intervening urban development. Wildlife use of the site is limited to species that are adapted to urban environments. 3 The most recent census was completed in 2020.

Sacramento CA Urban Area Source: Census Reporter, 2023.

Page 226 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 18 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Research completed to determine the biological resources associated with the proposed project included: (1) a query of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) to identify occurrences of special-status species within one mile of the project site; (2) a query of federally listed Threatened and Endangered species from the USFWS and the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory; and (3) a review of the USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map to identify the presence of wetlands within the project area. According to the USFWS and CNDDB records searches, there are 5 plant, 3 crustaceans, 1 insect, 1 fish, 2 amphibian, 1 reptile, and 1 bird special-status species that have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site. Additionally, 15 bird species protected by the MBTA have the potential to seasonally occur in the project vicinity. Because the proposed project would be constructed within an existing disturbed lot surrounded by developed urban uses, suitable habitat to support the majority of the listed species is not present. Sensitive natural habitats are those that are considered rare within the region, support sensitive plant or wildlife species, or function as corridors for wildlife movement. No sensitive natural habitats were identified by the CNDDB and CNPS lists for the proposed project area. A review of the USFWS NWI Map was completed to identify the presence of wetlands in the vicinity of the project. There are no wetland features identified on the NWI map within the project area. The State-threatened Swainson’s hawk has occurred in the project vicinity. There is a single occurrence within 0.5 miles of the project site. Swainson’s hawks generally forage within 10 miles of their nest tree, and more commonly within 5 miles; however, there is no foraging habitat on the project site. Existing trees within the project parcel may serve as nesting trees, though there is no evidence of use of the trees by Swainson’s hawks. As set forth in the project application documents, in response to the requirements in the Folsom Municipal Code Chapter 12.16 (Tree Preservation Ordinance) and Section 4.19 (Grading Permit Requirements) of the City’s Design Standards, the applicant proposes to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code provisions protecting special status and migratory birds by including the following standard requirement4 in the project design. The project will avoid construction or tree removal during nesting season, or if construction activities will occur during the nesting season and trees on the site have not been removed, the applicant will conduct pre-construction surveys for the presence of special-status bird species or any nesting bird species 30 days or less prior to the start of construction. These surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist within a 500-foot radius of the construction area. If active nests are identified in these areas, construction will be delayed until the young have fledged or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has been consulted to develop measures to avoid the take of active nests prior to the initiation of any construction activities. Thus, as proposed the project would not interfere with the value of the project site as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. 4 An agency may rely on generally applicable regulations to conclude an environmental impact will not be significant and therefore does not require mitigation. (San Francisco Beautiful v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1012, 1033, citing Tracy First v. City of Tracy (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 912, 932–934; Association for Protection Etc. Values v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 734–736 [categorical exemption].)

Page 227 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 19 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project It is noted that 11 native trees would be removed. The potential for disturbance to nesting birds protected under state and federal regulations is discussed above. 6.4 SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS RELATING TO TRAFFIC, NOISE, AIR QUALITY, OR WATER QUALITY 6.4.1 TRAFFIC The following regulations of the City of Folsom govern various aspects of the transportation system. FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN Policy M 1.1.3: Accessibility. Strive to ensure that all streets are safe and accessible to people with limited mobility and other disabilities. New and reconstructed facilities shall meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Policy M 2.1.1: Pedestrian Master Plan. Maintain and implement a pedestrian master plan that guides the development of a network that links residential developments with employment centers, public open spaces, parks, schools, shopping districts, and other major destinations. Policy M 4.1.3: Level of Service. Strive to achieve at least traffic Level of Service “D” throughout the city. Level of Service “E” conditions can be acceptable due to costs of mitigation or when there would be other unacceptable impacts, such as right-of-way acquisition or degradation of the pedestrian environment due to increased crossing distances or unacceptable crossing delays. Level of Service “E” may also be accepted during peak commute periods at major intersections within one-quarter mile of a freeway interchange or river crossing. Policy M 2.1.4: Sidewalk Network. Strive to fill gaps in the city’s existing sidewalk network. Policy M 2.1.5: Bikeway Master Plan. Maintain and implement a bikeway master plan that guides the development of a network that links residential developments with employment centers, public open spaces, parks, schools, shopping districts, and other major destinations. Policy M 3.1.1: Access to Public Transit. Strive to ensure that all residents have access to safe and convenient public transit options. Policy M 4.2.1: Parking. Maintain and implement a comprehensive on- and off-street parking system that serves the needs of residents and businesses while supporting the use of multiple modes of transportation.5 Policy M 4.2.2: Reduce Minimum Parking Standards. Consider reducing parking standards for private vehicles in transit-oriented developments, mixed-use developments and developments in high-density areas over time, while increasing parking for shared vehicles, alternative energy vehicles, bicycles, and other modes of transportation. Reduced parking standards must be supported by a demand analysis that supports the reduction. 5 As noted previously in Section 5.2 of this document, State law (Government Code §65863.2) enacted after adoption of the City’s 2035 General Plan and the applicable Zoning Code provisions prohibits the imposition of parking requirements for many types of urban development that are located within ½ mile of a major transit stop. The proposed project meets the requirements of this prohibition; therefore, to the extent that the City’s General Plan or Zoning Code would otherwise require minimum parking for the project, these policies are determined to be inapplicable to this site. For more information regarding the definition of these requirements, refer to Section 4.1.4.

Page 228 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 20 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Policy M 5.1.2: Off-Peak Deliveries. Encourage business owners to schedule deliveries at off- peak traffic periods in residential, commercial, or mixed-use areas. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES Goal 4. Circulation - To facilitate movement of vehicles, transit systems, pedestrians, and bicycles through the Historic District in such a way as to provide adequate access for local and through traffic without excessive traffic impacts on the character of the Historic District area and to facilitate adequate parking. Policy 4.4 - Pedestrian and bicycle circulation shall be encouraged through construction and improvement of pathways and safety features. Such paths shall connect to existing and future routes to serve both tourists and commute needs. Policy 4.6 - Adequate public parking shall be provided in proximity to commercial uses, including provision for tour buses. Such parking shall be designed and constructed to blend with historic structure or shall be screened. The Pedestrian Circulation Plan illustrated in §3.02.04.c.3 of the Design Guidelines indicates that Sutter Street west of Scott Street is considered to be a “major” sidewalk route. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN In 2022 the City of Folsom adopted an Active Transportation Plan (ATP). The ATP is the City’s plan for improving mobility for all residents and visitors who walk, bike, run, and roll6 in and around Folsom. The Plan sets forth policies, infrastructure projects, supporting programs, and implementation priorities. The ATP is an update to the previously-adopted Bicycle Master Plan (2007) and Pedestrian Master Plan (2014). The ATP focuses on improving the safety and comfort of active transportation facilities, improving connections among on- and off-street facilities, and supporting connections to destinations across the city. ATP Policies that apply to the proposed project include: • Policy 2.1.1: Identify and fill sidewalk gaps in the pedestrian network to provide for a complete and connected network. • Policy 2.2.2: Provide connections between modes, including bicycle and pedestrian connections to local and regional transportation options, including transit, buses that can accommodate bicycles, and park-and-ride lots. The ATP indicates that the sidewalk network is not continuous on Scott Street in the project vicinity. As proposed, implementation of the project would result in the installation of a sidewalk on the project’s Scott Street frontage consistent with Policy 2.1.1. Bicycle facilities are not currently provided along Sutter Street or Scott Street. The ATP designates Sutter and Scott Streets in the vicinity as a future Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard. Because the project 6 The term “roll” refers to a person who might use a wheelchair, assistive mobility devices, or other human-powered device on wheels.

Page 229 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 21 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project is not proposing to modify either Sutter or Scott Streets in the project vicinity, it would not interfere with the future provision of a Bicycle Boulevard by the City. Evaluation Implementation of the proposed project would increase traffic volumes on adjacent streets and at nearby intersections. However, while increases in traffic would decrease operations at studied intersections, all intersections would continue to meet General Plan and City operational goals and policies. With respect to transit and bicycle facilities, none are located within or adjacent to the project site, and the project would have no effect on such facilities or conflict with adopted City goals and policies for such facilities. Implementation of the project would result in the reconstruction of sidewalks along Sutter Street, and the new construction of a sidewalk on Scott Street. The improvement or addition of pedestrian facilities would implement General Plan, Historic District Design Guidelines, and ATP policies regarding the provision and improvement of pedestrian facilities within the Historic District. Project implementation would not conflict with any adopted City policies with respect to transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian circulation. Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) of the CEQA Guidelines describes criteria for analyzing transportation impacts. According to §15064.3(b)(1), land use projects that…are located within one-half mile of an existing major transit stop … should be presumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact. At a distance of 0.3 mile from the Historic District light rail station located at the west end of Sutter Street, the proposed project is less than the one-half mile threshold. This light rail station is considered to be a major transit stop (Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3(a)). Additionally, because the project does not provide for on-site vehicle parking, it would act to encourage alternative modes of travel (such as by transit, walking, or biking), thereby decreasing the number of vehicle miles travelled from those that might be expected from a similar use that did provide vehicle parking. As noted above, the project would not result in any modification to Sutter or Scott Streets except for the reconstruction of existing sidewalks on Sutter Street and the construction of new sidewalks along the Scott Street property frontage. Following the completion of construction, the paved sections of both Sutter and Scott Streets would be returned to their original conditions. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in any permanent changes to the design features or uses of adjacent roadways. There would be no increase in hazards related to a geometric design feature, or due to incompatible uses. Project construction would involve trenching within Sutter and Scott Streets to connect the project to existing underground utilities. Additionally, construction operations could result in lane closures on both streets that could cause delays and queuing of vehicle traffic, and thereby interfere with emergency services. Based on the applicant’s proposed schedule, the project would be constructed in a continuous period lasting approximately 18 months. The initial phases of project development are expected to be complete within 4-6 weeks from initiation (bedrock removal) followed by 2 months of construction of underground and civil improvement. These operations could include such activities as truck loading during site preparation to haul excess earth materials from the site, or delivering construction materials during building erection and finishing. Consistent with standard City CDD Specification requirements (Sections 10.05, Public Convenience, and 10.06 Public Safety and Traffic Control) and City Design Standards Section 13, a detailed Traffic Control Plan (TCP) would be required to detail how the applicant, any successor in

Page 230 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 22 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project interest, and/or its contractor will manage continuous roadway access for both emergency and non-emergency uses, and will include Best Management Practices (BMP), such as covering the trenched areas after work hours. As set forth in the project application documents, the applicant proposes to comply with the City’s CDD Specifications and Design Standards by including the following requirement in the project design. Prior to initiation of construction, the Applicant will obtain an encroachment permit from the City of Folsom for construction within the Sutter and Scott Street rights of way, and prepare a Traffic Control Plan according to the City’s requirements. The Applicant will publicly disseminate construction-related information through notices to adjacent neighbors, press releases, and/or the use of changeable message signs. The Applicant, or its construction manager, will notify all affected residences and businesses and post the construction impact schedule. Thus, as proposed the project would not unnecessarily interfere with circulation during project construction. The 2035 General Plan strives to maintain the established LOS D or better at throughout the City (M4.1.3). Level of service is typically used to evaluate traffic operations, in which operating conditions range from LOS “A” (free-flowing) to LOS “F” (forced-flow). The 2035 General Plan also accepts a lower LOS and higher congestion at major regional intersections (M4.1.3). Although LOS is no longer used as a metric for determining significance of transportation impacts under CEQA, a traffic impact study was prepared for the project in accordance with City requirements. The study found that the intersection LOS analysis results show that all study intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS established by 2035 General Plan policies during both AM and PM peak hours under “existing plus project” conditions (Kimley-Horn 2019/2023), and thus, the project would not result in traffic levels which would conflict with City LOS policies. The proposed project is also located in proximity to pedestrian and bicycle facilities that could be used for some of the project’s daily trips. 6.4.2 NOISE The City’s Noise Ordinance (FMC 8.42.060.C) states that noise sources associated with construction, provided such activities do not take place before 7 a.m. or after 6 p.m. on any day except Saturday or Sunday, or before 8 a.m. or after 5 p.m. on Saturday or Sunday, shall be exempt from the provisions of the Noise Ordinance. Additionally, Sections 6.09 (Noise Control) and 7.23 (Weekend, Holiday, and Night Work) of the City’s CDD Specifications act to reduce the potential effects of construction noise. Noise generated during construction would depend on the construction phase and the type and amount of equipment used at the construction site. Noise would be generated during site clearing, excavation, grading, placement of fill, hauling etc. Noise would also be generated during foundation work and framing, and during exterior and interior finishing by equipment such as saws, hammers, the radios and voices of workers, and other typical provisions necessary to construct a medium sized commercial/residential building. The highest construction noise levels would be generated during grading and leveling of the sites, with lower noise levels occurring during building construction and finishing.

Page 231 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 23 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project During construction, maximum noise levels ranging from 70 to 90 dBA can be expected at a distance of 50 feet from the operating equipment. Although construction activities would be temporary in nature, project construction could result in short-term increases in ambient noise levels at the nearest residences, primarily during site clearing and grading, which could result in annoyance7. Due to the required construction hours, impacts related to sleep disturbance are not anticipated. In addition, exposure of persons in the project vicinity to levels of construction noise which could cause damage to hearing is also not expected. Compliance with the City’s Noise Ordinance and the provisions of the CDD Specifications restricting the hours of construction will ensure there are no significant noise impacts resulting from the project. Additionally, the project applicant has offered the following commitment in order to reduce construction noise further than required by the City’s Noise Ordinance. As set forth in the project application, the applicant would: Limit construction activities, delivery of materials or equipment, and servicing of construction equipment to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activities are not proposed on Sundays and on all holidays. The Applicant will also abide by best construction practices, including: • Ensuring that motorized equipment is outfitted with proper mufflers in good working order, and selecting quiet equipment, such as air compressors, whenever possible. • Prohibiting unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines and turning off all equipment and vehicles when not in use. • Locating all stationary noise-generating construction equipment, such as air compressors, as far as practical from adjacent homes and acoustically shielding such equipment when it must be located near adjacent residences. • Siting equipment storage as far as possible from nearby sensitive receptors. Policy SN 6.1.8 of the Folsom 2035 General Plan pertains to vibration. That policy states that construction projects and new development anticipated to generate a significant amount of vibration are required to ensure acceptable interior vibration levels at nearby noise-sensitive uses based on Federal Transit Administration criteria as shown in Table SN-3 of the General Plan Safety element. Table 7-5 of the Federal Transit Administration’s publication, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, contains criteria for assessing potential damage to structures resulting from construction vibration. That table is reproduced below as Table 5. 7 Based on the applicant’s proposed schedule, the project would be constructed in a continuous period lasting approximately 18 months. The initial phases of project development are expected to be complete within 4-6 weeks from initiation (bedrock removal) followed by 2 months of construction of underground and civil improvement.

Page 232 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 24 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 5 FTA Vibration Damage Criteria Building/ Structural Category Approximate LV* Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 102 Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 98 Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 94 Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 90 * RMS velocity in decibels, VdB re I micro-in/sec Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) As an undeveloped project site located within an existing commercial and residential area, there are no existing sources of vibration or groundborne noise on the project site or in the project vicinity. During construction of the project, heavy equipment would be used for grading excavation, paving, and building construction, which would generate localized vibration in the immediate vicinity of the construction. Because of the shallow depth to bedrock across much of the site, the leveling of the building pad would require ripping by heavy equipment. However, given the subsurface conditions and steep terrain of the site, the project applicant has designed the building to be stepped back from the Sutter Street elevation to the rear lot line to avoid excessive need for excavation. See Figure 9. No blasting would be necessary with this project design. The range of vibration source levels for construction equipment commonly used in similar projects (not including blasting) are shown in Table 6. The vibration levels depicted in Table 6 are representative of measurements at a distance of 25 feet from the equipment source, which represents the approximate distances to the nearest existing structure to the project site. Table 6 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Approximate RMS LV1 at 25 feet Large bulldozer 87 Loaded trucks 86 Jackhammer 79 Small bulldozer 58 Notes: RMS velocity in decibels (VdB) re 1 micro-inch/second Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) As indicated in Table 5, a vibration level of 90 VdB is required before the onset of damage would occur to buildings which are extremely susceptible to vibration damage. Because vibration levels generated by the type of construction equipment which will be required for this project are not anticipated to exceed 90 VdB at the nearest structures, no damage to nearby buildings is anticipated to result from project vibration. The proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in permanent noise levels. The project consists of a mixed-use, commercial, office, and residential development. None of the project uses (commercial, office, or residential) would be associated with activities that would generate substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels.

Page 233 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 25 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project With respect to daily (not peak hour) traffic noise level increases due to the project, the transportation consultant has projected that the project would generate approximately 360 daily trips. Existing traffic volumes on these roadways are estimated by the City of Folsom to be approximately 2,100-4,500 ADT on Sutter Street and 1,400 – 2,800 ADT on Scott Street. Based on a conservative assumption that existing traffic volumes are at the lower end of the ranges cited above, the predicted project-related increases in traffic noise levels along Sutter and Scott Streets would be 0.4 dB and 0.5 dB Ldn, respectively, assuming all the project daily traffic would utilize both roads. The project-related traffic noise level increases cited above, which are based on conservative assumptions, would likely be imperceptible at the nearest residences to the project site. The project proposes three distinct exterior areas where people could congregate. One location is a ground floor (Level 1) outdoor dining area. The second is a small deck area on Level 2. The third location is a larger deck area associated with the proposed residences on Level 3. No outdoor use space is proposed on the roof of the building. There will be no outdoor speakers installed in any of these areas, and no live or recorded music will be performed or played at any of the outdoor spaces. As a result, the only noise source associated with these outdoor spaces would be people conversing. The proposed ground level dining area is located approximately 100 feet from the closest residential receptor to the southeast. At that distance, and assuming no shielding by intervening structures whatsoever, the predicted average and maximum noise levels would be 40 dB Leq and 45 dB Lmax, respectively. Due to the considerable shielding of the 2nd and 3rd level decks from the nearest residences, noise generated during outdoor conversations at those locations would be considerably lower. The predicted sound originating from the outdoor spaces of the project would be well below the noise standards of the City of Folsom 2035 General Plan, and well below measured existing ambient noise levels at the nearest residences. Mechanical equipment associated with the building heating, ventilating and air conditioning, as well as any mechanical equipment associated with a future restaurant use on the project site, would be located within an enclosed mechanical equipment well which would contain the noise. As a result, project mechanical equipment noise associated with the building operation is not predicted to exceed the applicable City of Folsom noise standards or substantially exceed existing ambient noise levels in the immediate project vicinity. The trash room serving the project is located on the ground level at the northwestern corner of the proposed building. The proposed trash collection area and proposed roll-up door is shielded from view of the nearest residences in the project area by the proposed project building and other existing structures in the project vicinity. Solid waste and organic waste removal services would be provided by the City of Folsom (solid waste) and a private hauler (organic waste). Depending upon the volume of waste generated by the restaurant, commercial, and office uses, trash and organic waste pickup could occur several times per week. During waste removal, noise would be generated by vehicle engines, collection operations, and backup alarms. Each collection event would last 15 minutes or less. Collection times could vary throughout the day, but would tend to occur most often during morning hours. As a matter of public health, safety and convenience, the City has exempted garbage collection generated by commercial uses from meeting Noise Ordinance standards. While early morning collection (typically used to prevent conflicts between large garbage collection vehicles and other

Page 234 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 26 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project activities) may introduce a source of noise that is irritating to some, the City has determined that it is within the public interest to collect garbage regularly and at times that would inconvenience the smallest group of residents possible. FMC §8.42.060 G of the Noise Ordinance exempts noise sources associated with the collection of waste or garbage from property devoted to commercial or industrial uses. The project site is zoned for commercial uses (as are the adjoining residences), and the proposed 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project would house commercial activities, including a restaurant, retailing, and offices. Thus, waste and garbage pickup would be exempt from Noise Ordinance requirements. In addition, due to the substantial shielding of the garbage collection area from the nearest residences, excessive noise levels during regular garbage collection operations are not anticipated. 6.4.3 AIR QUALITY CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS Construction and operation related emissions were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4.0. Output files and assumptions are available at the City of Folsom Community Development Department. CalEEMod default construction equipment with project-specific estimated phasing was used for modeling. Similarly, default trip generation and operational assumptions were used for a conservative estimate. Emissions of criteria air pollutants associated with construction and operation of the proposed project as estimated by CalEEMod are shown on Tables 7 and 8. Maximum daily emissions would not exceed the applicable Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) significance thresholds related to air quality. Because air emissions would be well below SMAQMD thresholds, project air pollutant emissions during both construction and operations would result in a less-than-significant impact. Table 7 Unmitigated Construction Related Emissions Year ROG NOX CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Pounds per day 2024 0.95 10.46 7.22 0.017 5.87 2.98 2025 7.45 5.58 7.45 0.012 0.36 0.24 Maximum Daily 7.45 10.46 7.45 0.017 5.87 2.98 SMAQMD Threshold n/a 85 n/a n/a 80 82 Threshold Exceeded? n/a NO n/a n/a NO NO Note: ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = respirable particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter The values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from CalEEMod. Emissions thresholds are included in SMAQMD Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (2009, updated through April 2021). CalEEMod model results are on file with the City of Folsom Community Development Department. Source: Planning Partners 2023. Within the City, consistent with Section 6.0.7 (Air Pollution Control) of the City’s CDD Specifications, Section 4.19 (Grading Permit Requirements) of the City Design Standards, and the

Page 235 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 27 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project SMAQMD regulations, all construction projects are required to implement the District’s Basic Construction Emission Control Practices, as applicable. These practices include the following: Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (SMAQMD 2009, Section updated July 2019) • 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 adjacent 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. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • 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, §s 2449(d)(3) and 2485]. Provide clear signage that posts this requirement for workers at the entrances to the site. • Provide current certificate(s) of compliance for CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation [California Code of Regulations, Title 13, §s 2449 and 2449.1]. For more information contact CARB at 877-593-6677, [email protected], or www.arb.ca.gov/doors/compliance_cert1.html. • 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. Table 8 Unmitigated Operation Related Emissions Category ROG NOX CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Pounds per day Area 0.27 1.91E-003 0.17 1.0E-005 9.2E-004 9.2E-004 Energy 0.01 0.097 0.08 5.9E-004 7.43E-003 7.43E-003 Mobile 0.89 0.73 5.37 9.08E-003 0.91 0.25 Total 1.17 0.82 5.62 9.68E-003 0.92 0.26 SMAQMD Threshold 65 65 n/a n/a 80 82 Threshold Exceeded? NO NO n/a n/a NO NO Note: ROG = reactive organic gases; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = respirable particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter The values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from CalEEMod. Emissions thresholds are included in SMAQMD Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (2021). CalEEMod model results are on file with the City of Folsom Community Development Department. Source: Planning Partners 2023. In order to support the use of the SMAQMD’s non-zero thresholds of significance for operational PM emissions, the SMAQMD provides guidance on Best Management Practices (BMP) to reduce

Page 236 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 28 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project operational PM emissions from land use development projects (SMAQMD 2009, Section updated October 2020). As required by existing regulations, the following BMPs provided by the SMAQMD will be included by the City of Folsom as Conditions of Approval: 1. Compliance with District rules that control operational PM and NOX emissions. Reference rules regarding wood burning devices, boilers, water heaters, generators and other PM control rules that may apply to equipment to be located at the project. Current rules can be found on the District’s website: http://www.airquality.org/Businesses/Rules-Regulations 2. Compliance with mandatory measures in the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6) that pertain to efficient use of energy at a residential or non-residential land use. The current standards can be found on the California Energy Commission’s website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/ 3. Compliance with mandatory measures in the California Green Building Code (Title 24, Part 11). The California Building Standards Commission provides helpful links on its website: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/Resources/Page-Content/Building-Standards-Commission-Resources-List- Folder/CALGreen 4. Current mandatory measures related to operational PM include requirements for bicycle parking, parking for fuel efficient vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and fireplaces for non-residential projects. Residential project measures include requirements for electric vehicle charging and fireplaces. 5. Compliance with anti-idling regulations for diesel powered commercial motor vehicles (greater than 10,000 gross vehicular weight rating). This BMP focuses on non-residential land use projects (retail and industrial) that would attract these vehicles. The current requirements include limiting idling time to 5 minutes and installing technologies on the vehicles that support anti-idling. Information can be found on the California Air Resources Board’s website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/idle-reduction-technologies/idle-reduction-technologies. Additionally, the California Air Resources Board adopted a regulation that applies to transport refrigeration units (TRUs) that are found on many delivery trucks carrying food. Information on the TRU regulation can be found on the California Air Resources Board’s website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/transport-refrigeration-unit. Since the proposed project may not have control over the anti-idling technologies installed on commercial vehicles coming to the project, the BMP is to provide notice of the anti-idling regulations at the delivery/loading dock and to neighbors. The notice to the neighbors should also include who at the retail or industrial project can be contacted to file a complaint regarding idling and the California Air Resources Vehicle Complaint Hotline 1-800-363-7664. 6.4.4 WATER QUALITY The proposed project does not involve any discharges that would violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The City is a signatory to the Sacramento County-wide NPDES permit for the control of pollutants in urban stormwater. Since 1990, 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

Page 237 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 29 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project controls (BMP), water quality monitoring, and other activities designed to protect area creeks and rivers (Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership 2019). The project would be required to implement all appropriate program requirements. In 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 control, flood protection, and water use. CDD Construction Specifications • Section 6.08 Water Pollution - requires compliance with City water pollution regulations, including NPDES provisions. • Section 8.2 Reseeding - specifies seed mixes and methods for reseeding of graded areas. • Section 9.1 Clearing and Grubbing - specifies protection standards for existing signs, mailboxes, underground structures, drainage facilities, sprinklers and lights, trees and shrubbery, and fencing. Also requires the preparation of a SWPPP to control erosion and siltation of receiving waters. City Design Standards • Section 4.19 Grading Permit Requirements – Defines requirements for obtaining a Grading Permit, including completion of a geotechnical/soils report, arborist’s report, engineering geology report (if necessary), and construction details for any needed retaining walls. As applicable, prior to issuance of a Grading permit, applicants are required to obtain a Tree permit from the City, any environmental permits issued by State or federal agencies for the purposes of protecting environmental resources, evidence of coordination with the SMAQMD regarding naturally occurring asbestos, and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. • Section 10-4 Erosion and Sedimentation Control – Requires a site specific erosion and sedimentation control plan of all construction projects within the City, including those that would result in the less of 1 acre in disturbed area. • Section 19 Storm Drainage Requirements and Policies – Defines City policies, standards, master plans, and requirements that apply to stormwater and flooding. Additionally, the City enforces the requirements of the FMC summarized in Table 9.

Page 238 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 30 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 9 City of Folsom Municipal Code Sections Regulating the Effects on Hydrology and Water Quality from Urban Development within the City Code Section Code Name Effect of Code 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 SWPPPs. 13.26 Water Conservation Prohibits the wasteful use of water; establishes sustainable landscape requirements; defines water use restrictions. 14.29 Grading Code Requires a grading permit prior to the initiation of any grading, excavation, fill or dredging; establishes standards, conditions, and requirements for grading, erosion control, stormwater drainage, and revegetation. 14.32 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 damage or that could divert floodwaters. Source: Folsom Municipal Code 2021. Construction activities associated with project implementation would include grading, excavation, and site leveling. As proposed, post-construction stormwater would be conveyed to an existing storm drain in the Sutter Street sidewalk adjacent to the northwest corner of the proposed building, and to an existing storm drain in Scott Street (see Figure 9). At these points, the project would be connected to the City’s stormwater drainage system. The proposed project would be required to comply with various State and local water quality standards (including full capture and treatment of runoff from the trash area), which would ensure the proposed project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge permits, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. The project site would be subject to National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit conditions, which include the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). As described above, the proposed project would also be subject to all of the City’s standard Code and construction requirements (listed in Table 9), including conditions for the discharge of urban pollutants and sediments to the storm-drainage system and restrictions on uses that cause water or erosion hazards. Further, prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, the applicant will be required to submit a drainage plan that shows how project BMPs capture and treat stormwater runoff during project construction and operations. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that water quality standards and waste discharge requirements are not violated, and water quality is protected. Compliance with regulations contained in the Municipal Code regarding implementation of stormwater BMPs, grading requirements and implementation of erosion control plans (noted) above as well as preparation and implementation of a SWPPP during construction, would avoid/minimize potential effects to water quality from stormwater runoff. Implementation of the proposed project would have the potential to generate stormwater and contaminated runoff from developed areas of the project site. Developed community stormwater

Page 239 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 31 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project conveyance facilities are located in both Sutter and Scott Streets. Because the site is currently undeveloped, the construction of the proposed project would result in the addition of new impervious surfaces to the project site. While the majority of the developed project site would be covered with impervious surfaces, the remaining areas would be landscaped. On-site drainage improvements include drainage collection pipes within the interior and along the margins of the property. The project site is within the existing urban area of the City served by urban stormwater facilities. As described above, the proposed project would also be subject to all of the City’s standard Code and construction requirements (listed in Table 9), including requirements for the treatment of discharges of urban pollutants and sediments to the storm-drainage system, and restrictions on uses that cause water or erosion hazards. The implementation of these requirements would ensure that no adverse effects due to stormwater generation or contamination would take place. 6.5 UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES The project site is fully served by urban levels of all utilities and services. Public utilities provided by the City within the project area include domestic water, wastewater collection, storm water drainage, and solid waste disposal. Private and public utilities other than the City provide electricity, natural gas, telephone, and cable television services. Wastewater treatment and disposal is provided to the City of Folsom by the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (SRCSD) at the SRCSD’s Wastewater Treatment Plant in Elk Grove. According to the City of Folsom and major utility providers, all utility and service systems are currently adequate to serve the proposed project. 7. POTENTIAL EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS 7.1 LOCATION The potential exception in §15300.2(a) does not apply because projects in the Class 32 category are not excluded on the basis of location. 7.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Under CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(b), a categorical exemption shall not be used when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There is no specific time requirement for the consideration of cumulative impacts “over time.” “The same place” is not defined in the CEQA Guidelines, but it is generally understood by the City to mean the project site and its vicinity, the proper scope of which is determined by the context of the project and potentially affected resources.8 8 [W]e construe “the same place” to refer to an area whose size and configuration depend on the nature of the potential environmental impact of the specific project under consideration. For example, in determining whether there may be a cumulative impact from an otherwise categorically exempt project that may affect water quality in a stream, consideration must be given to potential similar projects located in the watershed of the same stream. For a project producing noise pollution, the area to be considered would be that within which the noise could be expected to be audible.” (Robinson v. City and County of San Francisco (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 950, 959.)

Page 240 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 32 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project CEQA requires a lead agency to consider cumulative impacts from “reasonably foreseeable” projects (CEQA Guidelines section 15355(b)). Successive, recent projects of the same type in the same place (i.e., on or near the proposed project site) have not been approved or proposed. The most recent project that has been approved or proposed in the immediate vicinity of the project is the Barley Barn Tap Room, approved in 2022. However, the Barley Barn project is a bar/entertainment business, substantially different from the proposed Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project, which consists of retail/office/residential uses. Furthermore, once the construction of the proposed project is complete, there would be no available space on the site for future development. 7.2.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT Several projects have been completed near the proposed project and within the Sutter Street Subarea over the last few years. On the same block as the proposed project, two buildings have been constructed relatively recently. In 2013, a Commercial Design Review and a parking variance were approved to construct a 35-foot-high (on the Sutter Street frontage), three-story, mixed-use building at 607 Sutter Street (Fire and Rain Building). Additionally, a three-story, 29,998-square-foot mixed-use building was approved in 2006 for construction at 602-604 Sutter Street (Folsom Electric Building; also known as the Sutter Street Steakhouse Building), directly across the street from the proposed project site. The Folsom Electric Building is 42 feet tall along Sutter Street and 65 feet tall adjacent to the Public Parking Lot. City approvals for the Folsom Electric Building project consisted of a Commercial Design Review and variances for height and parking. Both buildings have been completed and are occupied9. Since the approval of the Railroad Block 2004 Implementation Plan in January 2006, several projects have been completed at the south end of the Sutter Street Subarea as part of a planned effort to redevelop the area into a mixed-use, civic-oriented development that preserves and enhances the historic railroad buildings and features in the area. Completed projects have included the construction of a multi-story parking garage, public plaza, landscaped amphitheater, restaurant, and two mixed-use buildings at 905 and 916 Sutter Street; renovation of the Southern Pacific Depot and interpretive center; commemorative paving and landscaping; and the creation of new interpretive displays. Taken together, these projects combined with the proposed project at 603 Sutter Street would not detrimentally affect the integrity of the Sutter Street Subarea. The subarea includes a variety of buildings types and uses. Historic buildings include restaurants, bars, stores, hotels, residences, and other types of buildings dating from roughly 1850 to 1950. Reflecting this long period of development, the subarea broadly displays a variety of styles, size, ornament, and forms. The large- scale new buildings and redevelopment projects in the Railroad Block area reference the railroad- 9 The City of Folsom prepared and certified separate Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Fire and Rain Building (607 Sutter St.), and the Folsom Electric Building (602/604 Sutter St.). Project impacts to visual quality were determined to be less than significant for the Fire and Rain Building. No adverse aesthetic effects were identified for the Folsom Electric Building. With respect to cultural and historic resources, no adverse effects to known cultural or historic resources were identified on either of the project sites or in their vicinity. Standard mitigation measures were adopted to avoid adverse effects to unknown cultural or historic resources. Thus, the two projects would not have established, or contributed to, cumulative impacts to these resources in the vicinity of the Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building.

Page 241 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 33 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project related development that historically characterized the area and preserve surviving historic railroad features, thus allowing the redeveloped area to continue to convey its association with Folsom’s railroad history. Meanwhile, the projects on the 600 block of Sutter Street, including the proposed project at 603 Sutter Street, continue the historic pattern of continuous commercial facades and storefronts along Sutter Street. The other recently completed projects on the 600 block are of a larger scale and more contemporary in design. Thus, they are not entirely compatible with the characteristics of the Sutter Street subarea. The 600 block as a whole has a less cohesive character than the Sutter Street blocks to the south that thereby allow for a greater variety of development. The proposed project is more compatible in scale and design than other recently completed buildings, and reinforces the block’s connection to the more cohesive collection of historic commercial and mixed-use buildings that are concentrated on the 700 and 800 blocks of Sutter Street. Due to the peripheral location of the 600 block, the proposed project and other recent projects in the area do not directly impact the core area of the Sutter Street Subarea to the south. The Sutter Street Subarea is a large district that continues to retain the vast majority of its contributing resources. The proposed project at 603 Sutter Street, in combination with other recently completed projects in the area, will not detract from the Sutter Street Subarea’s ability to convey its historic significance as the historic commercial center of Folsom. It does not appear, therefore, that the proposed new building and other recent projects would represent a cumulative impact on the Sutter Street Subarea or the setting of identified individual historic resources (the Cohn House and historic library building) pursuant to CEQA. 7.2.2 CITYWIDE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The Folsom 2035 General Plan EIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with adoption of the City of Folsom 2035 General Plan allowing for development, open space preservation, and provision of services for approximately 17,430± acres of land in the City of Folsom. Implementation of the 2035 General Plan would result in future land development, construction of infrastructure, and other actions that would result in increased levels of human activity, and that would convert or cover portions of the landscape. These actions would occur within areas designated by the 2035 General Plan for urban uses. Future development would consist of a variety of land uses, including residences, commercial activities, industrial uses, and the infrastructure necessary to support urban development. Buildout of the area subject to the Folsom General Plan envisions construction of up to 15,250 new dwelling units and 3,993 acres of residential, commercial and industrial uses. The Folsom 2035 General Plan contemplates the full range of land uses that would constitute a balanced community, including residential uses at a variety of densities, as well as commercial, office, employment, and open space uses. Additionally, public or quasi-public uses are contemplated by the Folsom 2035 General Plan, including schools, parks, fire stations, government offices, and other uses. The Folsom 2035 General Plan EIR analyzed the environmental impacts associated with adoption of the City of Folsom 2035 General Plan allowing for development, open space preservation, and provision of services for approximately 17,430± acres of land in the City of Folsom, including the project site.

Page 242 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 34 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project The 2035 General Plan EIR identified citywide significant impacts arising from urban development pursuant to the General Plan for the issue areas as shown in Table 10. Table 10 also presents the potential for the project to make a considerable contribution to the cited impacts. Table 10 Citywide Cumulative Effects Identified in the Folsom 2035 General Plan Program EIR Environmental Topic Considerable Contribution by Project? Where Discussed in This Document Aesthetics and Visual Resources Adverse effects on a scenic vista or substantial degradation of scenic character, damage to scenic resources within a scenic corridor, creation of a new source of light or glare.

No. Project design consistent with Historic District guidelines; Project not visible from sensitive viewpoints.

7.3.1/7.4
Air Quality Increase in operational emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors associated with 2035 General Plan buildout that could contribute to a violation of air quality standards, Increase in health risks associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to emissions of toxic air contaminants, Increase in exposure of sensitive receptors to emissions of odors.

No. Project located within a Transit Priority Area; Served by major transit stop; No parking offered. Additionally, the project's modeled construction and operational emissions are minimal, and less than all SMAQMD thresholds of significance.

6.4.3 Biological Resources Have a substantial adverse effect on special status species; Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. No. No sensitive habitat; Nesting bird avoidance is included in the proposed project; A City Tree permit is required.

6.3/7.3.2/7.3.3
Cultural and Historical Resources Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, Damage or destruction of previously unknown unique paleontological resources during construction • related activities.

No. Project would not adversely affect adjacent historical resources. 7.3.1/7.3.3/7.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No. No mineral resources at project site. 7.3.3 Global Climate Change Potential to conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for reducing GHG emissions, Potential to conflict with long term statewide GHG emissions reduction goals for 2050.

No. Project located within a Transit Priority Area; Served by major transit stop; No parking offered. n/a

Page 243 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 35 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 10 Citywide Cumulative Effects Identified in the Folsom 2035 General Plan Program EIR Environmental Topic Considerable Contribution by Project? Where Discussed in This Document Hazards and Hazardous Materials Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No. 7.3.3/7.5 Hydrology and Water Quality Alter the course of a stream or river increasing runoff resulting in flooding, Contribute runoff that exceeds stormwater drainage capacity or contributes additional polluted runoff, Place housing or other structures within 100 year flood hazard area.

No. Site outside of floodplain; No surface water features; project will connect to City stormwater drainage system which has adequate capacity to serve project.

6.4.4/6.5/7.3.3
Noise Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan, noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; or a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project, 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, exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels resulting from the proposed project.

No. Compliance with City construction requirements and additional voluntary applicant commitments beyond minimum City requirements. Minimal operational noise would not contribute to any substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels.

6.4.2 Public Services and Recreation Resources Require construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment – State and Regional facilities. No. All urban services available. 6.5 Transportation/Circulation Traffic level of service on local intersections, Traffic level of service on US Highway 50. No. Project located within a Transit Priority Area; Served by major transit stop; No parking offered

6.4.1 Utilities and Service Systems None No. All urban services available 6.5 Note: Identified effects listed in “normal” type were identified by the 2035 General Plan EIR as being significant and unavoidable. Effects listed in “italics” were determined to be less than significant after the implementation of adopted mitigation measures set forth in the 2035 General Plan EIR. Source: Planning Partners, 2023. Additionally, the 2035 General Plan EIR identified topics as having no impact or a less-than-significant impact, as shown in Table 11.

Page 244 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 36 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 11 Potential Citywide Impacts Determined to be Less than significant or No Impact by the 2035 General Plan EIR Potential Impact Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Considerable Contribution by Project? Agriculture and Forestry Resources a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? X No. No agricultural or forest resources in Project area. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract? X c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X Biological Resources e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? X No. Project would comply with City Tree Ordinance requirements. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? X No habitat conservation plan in Project area. Geological Resources a) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (VI.e) X No. Project served by community wastewater facilities. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 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 for people residing or working in the project area? X No. No airports in the project vicinity. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? X

Page 245 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 37 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Table 11 Potential Citywide Impacts Determined to be Less than significant or No Impact by the 2035 General Plan EIR Potential Impact Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact Considerable Contribution by Project? Hydrology and Water Quality b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? X No. Folsom is served by surface water. Coincident earthquakes and a filled Folsom Lake would be unlikely to occur. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X Noise and Vibration b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. X No. No harmful levels of vibration. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. X No private airports in project vicinity. Traffic and Circulation a) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? X No. No changes in air traffic patterns. b) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? X No new roadways. c) Result in inadequate emergency access? X No changes in emergency access. d) Eliminate or adversely affect an existing bikeway, pedestrian facility, or transit facility in a way that would discourage its use X Project takes advantage of nearby transit facility. e) Interfere with the implementation of a planned bikeway or planned pedestrian facility, or be in conflict with a future transit facility X No effects on bikeways or pedestrian facilities. f) Result in unsafe conditions for bicyclists or pedestrians including conflicts with other modes X See above. g) Result in demands to transit facilities greater than available capacity X See above. Source: Planning Partners, 2023.

Page 246 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 38 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Conclusion As indicated in Tables 10 and 11, the proposed mixed-use project would not make a considerable contribution to any of the citywide impacts identified in the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, even if the City were required to consider a citywide context for the cumulative impact exception of a categorically exempt project (which it is not, according to relevant CEQA case law), this potential exception of significant cumulative impacts of successive projects of the same type and in the same place does not apply to the project. 7.3 SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS DUE TO UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES Under CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(c), a categorical exemption shall not be used where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to “unusual circumstances.” Unusual circumstances may be established by showing that the project has some feature that distinguishes it from others in the exempt class, such as its size or location, and that there is a reasonable possibility of a significant effect due to that unusual feature or circumstance, or by showing that the project would have a significant environmental effect. For the unusual circumstances exception to apply, it is not enough alone that there is a reasonable possibility the project would have a significant environmental effect; instead, there must be a reasonable possibility that the activity would have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The nature of a project may be “unusual,” particularly if its scope and size differ from conditions in the surrounding vicinity. This includes whether the project is or is not consistent with the surrounding zoning and land uses, including consistency with the underlying General Plan and zoning designations and development standards. Conversely, the scope and size may be “unusual” if the use, height, or density vastly differ from surrounding uses. Therefore, “the presence of comparable facilities in the immediate area adequately supports [a]n implied finding that there [are] no ‘unusual circumstances’ precluding a categorical exemption.” (Walters v. City of Redondo Beach (2016) 1 Cal. App.5th 809, 821, quoting Bloom v. McGurk (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1307, 1316.) The project site possesses no unusual features or environmental characteristics that distinguish it from other properties of the same size in the downtown area. The project site is located within an urban area, surrounded by development, and sensitive resources are not present as explained below. The project site’s immediate area, and the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District in general, have similar 2035 General Plan and zoning designations as the subject property. There are no “unusual circumstances” that differentiate the project from the general class of similarly situated projects. For example, other existing properties in the surrounding area (604/602 and 607 Sutter Street) have developed similar mixed-used projects with similar dimensions to the proposed 603 Sutter Street mixed-use project. As proposed, the building height would be a maximum of 35 feet, 0 inches from the ground (building pad) to the roof surface, the maximum allowed by FMC §17.52.510.C within the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District. This also would be consistent with the height of surrounding properties on the 600 block of Sutter Street. Finally, the proposed project does not include uses that would be considered unusual in the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District. As indicated above in Section 5.2, all proposed project uses are allowed in the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District by the 2035 General Plan and the City’s Zoning Code.

Page 247 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 39 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

7.3.1 AESTHETICS The City of Folsom is located along the western edge of the Sierra Nevada foothills. The surrounding area to the east of the city includes residences, commercial uses, and grassy rolling hills at varying elevations. To the west is the substantially urbanized Sacramento metropolitan area. The area in the vicinity of the project site is considerably developed with urban land uses. Developed uses in the project vicinity include single family residences to the south and east, and commercial uses to the north and west. The Cohn House, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is immediately east of the project site, separated by Scott Street. Lake Natoma and the American River Parkway are located to the north, beyond the commercial corridor of Sutter Street. The project site is predominantly hidden by intervening buildings, bridges, and vegetation from viewpoints within the American River Parkway, developed recreation areas such as Black Miners Bar, and the Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park. From informal recreation areas on the Natoma Bluffs, the project site and nearby uses including the Cohn House are barely visible within the urban fabric of the Folsom Historic District and the city at large. The existing urban visual character of the project vicinity is defined by the nearby commercial and residential uses. Scenic vistas within the city and in the project vicinity vary from short-range to long-range views, depending upon the topography, intervening buildings, and the presence of mature vegetation. Views into the project site tend to be short-range, and activities on the site are potentially visible by several residents of the surrounding homes (especially those immediately to the south and east), patrons of nearby commercial uses, or motorists on Sutter Street, Scott Street, Riley Street on its approach to the Rainbow Bridge, and from the Folsom Crossing bridge. Views from the Natoma Bluffs, Lake Natoma, the Folsom Lake State Recreation Area, and the Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park are minimized by distance, by infrastructure such as the Folsom Crossing Bridge, changes in elevation, and intervening vegetation. Since the City characterized the visual resources of the Historic District in 1998, several changes have occurred within the District’s viewshed that have altered views of the Historic District as seen by outside viewers and by viewers within the Historic District itself. These changes include: construction of the Folsom Crossing bridge across Lake Natoma; construction of new public and private structures along and adjacent to Sutter Street, including the new three-story buildings adjacent to the proposed project at 604/602 and 607 Sutter Street, and modification of the building facades along Sutter Street west of Riley Street. The applicant’s intent is that the proposed building would appear similar to other commercial projects recently developed on the 600 block of Sutter Street and elsewhere within the Historic District consistent with the Historic District Design and Development Guidelines. As proposed, the building height would be a maximum of 35 feet, 0 inches from the ground (building pad) to the roof surface, as allowed by Folsom Municipal Code sections 17.52.510 C and 17.58.080. Parapets would be constructed along the Sutter Street and Scott Street frontages of the roof, but would be no higher than 39 feet, 0 inches from the building pad. Air conditioning and other mechanical equipment would be located within a sunken equipment well to reduce operational noise and visibility from surrounding areas and streets. The proposed 603 Sutter Street building would be visible from viewpoints immediately adjacent to the project, including from within several single-family dwellings and the Cohn House to the south and east. The proposed project would not be a significant part of the viewshed as seen from the

Page 248 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 40 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Natoma Bluffs and Black Miners Bar. Due to intervening bridges, evergreen vegetation, and buildings, the project would not be plainly visible from viewpoints within the American River Parkway nor the Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park. California Public Resources Code (PRC), §21099 sets forth the following standards with respect to infill projects to be constructed within a Transit Priority Area. PRC §21099. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms mean: (1) “Employment center project” means a project located on property zoned for commercial uses with a floor area ratio of no less than 0.75 and that is located within a transit priority area. (2) “Floor area ratio” means the ratio of gross building area of the development, excluding structured parking areas, proposed for the project divided by the net lot area. (3) “Gross building area” means the sum of all finished areas of all floors of a building included within the outside faces of its exterior walls. (4) “Infill site” means a lot located within an urban area that has been previously developed, or on a vacant site where at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins, or is separated only by an improved public right-of-way from, parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses. (5) “Lot” means all parcels utilized by the project. (6) “Net lot area” means the area of a lot, excluding publicly dedicated land and private streets that meet local standards, and other public use areas as determined by the local land use authority. (7) “Transit priority area” means an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, … (d) (1) Aesthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center project on an infill site within a transit priority area shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment. (2) (A) This subdivision does not affect, change, or modify the authority of a lead agency to consider aesthetic impacts pursuant to local design review ordinances or other discretionary powers provided by other laws or policies. (B) For the purposes of this subdivision, aesthetic impacts do not include impacts on historical or cultural resources. Evaluation of Applicability of §21099 The General Plan land use designation for the project site is Historic District – Mixed Use, and the zoning is Historic District (HD). The project lies within the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District. FMC §17.52.510 expressly permits mixed-use commercial/office projects within the subarea such as that proposed by the 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project. The floor area ratio (FAR) of the project exceeds 0.75, and as discussed below, the project is located within a transit priority area. Thus, the project qualifies as an Employment Center Project. The project site is surrounded by other urban uses, either adjoining the site or separated from it by improved public rights-of-way, thereby qualifying it as an Infill Site.

Page 249 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 41 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project The project is located 0.3 mile from the Historic Folsom Light Rail Station, designated by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments as a major transit stop. The proposed 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building project is located within the Transit Priority Area surrounding the station. Construction and operation of the proposed building would not have an adverse effect on historical or cultural resources in the project vicinity, or more generally within the Sutter Street Subarea of the Historic District. For more information regarding the project’s effect on historic structures and the Sutter Street Subarea, please refer to 7.6 of this document. Based on the foregoing, consistent with the requirements of PRC §21099, the aesthetic effects of the proposed project would not considered to be significant pursuant to CEQA or unusual. 7.3.2 TREE REMOVAL Chapter 12.16 of the City of FMC provides regulations for the protection, preservation, and maintenance of protected trees in Folsom. The ordinance protects native oak trees, heritage trees, regulated trees, and landmark trees. Protected trees are defined as shown in Table 12. (Folsom 2019) Table 12 Definition of Protected Trees Pursuant to FMC §12.16 Protected Tree Class Definition Native Oak Tree Any tree over 6 inches (DSH) of the genus quercus and species lobata (valley oak), douglasii (blue oak), wislizenii (interior live oak), agrifolia (coast live oak) or hybrids, thereof; or a multitrunked native oak tree having an aggregate diameter of 20 inches (DSH) or more. Heritage Tree An eligible tree on the City’s Master Tree over 30 inches in diameter DSH or an eligible multitrunked tree having an aggregate diameter of 50 inches or more at DSH. Regulated Tree Trees required by the City’s Zoning Code (parking lot trees and street trees) or required as conditions of a development approval, or required as mitigation by FMC §12.16. Landmark Tree A tree or group of trees determined by the city council to be a significant community benefit. Note: DSH indicates the diameter at standard height. See the footnote on this page for further definition. 10 Source: City of Folsom Municipal Code §12.16, 2021. Additionally, both the City’s CDD Specifications and City Design Standards regulate tree removal and requirements. CDD Construction Specifications Section 12.01 - Protection of Existing Trees - Specifies measures necessary to protect both ornamental trees and native oak trees. City Design Standards Section 4.19 Grading Permit Requirements – Defines requirements for obtaining a Grading Permit, including completion of a geotechnical/soils report, arborist’s report, engineering geology report (if necessary), and construction details for any needed retaining walls. As applicable, prior to issuance of a Grading permit, applicants are required to obtain a Tree permit from the City, any 10 Diameter at Standard Height is a method of expressing the diameter of the trunk of a standing tree. Under this protocol, measures of tree diameters are to be taken four feet, six inches above the ground surface on the high side of the tree.

Page 250 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 42 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project environmental permits issued by State or federal agencies for the purposes of protecting environmental resources, evidence of coordination with the SMAQMD regarding naturally occurring asbestos, and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Section 10.3 Grading Plan Requirements – Identifies additional Grading Plan requirements including information regarding existing trees and trees to be taken. In compliance with City requirements, tree surveys of the project site were completed in 2017, 2019, and 2022 (Arborwell 2017, ECORP 2019, Cal TLC 2022). The most recent (2022) survey concluded that within the proposed building footprint there are 11 native oak trees representing three species: valley oaks, blue oaks, and interior live oaks. Additionally, there are nine horticultural trees within the building footprint, which are all species of Prunus (fruit trees). Outside of the footprint there is one valley oak and one horticultural camphor tree. (Folsom 2019c, ECORP 2019, Cal TLC 2022) Except for 11 native oak trees and several ornamental trees, there are no riparian or other sensitive habitats existing on, or adjacent to, the project site. Trees on the site may provide nesting habitat for special status bird species, or for species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction occurred during the nesting season, nesting birds could be disturbed, leading to nest abandonment. The valley oak and ornamental trees on the project site could provide nesting habitat for bird species found in the vicinity of the project. Tree-cutting and excavation activities could potentially impact nesting birds that are protected under the federal MBTA of 1918 (16 USC 703-711) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) codes (§s 3503, 3503.5, and 3800). The laws and regulations prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests, or eggs. If construction activities are conducted during the nesting season (from March to September), nesting birds could be directly impacted by tree removal, and indirectly impacted by noise, vibration, and other construction related disturbance. As set forth in the project application documents, in response to the requirements set forth in the Folsom Municipal Code Chapter 12.16 (Tree Preservation Ordinance) and the regulations set forth in the City’s CDD Specifications and City Design Standards, the applicant proposes to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code provisions protecting special status and migratory birds by including the following standard requirement in the project design. The project will avoid construction or tree removal during nesting season, or if construction activities will occur during the nesting season and trees on the site have not been removed, the applicant will conduct pre-construction surveys for the presence of special-status bird species or any nesting bird species 30 days or less prior to the start of construction. These surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist within a 500-foot radius of the construction area. If active nests are identified in these areas, construction will be delayed until the young have fledged or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has been consulted to develop measures to avoid the take of active nests prior to the initiation of any construction activities. Thus, as proposed the project would not interfere with the value of the project site as habitat for nesting birds. Additionally, the project applicant has initiated compliance with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance consistent with FMC Chapter 12.16. Pursuant to City Standards Design Standards §4.19,

Page 251 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 43 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Grading Permit Requirements, obtaining a Tree Permit will be necessary prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Removal of oak or other protected trees is permitted by City regulations under specified circumstances and with required tree replanting at ratios specified by the City. Approval of a tree removal permit automatically requires replacement trees or payment of an in-lieu fee. Removal of a tree that is consistent with the criteria, provisions, and requirements set forth in City regulations would not result in a conflict with a local ordinance, and thus, removal of protected trees consistent with City regulations and requirements would not be considered a significant impact of the project or an unusual circumstance. The proposed tree removal is similar to other approved projects throughout the city that have also included removal of protected trees and replanting replacement trees. Removal of protected trees would not result in a significant impact due to unusual circumstances as properties and projects throughout the city are able to remove protected trees through compliance with the criteria for removal, approval of permit, and replanting replacement trees as required by City regulations. Thus, the project and its location do not differ from other projects of any type and location throughout the city that are bound by the same regulations. In addition, the trees themselves do not represent an unusual feature. While several trees are larger trees and visible along Sutter and Scott Streets in the immediate vicinity of the project site, the trees are not visible from a wide-ranging area, are not visually prominent or distinctive, and are not considered scenic resources. The trees do not represent a significant or prominent visual element of the surrounding area, and removal would not substantially alter the visual character of the area. While any tree may possess aesthetic qualities, the trees that would be removed are not unusual for the species, nor are they visually distinctive or prominent from a wide area. Therefore, the trees would not be considered an unusual feature. 7.3.3 OTHER POTENTIAL IMPACTS There is no substantial evidence that the proposed project would result in a significant impact as explained below. Therefore, there are no unusual circumstances related to the project or its surroundings that may lead to a significant effect on the environment. The project site and area are not located within a 1 percent (100-year) flood plain or 0.2 percent (500-year) floodplain as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (FEMA 2021). For these reasons, the project site does not contain unusual hydrologic conditions or circumstances, and the project would not result in significant impacts related to drainage or water quality degradation. Most mixed-use and other development projects throughout the City of Folsom are required to prepare a geotechnical engineering study. The geotechnical investigation conducted for the project addressed identified issues related to the excavation of undocumented fills, excavations into bedrock, drainage related to the shallow bedrock and other geologic features, and retaining walls, and provided recommendations to address these concerns (Youngdahl Consulting 2017/2022). Implementation of these recommendations would be verified through design documents that would be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to issuance of construction (grading or building) permits. The investigation concluded that the project is geotechnically feasible given the existing soil conditions and implementation of construction and design recommendations included in the geotechnical investigation. The investigation did not reveal any conditions that differ from

Page 252 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 44 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project other sites in the downtown area and throughout the city, and thus, there are no soils or geological features that would be considered unusual that aren’t encountered at other sites throughout the city. As explained in Sections 6.3 and 7.3.2, except for the suitability for nesting by Swainson’s hawks, the project site is not located in a potentially sensitive biological area, and with implementation of the applicant’s commitment to comply with federal and state provisions protecting Swainson’s hawk and other bird species, the project would not result in any adverse effects to biological resources. Thus, there are no conditions on the project site that differ from other sites with trees in the Historic District or elsewhere within the city. There are no sensitive biological resources on the project site that would be considered unusual that aren’t encountered at other sites throughout the city. The proposed project site is located on a Pre-Pleistocene to Older Pleistocene landform which is composed of Argonaut-Auburn-Urban land complex situated on 3 to 8 percent slopes. This landform is considered to be of very low sensitivity for encountering buried archaeological deposits (LSA 2017) A cultural resource evaluation was conducted, which included archival research and a surface reconnaissance. The archival research revealed that no previously recorded archaeological resources are located within the proposed project area (LSA 2017). Although the project area does contain historical resources outside of the project site, implementation of the project would not adversely affect historic resources as explained below in Section 7.6. The City of Folsom Emergency Operations Plan (Folsom 2020a) includes a section that addresses wildfires: Threat Assessment 1: Urban/Wildland Fire. This section provides general information regarding potential wildfire situations, outlines potential impact areas within the city, and describes potential impacts of a wildland/urban fire scenario. The City of Folsom has also prepared and adopted a Community Wildfire Protection Plan in cooperation with the California Department of Parks and Recreation. The plan meets United States Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management standards, and complies with requirements of the Health Forest Restoration Act of 2003. (Folsom 2013) According to California Fire and Resource Management Program (FRAP), the proposed project area is located within the Local Responsibility Area (CalFIRE 2019). The Sacramento Countywide Local Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies the project site as within an area of moderate to high fire threat (Sacramento County 2016). Exposure of the project site to wildfire risks is similar or less hazardous than other areas of the city. In response, the City has adopted and implemented fire avoidance and management plans to reduce the risk of wildland fire. Wildland fire threats at the project site would not result in an unusual circumstance. 7.3.4 CONCLUSION For these reasons explained above, there are no unusual circumstances surrounding the project or project site. Furthermore, there is no evidence that would suggest a reasonable possibility of a significant effect on the environment, let alone any evidence demonstrating any such effects will occur, and this exception does not apply to the project.

Page 253 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 45 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

7.4 SCENIC HIGHWAYS Under CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(d), a categorical exemption shall not be used for a project that may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The project site is not located adjacent to or near a highway; the nearest highway, State Route 50 is located approximately 2.3 miles south of the project site. Furthermore, there are no officially designated state scenic highways within or adjacent to the City of Folsom (Caltrans 2023). Therefore, the project would not result in damage to scenic resources within an officially designated state scenic highway, and this exception does not apply to the project. 7.5 HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES Under CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(e), a categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to §65962.5 of the Government Code (i.e., the Cortese List). The project site is not included on a list of hazardous waste sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5. The following Cortese List online data resources (CalEPA 2023) were reviewed during the preparation of this document: (1) the list of hazardous waste and substances sites from the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s (DTSC) EnviroStor database (DTSC 2023a); (2) the list of leaking underground storage tank sites from the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) GeoTracker database (SWRCB 2023); (3) the list of solid waste disposal sites identified with Waste Constituent Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit (CalEPA 2023b); and (4) the list of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to §25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC (CalEPA 2023c). No documented sites with the potential to impact the project site were identified on the project site or in the immediate project vicinity. A review of regulatory databases and local/state agency record repositories revealed that the closest cleanup site in the general vicinity of the project site is the Keefer Property LUST cleanup site. It is located approximately 0.15 miles to the east of the project site, and its status is Completed – Case Closed. Therefore, based on the above review, the project site is not included on any list compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and this exception does not apply to the project. 7.6 HISTORICAL RESOURCES Under CEQA Guidelines §15300.2(f), a categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 defines a historical resource as: • A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR); • A resource listed in a local register of historical resources. • Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historic resource. Generally, a resource is considered historically significant if it meets criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, including: • Is associated with events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

Page 254 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 46 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project • Is associated with the lives of people important in our past. • Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. • Has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history; OR • A resource determined to be a historical resource by a project’s lead agency. In 2021, the firm of Page & Turnbull, Inc. prepared an assessment of historic resources and their current historic status, and the character-defining features of the Sutter Street Subarea, part of the Folsom Historic District’s Historic Commercial Primary Area (Page & Turnbull 2021). The study considered the proposed project in relation to the Subarea’s character-defining features to assess the project’s compatibility with surrounding individually listed and individually eligible historic resources, such as the National Register-listed Cohn House at 305 Scott Street, and the historic library building at 605 Sutter Street. The study also analyzed project-specific and subarea-wide cumulative impacts of the proposed project on the Sutter Street Subarea of the Folsom Historic District. The following discussion summarizes these reports. Records of the known cultural resources found in Sacramento County are included in the files of the Office of Historic Preservation, California Historical Resources Information System. The North Central Information Center (NCIC), housed at California State University, Sacramento, locally administers these records. A cultural resources records search was conducted at the NCIC for the project site and surrounding area to determine its historic and cultural sensitivity (LSA 2017). The Cultural Resources Study also outlines results of a field survey, and an archaeology sensitivity assessment. The NCIC Records Search parameters included a 200-foot radius around the project site. The records search of the NCIC database did not identify any previously conducted studies on the project site, nor any previously recorded cultural resources in or adjacent to the site. One investigation has been conducted within the 200-foot study radius. That study included an inventory of historic-period built environment resources associated with the Folsom Historic District, including the Cohn House at 305 Scott Street, and the original location of the Folsom Library building located immediately adjacent to the proposed project site. The original library building still stands, located at 605 Sutter Street and is included on the City of Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory. (Folsom 2022) Non-privileged portions of the records search are available for review by request through the City of Folsom Community Development Department, 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630. Requests should be directed to the attention of Steven Banks, Principal Planner. 7.6.1 LOCAL REGULATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCES City of Folsom 2035 General Plan. The General Plan includes goals and policies regarding cultural resources in Chapter 6, Natural and Cultural Resources. Goal NCR 5.1 encourages “… the preservation, restoration, and maintenance of cultural resources, including buildings and sites, to enrich our sense of place and our appreciation of the city’s history.” Policy NCR 5.1.4, Applicable Laws and Regulations, requires the proposed project to comply with City, State, and federal historic preservation laws, regulations, and codes to protect and assist in the preservation of historic and

Page 255 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 47 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project archaeological resources. Policy NCR 5.1.6, Historic District Standards, requires that the proposed project maintain and implement design and development standards for the Historic District. (Folsom 2018) Historic District Ordinance. FMC Chapter 17.52 defines the City’s Historic District and establishes standards and regulations for development of property within specific subareas of the Historic District. The proposed project lies within the Sutter Street Subarea. (Folsom 2019) Historic District Design and Development Guidelines. The Design and Development Guidelines provide a comprehensive policy manual to assist with the implementation of the regulations contained in the FMC. In addition to design review standards, the guidelines set forth criteria to guide future development within the Historic District; policy direction concerning private and public development; and policy direction concerning public infrastructure and circulation improvements. (Folsom 1998) Standard Construction Specifications and Details. The City of Folsom developed a Standard Construction Specification and Details document in 2004, and updated it in January 2017. The document includes Article 11 - Cultural Resources, which provides direction on actions to be taken in the event that materials are discovered that may ultimately be identified as a historical or archaeological resource, or human remains (Folsom 2017). 7.6.2 EXISTING HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS The following section examines the national, state, and local historic status currently assigned to two historic resources that are adjacent to the proposed project site: the Cohn House at 305 Scott Street and the historic library building at 605 Sutter Street. The site of the proposed project at 603 Sutter Street is an undeveloped lot and has no historic status. The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nation’s most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level. The Cohn House is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The historic library building at 605 Sutter Street is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens. The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places. Because it is listed on the National Register, the Cohn House is listed on the California Register of Historical Resources. The historic library building at 605 Sutter Street is not listed on the California Register of Historical Resources.

Page 256 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 48 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Properties listed or under review by the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are listed within the Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) and are assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code (Status Code) of “1” to “7” to establish their historical significance in relation to the National Register or California Register (CA OHP 2020). Properties with a Status Code of “1” or “2” are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of “3” or “4” appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of “5” have typically been determined to be locally significant or to have contextual importance. Properties with a Status Code of “6” are not eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of “7” means that the resource has not been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation. The Cohn House is listed in the BERD database for Sacramento County with a status code of 1S, meaning an “individual property listed in the National Register by the Keeper. Listed in the California Register.” (CA OHP 2020). The historic library building at 605 Sutter Street is listed in the BERD database for Sacramento County as the Folsom Library with a status code of 6Y, meaning a property “determined ineligible for National Register by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for California Register or Local Listing11.” The most recent update to the BERD database was in March 2020. In 1998, the City of Folsom adopted the Historic Preservation Master Plan, which created the City of Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory, a list of historic resources in the city that is updated over time. The Cultural Resources Inventory, including registration forms, is kept by the City of Folsom Community Development Department. The Cohn House at 305 Scott Street and historic library building at 605 Scott Street are listed on the City of Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory. 7.6.3 HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE The Cohn House property was listed on the National Register in 1982. The following physical description and summary of its historic significance is excerpted from the resource’s National Register nomination form: The 100 foot by 140 foot property contains essentially four structures: the large 1890s house; the original 1860s house and barn, attached to the later house and serving as its kitchen/service area; and a small outbuilding in the garden to the north of the house. The Cohn House is a particularly fine local representative of late 19th century residential architecture. The complex juxtaposition of forms and the great variety of architectural detail of this Queen Anne style structure establish its fine design qualities. Its large size and impressive siting on a hill overlooking the town and valley below add to its visual importance. Derived from a published architectural “pattern book”, the design of the building reflects the widespread and established practice of building according to published designs. The two buildings still incorporated into the larger house represent a rare vestige of working class housing of the city’s earliest decades. 11 Page & Turnbull found a discrepancy with the address listed for the library building on Sutter Street. The library is listed in the BERD database as 607 Sutter Street, Folsom Library, but its actual location is at 605 Sutter Street.

Page 257 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 49 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Historic Library Building. According to the listing in the Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory, the historic library building at 605 Sutter Street was constructed around 1915. It consists of a one-story wood frame building with a simple rectangular floor plan and a front-facing gable roof with wide overhanging eaves and exposed rafter tails. The front, northwest façade has a full-width porch; both the building and porch supports are clad with painted wood shingles. Non-original windows and doors at the front façade are surrounded by molded wood trim, and modern concrete stairs extend up the steep sloping grade of the site to the front porch from Sutter Street. As noted above, the historic library building is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources, but is listed on the City’s Cultural Resource Inventory list. Sutter Street Subarea of the Folsom Historic District. A Historic Assessment and Project Evaluation Report for City of Folsom Streetscape Improvements was prepared in 2008 (Page & Turnbull 2008). The evaluation included the Sutter Street Subarea (called the Sutter Street Historic District in the report) for listing on the California Register. The report found that the Sutter Street Subarea “is significant under Criterion 1 (Events) as the commercial downtown of Folsom which served as the City’s commercial, social, and cultural center between the 1860s and 1950s, and under Criterion 3 (Architecture) as a group of representative buildings that exemplify the vernacular commercial building styles popular in Folsom between the 1860s and 1950s. However, the Sutter Street Historic District does not retain integrity of design, materials, and workmanship, and does not retain sufficient integrity to portray its historic significance. Therefore, the district is not eligible for listing in the California or National Registers. The Sutter Street Subarea is listed in the Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory as the Sutter Street Commercial District. 7.6.4 CEQA REQUIREMENTS According to CEQA, a “project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historic resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment”. Substantial adverse change is defined as: “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historic resource would be materially impaired.” The significance of a historical resource is materially impaired when a project “demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance” and that justify or account for its inclusion in, or eligibility for inclusion in, the California Register. Thus, a project may cause a substantial change in a historic resource but still not have a significant adverse effect on the environment as defined by CEQA as long as the impact of the change on the historic resource is determined to be less-than-significant, negligible, neutral or even beneficial. In completing an analysis of a project under CEQA, it must first be determined if the project site possesses a historical resource. A site may qualify as a historical resource if it falls within at least one of four categories listed in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(a). The four categories are: 1. A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, §4850 et seq.). 2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in §5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of §5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed

Page 258 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 50 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. 3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, §4852). 4. The fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register of historical resources (pursuant to §5020.1(k) of the Pub. Resources Code), or identified in an historical resources survey (meeting the criteria in §5024.1(g) of the Pub. Resources Code) does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in Pub. Resources Code §s 5020.1(j) or 5024.1. In general, a resource that meets any of the four criteria listed in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(a) is considered to be a historical resource unless “the preponderance of evidence demonstrates” that the resource “is not historically or culturally significant.” 12 7.6.5 EVALUATION CRITERIA For the purpose of this analysis, Page & Turnbull, Inc. developed the following list of character-defining features of the Sutter Street Subarea, based on the Folsom Streetscape Improvements Historic Assessment Report (dated March 2008) and a site visit on February 10, 2021. The character-defining features of the Sutter Street Subarea include, but are not limited to: BUILDINGS Massing and Form • Commercial and mixed-use building footprints typically fill the width of the parcel and have tall, narrow massing • Commercial and mixed-use buildings typically with flat, stepped, or Mission style parapets or false fronts in front of flat or gabled roofs • Residential buildings with gabled or hipped roofs Size, Scale, and Proportion • Typically one- or two-story buildings with regular, rectangular floor plans • Frontages of commercial and mixed-use buildings typically between 25 and 50 feet wide 12 The existing property at 603 Sutter Street does not qualify as a historic resource under any of the above categories. The Sutter Street Subarea does qualify as a historic resource, as described under Category 2, because it is listed in a local register of historical resources, the Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory.

Page 259 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 51 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Materials • Buildings clad with traditional materials ‒ such as wood siding, brick, stone, plaster, or stucco - with the highest quality materials and ornamentation facing Sutter Street • One primary cladding material used on facades facing Sutter Street Fenestration • Traditional commercial storefront elements, such as fixed ground-floor display windows, arched or rectangular transom windows, and some recessed entries and bulkheads • Pedestrian-scaled entries • Wood panel front doors with integrated glass • Operable tall, narrow wood sash windows, some with arched or segmentally arched profiles, especially at upper floors Design Features & Architectural Details • Coverings (i.e., awnings, canopies, or balconies) with narrow wood supports or columns; coverings at commercial and mixed-use buildings along Sutter Street typically cover the majority if not all of the sidewalk • Details consistent with architectural style of the individual building, such as wood spindlework, brackets, and molded window trim on Italianate and Queen Anne style buildings; red clay tile roofs and decorative inlaid tiles on Spanish Colonial Revival buildings; pilasters and dentilled cornices on Neoclassical buildings, and wide eaves with exposed rafter tails on Craftsman style buildings Streetscape and Other Features • Commercial and mixed-use development south of Scott Street; residential development north of Scott Street • Commercial and mixed-use building footprints are set with minimal or no setback from the sidewalk, creating a continuous wall frontage along Sutter Street • Single-family residential buildings typically have landscaped set back from the sidewalk • Width of street right of way • Ascending slope of Sutter Street from the southwest to northeast • Approximate 10-foot sidewalk width • Change in grade from the street level to raised sidewalk level • Granite curbs • Granite stair at the northeast corner of Sutter Street and Wool Street • Concrete sidewalks with concrete stamps, used by concrete contractors as a means of advertising and dating their work • Railroad turntable • Railroad tracks and alignments Conclusion Because the project site at 603 Sutter Street is an undeveloped lot and is, therefore, a non-contributing resource within a historic district, the project site itself is not considered a historic resource. Consequently, the analysis focuses on potential impacts to the surrounding individual historic resources and on the Sutter Street Subarea.

Page 260 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 52 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

7.6.6 PROJECT-SPECIFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The proposed project includes the construction of a new mixed-use building at the northeast end of the locally designated Sutter Street Subarea of the Folsom Historic District. The proposed project will occur on an undeveloped lot and, thus, does not include the demolition or physical alteration of any individual historic resources. Therefore, the construction of a new building does not represent a direct project-specific impact to a historic resource. COMPATIBILITY OF PROPOSED PROJECT WITH NEARBY INDIVIDUAL HISTORIC RESOURCES The proposed project is evaluated in terms of its compatibility with the nearby historic resources using Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as a guiding principle, which reads: “New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.” The proposed project differs in scale, massing, materials, and design from those of the Cohn House and historic library building. Unlike the Cohn House and library building, which have generous setbacks and greenspace, the proposed new building has a much larger footprint that fills nearly the entirety of the parcel and is minimally set back from the public right-of-way. The three-story building exhibits wide, horizontal massing and a flat roof in contrast to the tall, narrow massing and gabled roofs of the Cohn House and the smaller, boxy massing of the library building. Subtle setbacks at the northwest end of the north façade and southeast end of the east façade provide some visual relief between the minimal setback and larger massing of the proposed new building and the deeper setbacks and one-story massing of the library building and an adjacent house at 305 Scott Street. Although this massing is inconsistent with the individual massing of the Cohn House and library building, it is consistent with the larger massing, continuous wall faces, and lack of front or side setbacks that are typical of the historic commercial and mixed-use buildings that characterize the majority of the Sutter Street Subarea to the southwest. The design of the proposed new building, thus, reflects the historic character of its immediate setting along the primarily commercial Sutter Street corridor where the street begins to transition to smaller historic residential development at the north end of the Sutter Street Subarea and into the adjacent Figueroa Subarea. Therefore, the difference in massing between the proposed new building, Cohn House, and library building, does not detract from the integrity of the historic setting of the adjacent historic resources. At three stories tall and tucked into the sloping grade of the project site, the proposed building’s height provides a smooth transition from the small, one-story height of the library building to the essentially three-story Cohn House at the top of the hill with its tall, visually dominant turret. The first two stories of the proposed new building roughly align with the ridge height of the adjacent library building; the setback of the third story from Sutter Street and Scott Street and its increased step back immediately adjacent to the library building minimize the appearance of the building’s third story and give the impression of a smaller two-story building from the street level. Due to the sloping grade of the site, the building appears as a two-story building at its east façade, facing the Cohn House, and as a one-story building at its south façade, facing an adjacent, non-historic residence at 306 Scott Street. Thus, the building’s height is compatible with the height of the neighboring historic resources and their immediately surrounding setting.

Page 261 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 53 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project The materials of the proposed new building, while different from those of the Cohn House and library building, are compatible with the mix of materials that are displayed on historic commercial and residential buildings along this section of the Sutter Street Subarea. The Cohn House and library building are both wood framed buildings with wood cladding, wood window and door trim, wood porch supports, wood ornamentation, and shingled roofs. The proposed new building, on the other hand, features brick veneer cladding on the first two floors; horizontal cement fiber siding on the set-back third story; a mix of steel and wood balcony and awning structural systems; and corrugated metal roofing. The use of wood balcony supports at the northwest corner of the building is compatible with the wood cladding and materials of the Cohn House and historic library building. Although it is not made of wood, the use of horizontal cement fiber siding on the recessed third story will be designed to visually appear like wood. Thus, this material will be compatible with the historic materials in the subarea while being clearly differentiated from them. This horizontal cement fiber siding will also cover the entirety of the south façade that faces an adjacent residential property at 306 Scott Street and roughly three-quarters of the east façade facing the Cohn House, softening the transition between the new building and the primarily wood materiality of the adjacent historic resources. Although the brick veneer cladding on the first two stories of the new building is inconsistent with materials of the immediately adjacent historic resources, it reflects similar masonry facades of several historic commercial and mixed-use buildings on blocks of the Sutter Street Subarea to the southwest of the project site. Thus, similar to the discussion on massing, the use of varied materials on the proposed new building is compatible with the mixed commercial and residential character of the immediately surrounding block, and does not detract from the integrity of the neighboring individual historic resources’ setting. Perched on a large, elevated parcel on a hill at the corner of Sutter and Scott streets, overlooking the rest of the Sutter Street Subarea to the southwest, the tall 1890s house at the Cohn House property is a visual landmark that characterizes views at the northeast end of the Sutter Street Subarea as it transitions to the primarily residential Figueroa Subarea to the north and east. The library building, which is diminutive in size and generously set back from the street, generally recedes into the background and does not present a prominent visual focal point of the streetscape. Although the proposed project will obstruct some views of the Cohn House from the far south end of Sutter Street closer to Riley Street, other tall developments at 604/602 and 607 Sutter Street have already affected views of the property as well as the historic library building. Both resources will remain visible from the middle of the block as one travels north along Sutter Street, and when looking from Scott Street to the north and south. The three-story height of the new building and its siting into the sloped grade of the lot, as well as the unimpacted garden at the northwest side of the Cohn House property, allow the Cohn House to maintain its visual dominance at the top of Sutter Street. Although the proposed project is larger in scale than these two specific buildings and differs in its use, massing, materials, and design, these differences reflect the mixed commercial and residential character and variety of historic and non-historic buildings of the immediately surrounding blocks of the Sutter Street Subarea. Based on the above, the proposed project would not affect the ability of the two individual historic resources to convey their historic significance. COMPATIBILITY OF PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE SUTTER STREET SUBAREA OF THE FOLSOM HISTORIC DISTRICT The proposed project would be located within the boundaries of the Sutter Street Subarea of the Folsom Historic District. The proposed project is located at the southeast corner of Sutter Street

Page 262 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 54 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project and Scott Street at the northeast periphery of the subarea. At this peripheral location, the character of the subarea shifts from predominately commercial development along Sutter Street to the southwest to predominately residential development to the north and west. As described in the previous section, the National Register-listed Cohn House is situated to the northeast of the project site across Scott Street, and the locally listed historic library building is located immediately adjacent to the project site at 605 Sutter Street. Recent mixed-use infill buildings have been constructed directly across from the project site at 604/602 Sutter Street and next to the library building at 605 Sutter Street. Thus, the proposed building will be located at the edge of the district, surrounded by a mix of historic and non-historic buildings, and result in the replacement of an undeveloped lot in the subarea with a new infill building. Due to the peripheral location of the proposed project, the effect of minor incompatibility issues on the overall historic character of the district as described in the following paragraphs would be expected to be minimal. The following discussion analyzes the proposed project’s compatibility with the character-defining features of the district, as described above, as well as Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Massing and Form The proposed building at 603 Sutter Street will adhere to some characteristics of form and overall continuity of the surrounding Sutter Street Subarea. Like the majority of historic buildings in the subarea, the proposed new building has a flat roof with a stepped parapet wall; however, its wide horizontal massing contrasts with the tall, narrow massing that is typical of historic buildings in the subarea. Brick pilasters and the use of subtle setbacks at the northwest end of the north façade and southeast end of the east façade break this larger massing into narrower volumes that are more consistent with the narrow massing of subarea’s historic buildings. A curved corner at the intersection of Sutter and Scott streets is a departure from the regular, rectilinear forms of the surrounding historic buildings that subtly differentiates the new building from the old. Size, Scale, and Proportion The proposed project shares some elements of scale and proportion with the Sutter Street Subarea. The building will have approximately 94 feet of frontage on Sutter Street. While this is much wider than the typical 25- or 50-foot frontages of historic buildings in the subarea, the use of a setback at the northwest corner of the north façade along Sutter Street and slight variation in the detailing of the brick veneer cladding breaks the façade into a roughly 30-foot frontage and 64-foot frontage, more in line with the scale of frontages at historic buildings. The building will be composed of three stories. It will be 35 feet tall to the roof surface and 39 feet tall to the rooftop parapet. While most of the historic buildings within the subarea are one or two stories tall, the prevalence of parapet walls and taller floor-to-ceiling heights create the appearance of buildings that are taller than two stories. The height of the proposed building meets the 35-foot maximum allowable zoning height for buildings in the Sutter Street Subarea, as well as the 15-foot maximum height allowance for architectural features above the building height. The visual impact of the height of the new building is minimized by setting back the third story volume and using a different exterior cladding that is of a lighter color and material than the heavy brick masonry veneer of the first two floors. This makes the building appear as a two-story building from Sutter Street, even though it is taller. The size of the building is further mitigated by setting it down into the sloping grade of the site, which allows the building to appear as a two-story building at its east façade, facing Scott Street, and as a one-story building at its south façade, facing an adjacent

Page 263 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 55 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project property at 306 Scott Street. In summary, despite the difference between the wide, horizontal massing and slightly taller height of the proposed building from historic buildings in the subarea, the proposed project will be generally compatible in scale and proportion to the overall character of the surrounding historic district and one- to two-story heights of historic buildings in the subarea. Materials The proposed building will be clad in a mix of brick veneer and horizontal cement fiber siding. Brick veneer will cover the first and second floors of the north façade and north portions of the east and west facades, while horizontal cement fiber siding that is made to look like wood will be used on the third floor, south façade, and south portions of the east and west facades. Windows will have aluminum sashes painted to match painted wood trim. An awning across the north façade will be supported by a painted steel structure and corrugated metal covering, while a balcony at the west end of the north façade will be supported by a wood structure. The balcony and third-story deck will have iron railings. Though historic buildings in the Sutter Street Subarea typically display one primary cladding material facing the street, the use of brick veneer and horizontal cement fiber cladding that imitates the appearance of wood reflects the use of brick or wood siding on the majority of commercial and mixed-use buildings in the subarea. Historic residential buildings directly to the north and west of the project site are predominately clad with wood siding, and the use of horizontal cement fiber siding that looks like wood on secondary and rear facades presents a compatible but differentiated solution that softens the transition from the masonry construction of buildings along Sutter Street to the adjacent residential buildings and neighborhood. Although the fenestration, awnings, railings, and balconies display a mixture of contemporary and traditional historic materials, because the overall form, scale, function, placement, and configuration of these features is generally in keeping with those of historic buildings in the subarea, they reflect a compatible but differentiated interpretation of these characteristic features. The texture of materials in the Sutter Street Subarea is generally rough and varied, consisting of raw and painted brick, wood, granite, and decorative wood embellishments that introduce additional texture to wall surfaces and architectural features. These surfaces are periodically broken up by smooth panes of glass windows. The brick veneer cladding of the proposed new building maintains the rough texture of the Sutter Street Subarea. While the unpainted brick veneer cladding reflects this roughness, the painted steel structural elements, iron balcony railings, and aluminum windows have a smoother texture than their historic counterparts. Overall, however, these smoother textures are limited to a small proportion of the exterior of the building and do not detract from the rich and varied texture that characterizes the Sutter Street Subarea. Rather, this smoothness of these features provides a subtle differentiation between the new building and surrounding historic buildings. Fenestration The fenestration of the proposed project is generally compatible with the fenestration of historic buildings in the Sutter Street Subarea, though there are some differences. Historic commercial and mixed-use buildings along Sutter Street typically have ground-floor storefronts with fixed wood or steel frame display windows, glazed wood doors, and transom windows; some have bulkheads or recessed entries. Fenestration on the upper floors of these buildings, as well as all floors of historic residential buildings in the subarea, primarily consist of regularly spaced tall, narrow windows with operable wood sashes and molded wood trim.

Page 264 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 56 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project Fenestration of the proposed project differs somewhat in material from the fenestration of historic buildings in the Sutter Street Subarea but is generally compatible in overall form, pattern, and scale. The new building will have a system of aluminum windows with painted wood trim. Windows on the first floor of the new building’s north façade will be aluminum, but they include many traditional storefront features – such as glazed doors, fixed display windows with bulkheads, and transom windows – thus reflecting a contemporary interpretation of historic commercial storefronts in the subarea. Upper-story windows will also be aluminum and will have operable single-hung sashes that are tall and narrow in form, consistent with the operability, form, and scale of windows in the subarea. As such, although the sash material and detailing of fenestration at the proposed project differ from those of historic buildings, in general, they are compatible with the fenestration that characterizes the Sutter Street Subarea. Design Features & Architectural Detail The proposed building offers a contemporary interpretation of the design of historic commercial and mixed-use buildings that were constructed along Sutter Street during the mid- to late nineteenth century. The brick veneer cladding is ornamented with a dentilled brick cornice that references similar brick cornices on historic buildings in the subarea and other Gold Rush-period towns. The building also has a simple, stepped parapet, similar to the false fronted buildings with street-facing parapet walls that line Sutter Street. Covered awnings that extend over the sidewalk, some of which also act as second-story balconies, are characteristic of the Sutter Street Subarea. The proposed new building features an awning, balcony, and rooftop deck that are similar in function, scale, and design to those of historic buildings, though, as previously discussed, they differ in materials. The curved corner at the intersection of Scott and Sutter streets, meanwhile, introduces a more modern element to the building’s design; however, because it is only visible from secondary vantage points, it does not detract from the overall appearance and continuity of Sutter Street’s streetscape. The new building has an otherwise minimal design that is reflective of its time. The combination of modern interpretations of historic design features adds visual detail and richness to the design of the proposed new building that enhance its compatibility with the surrounding historic subarea. Streetscape and Other Features The proposed building’s design is consistent with the historic streetscape elements of the Sutter Street Subarea. The proposed building’s footprint is set back a few feet from the sidewalk along Sutter Street to accommodate a lightwell and entries at the north façade, and has no setback from the property line along Scott Street. This is consistent with the typical minimal or zero lot line setbacks of historic commercial and mixed-use buildings from the sidewalk within the Sutter Street Subarea. Characteristic street and sidewalk widths of the district will be retained. Although the project proposes to excavate a portion of the site to construct the building on a level grade, this will be limited to the project site and will not impact the characteristic ascending slope of Sutter Street. 7.6.7 CONCLUSIONS REGARDING SUTTER STREET SUBAREA COMPATIBILITY In summary, the proposed new building at 603 Sutter Street is compatible with the character-defining features of the Sutter Street Subarea, including its flat roof and minimal setback from the sidewalk; ground-floor storefront and tall, narrow upper-story windows; use of brick exterior cladding; and incorporation of characteristic architectural features such as a covered awning, stepped parapet wall, and decorated brick cornice. The building’s broad horizontal massing and large scale have been addressed through the use of side and rooftop setbacks and the articulation of the facades into more compatible volumes. Some aspects of the proposed project are not strictly compatible

Page 265 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 57 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project with the characteristics of the historic district, including the rounded corner design at Sutter and Scott streets and the use of contemporary materials and features, such as horizontal cement fiber siding, divided-lite aluminum windows and French doors, corrugated metal roofing, and steel structural supports. These differences generally represent modern interpretations of historic programmatic needs and construction technology that characterize the subarea. Overall, these differences serve to distinguish the building from the historic fabric, per Standard 9 of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Overall, while a few aspects of compatibility could be improved, these considerations do not appear to represent a significant impact to the surrounding historic district such that the subarea would no longer be able to convey its historic significance. Additionally, the minor elements of incompatibility of the proposed project are tempered by the location of the proposed project, at the subarea’s northeast periphery. Thus, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource and this potential exception does not apply to the project.

Page 266 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 58 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project

8. LITERATURE CITED Arborwell, 2017. Tree Inventory Letter Report, 512 and 603 Sutter Street, Folsom, California. March 21, 2017. Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc., 2021. Noise and Vibration Assessment for 603 Sutter Street Development, Folsom, California. April 9, 2021. California, State of. 2021. Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFIRE), Fire and Resource Assessment Program, 2021. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Area Map. California, State of. 2023. Department of Toxic Substances Control. DTSC Envirostor database search. Accessed by Mary Wilson of Planning Partners on July 13, 2023 at https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=603+sutter+street%2C+folsom%2C+ca California, State of. Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2023. List of Eligible and Officially Designated State Scenic Highways. Accessed on July 13, 2023, at < https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways>. California, State of. 2023a. California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed by Mary Wilson of Planning Partners on July 13, 2023 at https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ _____, 2023b. CalEPA Sites Identified with Waste Constituents above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. Accessed by Mary Wilson on July 13, 2023 at https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf _____, 2023c. CalEPA Hazardous Waste Facilities Subject to Corrective Action Pursuant to §25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code. Accessed by Mary Wilson on July 13, 2023 at https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/ California, State of. Office of Historic Preservation, 2020. Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), Sacramento County, updated March 2020. California Tree and Landscape Consulting, Inc. 2022. Preliminary Arborist Report and Tree Inventory. July 14, 2022. Census Reporter, 2023. Map of Sacramento, CA Urbanized Area. Accessed on July 12, 2023 at https://censusreporter.org/profiles/40000US77068-sacramento-ca-urbanized-area/ ECORP Consulting, Inc., 2019. Arborist Survey Report, Z Global – 603 Sutter Street, Folsom, CA. March 12, 2019. Environmental Planning Partners, Inc., 2021. Field Reconnaissance March 7, 2023. Folsom, City of, 2022. City of Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory, as amended July 20, 2022.

Page 267 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 59 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project _____, 2020. Community Development Department Standard Construction Specifications and Details. February 2020. _____, 2020a. City of Folsom Emergency Operations Plan, Evacuation Plan. September 8, 2020a. _____, 2019. Folsom Municipal Code, Title 12 Streets and Sidewalks, Chapter 12.16, Tree Preservation. Accessed on July 23, 2019 at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Folsom/#!/Folsom12/Folsom1216.html#12.16 _____, 2018. City of Folsom 2035 General Plan. Prepared by Mintier-Harnish, Sacramento, California. Adopted August 28, 2018. _____, 2017. City of Folsom Standard Construction Specifications. Originally adopted in May 2004, Updated in January 2017. _____, 2014. General Plan Update Background Report Public Review Draft, Chapter 6 Open Space and Natural Resources. Unpublished. April 2014. _____, 2013. City of Folsom Community Wildfire Protection Plan. April 2013. _____, 1998. Historic District Design and Development Guidelines. Kimley Horn and Associates, 2023. Traffic Impact Study, Trip Generation Comparison, Historic Sutter Mixed-Use Building, 603 Sutter Street, Folsom, California. August 8, 2023. _____, 2019. Traffic Impact Study, Historic Sutter Mixed-Use Building, 603 Sutter Street, Folsom, California. July 30, 2019. LSA Associates, Inc., 2017. Cultural Resources Study, 510 Sutter Street and 605 Sutter Street Properties, City of Folsom, Sacramento County, California. March 2017. Page & Turnbull, Inc., 2021. 603 Sutter Street Proposed Project Analysis Memorandum. Folsom, CA. Prepared for Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. March 24, 2021. _____, 2008. Historic Assessment and Project Evaluation for City of Folsom Streetscape Improvements. March 2008. Sacramento, County of, 2016. Sacramento Countywide Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, Annex C, Folsom Community Element. December 2016. SMAQMD, 2009. CEQA Guidance and Tools. December 2009, most recently revised April 2021. Accessed on July 18, 2023 at < http://www.airquality.org/businesses/ceqa-land-use-planning/ceqa-guidance-tools> Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership, 2019. Accessed on July 16, 2019 at http://www.beriverfriendly.net/.

Page 268 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Notice of Exemption 60 City of Folsom August 2023 Historic Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building Project State Water Resources Control Board, 2023. Geotracker database search. Accessed by Mary Wilson of Planning Partners on July 13, 2023 at https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=603+sutter+street%2C+folsom United States, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2021. National FloodHazard Layer FIRMete – 603 Sutter Street. Accessed on February 26, 2021 at: https://msc.fema.gov/arcgis/rest/directories/arcgisjobs/nfhl_print/mscprintb_gpserver/j3d3d6bb5afcc47e398de1ff96e19d0dd/scratch/FIRMETTE_9c534820-b4da-4ef0-a31e-f561bba3908e.pdf United States, Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration (FTA), 2018. Federal Transit Administration Publication. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018. Williams + Paddon, Inc., 2023. Project Plans prepared for Cedrus Holdings, LLP. 2023 Youngdahl Consulting Group, Inc., 2022. Geotechnical Engineering Study Update. Project No. E17056.001. July 21, 2022. _____, 2017. Geotechnical Engineering Study for Sutter Street (603). Project No. E17056.000. March 16, 2017.

Page 269 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 19

Special Studies Found on City Website at:
(https://www.folsom.ca.us/government/community-development/planning- services/current-project-information)
• Traffic Impact Study, dated July 30, 2019
• Trip Generation Memorandum, dated August 8, 2023
• Project Analysis Memorandum, dated March 24, 2021
• Project Analysis Memorandum, dated August 25, 2023
• Cultural Resources Study, dated March 2017
• Noise and Vibration Assessment, dated April 16, 2021
• Arborist Inventory, dated March 21, 2017
• Arborist Survey, dated March 12, 2019
• Arborist Report, dated July 14, 2022
• Geotechnical Study, dated March 2017
• Geotechnical Study Update, dated July 21, 2022

Page 270 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Historic District Commission
603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145)
September 6, 2023

Attachment 20

Public Comments Regarding
Current Proposed Project

Page 271 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Vee Sanchez <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2023 8:37 PM
To: Steven Banks
Subject: Support for 603 Sutter Street Mixed Use Project CAUTION: 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.

Hi Mr. Banks,

I am emailing you to express my support for more affordable housing ‐ and support for the 603 Sutter Street Mixed Use Project.

The project would provide much needed affordable housing in the area. I understand that there may be some opposition against the build.

However, without prioritizing
affordable housing, homelessness is bound to increase. Inclusive and well integrated communities are more prosperous and are safer for all.

Thank you for your consideration,
‐‐
Vee Sanchez
Affordable Housing Policy Manager
Empower Missouri
C:417‐824‐6679
[email protected]
To help protect you r priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

https://empowermissouri.org/woa2023/

You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important

Page 272 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2023 8:31 AM
To: Desmond Parrington; Pam Johns
Cc: Steven Banks; Sari Dierking; [email protected]
Subject: Re: 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting
CAUTION: 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.

Pam and Desmond:

Mr. Banks' email below states that "the applicant is not proposing to provide any parking (on‐site or off‐site) to serve the proposed project per new State Legislation (Assembly Bill 2097) which states the cities in California can no longer impose minimum parking requirements on new developments within a half‐mile of
major public transit stop." Mr. Banks then states that the project is no longer required to obtain a parking variance. This position fails to recognize the continued applicability of the City's handicapped parking standards.

When I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to discuss
a few planning matters with Desmond, I mentioned
that I was concerned CDD was overlooking the need for the 603 Sutter Street project to provide accessible parking or to obtain a variance from the City's handicapped parking requirements. That aspect of this project remains unaddressed, yet your department is advertising that the project is ready for an approval decision. I am respectfully requesting that you retract the public notice for a Sept 6 hearing and postpone any further processing of this application until the applicant submits all required application materials, including an application and applicant's rationale for a handicapped parking variance.

AB 2097 added Section 65863.2 to the Government Code which does preclude the City's imposition of minimum parking standards in certain circumstances. However, the law expressly does not dismiss or disallow the City from requiring compliance with parking standards for the provision of parking spaces accessible to persons with disabilities. Gov. Code Section 65863.2(f) states, "This section shall not reduce, eliminate, or preclude the enforcement of any requirement imposed on a new multifamily residential or nonresidential development that is located within one‐half mile of public transit to provide electric vehicle supply equipment installed parking spaces or parking spaces that are accessible to persons with disabilities that would have otherwise applied to the development if this section did not apply."

Based on the proposed first floor retail (2,716 sf) and second floor office (5,246 sf), without AB 2097 the project would otherwise be required to provide at least 22 parking spaces or apply for and obtain a variance
from the City's minimum parking standard of 1 space per 350 sq ft of office/retail in the Historic District. FMC Section 17.57.050(B) specifies the number of parking spaces that "shall be provided for the handicapped" and requires that one (1) handicapped parking space is required when the total number of standard parking spaces otherwise required is between 0 and 40.

The project is therefore required to either provide a minimum of 1 parking space that meets the handicapped parking space design requirements of FMC 17.57.050 (e.g., located so as to provide for safety and optimum

Page 273 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
2 proximity for direct access to the primary entrance of the building, at least 14 feet wide, etc.) or the project applicant needs to apply for and obtain approval of a variance from the City's handicapped parking standard. Per FMC 17.62, to be considered for a variance, an applicant must submit an application with evidence showing 1) exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, 2) that the variance is needed for the preservation of property rights, and 3) that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare.

It may be that this applicant could make a strong argument for why the project should be eligible for a
handicapped parking variance, and the FMC provides a mechanism for the applicant to request the variance and explain his rationale. City decision makers can then decide whether or not that variance should be granted and along with that can consider whether the project needs to be conditioned in any way to help address the deficiency in accessible parking.

Thank you,
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]
From: Steven Banks <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 2:19 PM
Subject: 603 Sutter Street Mixed‐Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting

Good afternoon,

The purpose of this message is to inform you that the proposed 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use project (PN 17- 145) has been scheduled to be heard by the Historic District Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting on September 6, 2023. Attached is a copy of the Public Notice for the proposed project with additional details regarding the Historic District Commission meeting. As you may be aware, the applicant revised their Development Application in February of this year, the updated application, relevant development plans, environmental document, and special studies can be found on the City’s website located at: https://www.folsom.ca.us/government/community-development/planning-services/current-project- information There are three notable changes to the Development Application that I wanted to make sure that you were aware of. The first change or modification is that the applicant is not proposing to provide any parking (on-site or off-site) to serve the proposed project per new State Legislation (Assembly Bill 2097) which states the cities in California can no longer impose minimum parking requirements on new developments within a half-mile of major public transit stop. The second change is that the applicant is reducing the number of proposed residential rental units from three to two. The two proposed residential rental units will still be located on the third floor of the mixed-use building. Lastly, the applicant has modified the Development Application and is now only seeking Design Review approval from the Historic District Commission for development of the proposed project as a Height Variance, Parking Variance, and Conditional Use Permit are no longer required based on the modifications to the proposed project and recent changes in State law.

If you have any comments or questions regarding the proposed project, City staff welcomes you to reach out to us via email ([email protected]) or phone (916-461-6207). City staff also encourages you to attend the Historic District Commission meeting on September 6, 2023.

Best regards,

Page 274 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
3 Steve

Steven Banks
Principal Planner
City of Folsom
(916) 461-6207
[email protected]

Page 275 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 11:55 AM
To: Desmond Parrington; Pam Johns
Cc: Steven Banks; [email protected]; Sari Dierking
Subject: 603 Sutter Street - Vibration Impacts to Adjacent Properties CAUTION: 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.

Desmond:

I am concerned about construction vibration impacts on the historic library building and its unique coble‐ surfaced retaining wall fronting Sutter Street. Planning Partners' discussion of potential vibration impacts is obviously mistaken in stating, "[t]he vibration levels depicted in Table 6 are representative of measurements at a distance of
25 feet from the equipment source, which represents the approximate distances to the nearest existing structure to the project site."

In reviewing project drawings, I do not see the specific distance identified between the proposed excavation and the adjacent historic library building and its unique coble‐surfaced retaining wall. However, it is obvious
that the distance between the project excavation areas and the historic library building is much less than 25 feet and more on the order of 5 feet or less.

I request that before you take this project to the HDC, you address the obvious deficiencies in the vibration impact analysis (and other deficiencies in PP's evaluation document; e.g., see PP's Figure 2 which labels a sewer pump station as the light rail station) and, in doing so, I request that you also recognize that the project's unique circumstances and potential to result in significant impacts preclude the use of a CEQA exemption.

Thank you,
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]

Page 276 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 12:53 PM
To: Pam Johns; Desmond Parrington
Cc: Sari Dierking; [email protected]; Steven Banks
Subject: 603 Sutter Street - Maximum Height
CAUTION: 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.

Pam and Desmond:

Planning Partners' Supplemental Analysis for 603 Sutter Street states, "[a]s proposed, the building height would be a maximum of 35 feet, 0 inches from the ground (building pad) to the roof surface, the maximum allowed by FMC §17.52.510.C within the Sutter Street subarea of the Historic District."

Figure 5 of the PP document includes a drawing illustrating the North Elevation along Sutter Street, and provides a red dashed line demonstrating what is labeled as the "Max. Allowable Height Plane" angling upward from west to east following the Sutter Street slope. The drawing also labels and illustrates the "roof surface" with a blacked dashed line. Centrally in the drawing, the lines cross each other obviously demonstrating that the proposed roof surface extends above the maximum allowable height. Perhaps this is just a few inches of this one portion of the building, but it is entirely unclear how your consultant concluded that the building is a max of 35.0 feet, when at the same time information is presented that clearly shows the building's roof would exceed this height. (Note that I am not referring to the parapet wall which is clearly several feet above the allowable height and also should be factored into the max allowable height assessment.)

A determination that the building doesn't exceed the maximum allowable height is clearly contradicted by evidence in the drawings that show the proposed building height does exceed the maximum allowable height. Therefore, the project as proposed requires a height variance or the project needs to be redesigned
to lower it to be below the max allowable height. This project is not sufficiently evaluated and applications for the variances this project requires (height, as well as disabled parking per separate communication) have not been submitted. This project is simply not ready for a hearing.

(Pam: You might recall a few years ago in acknowledging the missteps at 908 Bidwell and the side‐yard setback variance situation there, you advised that had the new structure been moved even an inch closer to the side property line, that would have triggered the need to revisit the variance approval. Your commitment to precise measurement is appreciated and needs to be applied here as well.)

Thanks,
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]

Page 277 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2023 10:44 AM
To: Pam Johns; Desmond Parrington; Steven Banks
Cc: Sari Dierking; [email protected]
Subject: 603 Sutter Street - Architectural Review Documents CAUTION: 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.

Pam, Desmond, and Steve: The following documents related to architectural design and impact evaluation are referenced in, but not included with, the materials posted on the Pending Development Applications webpage for the 603 Sutter Street project. Can you please provide the documents ASAP so I can consider in my review?

1. City of Folsom Cultural Resources Inventory, as amended July 20, 2022. I was not aware of an amendment to the cultural resources inventory, but this is discussed, cited, and listed in the references of the "Categorical Exemption Supplemental Analysis" (Planning Partners, Aug 2023). I would like not just the list per the 2022 amendment, but also any documentation/analysis that went along with any such July 2022 amendment, including documents/records associated with any HDC and/or public review and input opportunities for that amendment.

2. Third‐party Independent Historic Architect Specialist Review. The "Categorical Exemption Supplemental Analysis" (Planning Partners, Aug 2023) references
a March 2021 Page & Turnbull project analysis that was
prepared for a building design different than the currently proposed building. The 2021 P&T report (evaluating a now‐superseded building design) is included in the materials posted on the PDA webpage and I do not see any other more recent review or any review of the currently proposed building design. However, the applicant's narrative of Feb 2023 states, "the applicant voluntarily agreed to fund a third‐party review by an independent historic architect specialist. We understand that the independent review of the proposed design was positive." Can you please either provide documentation of that third‐party review or advise if the third‐ party review being referenced is actually the 2021 P&T evaluation of the now‐superseded building design?

3. Non‐privileged Portions of the Records Search, including the actual request submitted requesting the records search. Page 46 of the Planning Partners
Aug 2023 report states, "Non‐privileged portions of the records search are available for review by request through the City of Folsom Community Development Department, 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630. Requests should be directed to the attention of Steven Banks, Principal Planner." Please consider this to be my request for those documents.

Thank you,
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]

Page 278 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

To: Deputy City Clerk/Records/direction to elected council and city lawyers; cc: copied to Investigative agencies, local residents
From: Laurette Laurent
August 24 2023

Re: Apparent false publication data; false or no Filings with County; False claim of Infill CEQA application

Context: Public Notice WRONGLY states EITHER the resident APPEARS and tries to speak objections in minutes OR they must DELIVER Objections at meeting. WRONG!!! Apparently many Other FALSE claims are in PUBLIC NOTICE 8 24 2023 in Telegraph, and Actual apparent Pattern of recurring Failures in Legal Compliance. [It is PN-17-145 back to haunt Abutting Residential Zone District citizens with NO city Lawyers- Certification in Re: Misstatements of Governing Laws] Years of this is abusive, wrongful PATTERN of behaviors, attributable ultimately to Elected Officials Failures.

Clearly THIS does NOT meet CEQA and California Government CODE Laws because this is really a REZONING to a NON-Existent ZONE DISTRICT. Thus it's de-facto REZONING by means of having TWO Distinct “plan commissions” & NO Licensed Engineer to APPROVE and PREVENT such misdeeds. Folsom thinks it can have TWO plan commissions not the legal One per entity. Folsom thinks Advisory groups can MAKE REZONING DECISIONS without Legal Due Processes being applied.

Proof of this is clear in California Government Code Laws which I have repeatedly supplied directly to city lawyers [always silent on violations], and city council elected persons who routinely DENY APPEALS to such highly questionable & likely wrongful Patterns of Wrongful Violations.

Any law-abiding Licensed Attorney at Law can verify doing a quiet “de Facto” rezoning in this manner is NOT permitted in this state/country. There is NO DEFINITION of any

Page 279 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
“mixed use Zone District” in city Laws. There is NO ADMISSION Law absolutely Prohibits having TWO “plan commissions” which creates TWO distinct cities and an improper group of private appointed citizens actually Changing Land Uses AT WILL, with some city council Refusal to enforce laws by following proper Signed & Sealed Reports of Licensed Expert and Independent City Engineer in charge.

Transit-Oriented Development Overlay = NOTE OVERLAY IS NOT ZONE DISTRICT East Bidwell Mixed Use Overlay = NOTE OVERLAY IS NOT ZONE DISRICT Historic District Boundary BLUE LINE

ISSUE: Light BLUE COLOR labeled as “”HF” Historic Folsom MIXED USE Zone District. However, consult the included Folsom Chapter 17 in this report.

There is NO Legal Zone District called “Mixed Use” which includes, like real Zone District Definitions all the Standards, Regulations, Infrastructure, Road widths, Safety & CA FIRE CODE laws into its actual Legal Definition as a State of California Legally Sufficient under Government Code 65000 laws, to be such a complete Legal Definition of All Components of a ZONE DISTRICT DEFINITION.

Below is ENTIRE FMC Statement of ZONE DISTRICTS in city of Folsom.

There is no such thing as a “mixed use Zone District.” No city Engineers could Possibly ADAPT the Infrastructure and Public Services to such Arbitrary diffuse improper “laws” and the Demands they create on Infrastructure and SERVICE Provision in a single city.

Folsom OFFICIAL & Legally BINDING DEFINITION of ZONE DISTRICTS within city Limits must be fully defined in Folsom Municipal Code which is the Controlling Zoning LAW:

NOTE: Legally Folsom law is improperly labeling Legal ZONE DISTRICTs “classes of general districts.” State and Federal law DO NOT allow for distinguishing a “difference” between a “class” of Zone District and actual Legal Definition of Each ZONE DISTRICT,

Page 280 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
with statements of all Standards which apply in Each Defined & Named ZONE DISTRICT.

Overlays, such as those included magically, WITHOUT PUBLIC VOTING, are NOT ZONE DISTRICTS at all. Overlays and “Mixed Use” “districts” are NOT LEGALLY DEFINED by city of Folsom employees, such as city lawyers CERTIFYING with their Licenses, that NEW ZONE DISTRICT Definition have been, were, or Will be created and Approved in Open Sessions, and possibly subject to Public Vote.

Creating Willy-nilly, new commissions without any Right to be a SECOND, ONLY Part of city Land Use Laws IS NOT Granted to cities or counties by CA Govt Code Enabling Legislation. It is ONE plan commission for each ONE CITY.

Any unlicensed Trained Expert employed by city, or in elected office, who Claims a Right to a “second commission creation” with Legal powers to treat One, very old part a city Differently in ZONE DISTRICT Definitions & Administration is NOT obeying CA Govt Code Prohibitions on More Than one single Set of City Zone Laws, and One single Plan Commission.

In this country, cities cannot have Multiple “plan Commissions” to administer different parts of city --- which creates Multiple cities with NO applicable Standards in the “second, third” of subsequent improper divisions of that one city.

Such a Right is DENIED to any city or other entity in this state, or this country.

Furthermore, where in CA Government Code does State grant to cities the Right to Make NEW Zone Districts and New Commissions to 'grant Exceptions to Law' without PUBLIC HEARINGS and Preferably VOTE of Residents to approve such huge Land Use Alterations.

Note there is NO 21st century Hard Proof of Public Notices being given, and multiple bogus “extra plan commissions created.” City law clearly states the 20th century Laws are STILL the Prevailing law ---- no matter how many “overlays” are used by these bogus additional “commissioners” and others, to Treat this like TWO distinct cities with 2 distinct sets of Standards, Regulations, ENFORCEMENT bodies.

Note in FMC: Very Old, Prior Century City Laws/Ordinances are CITED as the Legal Authority granted to Folsom by State Laws. However, this bogus set of OVERLAYs are NOT created and not allowed by CA Government Code --- hence the city's actions DO NOT OBEY State Laws – which are the Final Authority.

While “architectural” groups are allowed, NOTHING they decide can be LEGALLY Valid because if they were --- then Folsom is claiming it is Legal to have TWO plan commissions with TWO separate sets of laws --- which is against higher laws.

OVERLAYS are NOT ZONE DISTRICT LAW Definitions at all. Advisory-Only people, including those with Conflicts of Interests, cannot legally make Zone Law Alterations in this country. Each Zone District requires Conformity with Higher Levels of Law Enforcement. Our US Constitution gives us these Rights to be Equal Americans under Laws.

Had not a prior elected man put Entire city Laws and Charter ONLINE ONLY, this nonsense of changing laws without Open Public Notice & Hearings, could never have happened. This current council Must be held RESPONSIBLE for ignoring the Failure of Folsom CA to have any longer a Title/Duties/Responsibilities and longterm Contract of an Independent Licensed Civil Engineer in Charge.

Page 281 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Chapter 17.10

DESIGNATION OF DISTRICTS
Sections:

17.10.010 Established.

17.10.020 Special districts established.

17.10.010 Established.

The several classes of general districts established and into which the city is divided are designated as follows:

A. R-1-L, R-1-ML, R-1-M, single-family residence districts; B. R-2, two-family residence district;
C. R-3, neighborhood apartment district;
D. R-4, general apartment district;
E. C-1, neighborhood business district;
F. C-2, central business district;
G. C-3, general commercial district;
H. CH, highway service commercial district;
I. CM, commercial-manufacturing district;
J. M-1, light industrial district;
K. M-2, general industrial district;
L. M-L, limited industrial district;
M. MF, industrial frontage district;
N. PD, planned development district;
O. R-M, residential, multifamily dwelling district;
P. BP, business and professional office district. (Ord. 378 (part), 1979: prior code § 3102.01)

17.10.020 Special districts established.

In addition to the foregoing classes of districts, certain combining districts are established and are designated as follows:

A. A, special agricultural district;
B. B, special building site district;
C. F, special highway frontage district;
D. P, special parking district;

Page 282 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

E. H, special height limit district;
F. CD, special civic district. (Ord. 378 (part), 1979: Ord. 239 § 1, 1969; prior code § 3102.02)

The Folsom Municipal Code is current through Ordinance 1336, passed January 10, 2023.

Disclaimer: The City Clerk’s office has the official version of the Folsom Municipal Code. Users should contact the City Clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above.

City Website: https://www.folsom.ca.us
City Telephone: (916) 355-7270
Code Publishing Company

COMMENTS: PLEASE NOTE, Combining Districts are NOT ONLY NOT DEFINED, but city Laws DO NOT PROVIDE Actual enforceable STANDARDS for Public Infrastructure in these “combining districts.”

In Plain Words, “combining district” has NO DEFINITIONS for What they are and WHAT STANDARDS, Bulk Regulations, and Restrictions APPLY.

Clearly this is “ZONING” without Obeying CA State Govt Code 65000 et seq.

https://www.nevadacityca.gov/files/documents/NevadaCityHistoricNeighborhoods DistrictInitiative1338040331070722PM.pdf

Example of Historic Neighborhood District with REGULATIONS Requiring VOTE of LOCAL RESIDENTS to APPROVE ANY “changes” to nature of any buildings --- not specified in HND LAW whether Future Buildings are ALSO SUBJECT TO VOTE OF HND or City-Wide RESIDENTS for approval of NEW CONSTRUCTION of any TYPE.

There is considerable evidence from city's own Charter and FMC in their “online-only” state, that both are NOT in compliance with either State, Federal laws, or the Constitutions of both these higher levels of government. If you live adjacent to a Residential Zone, and NO such legal entity as a “Mixed Use Zone District” even EXISTS [nor does “combining district” have any Legal basis]
it would appear you have every Right to seek Formal Investigations and file Formal Complaints with an agency which has Authority under law to enforce Patterns of organized Violations of laws by multiple persons.

How can your Parcel and home maintain any True Value if the city claims to have the RIGHT to Densify, Deversify, Alter, ADD dis-allowed Zone District Uses --- which impact the value of YOUR property. But, Worst of all your raw sewage lines are impacted. Your roadways are mis-used and over-crowded by Other Zone District Uses such as Commercial, Live-Entertainment Commercial, Outdoor consumption of Restricted food or beverage on Public Property AND your property.

Your parcels have been used as public toilets, illegal commercial Use parking.

Page 283 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

This city has seen fit to make you In EFFECT a second city where YOUR Property Rights and Your Zone District Definition and Legal Uses are mixed & confused with all sorts of Land Uses NOT legally permitted in your Residential Zone District.

You also have seen repeatedly the city illegally using a second [not allowed] “plan commission” group to actually ALTER Zone District LAND USES which is clearly NOT consistent with California State Government Code.

For your information, Formal Reports have been filed that using this illegal “second Land Use Exception- granting body” nonsense, has led to huge, really huge amounts of Real Estate Tax Revenue to the Entire Sacramento County.

It adds to home owner & other Residential Zone RE Tax Assessments Rising, so that city can make City Owned Parcels the “off street parking” by a simple declaration of this “h.d. Commission” which is NOT under CA Law allowed to ENACT Land Use Exceptions, NOT permitted as a Second plan commission in this state/country.

It is time to consider: in such fast-changing political conditions, is it acceptable for a city to continue to operate in this decades long fashion? How much harm and expense have you suffered on your own Parcel? How many Public Infrastructure projects have NEVER happened nor been paid for by New Development owners/builders – who are apparent kings of city?

Why is every roadway, raw sewage pipe full of 3 prisons plus most city raw sewage, suddenly caused you money, time, inconvenience, concern --- and finally city admits a sudden Giant shortfall of $600,000 and looming larger shortfalls and new taxes to cover ignored & willfully occurred actions which harm residents?

FAULTS in Telegraph Public Notice include following:

THIS is NOT a CEQA “infill project” because there is NO ZONE DISTRICT DEFINITION for this type of Land Use in Commercial Zone contained in preserved PRINT VERSIONS of City Laws and Zoning maps.

PROOF: Entire city Zone District DEFINITIONS law is cited --- and there is NO “Mixed Use Zone District Defined”. It would be insane to think that without APPROVED City Engineer Plans, this rock pile abutting Residential Zone Districts would be suitable for Land Use WITHOUT all the City Services, Infrastructure, Roadways, being Protected, enlarged as needed for a Legal Zone District Commercial Zone Application. Plainly put, this is a 2nd “plan commission” pretending to have the Rights and Power to REZONE this Parcel into a NON-EXISTENT Multi-uses & incompatible Zone Districts as defined by city, and Regulated by State Law.

Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15300.2 (“ange without regulatory effect amending Note filed 10-6-2005 pursuant to section 100, title 1, California Code of Regulations (Register 2005, No. 40).”) https://casetext.com/regulation/california-code-of-regulations/title-14-natural- resources/division-6-resources-agency/chapter-3-guidelines-for-implementation-of-the- california-environmental-quality-act/article-19-categorical-exemptions/section-153002- exceptions
Clearly, Folsom's lawyers FORGOT to check the LAW BOOKS before having planners proceed with a Clear EXCEPTION to use of So-called “infill” rule. A,B, C all apply.

There is tremendous evidence and Signed Reports proving Infrastructure is so poor in this area that Waterworks Engineers stated to Folsom: NO densification of Uses, NO

Page 284 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Uses of Conditional Use Permits/exceptions to densify or alter Zoning until AFTER the Raw Sewage system in this American River Impacting Sewageshed is Made sufficiently in Hydraulic Capacity to AVOID making [again] the Federal Waters and Watershed forests, an Open Folsom & Prisons raw sewage conveyance. Link to study supplied to planners, council & city lawyers, dozens of times.

MAJOR LEGAL ISSUE: Lookup by APN SHOWN results in NO RESULTS, BUT using ADDRESS 603, the city SIZE OF PARCEL APN # is TOTALLY WRONG.

PARCEL INFORMATION: Check NOTICE APN = 070 0111 010

DOES NOT EXIST

Is this a case of city employees making up what SHOULD have been FILED with Sacramento County Recorder & Tax Assessor by our Missing Folsom City Engineer in Charge??? Who makes such critical errors and places Legal Notice with False information???

One might stop here, but the Implications of false filings by non-licensed employees, goes far further in terms of LOST TAX REVENUE because of FALSE FILINGS. Look at TAX Information for this ADDRESS, but NOT Parcel APN.

Net Assessed Value $135,450
https://www.google.com/maps/place/603+Sutter+St,+Folsom,+CA+95630/@38.6782716,- 121.175545,121m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x809ae6ab15a19b87:0xb78f15c27d259a35!8m2!3d38 .6782676!4d-121.1751775!16s%2Fg%2F11c4gm_w_0?entry=ttu
Check Google Map --- this is an urban forest lot !!! It abuts according to Sacramento Cty Single family homes, including one which is a true Historic Treasure.

NOTE Sacramento County alleged ZONE DISTRICT ----

Page 285 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

HD Zone District --- which is NOT a ZONE DISTRICT at all, but a mere OVERLAY with NO binding Legal Authority to ever call “h.d.” a ZONE DISTRICT under Law.

ISSUE:

Unless this OWNER: “Cedrus Holdings Co.” can justify and PROVE it bought this lot LONG AGO --- which justifies the tiny Annual RE TAX BILL, how does this lot have Assessed Current Evaluation which is so low?
Who believes this beautiful lot 7,400 sq ft was only $135K in 2020?

Last Ownership Transfer Document
Type
GRANT DEED/CORP . DEED/GIFT DEED/JNT TEN
DEED
County Recorder's Document Number Book 20200827, Page 833 Event Date Thu Aug 27 2020
Assessor's LOT DESCRIPTION states: LOTS 1 & 2
Sec. Of State says this Co. does NOT EXIST. What is with city staff with licenses to protect against errors, omissions, wrong filings?

Advanced Search

• No results found for the specified name.

SUMMARY QUESTIONs:

Who at city is PROVING this is NOT a false owner name,

Page 286 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.

Who, without any License, filed Folsom Reports resulting in questionable Difference between 2020 Price plus two different results
for address vs APN?

Why is Valuation since 2020 so LOW, and the “Cedrus Holding Co.” is not a California company according to California Secretary of State?

https://finance.saccounty.gov/AuditorController/Documents/TaxAcct/RATE%20BOOK%20 22-23%20Combine.pdf

Who gave city permission to violate the State Government Code Rule:
one city --- ONLY one plan commission which merely makes Recommendations to council on REZONE Actions with huge impacts on a troubled Sewershed above/abutting American River?

Who really advised this planner to make a FALSE CLAIM that this WAS NOT a Real CEQA EXCEPTION to the so-called INFILL notion?

Who said this lot is anything EXCEPT Residential Zone from the “real Printed Folsom laws & Charter in print” but dropped off the printing press by a certain mayor, to expedite his interests?

Page 287 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 11:27 AM
To: Desmond Parrington
Cc: Steven Banks; Pam Johns; Sari Dierking; Elaine Andersen; Rosario Rodriguez; YK Chalamcherla; Sarah Aquino; Anna Rohrbough; Mike Kozlowski; [email protected] Subject:

Re: 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting
CAUTION: 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.

Mr. Parrington:

On June 22nd you wrote in an email to me, "I am interested in working with you, HPL, HFRA, FHDA, and others in a productive way to improve the process, improve the zoning regulations in the Historic District, and develop objective design standards for the area to do what we can to protect it given all the changes in state law."

Based on Mr. Banks' email below and my review of the 603 Sutter Street project‐related materials on the City's pending development applications webpage, it appears that you and your staff are intending to bring forward a project to the Historic District Commission that fails to comply with existing objective standards in the Folsom Municipal Code (FMC). If you and Ms. Johns are truly interested in a productive way to improve the process and protect the Historic District, I suggest you begin immediately by performing a more careful review of the 603 Sutter Street project and recognize that the project has thus far been inadequately reviewed and processed.

Project documents include a report by Planning Partners entitled "Categorical Exemption Supplement". Instead of updating the previous CEQA Initial Study (several draft versions of which have been prepared for various previous iterations of this project), the Planning Partners document was apparently prepared with the sole purpose of making an argument for why the City can claim that the project is exempt from CEQA. Consider this approach in light of information you presented to the community in a virtual meeting on August 17, in which you and your consultant presented a slide on the purposes of the CEQA process, explaining that important purposes of CEQA include "public involvement and disclosure" and "informed decision making." While there are other reasons that the project does not qualify for a CEQA exemption, attempting to avoid those two important purposes for the 603 Sutter Street project is inexcusable for the 603 Sutter Street project.

Immediately across Scott Street from the 603 Sutter Street site is Folsom's premier historic property, the NRHP‐listed Cohn House. To the immediate west
of 603 Sutter Street is the historic Folsom library property, on which sits the historic library building and a unique and perhaps one‐of‐a‐kind cobble‐faced retaining wall. East and south of 603 Sutter Street is a Historic Folsom residential neighborhood in which live many Folsom residents who care deeply about this community, its historic character, and our ability to enjoy living here safely and comfortably. Yet, instead of embracing the public involvement, disclosure, and informed decision‐making that a comprehensive CEQA process would entail, it appears you are now intending to assert a CEQA exemption in an effort to avoid those aims. City staff have previously circulated at least two draft Initial Studies for previous iterations of this project, both of which identified potentially significant

Page 288 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
2 environmental impacts and mitigation measures recommended to address those impacts; yet, although the basic project remains essentially the same ‐ a new building that is too large for the property's setting ‐ you now appear to have decided to avoid the public involvement, disclosure, and informed decision‐making (and mitigation) that would be involved with a meaningful CEQA process. How you arrived at that approach is baffling and truly disappointing, and I strongly encourage you to reconsider.

Further insulting this community, last week Mr. Banks circulated a revised public notice for the HDC hearing which eliminates the ability of "any interested party" to appeal an HDC decision to the City Council, and now
specifies that an appeal can only be filed by a person whose property rights are affected. The language in the revised notice substantially restricts standing to appeal an HDC decision to the City Council. Even if property rights are broadly interpreted, the revised language effectively denies the right of many Folsom residents to even attempt to show standing. For instance, many residents are renters and do not own property in the City, so it would be seemingly impossible for those non‐property‐owning residents to qualify for an appeal, and non‐profit organizations interested in protecting the Historic District but which do not own property would be similarly limited in demonstrating standing to appeal. Further, many individuals and organizations who, based on the revised language may not have standing to appeal to the City Council, will still have standing to legally challenge the claimed CEQA exemption. Therefore, the approach of your revised hearing notice creates a situation in which an HDC decision could subject the City to a lawsuit without first providing an opportunity for the City Council to hear from concerned residents and organizations and giving the City Council an opportunity to address concerns and avoid a lawsuit. Previous HDC hearing notices advised that an appeal could be filed by any interested party. Rescinding that ability severely restricts the public's right to be heard by our elected officials and puts the City at a heightened legal risk.

Below is discussion of some
of the objective standards of the Folsom Municipal Code with which the currently designed project does not comply and for which the project must be required to obtain variances or be redesigned to comply with (and there may be others):

FMC 17.52.420 "Architectural features. Fireplaces, bay windows, attached porches and decks and patios
higher than 30 inches above grade, may extend into a required setback area a maximum of 2 feet, but shall not be closer than 3 feet to a property line or closer than 6 feet to any portion of another structure. The combined length of all such features shall not account for more than 25 percent of the length of the wall surface on which the features are located." The project fails to comply with the objective standards of

17.52.420. The proposed second floor deck along Sutter Street extends 5ft 1in over the property line (into the public right of way) and therefore does not comply with the "shall not be closer than 3 feet to a property line" objective standard. The proposed third floor deck extends to the property line along Scott Street and therefore does not comply with the "shall not be closer than 3 feet to a property line" objective standard. Additionally, the proposed design includes second and third floor decks that both extend along the building's entire Sutter Street frontage. These combined length of these features compose 200 percent of the wall and do not comply with the "shall not account for more than 25 percent of the wall surface" objective standard. Additionally, the third‐floor deck extends along 50 percent of the building wall facing Scott Street, and therefore this feature does not comply with the "shall not account for more than 25 percent of the wall surface" objective standard. The proposed second and third floor decks do not comply with the FMC

17.52.420 objective standards and require variances or the project needs to be redesigned to comply with this code section.

FMC 17.52.510 "Sutter street subarea special use and design standards. C. Height. Building heights shall not exceed 35 feet adjacent to the
sidewalk area on Sutter or Leidesdorff Street and 50 feet in other sections of the subarea. Towers, spires, or other similar architectural features may extend up to 15 feet above the building

Page 289 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
3 height." According to the project drawings (see North Elevation on Figure A‐211), the proposed roof level would extend above the 35ft level on northwest corner of the third floor and the proposed parapet wall would extend as much as 4 feet above the maximum allowable height plane as illustrated in the drawings. Even if the parapet wall was excused from the building height consideration (which it cannot be), the roof itself still extends above the max height plane as illustrated by the project design plans. Further, the 17.52.510(C) height provision pertains to "building height" not "roof height." The parapet walls that extend above the roof elevation are part of the building and exceed the height limitation. The parapet walls are not towers or spires, and are not similar to towers or spires, they are part of the building and are subject to the height limitation.

The building height does not comply with FMC 17.52.510(C) objective height standard and requires a variance or the project needs to be redesigned to comply with this code section.

FMC 17.57.050(B) is an objective standard that specifies the number of parking spaces that "shall be provided for the handicapped" and requires that one (1) handicapped parking space is required when the total number of standard parking spaces otherwise required is between 0 and 40. Although AB 2097 added Section 65863.2 to the Government Code which precludes the City's imposition of minimum parking standards on this project, the law expressly does not dismiss or disallow the City from requiring compliance with parking standards for the provision of parking spaces accessible to persons with disabilities. Gov. Code Section 65863.2(f) states, "This section shall not reduce, eliminate, or preclude the enforcement of any requirement imposed on a new multifamily residential or nonresidential development that is located within one‐half mile of public transit to provide electric vehicle supply equipment installed parking spaces or parking spaces that are accessible to persons with disabilities that would have otherwise applied to the development if this section did not apply." Based on the proposed first floor retail (2,716 sf) and second floor office (5,246 sf), without AB 2097 the project would otherwise be required to provide at least 22 parking spaces. FMC Section 17.57.050(B) specifies the number of parking spaces that "shall be provided for the handicapped" and requires that one (1) handicapped parking space is required when the total number of standard parking spaces otherwise required is between 0 and 40. The project is therefore required to either provide a minimum of 1 parking space that meets the handicapped parking space design requirements of FMC 17.57.050 (e.g., located so as to provide for safety and optimum proximity for direct access to the primary entrance of the building, at least 14 feet wide, etc.) or the project applicant needs to apply for and obtain approval of a variance from the City's handicapped parking standard.

This project is not ready for the HDC. An applicant can propose a project that does not comply with design

standards, but to do so, must file an application for a variance for each non‐compliant project component and provide the applicant's attempt at justifying the variance. Rather than your staff's current approach of attempting to help this applicant circumvent the FMC's objective design standards and variance obligations, please readjust your trajectory for this project and process it in compliance with the requirements of the FMC and in a manner that is protective of the City's Historic District and its historic properties, resources, and residents.

Thank you,
‐Bob Delp

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]

Page 290 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
4 From: Steven Banks <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 2:19 PM
Subject: 603 Sutter Street Mixed‐Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting

Good afternoon,

Best regards,

Steve

Steven Banks
Principal Planner
City of Folsom
(916) 461-6207
[email protected]

Page 291 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Adena Blair <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 5:53 PM
To: Steven Banks
Cc: Bob Delp; Jennifer Lane
Subject: Re: Amended Public Notice for 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Project Attachments: HDC Amended Public Notice 11x17 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use Building (PN 17-145) 9-6-23.docx CAUTION: 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.

Hi Steve,
Thank you for sending this amended notice.

You say that it "simply clarifies who is eligible to file an appeal," but this doesn't seem like a simple issue. The notice you sent before this one said anyone could file an appeal and I think that's what other notices for Historic Commission meetings have said in the past, but this revised notice seems to really limit who can file an appeal. Can you do that?

I live about a block from 603 Sutter and I'm really concerned about the project, but I haven't really thought about if my "property rights" would be affected. The proposed building is too big (taller than what the city code allows), the businesses and restaurant and whoever else would use the building will make an already ridiculous parking situation in this neighborhood even worse (I know the City can't impose minimum parking standards any more, but there are a lot of other things the City could do to address impacts related to parking, and I'm afraid you and the Historic Commission won't try to do anything about those).

The very thought of an eating establishment and the corresponding smelly dumpster makes me want to gag if one is located anywhere on the site. Try walking anywhere near the one on the corner of Riley and Scott in the heat of the day to get a preview.

I don't see how they could justify it, but if the Historic Commission does approve this building I think we should be able to ask the the City Council to reconsider. Is this revised notice saying that I and my neighbors can't appeal to the City Council?

Respectfully,
Adena Blair, 607 Figueroa St

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 08:36:12 AM PDT, Steven Banks <[email protected]> wrote:

Good morning,

Page 292 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
2 Please find the amended public notice for the 603 Sutter Street Mixed-Use project which is scheduled to be heard by the Historic District Commission on September 6, 2023. The amended public notice simply clarifies who is eligible to file an appeal regarding the proposed project to the City Council and the process for filing an appeal.

Best regards,

Steven Banks
Principal Planner
City of Folsom
(916) 461-6207
[email protected]

Page 293 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
1 Christina Kelley
From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2023 10:18 AM
To: Desmond Parrington
Cc: Steven Banks; Pam Johns; Sari Dierking; Elaine Andersen; [email protected]; Nathan Stroud Subject: Re: 603 Sutter Street [Oak Tree Impacts]
CAUTION: 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.

Desmond: I'm sure you're already planning to, but can you please make sure the staff report fully addresses the project's impacts to "protected" oak trees and clearly discusses:

1) the applicant's rights, or lack thereof, to destroy/damage protected trees that are on City property (per mapping in most recent arborist report,
two protected oak trees that would be eliminated by the project are on City property and are not on the 603 Sutter parcel);

and

2) the findings that the HDC would need to make to allow the destruction of these two protected oak trees on City property, in particular, the
required finding that, "[u]se of the property consistent with the Zoning Code cannot be made unless the Protected Tree is removed and there are no Reasonable Alternative Measures to allow for use of the property consistent with the Zoning Code."

I suggest that reasonable use of the property could be
made while preserving even some of the protected
trees that are on the property; and reasonable use of the property could certainly be made without destroying both of the two oak trees that are not even on the property.

Thank you,
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]

From: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 2:24 PM
To: Desmond Parrington <[email protected]>
Cc: Steven Banks <[email protected]>; Pam Johns <[email protected]>; Sari Dierking <[email protected]>; Elaine Andersen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 603 Sutter Street Mixed‐Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting

If you intend to proceed with the Sept 6 hearing, I will await the staff report and provide my input to the HDC. If you decide to take seriously my concerns about this project not being ready for hearings, I would be glad to discuss with you and the applicant and whomever else ways in which I think the City could correct deficiencies and move a 603 development project to the finish line.

Page 294 ends

10/10/2023 Item No.10.
2 Thanks, Desmond.
‐Bob

Bob Delp
916‐812‐8122
[email protected]
From: Desmond Parrington <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 2:10 PM
To: Bob Delp <[email protected]>
Cc: Steven Banks <[email protected]>; Pam Johns <[email protected]>; Sari Dierking <[email protected]>; Elaine Andersen <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: 603 Sutter Street Mixed‐Use Project Scheduled for September 6, 2023 Historic District Commission Meeting

Hi Bob:

We have received all
your emails and are currently gathering the information you’ve requested and looking into the issues you’ve raised. Since August 18th, we have received 8 separate emails from you requesting information or raising issues that you want staff to address. If there are further issues or information you need, please let us know as soon as possible so that we can get that to you. Staff will be providing you this week with one consolidated email response containing the information that you have requested. Please note that any issues raised after the release of the staff report later this week will be addressed by staff at the Historic District Commission meeting on September 6th.

‐Desmond

Desmond Parrington, AICP
Planning Manager
City of Folsom
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
[email protected]
o:916-461-6233 c:916-216-2813
www.folsom.ca.us

Page 295 ends

Folsom City CouncilOctober 10, 2023

Folsom City Council
October 10, 2023