Folsom City Council
August 27, 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
people will be living in the project planning area. Overthe'12-year buildout of the project, with residencies within the project planning area, many people could be exposed to odor impacts. As stated in the General Plan ElR, it is infeasible to allow new development near existing developments and not have the possibility of odorous emissions that would impact nearby receptors, thus the project would be subject to mitigation measures from the 2035 General Plan EIR in the project planning area. For example, future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement Mitigation Measure 3A,2-1a to include measure to control air pollutant emissions generated by construction activities and Mitigation Measure 3A.2-1f to implement SMAQMD's Enhanced Exhaust Control Practices during construction.

The project would not introduce a new or substantially more severe impact than what was identified in the General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 3.2-25 through 3.2-27).

6.3 SECTION 3.3A: CULTURAL RESOURCES
lmpact 3.3-1 Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource The 2035 General Plan EIR lmpact CUL-1 determined that implementation of the 2035 General Plan could result in impacts to historical resources and identified that impacts to historical resources would be significant and unavoidable. Similarly,lmpact 34.5-1of the FPASP EIR/ElS determined that implementation of the FPASP could result in impacts to historical resources and identified that even with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3A.5-1b, effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Because this issue was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the FPASP EIR/ElS and the proposed footprint of development has not changed from what was in those documents, there would be no additional impacts as a result of implementing the project. Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with existing federal and state regulations, and General Plan Polices NCR 1.1.4, NCR 5.1.1, NCR 5.1.2, NCR 5.1.4, and NCR 5.1.5; and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElR adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Future development would be subject to federal (National Historic Preservation Act), state (PRC Section 2'1000 et. Seq. and California Historical Building Code), and local regulations (General Plan Policies) designed to protect cultural resources. General Plan Policy NCR 1.'1.4 encourages new developments to plant native vegetation, including that which is important to Native American lifeways and values, and drought tolerant species and prohibit the use of invasive plants. General Plan Policy NCR 5.1.1 requires historic buildings and sites to be preserved or incorporated into the design of new development, whenever feasible. General Plan Policy NCR 5.1.2 requires the maintenance of an inventory of prehistoric and historic resources, including structures and sites, which would minimize the chance that a historic resource would unknowingly be adversely impacted. General Plan Policy NCR 5.1.4 requires compliance with City, State, and Federal historic laws and regulations to protect and assist in the preservation of historic and archeological resources, which includes carrying out project-level cultural resources surveys, evaluations of significance, determinations of impact, and development of appropriate preservation or mitigation measure. General Plan Policy NCR 5.1.5 encourages obtaining Federal, State, and private funding and incentives for maintaining and rehabilitating historic buildings and sites, which would preserve existing resources.

Future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b to perform an inventory and evaluation of cultural resources for the California Register of Historic Places and perform treatment where damage Criy ci i-cisorn 203: Gereral Pian Amencrenis icr":ncreased iies:derirai Cacacity Projecl itr-rirngs ano i:acis rn Suppor'i oi iiri:ngs':B

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
or destruction cannot be avoided. Because this issue was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the FPASP EIR/EIS and the proposed footprint of development has not changed from what was in those documents, there would be no additional impacts as a result of implementing the project (Draft SEIR, pages 3.3-'16 through 3.3-19). lmpact 3.3-2 Cause a Substantiat Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archaeotogical Resource
The General Plan EIR lmpact CUL-2 determined that implementation of the 2035 General Plan could result in significant impacts to archaeological resources and identified that even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (General Plan lmplementation Program NCR 7), effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Similarly, lmpacts 3A.5-1 and 3A.5-2 determined that implementation of the FPASP could also result in impacts to archaeological resources and identified that even with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.5A-1b and 3A.5-2 effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Future development associated with project could be located on parcels that contain known or unknown archaeological resources and ground-disturbing activities could result in discovery or damage of yet undiscovered archaeological resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan EIR or the FPASP EIR/EIS.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required, Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with state and local regulations and implementation of the FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.5-1b and 3A.5-2.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Future development would be subject to state regulation (PRC Section 21000 et. Seq) that requires local agencies to determine whether projects may have a significant effect on archaeological and historical resources, City regulations (Standard Construction Specifications and Details, General Provisions, Article 11. Cultural Resources) that require contractors to stop work upon the discovery of unknown cultural or historic resources. An archaeologist must then be retained to evaluate the significance of the resource to establish mitigation requirements. General Plan Polices NCR

5.1.2 through NCR 5.1.4 require the maintenance of an inventory of prehistoric and historic resources, call for the nomination of additional buildings and sites to the City of Folsom Cultural Resources lnventory of locally significant cultural resources, and require compliance with City, State, and Federal historic laws and regulations to protect and assist in the preservation of historic and archeological resources, respectively.

Future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b to perform an inventory and evaluation of cultural resources for the California Register of Historic Places and perform treatment where damage or destruction cannot be avoided and Mitigation Measure 3A.5-2 to conduct construction personnel education, conduct on-site monitoring if required, and stop work if cultural resources are discovered. Because this issue was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the FPASP EIR/EIS and the proposed footprint of development has not changed from what was in those documents, there would be no additional impacts as a result of implementing the project. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the existing General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 3.3-19 through 3.3-21). lmpact 3.3-4: Disturb Human Remains
Compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Although much of the area north of Highway 50 is built out, the potential for un-marked human interments still exists in Folsom and the surrounding area. Ground-disturbing C:iy cf .cisorr 2C35 Gener'ai ?lan An:encrrents {cr-:ncreased Residert:ai Capacri'v Pr'ojeci iinCings and i:acts:r Supcci'i of FinCings 1g

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
construction activities associated with implementation of the project could uncover previously unknown human remains. Development would be subject to the same state and local regulations as development under the General Plan ElR. Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the 2035 General Plan ElR. lmpacts would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with Californla Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measure

3.A5-3.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains are contained in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097. These statutes require that, if human remains are discovered, potentially damaging ground-disturbing activities in the area of the remains shall be halted immediately, and the appropriate County coroner shall be notified immediately. lf the remains are determined by the coroner to be Native American, Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified within 24 hours and the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains. Following the coroner's findings, the NAHC-designated Most Likely Descendant (MLD), and the landowner shall determine the ultimate treatment and disposition of the remains and take appropriate steps to ensure that additional human interments, if present, are not disturbed. The responsibilities for acting upon notification of a discovery of Native American human remains are identified in Public Resources Code Section 5097.94. ln addition, development within the Folsom Plan Area would be subject to FPASP EIR/EIS Mitigation Measure 3A.5-3 to suspend ground disturbing activities if human remains are encountered and complywith California Health and Safety Code procedures. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElS mitigation measure would ensure that impacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.3-23 through 3.3-26).

6.4 SECTION 3.3B: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
lmpact 3.3-3 Cause a Substantiat Adverse Change in the Significance of a Tribat Cultural Resource
General Plan EIR lmpactTCR-I determined that implementation of the 2035 General Plan could result in significant impacts to archaeological resources and identified that there are no feasible available mitigations that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, and effects would remain significant and unavoidable. Future development associated with this project could be located on properties that contain known or unknown tribal cultural resources which could result in damage to or destruction of these resources. However, development within the City and Folsom Plan Area would not occur on any sites beyond those already analyzed in the General Plan EIR and FPASP EIR/EIS.

Since potential for impacts to tribal cultural resources remain, the project impacts would be significant. There is no new significant effect and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

City of lciscrr 2035 Geneiai Pian ;\'neninenis for rncteased Resrien'rial Caoacity Prcjeci iindings and iacis !n S'..:pcori' of lirCinqs2A

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliancewith state and local regulations and implementation of the new General Plan lmplementation Measure NCR 9 and FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.5-1a, 3A.5-2, and 34.5-3.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Future development would be subject to state regulations (Senate Bill [SB] 18 and Assembly Bill [AB] 52). SB 18 requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations priorto making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan, or when dedicating open space that contains Native American cultural places. AB 52 requires local and state governments to consult with California Native American tribes as part of CEQA review. City regulations (Standard Construction Specifications and Details, General Provisions, Article 11. Cultural Resources) requires contractors to stop work upon the discovery of unknown cultural or historic resources. An archaeologist must then be retained to evaluate the significance of the resource to establish mitigation requirements.

General Plan Policy NCR 1.1.4 encourages new developments to plant native vegetation, including that which is important to Native American lifeways and values, and drought tolerant species and prohibit the use of invasive plants. General Plan Policy NCR 5.1.2 through NCR 5.1.4 require the maintenance of an inventory of prehistoric and historic resources, call for the nomination of additional buildings and sites to the City of Folsom Cultural Resources lnventory of locally significant cultural resources, and require compliance with City, State, and Federal historic laws and regulations to protect and assist in the preservation of historic and archeological resources, respectively.

Additionally, General Plan lmplementation Policy NCR 9 would require management of tribal cultural resources through suspension of work in the vicinity of a tribal cultural resource find, notification of the appropriate oversight agency and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, and appropriate treatment (Final SEIR Section 4). General Plan lmplementation Policy NCR'10 would require that tribal cultural resources be kept confidential and not be disclosed in public documents, etc. (Final SEIR Section 4).

Mitigation Measure 3A.5-2 to conduct construction personnel education, conduct on-site monitoring if required, and stop work if cultural resources are discovered, and Mitigation Measure 3A.5-3 to suspend ground-disturbing activities if human remains are encountered and compliance with California Health and Safety Code Procedures. Because this issue was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the FPASP EIR/EIS and the proposed footprint of development has not changed from what was in those documents, there would be no additional impacts as a result of implementing the project. There is no new significant effect and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 3.3-21 through 3.3-23).

6.5 SECTION 3.4: ENERGY
lmpact 3.4-1: Wastefut, lnefficient, or Unnecessary Consumption of Energy, During Project Construction or Operation
When compared to the General Plan buildout, full buildout of the project would result in the consumption of additional energy supplies during construction in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel consumption. However, the project's energy expenditure would not be considered atypical when compared to other construction projects. When compared to buildout of the General Plan, operations of new land uses associated with the project would result in additional energy consumption, but the project would be required to comply with the most recent iteration of the California Energy Code. As compared to the General Plan ElR, the project would be more energy efficient when considered in the context of the number of residents that the project supports. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact than the General Plan EIR land uses due to its greater energy efficiency. This impact would be less than significant.

City of tclscm 20-i5 Gener'ai Plan Arnen<irneris for-!r:cr'easei Res;ieni:ai Cacacity ?tcject i:rriiings ar:d Facts,,: Support of !:ndings 2:

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The energy needs for project construction would occur over a 12-year period and are not anticipated to require additional capacity or substantially increase peak or base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy, as compared to existing conditions. There is no atypical construction-related energy demand associated with the proposed project. Nonrenewable energy would not be consumed in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner when compared to other construction activity in the region. The project is anticipated to require less fuel when compared to the land uses evaluated under the General Plan. Reduced energy consumption would result from project construction as development of medium-to-high density housing is less intense than construction associated with non-residential uses.

Energy impacts during construction would be less than significant (SElR, pages 3.4-8 and 3.4-9).

The project would increase electricity and natural gas consumption relative to existing conditions during operation.

The project is anticipated to require more energy in all sectors when compared to the land uses evaluated in the General Plan ElR. This is primarily due to the increase in residential development as part of the project, which would result in an increase in daily trip generation and associated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and energy use per residential unit. However, the projectwould result in increased population densityfrom additional residential units associated with higher density development rather than single-family residences. Therefore, the energy efficiency per capita for the project would be lower as compared to the General Plan. Energy impacts during operation would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.4-9 and 3.4-10). lmpact 3.4-2: Conftict with or Obstruction of a State or Loca[ Ptan for Renewabte Energy or Energy Efficiency
Although implementation of the project would increase energy demands compared to existing conditions, development would be required to comply with applicable California Energy Code, Folsom General Plan policies and Renewable Portfolio Standard. As a result, implementation of the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. This impact would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with applicable California Energy Code, Folsom General Plan Policies, and Renewable Portfolio Standard.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
New land uses developed as part of the project would comply with the 2022 California Energy Code, which is intended to increase the energy efficiency of new development projects in the state. Through the permitting process, all development proposed under the project would comply with the current and future versions of the State's Title 24 California Building Code, as part of the 2022 California Energy Code.

C:iy cf rolsonr 203S Cenerai Plan Amecct.':ents fcr rncreasei Resiiertiai Caoac:ty Pr'cjeci itinCincs and i:acts :n Supcor't of Finc:ngs22

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
The project would be required to implement General Plan Policies LU 1.1.13 "Sustainable Building Practices," and LU

1.1.14 "Promote Resiliency." Future development associated with the project would adhere to General Plan Policy LU

1.1.13 that requires compliance with the State's Title 24 California Building Code, which now requires solar installation on all apartments developed as part of the project.

The project is served by Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), an electricity utility. SMUD is required to complywith the future benchmarks of the state's Renewable Portfolio Standard (i.e.,52 percent renewable by2027, 60 percent by 2030, and100 percent by 2045). Because electricity utilities in the state are required to increase the percentage of renewable energy sources in the electricity they provide, over time electricity consumed as part of the project would increasingly be provided by renewable sources.

Due to the inclusion of energy efficiency and renewable energy measures as part of the project and compliance with state regulations related to energy efficiency and renewable energy and General Plan policies, project implementation would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. lmpacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.4-10 and 3.4-11).

6.6 SECTION 3.5: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND CLIMATE
CHANGE
lmpact 3.5-1: Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Consistency with Reduction Ptans and Measures
Construction and operation of the project would result in GHG emissions. Project construction emissions are anticipated to be lower and operational emissions are anticipated to be higher than previously evaluated in the General Plan ElR. However, the proposed project would increase residential density, which results in more VMT and GHG efficiency on a per capita basis, consistent with the goals and objectives of the GHG reduction strategy in the adopted CAP (integrated in to the 2035 General Plan). Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially greater impacts relating to GHG emissions, but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with General Plan Policy SN 7.1.2, Policies NCR 1.1.8, 3.2.1,

3.2.6, and FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.4-1,3A.4-2a, and 34.4-2b.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Emissions associated with construction activities from the project are anticipated to be lower than emissions associated with the previously evaluated land uses. Although there would be an increase in the total number of residential units, the decrease in non-residential uses as part of the project would result in less intensive construction and thus reduced emissions. Total mass emissions associated with the project would result in an increase as compared to emissions from the General Plan ElR. However, development associated with the project would result in a denser population in Folsom and the GHG efficiency (i.e., emissions per capita) would be lower under the proposed project as compared to the existing General Plan. Additionally, the project would be consistent with General Plan policies adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions and is therefore consistent with the adopted CAP. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially greater impacts relating to GHG emissions. However, even with incorporation of these mitigation measures and policies, the project would result in increased GHG emissions, and the future year GHG reduction targets may not be met (Draft SEIR, pages 3.5-'10 through 3.5-12).

Clty oi iciscm 2C35 Genei'ai Plan ArrTendrrents fo'lncr'eased Res;Centiai Caoacity Pr'oject trndings and Facis :r Suppcr't oi i--indings 23

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asceni

6.7 SECTION 3.6: LAND USE AND PLANNING
lmpact 3.6-1: Conftict with Appticable Land Use Plans, Policies, and Regutations lmplementation of the General Plan would be consistent with existing regional land use plans, policies and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project would allow for increased minimum densities on rezone sites that are with multi-family and mixed-use designations. The project would also include land use amendments to the FPASP for the proposed rezone sites within the Folsom Plan Area.

These amendments would be in compliance with State law requirements and are intended to help the city meet its share of the RHNA. The project is consistent with General Plan and FPASP policies related to environmental protections associated with land use, including those that address the amount and location of groMh, allowed uses, and development densities and intensities. The project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact regarding land use and planning than was identified in the General Plan ElR. This impact would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Future development associated with the project, including residential development within the project planning area, would be required to be consistent with the General Plan and the FPASP (for sites located within the Folsom Plan Area) policies and programs adopted to address environmental effects. Future development would be reviewed for consistency with the development standards set forth in FMC and applicable objective design and development standard as part of the design review process. The project would not remove or modify any policies or measures from the General Plan and FPASP that are intended for environmental protection. This impact would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.6-9 and 3.6-10).

6.8 SECTION 3.7: NOISE AND VIBRATION
lmpact 3.7-1: Construction Activities Could Result in a Substantial Temporary lncrease in Noise Levels at Nearby Noise-Sensitive Land Uses
Construction activities associated with implementation of the project would result in greater construction noise than anticipated in the General Plan ElR. However, implementation of proposed mitigation measures and adopted mitigation measures from the FPASP EIR/ElS would reduce project impacts to less than significant, consistent with the conclusion in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-'1. The mitigation measure is feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Ciiy of iciscm 2C35 Cener'ai Pran Amercr.:ier'is fcr,ncreasec Resicent:ai Caoaci'ry Ptciec'. i;ncir:gs anc i:acts ;n Suooor': cf iiriirqs24

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascenl
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.7-'1: Construction Noise Reduction Measure Add new lmplementation Program SN-17 Construction Noise Reduction:
> The City shall require that the following measures shall be implemented and specified on subsequent project building plans for development north of Highway 50 within 560 feet of sensitive land uses to ensure construction noise does not exceed 80 dBA L"o at the nearest receptors:
. To the extent feasible, alternative construction processes that generate lower noise levels shall be selected. . Construction equipment staging areas shall be located at the farthest distance feasible from nearby sensitive land uses.
. For projects with pile driving, with approval and supervision of a qualified structural engineer, pile holes shall be predrilled to minimize the number of pile hammer drives necessary to seat piles, where feasible.

Alternative to impact hammers, such as oscillating or rotating pile installation systems shall be used where feasible.
. Effective pile driving noise control may be achieved by utilizing pile driving shrouds that acoustically shield the pile hammer point of impact, placing resilient padding on top of the pile, and by reducing exhaust noise with sound absorbing mufflers.
. Post visible signs along the perimeter of the construction site that disclose construction times and duration, as well as a contact number for a noise complaint and enforcement manager.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Adherence to the Folsom Standard Construction Specifications, General Plan policies, FMC, and Mitigation Measure

3.7-'1 and FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.'11-1 would reduce construction noise and development under projectwould not result in a substantial temporary increase in noise. Specifically, Mitigation Measure 3.7-1 would reduce construction noise for development north of Highway 50 within 560 feet of sensitive receptors by requiring mufflers that reduce noise levels by at least 5 dBA and effective pile driving noise controls, such as pile driving shrouds, that can reduce noise by up to 30 dBA. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-1 noise levels from the loudest construction equipment (i.e., pile driving) would be reduced to 71 dBA and below the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction noise threshold of 80 dBA Luq. Project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation (Draft SEIR, pages 3.7-15 ro 3.7-17).
lmpact 3.7-7: Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Excessive Vibration Construction activities associated with implementation of the project would result in greater construction noise than anticipated in the General Plan ElR. However, implementation of proposed mitigation measures and adopted mitigation measures from the FPASP EIR/ElS would reduce project impacts to less than significant, consistent with the conclusion in the General Plan ElR.

FI N DI NGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7 -2.fhe mitigation measure is feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Ciiy of :o!soi'r 2C35 Gene;'ai ?lan Arendmenis fcr-increased Res:Cerliai Capacliy lroject Frniings and Facis in Supoori sf F:ndings )5

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Mitigation Measure 3.7-2: Develop and lmplement a Vibration Damage Control Plan Add new lmplementation Program SN-18 Construction Vibration Reduction:
> The City shall apply this lmplementation Program to construction activity involving pile-driving activities located within 96 feet of any building and vibratory rollers located within 26 feet of any building to reduce the potential for structural damage.
> Require project applicants with projects that involve pile-driving activities located within 96 feet of any building and vibratory rollers located within 26 feet of any building to deVelop a vibration control plan. The plan shall consider all potential vibration-inducing activities that would occur within the distance parameters described above and include various measures, setback distances, precautions, monitoring programs, and alternative methods to traditional pile-driving or other vibration intensive activities with the potential to result in structural damage. The following vibration control measures (or other equally effective measures approved by the City) shall be included in the plan:
. To prevent structural damage minimum setback requirements for different types of ground vibration- producing activities (e.g., pile driving, vibratory roller) for the purpose of preventing damage to nearby structures shall be established based on the proposed pile-driving activities and locations, once determined . All vibration-inducing activity within the distance parameters described above shall be monitored and documented for ground vibration noise and vibration noise levels at the nearest sensitive land use and associated recorded data submitted to the City of Folsom so as not to exceed the recommended FTA vibration damage levels.
. Alternatives to traditional pile driving (e.g., sonic pile driving, jetting, cast-in-place or auger cast piles, non- displacement piles, pile cushioning, torque or hydraulic piles) shall be considered and implemented where feasible to reduce vibration levels.
. Limit pile-driving activities to the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday' ' Predrill pile holes to the maximum feasible depth to reduce the number of blows required to seat a pile. . Operate allvibration inducing impact equipment as far awayfrom vibration-sensitive sites as reasonably possible.
. Phase pile-driving and high-impact activities so as not to occur simultaneously with other construction activities, to the extent feasible. The total vibration level produced could be significantly less when each vibration source is operated at separate times.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Adherence to General Plan Policy SN 6.'1.8 and implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7 -2 and FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.'1'1-3 would reduce potential vibration damage impacts from construction activities by requiring minimum setbacks to sensitive land uses, monitoring vibration levels during construction, and the use of alternative equipment when appropriate. Specifically, Mitigation Measure 3.7-2 would require alternatives to pile driving, such as auger cast piles that are free of vibration or jetting that can reduce vibration by 45 percent or to 0.64 inches/sec. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-2 vibration from the most vibratory equipment (i.e., pile driving) could be reduced to below FTA's recommended standards with respect to the prevention of structural building damage (0.2 and 0.08 inlsec peak particle velocity) for normal and historical buildings, respectively). Through these measures, potential substantial impacts on sensitive land uses from pile driving, vibratory roller activity, and blasting would be reduced to meet applicable thresholds. lmpacts would be less than significant with mitigation (Draft SEIR, pages 3.7-17 through 3.7-20).

Ciiy ci fcisorn 2035 Ge,reraiPian Amendner:,'fl.;:;;T:1111:::;i":::il;iTfi; ta

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asc.enl
lmpact 3.7-3: Traffic Noise
lmplementation of the project would result in a net increase in traffic noise ranging from 0 to 3.6 dB Ldn on roadway segments within the project planning area. Therefore, project-related traffic noise would not generate a substantial increase in severity beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with FPSAP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measure 34.11-4 and General Plan Policy SN 6.1.2.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
lmplementation of the project would result in net noise increases ranging from 0 to 3.6 dBA Ldn on roadway segments within the project planning area. The General Plan EIR identified that traffic noise would result in net increases ranging from 0 to 8 dBA. The project would be subject to General Plan Policy SN 6.1.2, requiring mitigation for noise due to traffic on public roadways for new residential development to meet the noise standards. Additionally, the project would be subject to adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.11-4 for development in the Folsom Plan Area, and the FMC noise standards as they aim to comprehensively address construction noise sources. There is no new significanttraffic noise effect, and the impact is not more severe than identified in the General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 3.7-20 through 3.7-23).
lmpact 3.7-4: Expose Existing Sensitive Receptors to New Stationary Noise Sources that Exceed Appticabte Noise Standards
All future development associated with the project would be required to comply with the FMC and General Plan policies related to stationary noise standards. However, due to the programmatic nature of the project it cannot be assured thatfuture development as part of the projectwould not exceed applicable standards. lmplementation of proposed mitigation measures and adopted mitigation measures from the FPASP EIR/ElS would reduce project impacts to less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-4. The mitigation measure is feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.7-4: Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling Noise Add new lmplementation Program SN-19 Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling Noise Reduction:
> The City shall require an acoustical assessment to be prepared as part of subsequent land use development associated with development if an HVAC would be located within 55 feet of a sensitive receptor. The acoustical assessment shall evaluate the potential operational noise impacts attributed to HVAC noise. The acoustical assessment shall be completed by a qualified acoustical consultant that shall verify that the chosen mechanical equipment for individual development projects would not exceed 45 dBA aI the nearest sensitive receptor, in accordance with City of Folsom noise standards. Where the acoustical analysis determines that noise levels would CIty cf loiscrr 2C35 Generai Pran Arrencments for'ircreased Res;ieri;al CaQaciiy lr6js6i i:incings ar:c iacts :r Suoccrt oi :inciincs 2'7

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asce nt
exceed applicable City noise standards, noise reduction measures shall be identified and included in the subsequent project. Nosie reduction measures may include, but are not limited to:
. Selecting equipment with noise specifications that do not exceed the 45 dBA HVAC noise standard at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor.
. ldentifying the equipment's noise screening distance, ensuring that noise levels attenuate to below the 45 dBA HVAC noise standard atthe nearest sensitive receptor, and installing the equipment at a distance no less than the screening distance.
. Employing noise dampening techniques such as solid enclosures or parapets walls to block the line-of-sight between the noise source and the noise-sensitive receptors. Blocking the line of sight with a solid barrier or enclosure would reduce noise levels by at least 5 dBA.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Adherence to the General Plan Policy 6.1.2 and implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-4 and FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.'11-5 would reduce potentially significant stationary and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors to a less-than-significant level. Screening distances, acoustical shielding methods, and proper selection of HVAC units with low noise emissions would ensure HVAC noise levels would comply with the stationary noise standard of 45 dBA at a receiving sensitive receptor. lndividual developments would be required to adhere to the standards set forth in the FMC, General Plan, and mitigation measures of the SEIR. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation (Draft SEIR, pages 3.7-23 and3.7-24).

6.9 POPULATION AND HOUSING
lmpact 3.8-1: lnduce Substantial Poputation Growth
The project would accommodate up to 6,046 net new housing units, which would accommodate approximately 15,418 people. This growth would exceed the projected population under the General Plan, but would be consistent with the most recently adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element. The project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact regarding population growth than was identified in the General Plan ElR. This impact would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would result in a net new capacity of 6,046 housing units in the project planning area, which would accommodate approximately'15,418 people, based on 2.55 persons per dwelling unit. Therefore, the project would result in 15,4'18 new residents in the city beyond what was projected in the 2018 adopted General Plan. However, the City's Housing Element, as part of the General Plan, calls for creation of new housing opportunities to meet projected residential growth in the city acknowledged as part of the City's RHNA. The project is designed to fulfill Program H-2 of the Housing Element through amending standards to facilitate an increase in the amount of available land for residential and mixed-use development and increase the amount of higher density residential development in certain areas of the City. Although the project would have the potential to exceed the maximum population established in City of foisorn 2035 Ceneral 2lan Arner:cnerts icr'increased Res:centia Cacacily Frcject i-!ndirES anc i-acts in Supcor"r ci'i;niinEs28

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
the General Plan ElR, the population increase potential associated with the project would be consistent with the 2021- 2029 Housing Element and thus generally consistent with City and regional growth assumptions. The increased population levels associated with the project would be consistent with regional growth projections for the City and would meet the City's RHNA. The project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the city and impacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.8-4 and 3.8-5).

6.10 PUBLIC SERVICES
lmpact 3.9-1: Require Construction of New Governmental Facitities, Resutting in Adverse EnvironmentaI lmpacts
Under the project, development would be intensified within the City and may increase demand for public services (including fire and police protection) that could require new or expanded facilities. Expansion of existing governmental facilities or construction of a new facility to meet the needs of the project would involve minor land clearing, grading, installation of utilities, and building construction. Construction activities and duration would be typical of such facilities and would be required to comply with applicable City policies and regulatory requirements to reduce adverse environmental effects. Additionally, new governmental facilities, including fire and police stations, would be constructed within the footprint of development envisioned as part of the 2035 General Plan. Therefore, such construction for new government facilities to support the project would not result in adverse effects on the environment. lncreased population growth resulting from the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact related to the construction of government facilities than was addressed in the General Plan ElR. This impact would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Development of new public service facilities would include construction activities that are typical of other allowable land use types within the City (e.g., industrial, warehouse, commercial), and would consist of activities such as clearing and grading, utility installation, and construction of new structures. Construction would result in impacts that are similar to those discussed throughout the SEIR, including temporary traffic, noise, and air quality impacts from construction. Generally, public services facilities are small (e.g., on the order of 2.5 acres) and their construction and operation would be required to comply with applicable City policies and regulatory requirements to reduce adverse environmental effects. There is no evidence to suggest that expansion of existing governmental facilities or construction of a new facility would result in unmitigable, adverse effects on the environment. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.9-10 and 3.9-11). lmpact 3.9-2: Require Construction of New Schools, Resutting in Adverse Environmental lmpacts
Under the project, development within the City would be intensified and may increase demand for schools that could require new or expanded facilities. Expansion of existing schools or construction of a new school to meet the needs of the projectwould involve minor land clearing, grading, installation of utilities, and building construction.

Construction activities and duration would be typical of such facilities and would be required to comply with applicable City policies and regulatory requirements to reduce adverse environmental effects. Additionally, new C:ty oi iolscrl 2C.35 Generai Plan Ainenirnenis for increased Res;Centiai Cacaciiy Projeci ;!ndings and Facis rn Suiri:or'i oi i:incilcs 29

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
schools would be constructed within the footprint of development envisioned as part of the 2035 General Plan.

Therefore, such construction for new schools to support the project would not result in adverse effects on the environment. The increased student population resulting from the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact related to the construction of schools than was addressed in the General Plan ElR. lmpacts would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would generate approxim ately 967 new students that would be served by the new schools proposed by the FPASP, which would fulfillthe demand generated bythe project. Construction of these schools would not result in any substantial physical impacts specific to public services that are not already an inherent part of overall project impacts and would be constructed within the footprint of development proposed in the General Plan. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the existing General Plan ElR. lmpacts specific to public facility construction related to school services are less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages

3.9-11 and 3.9-12).
lmpact 3.9-3: Require Construction of New Park or Recreation Facitities, Resutting in Adverse EnvironmentaI lmpacts
Construction of park facilities would be subject to federal and state requirements, City regulations, and 2035 General Plan policies that would ensure that adequate parkland would be provided, and physical deterioration of existing facilities would be reduced. Furthermore, the City's existing and planned parks would sufficiently meet the City's standards for parkland supply as the population grows. This growth would be within the projections assumed under the General Plan. Therefore, increased population growth resulting from the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact related to park and recreational facilities than was addressed in the General Plan ElR. Project impacts would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with General Plan Policy LU 6.1.4.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
An increase of 15,418 persons as part of the project would result in the need for an additionalTl acres of parkland beyond the current 552 acres required underthe 2035 General Plan for a grand total of 629 acres of parkland in the City to meet the City standard. As indicated in the Parks and Recrestion Master Plan: 2015 PIan Update, the City of Folsom Parks and Recreation Department manages a total of 89'1 acres of parks and open space, consisting of 340 acres of developed parks, 500 acres of open space, and 51 acres of Class I Bike Trial. Therefore, there would be sufficient parkland to support project buildout. Additionally, as part of the project, future tentative subdivision and City cf Foisorr 2C35 Gere;'ai tlac Aiiendinenis icr !ncreased Resiieriiai Cacaciiy Projecl rinctngs ani i-acis !r Supcor't ol !;ndirlqsin

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
tentative parcel maps under the project would be required to dedicate land or pay an in-lieu fee for the development of neighborhood and community parks, pursuant to FMC Chapter 16.32 and Chapter 4.'10. Future development would also be subject to General Plan Policy LU 6.'1.4 that requires open space in each residential development. FMC Chapter 3.'130 establishes and imposes a Specific Plan lnfrastructure Fee on new development within the Folsom Plan Area that equitably spreads the burden of public improvements and facilities and distributes the cost of public lands and community parkland to development projects within the Folsom Plan Area. lmpacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 3,9-13).

6.11 TRANSPORTATION
lmpact 3.10-1: Transit, Bicycte, and Pedestrian Facility lmpacts and Plan Confticts lmplementation of the project would be subject to and implement General Plan and FPASP objectives and policies relevant to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and services. Additionally, future development under the project would be subject to applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than what was addressed in the General Plan ElR. Project impacts would remain less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required
Facts in Support of Findings
Future development site designs would be required to incorporate improvements consistent with applicable General Plan policies related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. For example, General Plan Policy M 1.'1.1 encourages all roadway improvements to be developed to serve the needs of all users, including bicyclists, public transit users, children, seniors, persons with disabilities, pedestrians, motorists, and movers of commercial goods. Policies M 1.1.5 and M 1.1.6 call for a connected street network that promotes walkability and bicycle and pedestrian connections to public transit stops. Policy M 3.1.1 encourages all residents to have access to safe and convenient public transit options. Compliance with the applicable General Plan and FPASP objectives and policies would ensure that the increased demand for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities resulting from the project would not exceed the capacity of existing and planned facilities. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than what was addressed in the General Plan ElR. The project would result in a less-than-significant impact on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities (Draft SEIR, pages 3.10-16 and 3.10-'17). f mpact 3.10-2: Vehicte Miles Traveted lmpacts
The project would result in development of up to 6,046 additional housing units. Of those units, the project would provide capacity for up to 56 percent or 3,386 low-income units.; However, the City of Folsom conservatively determined that based on the rate of existing affordable housing development within the cily,26 percent of the project's units on average would be low-income units. Therefore, the VMT analysis accounted for the reduction associated with 26 percent affordable units that would result in a reduction in trips and trip length as compared to market-rate housing. Therefore, the project would result in approximalely 6.62 residential VMT per capita, which is less than the threshold of 7.51 VMT per capita (i.e., 15 percent below citywide VMT per capita). Additionally, the project would not result in retail development that would be greater than 125,000 square feet. Potential retail development resulting from the project would be considered local serving and would not result in a net increase in VMT. The project VMT impacts related to residential land use and retail land use would be less than significant. iity ci :oisorr 2C35 Generai ?ian Anrencmenis {or incr'eased Res:cjeeiiai Caoaci:y }r'c.;ecl r-:r:ci:':gs anc iacis;r SJ0po:'t of F:ri;ngs ,.1 1

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than slgnificant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would accommodate local serving retail as defined in the Sacramento County Transportation Analysis Guidelines. Local serving retail is generally associated with shorter trips and, therefore, is screened from detailed analysis and presumed to result in a less than significant impact. Additionally, the VMT analysis determined that the residential uses associated with the project would result in a VMT per capita of 6.62 which is below the citywide threshold of 7.5'1 VMT per capita (i.e., '15 percent below existing citywide VMT per capita). Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial increase in VMT. This impact is less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.'10-18 and

3.10-19).
lmpact 3.10-3: Hazardous Design Feature lmpacts
Future development under the project would be constructed in accordance with applicable roadway design and safety guidelines. The project would not increase hazards because of a roadway design feature or incompatible uses and would include a roundabout prioritization policy that would provide opportunities for improved safety.

Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than what was addressed in the General Plan ElR. The project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to transportation hazards.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Future development under the project would be designed in accordance with City standards and specifications which address potential design hazards including sight distance, driveway placement, and signage and striping. ln addition, any new interchanges, new and modified ramps, or auxiliary lanes along freeway that would result as part of the project would be subject to approval by Caltrans which would ensure projects would be consistent with Caltrans' standards and not result in transportation hazards. Any new transportation facilities, or improvements to such facilities associated with future development would be required to comply with General Plan policies, including Policy M 1.1.3 to require new and reconstructed facilities to meet the Americans with Disability Act requirements and Policy M 3.1.1 to ensure all residents have access to safe and convenient public transit options. The project would include the addition of a roundabout prioritization policy in Ihe City of Folsom General P/on. Roundabouts are a Federal Highway Administration's Proven Safety Countermeasure effective in reducing roadway fatalities and serious injuries. The projectwould result in a less- than-significant impact related to transportation hazards (Draft SEIR, pages 3.'10-19 and 3.10-20). lmpact 3.10-4: Emergency Access lmpacts
Future development under the project would be required to meet all applicable emergency access and design standards to ensure that the project would provide adequate emergency access. ln addition, compliance with General Ciiy ci;cisom 203i Generai ?ran Ar'neccments fcr incr'easerl Resicienilai Cacaciiy Pi'cjeci Finoinqs ani i:acis in Slopor't of F,rd:r-:gs32

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Plan policies would provide emergency access improvements that would enhance emergency access. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than what was addressed in the General Plan ElR. The project would result in a less-than-significant impact.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Emergency access for future development under the project would be required to meet the fire and emergency access roads design standards per FMC Section 17.57.080 and the Folsom Fire Code Chapter 5, Section 503, "Fire Apparatus Access Roads." ln addition, General Plan policies M 1.1.5 and M 4.1.10 require the continuation of the street network between adjacent development projects to allow easier access for emergency vehicles and the continuation of the traffic calming measures implementation in neighborhoods in ways that accommodate emergency access vehicles, respectively. Compliance with the existing regulations and relevant General Plan policies would ensure that future development would be designed to meet all emergency access and design standards. lmpacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 3.10-20).

6.12 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
lmpact 3.11-1: Adverse lmpacts on Sufficient Water Suppty and Treatment lmplementation of the project could generate additional water demand for water supplies from the provision of additional housing. However, the City of Folsom and EID would have sufficient surplus to meet the additional water demand. Therefore, the additional water demand resulting from the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe water supply impact than was addressed in the General Plan ElR. Project impacts would be less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Approximately 4,164 new units would be located in the East Bidwell Corridor and the Transit Priority Areas, which would receive water service from the City of Folsom. The addition al 4,164 units would result in increases in water demand of approximately 916 acre-feet per year (AFY). The City of Folsom would have sufficient water supplies to serve the projected 916.08 AFY of water demand resulting from the future development in East Bidwell Corridor and Transit priority Areas during normal year, single-d ry year, and five-year consecutive drought. lmplementation of the project would result in an additional 1,882 housing units in the Folsom Plan Area. The additional 1,882 net new housing units in the Folsom Plan Area would result in increases in water demand of approximalely 414 AFY. Of the Cliy o1 icisoi'::2035 Genei.ai PIan Ar:rercments ioi-increased Resldeniiai Canacity !r'cjet.t i:irrciir:gs anc Facts rn Sup!ori of .indings

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
414 AFY water demand, approximately 359 AFY would be within the City of Folsom's service area and 55 AFY within the El Dorado lrrigation District's service area. Both the City of Folsom and El Dorado lrrigation District would have sufficient water to serve the project. Modeling conducted for the project indicated that the increase in water demand resulting from the project would not result in adverse hydraulic impacts to the City's water distribution system. lmpacts would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 3.11-18 through 3.11-20). lmpact 3.11-2: Exceed the Capacity of the Wastewater Treatment Provider or Adverse Effects Associated with Construction of Wastewater Treatment and Disposal lnfrastructure General Plan EIR lmpact USS-3 identified less than significant impacts related to wastewater collection, transmission, and treatment. lmplementation of the project could generate wastewater as a result of increased housing in the city.

The existing wastewater conveyance infrastructure in the City of Folsom would not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated additional wastewater. Therefore, the wastewater resulting from the project would result in a new and substantially more severe wastewater impact than was addressed in the General Plan EIR; however, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's effects are less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.11-2a and 3.'1'l- 2b. The mitigation measures are feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a: lmplement Localized lmprovements in the 33-lnch Shed Future development in the 33-inch shed in the project area shall be responsible for the cost and preparatlon of a sewer study and if that study shows that the project increases parcel specific wastewater generation beyond the parcel specific wastewater generation analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build- Out Growth Development Scenario), the project shall be responsible for providing fees to analyze and construct localized wastewater improvements to address capacity issues in the sewer shed. Localized capacity improvements, such as upsizing pipes, shall be constructed and completed in accordance with a time schedule defined in the development specific conditions of approval. This shall be a condition of approval for all projects in the 33-inch shed within the project area.

Mitigation Measure 3.11-2b: Develop and lmplement a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan for the 27-lnch Shed To address capacity concerns in the City's wastewater conveyance system the City shall develop a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan for the 27-inch Shed prior to approval of development in the project area that exceeds the wastewater generation analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Development Scenario) within the 27-in Shed.

The Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall identify the final anticipated extent of pipeline and pump station improvements as well as any phasing improvements tied to residential development timing and/or location in the 27- inch Shed. The Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall include mechanisms and improvements for addressing sewer capacity. The Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall contain the goals of the plan, a description of proposed upgrades and features that would be implemented, a long-term maintenance and operation strategy, and an approach for implementation of proposed improvements to the wastewater conveyance system. Potential improvements may include, but are not limited to:
> construction and operation of a new pump station near the intersection of Riley Street and East Bidwell Street, > construction and operation of a new 8-inch force main from the pump station to high point at Glenn Drive and Sibley Street in order to divert flows from the 27-inch shed into the 33-inch shed, C:ty cf i-ciscr 2C.j5 Generai Pian Ai':.:erdrnenis for' increaserj Resiieniral Caoaciiy Ptoject F:nrllngs anc tacts in Supooi't oi F:ncrngs3a

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascerrt
> upsizing existing 8-inch pipelines on Glenn Drive and Sibley Street to 12-inch, and > identification of addition localized sewer improvements.

Upon completion of the Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan, the City shall secure any required permits for implementation of identified improvement strategies. lmprovements identified in the Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall be implemented prior to issuance of grading permits for future development that increases wastewater generation beyond that analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacily Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Development Scenario) in the 27-inch Shed.

Future development in the 27-inch shed in the project area shall be responsible for the cost and preparation of a sewer study and if that study shows that the project increases parcel specific wastewater generation beyond the parcel specific wastewater generation analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacily Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build- Out Growth Development Scenario), the project shall be responsible for providing fees to analyze and construct localized wastewater improvements to address capacity issues in the sewer shed. Localized capacity improvements, such as upsizing pipes, shall be constructed and completed in accordance with a time schedule defined in the development specific conditions of approval. This shall be a condition of approval for all projects in the 27-inch shed within the project area.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The eastern project planning area north of Highway 50 is located within the FE3 Sewer Shed that has capacity to serve the project. Within the Folsom Plan Area new wastewater collection and conveyance facilities have been planned and there is adequate capacity to support the project. The central project planning area north of Highway 50 is located within the 33-lnch Sewer Shed. The simulation for project development in the 33-inch Shed indicated that the 33-inch sewer line would have capacity for the increased wastewater flow in general. However, development associated with the project would have the potential to reach the capacity of some localized sewer lines, specifically along Riley Road, Sibley Drive, and Glenn Road if the level of development exceeds that identified in the 2035 General Plan ElR. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a would ensure local improvements would be constructed to maintain capacity in the sewer shed. The western project planning area north of Highway 50 is located within the 27;1nch Sewer Shed, which upon buildout of the 2035 General Plan willbe at capacity. Mitigation Measure

3.11-2b would require implementation of a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan to allow for additional capacity for any new development in excess of the amount identified in the 2035 General Plan ElR. lmpacts would be less than significant with mitigation (Draft SEIR, pages 3.11-20 through 3.11-24).

6.13 CHAPTER 4: CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative Aesthetics lmpacts
As identified in lmpacts 3.'1-l through 3.1-4of this SEIR (pages 3.'l-6through 3.1-12), the project planning area is in areas planned for urban development. lmplementation of the project would result in increased residential development capacity in the project planning area. Future development associated with project would be required to comply with FMC, applicable design guidelines, objective design and development standards, and General Plan policies to ensure design compatibility with surrounding development and to address light and glare effects. Future development in the Folsom Plan Area would implement FPASP Mitigation Measures 3A.1-1, 3A.1-4, and 3A.1-5 to minimize impacts related to visual degradation and lighting by maintaining a landscaped corridor adjacent to Highway 50, locating construction staging areas and material away from sensitive land uses, and implementing a lighting plan. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to aesthetics resources beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. The project's contribution to the significant cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.

Ciiy oi iciscr 2C35 Generai Plal Arnendn:ecis ic:-!ncreased Res:dertlai Cacaciiy Project iinclrnqs arrd Facts ir': Support ol;irdings 35

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asr.ent

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with the FMC, applicable design guidelines, objective design and development standards, and General Plan policies and implementation of FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.1-1, 3Aj-4, and 3A.'l-5.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would not change the development footprint analyzed in the General Plan ElR. Future development in the East Bidwell Mixed Used Overlay designation and the new transit-oriented development overlay designation would generally improve the visual quality of the affected areas by developing vacant, underutilized, or aging properties and creating a more unified visual experience consistent with the surrounding development. Future development would be required to comply with FMC Chapter'17.59 regarding placement of signage to protect views from scenic corridors, which requires approval from the Planning Director for signs visible from a scenic corridor.

Development identified in the FPASP would change the existing grassland and oak woodlands to urban land uses.

Similar to the findings of the FPASP EIR/EIS, development as part of the project in the Folsom Plan Area would add to the alteration of existing views and the quality of the public views from Scott Road. However, these sites were planned for development and analyzed as such in the FPASP EIR/EIS. lmplementation of the FPASP EIR/EIS Mitigation Measures 3A.1-1 and 3A.1-4 would reduce impacts to scenic vista.

Future development associated with the project would be subject to existing regulations governing scenic quality as discussed in Section 6.1 above. Future development would increase the amount of light and glare through the installation of exterior lighting and reflective window glazing within the project planning area similar to the conditions anticipated for the planned urban land uses for the City under the General Plan. Consistent with the General Plan ElR, compliance with California Building Code building standards, which require minimizing light pollution and nighttime glare; FMC Chapter 17.59.040, which identifies designated scenic corridors within the city and includes special provisions for the placement and lighting of signage in scenic corridors; FMC Chapter 17.23, which provides design standards for mixed-use zones, including lighting; lighting recommendations contained in the City's Multifamily Development Design Guidelines and the FPASP Community Design Guidelines; General Plan Policy NCR 2.'1.3, which require lighting to be directed downward to minimize overspill and glare onto adjacent properties and reduce vertical glares; and, General Plan lmplementation Program NCR-6, which requires shielding or screening lighting fixtures, prohibiting the use of unusually high intensity light fixtures, and using appropriate building materials (e.9., low-glare glass, low-glare building glaze, and neutral, earth-toned colored paint and roofing materials), would reduce and minimize light and glare impacts. Any future development in the Folsom Plan Area would be required to implement FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.1-5 to reduce significant impacts associated with new sources of light and glare through compliance with lighting standards and implementation of a lighting plan.

The project would not change the development footprint analyzed in the General Plan EIR and would not result in a new or more severe aesthetics impact than disclosed in the General Plan EIR with compliance with existing regulations and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElS mitigation measures. Therefore, the project's contribution to the significant cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-3).

Cumulative Air Quatity lmpacts
The General Plan EIR determined that buildout of the General Plan would result in exposure of toxic air contaminants (TACs) to sensitive receptors that could not be reduced to less than significant levels within the Folsom Plan Area.

Additionally, buildout of the General Plan would result in odorous emissions from construction throughout the city.

Ciiy o1 icisom 2035 Generai Plan A:-ner.cnrents for'increased Resldenitai Caoaciiy Frojeci iircirgs anc iacls in Support cf iirclnEs?t6

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascer t
Consequently, implementation of the 2035 General Plan would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. The project would generate greater mass emissions than the land uses in the 2035 General Plan ElR, butthe projectwould be more efficient on a per person basis. Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR. The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative air quality impacts beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with SMAQMD Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices, SMAQMD's Ozone Attainment Plan, MTP/SCS and General Plan policies, and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.2-1a,3A.2-1f,3A.2-2 and 34.2-'1c, and3A.2-4a.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The geographic context for cumulative impacts related to air quality is regional for criteria pollutant and ozone precursors and includes the Sacrament County Valley Air Basin and Sacramento County within the jurisdiction of SMAQMD. The context is local for toxic air contaminants and odors. As identified in the SEIR, the project would not generate construction emissions of any criteria air pollutants or precursors that would substantially increase local mobile-source CO emissions. Development would be required to comply with SMAQMD Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices and General Plan policies to reduce emissions. While construction would occur nearby existing and future sensitive receptors the project would be subject to General Plan policies and mitigation from the General Plan EIR to reduce emissions. The project would not introduce a new or substantially more severe air quality impact than what was identified in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative air quality impacts beyond what was identified in the General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, pages 4-3 and 4-4).

Cumutative HistoricaI Resources lmpacts
Future development as part of the project would be subject to federal (National Historic Preservation Act), state (PRC Section 21000 et. Seq. and California Historical Building Code), and local regulations (General Plan Policies NCR'1.1.4, NCR 5.1.1, NCR 5.1.2, NCR 5.1.4, and NCR 5.1.5). Future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b to reduce impacts to historical resources. Because future development would occur on the same footprint as previously analyzed in the General Plan ElR, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to historical resources than disclosed in the General Plan ElR.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with existing federal and state regulations, and General Plan Polices NCR 1.1.4, NCR 5.'1.1, NCR 5.'1.2, NCR 5.1.4, and NCR 5.1.5; and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElR adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b.

C;iV cf ro;scni 2035 General Plan Ai.."ecCmenis {or'lncteasec llesldertiai Cacaciiy Droject finCrnqs arJ iacts rr Supcci't ci::rndtngs 1l

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascei'rt

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would result in increased residential density throughout the project planning area. lncreased development has the potential to result in an adverse change to historical resources throughout the project planning area. However, developmentwould occur on the same footprint as previously analyzed in the General Plan ElR.

Development associated with the project within the Folsom Plan Area would be required to comply with adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.5-'lb requiring projects to perform an inventory and evaluation of cultural resources minimize or avoid damage or destruction and perform treatment where damage or destruction cannot be avoided. However, the environmental review would not prevent the demolition of all historical resources. lmpacts would remain cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to historical resources (Draft SEIR, page 4-4).

Cumutative Archaeotogicat Resources lmpacts
Future development as part of the project would be subject to state and local regulations and General Plan policies to reduce impacts to archaeological resources. Future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement Mitigation Measure 34.5-1b Mitigation Measure 3A.5-2 to evaluate cultural resources on-site and provide cultural resources education to construction personnel. However, because this issue was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and the FPASP EIR/EIS and the proposed footprint of development has not changed from what was in those documents, there would be no additional impacts as a result of implementing the project. The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to unique archaeological resources. lmpacts would remain cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with state and local regulations and implementation of the FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measures 3A.5-'lb and 34.5-2.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would result in increased residential density throughout the project planning area. lncreased development has the potential to result in an adverse change to unique archaeological resources throughout the project planning area. However, development would occur on the same footprint as previously analyzed in the General Plan ElR. Development associated with the project would be required to comply with adopted Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (General Plan lmplementation Program NCR 7) to develop a program for inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources. Development within the Folsom Plan Area would be required to comply with Mitigation Measures 3.5A-1b to perform an inventory and evaluation of cultural resources minimize or avoid damage or destruction and perform treatment where damage or destruction cannot be avoided and 3A.5-2 to conduct construction personnel education, conduct on-site monitoring if required, stop work if cultural resources are discovered, assess the significance of the find, and perform treatment or avoidance as required. However, the environmental process of review would not prevent the demolition of all unique archaeological resources. lmpacts would remain cumulatively considerable. Nevertheless, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to unique archaeological resources (Draft SEIR, pages 4-5 and 4-6).

C:ty ci icisom 2035 Gerrerai liar': Ai::eni:'nenls icr:ncteased lesioentiai Caoac:ty Frcject Fii'cincs anc iacrs in Supoor'i ci:iriinEs38

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascerl
Cumulative Tribat Cuttural Resources lmpacts
Future development as part of the project would be subject to state and local regulations to reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources. Future development within the Folsom Plan Area would implement FPASP EIR/ElS Mitigation Measures 3A.5-1a, 3A.5-2, and 3A.5-3 to reduce the potentially significant impact associated with the possible destruction of tribal cultural resources. However, compliance with existing regulations and implementation of previously adopted mitigation would not prevent the demolition of all tribal cultural resources. lmpacts would remain cumulatively considerable. The project would not result in a new or greater contribution tb cumulative effects to tribal cultural resources.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with state and local regulations and implementation of General Plan lmplementation Measure NCRS and FPASP EIR/ElS adopted Mitigation Measures 34.5-1a, 3A.5-2, and 3A.5-3.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The proposed project would result in increased residential density throughout the project planning area. lncreased development has the potential to result in an adverse change to tribal cultural resources throughout the project planning area. However, development would occur on the same footprint as previously analyzed in the General Plan ElR. The results of the AB 52 consultation indicated thai the project planning area is highly sensitive for tribal cultural resources. lmplementation of projects contemplated in the proposed plan may require subsequent discretionary approvals and site-specific project-level analyses to fulfill CEQA requirements, which may include additional AB 52 consultation and identification of tribal cultural resources. However, the environmental process reviewwould not prevent the demolition of all tribal cultural resources. lmpacts would remain cumulatively considerable. All development in the City would be subject to General Plan lmplementation Policy NCR 9 that requires management of tribal cultural resources through suspension of work in the vicinity of a tribal cultural resource find, notification of the appropriate oversight agency and Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, and appropriate treatment (Final SEIR Section 4). Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to tribal cultural resources (Draft SEIR, page 4-5).

Cumutative Human Remain lmpacts
Compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 and implementation of FPASP EIR/ElR Mitigation Measure 3.A5-3 would ensure that project impacts to human remains would be less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to human remains impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

City oi iolsoir 2t35 Ceneral Plan Anendnenls for-incr'eased Reslienriai Caoaciiy ?rciecl F:r:cinqs anc iacls in Si;ooor'i ci Findings ?q

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascetr:i
Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 and implementation of FPASP EIR/EIR adopted Mitigation Measure

3.A5-3.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The proposed project would result in increased residential density throughout the project planning area. lncreased development has the potential to result in an adverse change to interred human remains throughout the project planning area. However, development would occur on the same footprint as previously analyzed in the General Plan ElR. Development associated with the project would be required to adhere to state regulations related to the handling of human remains. Additionally, development within the Folsom Plan Area would be required to comply with adopted Mitigation Measure 3.5A-3 (suspend ground-disturbing activities if human remains are encountered and complywith California Health and Safety Code procedures) and would reduce impacts to less than significant. lmpacts would remain less than cumulatively considerable (Draft SEIR, page and 4-5).

Cumulative Energy lmpacts
The project would comply with applicable energy efficiency requirements and would implement design features that meet or exceed current requirements per Title 24 and CALGreen. Because the project would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy and would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, the project would not result in a significant cumulative energy impact. The project's contribution to substantial effects related to energy would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additionalmitigation is required beyond compliancewith existing regulations (i.e., Title 24and CALGreen).

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would consume energy related to transportation (i.e., gasoline and diesel consumption for passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, and other vehicles) and construction. The project would be required to implement energy efficiency measures in accordance with the Title 24 California Energy Code, which includes CALGreen, to reduce energy demand from buildings and would likely implement transportation demand management strategies to reduce the number of vehicle trips and VMT, which would reduce fuel consumption. The project would increase energy demand during temporary construction activities for new buildings and facilities. During operation, the project would be expected to requlre more energy overall when compared to the land uses evaluated in the General Plan EIR due to the increase in residential capacity. However, as discussed in Section 6.4 above, the project would result in less than significant energy impacts during construction and operation. Therefore, the project's contri.bution to energy impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 4-5 and 4-6).

Cumutative Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Ctimate Change lmpacts The General Plan EIR concluded a less-than-significant impact associated with the buildoutyearof the general plan (i.e.,2035). However, the General Plan EIR concluded that a significant and unavoidable impact associated with future target year 2050. The project would be consistent with adopted GHG reduction strategies that aim to improve GHG C:iy ci rciscm 203! Gererai Pian Ar'nercrents for increased Resiceni;al Caoaciiy Prilecl f incings ani l:acts tn Sucpor't cf Finciings1+2

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
efficiency, the project would not conflict with the City's ability to achieve their 2035 targets, however, the project does not include any additional measures or GHG reduction strategies that would assist in meeting the 2050 targets.

Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially greater impacts relating to GHG emissions but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Because the issue of global climate change is inherently a cumulative issue because the GHG emissions of individual projects cannot be shown to have any material effect on global climate. Therefore, the project's impact on climate change is addressed only as a cumulative impact. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No feasible mitigation is available beyond implementation of FPASP EIR/ElS Mitigation Measures 3A.4-1, 3A.4-2a, and 3A.4-2b.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Based on the comparative analysis conducted to representthe change in emissions associated with buildoutof the project, total mass emissions associated with the project would result in an increase as compared to emissions from the General Plan ElR. This is primarily due to the increase in the number of residential land uses, which would result in an increase in daily trip generation and associated VMT. Because the project would increase GHG emissions compared to the General Plan EIR and because further substantial GHG emissions reduction would be required to meetthe 2045 carbon neutrality goals and 2050 GHG reduction targets, the GHG impacts were determined to remain significant consistent with the conclusion of the General Plan ElR. Because climate change is a global problem caused by global pollutants and is inherently cumulative, the analysis concluded in the SEIR is a cumulative analysis.

Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, consistent with the conclusion in the General Plan EIR (Draft SEIR, page 4-6).

Cumulative Land Use and Ptanning lmpact
The project is consistent with applicable General Plan and FPASP policies related to environmental protections. There is no new significant effect, and the impact is not more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR.

Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects to land use and planning beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. The project's contribution to the significant cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required
Ciiy cf iciscm 2C35 Gener'ai P:an Arnendmeris Icr-increased Res:Centlai Cacaciiv Proiect iindings ari lacls ;r'r S,J0ooi'i si itndtngs
1+',

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would amend the City's 2035 General Plan and Toning Code to increase the minimum density and maximum floor area ratio standards in the project planning area to maintain multi-family and mixed-use land available to meet the target housing demand at all income levels for the RHNA. The project would also amend the FPASP to increase residential development capacity on the proposed rezone sites within the Folsom Plan Area. As discussed in Section 6.5 above, future development associated with the project, including residential development within the project planning area, would be required to be consistent with the General Plan and the FPASP (for sites located within the Folsom Plan Area) policies and programs adopted to address environmental effects. ln addition, the project would be in compliance with State law requirements and meet the RHNA for the City. The project would not remove or modify any policies or measures from the General Plan and FPASP that are intended for environmental protection. The project's land use and planning impact would be less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to the significant cumulative impact would be less than cumulatively considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-6).

Cumulative Construction Noise and Vibration lmpacts
Adherence to the construction noise requirements in the Standard Construction Specifications, the General Plan policies, FMC, and mitigation measures would avoid the generation of substantial temporary construction noise levels. The project would result in less than significant construction noise and vibration impacts with mitigation. The project's contribution to construction noise and vibration impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are offset and less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1 and 3.7-2.Ihe mitigation measures are feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1 and Mitigation Measure 3.7-2 would be required.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Adherence to the Folsom Standard Construction Specifications, General Plan policies, FMC, Mitigation Measures 3.7-1 and3.7-2, and FPASF EIR/EIS Mitigation Measures 3A.11-1 and 34.'11-2 would reduce construction noise and vibration impacts to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the project's contribution to construction noise and vibration impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 4-6 and 4-7).

Cumulative Traffic Noise lmpacts
The increase in traffic noise levels that would result from project implementation would not generate a substantial increase in traffic noise levels above those anticipated under the General Plan buildout. Therefore, there is no new significant effect, and the impact is not substantially more severe than the impact identified in the General Plan ElR.

This impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

C,ty ci icisorr 2035 Cenerai P;an Amencnenis icr incr'easei Res:cer:iia: (-acaciiy Pr'oiecl r:ncirgs anci iacls rn 5i:pcori ci i:irrjiecs42

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascenl
Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with FPASP EIR/EIS adopted Mitigation Measure 3A.11-4 and General Plan Policy SN 6.1.2.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The project would be subject to General Plan Policy SN 6.1.2, which requires mitigation for noise due to traffic on public roadways for new residential development to meet the noise standards. Additionally, the project would be subject to FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.11-4 for development in the Folsom Plan Area, and the FMC noise standards as they aim to comprehensively address construction noise sources. Compliance with General Plan policy and implementation of adopted mitigation measure would ensure that no new significant traffic noise effect would occur, and the impact is not more severe than identified in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project's contribution to traffic noise impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-7).

Cumulative Stationary Noise lmpacts
Adherence to the General Plan Policy 6.1.2 and implementation of applicable mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant stationary noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors to less than significant. Therefore, the project would not contribute substantially to a cumulative impact related to stationary noise and this impact would be less than cumu latively considerable,

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are offset and less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-4. The mitigation measure is feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure 3.7-4 would be required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Adherence to General Plan Policy 6.1.2 and implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-4 and FPASP EIR/ElS Mitigation Measure 3A.1'1-5 would reduce potentially significant stationary and HVAC noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors to a less-than-significant level. Future developments would be required to adhere to the standards set forth in FMC, General Plan, and mitigation measures of the SEIR. The project's contribution to stationary noise impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable, The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-7).

Cumulative Population and Housing lmpacts
The project would not induce substantial population growth above that which is already anticipated for the City and the region. Thus, the cumulative impact would not be significant. The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative population growth beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. The project's contribution to cumulative population growth would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Ciiy ci lciscn 2C35 Cenerai Dlan Ar"rendmeitis ior"lccreesec Resicier:tlai Capacily'rcjecl FlnCrngs and iacts:r: Si.;pccti of Ftndilgs 43

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asr.ent
Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
SACOG is the lead agency for developing the RHNA for the Sacramento region, which includes Sacramento County and the City of Folsom. The project would ensure that Folsom has adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA and also provides additional sites to ensure that over the long-term, beyond Ihe 2021-2029 RHNA period, that the City continues to have adequate sites to accommodate a range of housing needs. The project has been developed to accommodate the growth projections in the RHNA and is consistent with long-term regional growth projections.

Therefore, implementation of the projectwould assist Folsom in accommodating itsfairshare of groMh and housing needs under cumulative conditions. Therefore, the project's contribution to population and housing impacts would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-7).

Cumulative Public Services lmpacts
Development in the City would be suloject to General Plan policies and mitigation measures identified in the General plan ElR, which would subsequently reduce physical environmental effects and provide additional police and fire protection services, as well as school facilities, as areas develop. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to public services beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. The project's contribution to substantial effects related to public services would be lessthan cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Cumulative development In the city would continue to increase the concentration of people and structures within the local public servicejurisdictions which in turn increases demand for such services. The increase in population under the project could continue the trend of increasing the demand for public services and could combine with other proposed development projects within the City to result in a cumulative increase in demand for public services such that new or physically altered governmental facilities would be required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives and the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. As noted in Section 3.9 of the SEIR, "Public Services and Recreation," it is not anticipated that new or expanded public facilities would be required to accommodate development under the project. Further, new development and growth would occur within existing developed areas where public services currently exist. To the extent that any potential expansion of public facilities is required to accommodate new development and growth in the area, it is reasonable to assume that these would be expansions of existing facilities, or new facilities in already developed areas which would typically be exempt from CEQA review as infill development. Future development projects would also be required to pay impactfees consistentwith localjurisdiction requirements, including the City and FCUSD, to ensure the adequate provision of public services, including schools. lmpacts related to public facilities construction and school services would be less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to public services impacts would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 4-7 and 4-8).

City ci ioison 2C3-{ General P:an Ai'rercments icr :ncr'easec Res:Cer: al Caoacrly Pt-ciecl iincir':gs anc i-acls in SL.:pcor't of irr<iings44

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Cumulative Recreation lmpacts
The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to recreation beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to recreation would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with Quimby Act, General Plan Policy LU 6.1.4, and FMC Chapters 16.32 and 4.10.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The Quimby Act, which applies to cities and counties in the context of approval of residential subdivisions, has a parkland standard of 5 acres per 1,000 persons. The City is subject to the standards of the Quimby Act, and the increase in recreational facilities/areas under the project would be consistent with the Quimby Act and would offset the incremental increase in recreational facility demand associated with implementation of the project. As discussed in Section 6.6 above, the City would have sufficient parkland to support project buildout. Future development would also be subject to General Plan Policy LU 6.1.4 that requires open space in each residential development. Future tentative subdivision and tentative parcel maps underthe projectwould be required to dedicate land or payan in- lieu fee for the development of neighborhood and community parks, pursuant to FMC Chapter 16.32 and Chapter

4.10. The project would result in less than significant impacts related to recreation and parks. Therefore, the project's contribution to recreation and parks impacts would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-8).

Cumulative Transit, Bicycte, and Pedestrian Facitity lmpacts The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FI NDI NG5
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
lmplementation of the project would be subject to and would implement General Plan policies applicable to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and service. Additionally, subsequent development projects under the project would be subjectto all applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities.

Compliance with the applicable General Plan and FPASP objectives and policies would ensure that the increased demand for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities resulting from the project would not exceed the capacity of existing C:iy oi iclsci'r 2035 Generai 2lar Arnendr'"',enis loi iccreased Res;dert:ai Cacacity Pi'oject irncings ano !acts ir: Suppci'i cf !tndinEs 4i

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascenl
and planned facilities. The project would result in a less-than-significant impact on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the project's contribution to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities impacts would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-9).

Cumulative Vehicte Mites Traveted lmpacts
The addition of project-generated total daily VMT within the City would not result in an exceedance of the established Citywide threshold of 7.51 VMT per capita. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to VMT would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The discussion of VMT impacts associated with the project is inherently a cumulative impact analysis as it compares the project to City VMT standards associated with buildout of the City. The project would have a reduced VMT per capita of approximately 6.62 when incorporating the trip generation rate reduction and trip distance reduction associated with low-income units, which is less than the citywide threshold of 7.51 VMT per capita. Therefore, residential VMT cumulative effects associated with the project would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-9).

Cumutative lmpacts Retated to Hazardous Design Feature or lncompatible Uses lmplementation of the project would be subject to, and constructed in accordance with, applicable roadway design and safety guidelines and General Plan policies. The project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses beyond what was identified in the General plan ElR. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to design features or incompatible uses would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potentlal impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
As discussed above in Section 6.'10, any new transportation facilities, or improvements to such facilities associated with future development would be required to comply with General Plan policies, including Policy M 1.1.3 to require new and reconstructed facilities to meet the Americans with Disability Act requirements and Policy M 3.1.1 to ensure all residents have access to safe and convenient public transit options. Development in the Folsom Plan Area would be required to comply with FPASP objectives and policies, including Objective 7.1 to create a safe and efficient circulation system for all modes of travel and Policy 7.2 to provide Americans with Disability Act accessible circulation and minimize barriers to access by pedestrians, persons with disabilities, seniors, and bicyclists. New or improved C,iy cf tcisorr 2031 Cenerai irian ArenCrreris for'lncraasec Res;ieriial Caoacity Pr"cject r:nc:ngs ar'.j lac:s :r 5ucr;or't oi '::ni:ngs46

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
transportation facilities would be designed in accordance with Caltrans' policies and procedures to ensure a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system is maintained. The project would include the addition of a roundabout prioritization policy in the City of Folsom General Plan. Future projects associated with the roundabout policy would be subject to the City's Public Works Department review and approval to ensure all applicable standards are met. The project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to transportation hazards. Therefore, the project's contribution to impacts related to hazardous design feature or incompatible use would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-9).

Cumutative Water lmpacts
The additional water demand from implementation of the project would not result in a new or substantially more severe impact regarding water supply than was addressed in the General Plan ElR. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to water service beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. Thus, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to water service would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
As discussed in Section 6.11 above, the development north of Highway 50 would result in increases in water demand of approximately 916 AFY in the City of Folsom. The City of Folsom would have sufficient water supplies to serve the projected 916 AFY of water demand during normal year, single-dry year, and five-year consecutive drought. The development south of Highway 50 would result in increases in water demand of approximalely 414 AFY. Of lhe 414 AFY water demand, approximately 359 AFY would be within the City of Folsom's service area and 55 AFY within the El Dorado lrrigation District's service area. Both the City of Folsom and El Dorado lrrigation District would have sufficient water to serve the project. Modeling conducted for the project indicated that the increase in water demand resulting from the project would not result in adverse hydraulic impacts to the City's water distribution system. The impacts related to water supply and water infrastructure would be less than significant. Therefore, the project's contribution to impacts related to water supply and water infrastructure would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, pages 4-9 and 4-10).

Cumulative Wastewater and Stormwater lmpacts
lmplementation of the project could generate wastewater as a result of increased housing in the City. The existing wastewater conveyance infrastructure in the City of Folsom would not have sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated additional wastewater. lmplementation of Mitigation Measures3.l1-2a and 3.1'l-2b would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to wastewater and stormwater services would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FI N DI NGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are offset and less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.11-2a and 3.11-2b. These mitigation measure are feasible and will be adopted and included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.

C:iy cf Fclson 20.15 Gererai ?lan Ar,.:ercments ior ir-creasei Resrrjeni:ai Caoacriy Pr'cjecl :-:r:orlqs a'lc lacis:. Suoccii';i j rc lgs 47

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asceni
Mitigation Measure
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a and Mitigation Measure 3.11-2b would be required

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
The discussion of wastewater conveyance impacts associated with the project for is inherently a cumulative impact analysis as the wastewater model includes existing and proposed future development as anticipated in the General Plan ElR. As summarized in Section 6.1.1 above, development associated with the project beyond that identified in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Buildout Scenario) would have the potential to reach the capacity of some localized sewer lines, specifically along Riley Road, Sibley Drive, and Glenn Road. lmplementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a would ensure local improvements would be constructed to maintain capacity in the sewer shed. The western project planning area north of Highway 50 is located within the 27-lnch Sewer Shed, which does not have capacity beyond the amount originally identified in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacily Assurance Plan (Ultimate Buildout Scenario). Mitigation Measure 3.11-2b would require preparation of sewer studies for future projects and development and implementation of a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan to allow for additional capacity. lmpacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Therefore, the project's contribution to wastewater and stormwater impacts related to would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (SElR, page 4-10).

Cumutative Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications lmpacts Future development associated with the project would be following more stringent energy efficiency standards, which would reduce the demand for energy use. ln addition, compliance with General Plan Policies PFS 8.1.1 through PFS

8.1.5 would also ensure that adequate utilities services would be provided to the City's residents. Therefore, the project would not result in a new or greater contribution to cumulative effects related to dry utilities facilities beyond what was identified in the General Plan ElR. Thus, the project's contribution to substantial effects related to dry utilities facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable.

FINDINGS
The City of Folsom City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the potential impacts related to the project's cumulative effects are less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measure
No additional mitigation is required beyond compliance with most current energy efficiency standards and General Plan policies.

FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
lmplementation of the project would result in 6,046 housing additional units in the project planning area and reduction of 251,266 square feet of non-residential land use in the Folsom Plan Area. lt is anticipated that the demand for electrical power, natural gas, and telecommunication services would be increased for residential use but would be decreased for non-residential use compared to what was evaluated in the General Plan ElR. As discussed in lmpact 311-4of the SEIR (pages 3.11-25 and3.11-26), a Technical Dry Utilities Studywas prepared forthe Folsom Plan Area by Capitol Utilities Specialists in 2009. The study concluded that all the major dry utilities (natural gas, electric, telephone, and cable television) necessary to serye the FPASP either already exist on-site or are available adjacent to the site. Furthermore, SMUD, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and AT&T and Comcast Communication have planned to construct additional electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication infrastructure to serve the Folsom Plan Area. lmplementation of General Plan Policies PFS 8.1.1 through PFS 8.1.5 would ensure that adequate utilities services would be provided to the City's residents. Regulations, including State energy efficiency standards and building C;iy cf rciscr: 2C:15 Generai Plan Amenirrenis icr lncreasec R.es;dentiai Cacac:ty Ftoject F;ndir':qs anc lac.:s :r Slcpor'i cl i:incilngs/+8

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
regulations, have generally reduced the demand for energy on a per-unit basis compared to the industry standard when the General Plan EIR was prepared. lt is reasonable to assume that the project would not result in a substantial increase in demand for dry utilities compared to what was evaluated in the General Plan EIR and planned for the Folsorn Plan Area. The project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded dry utilities infrastructure that have not been evaluated in the General Plan EIR and have been planned for the Folsom Plan Area. lmpacts would be less than significant, Therefore, the project's contribution to impacts related to electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications would be less than cumulative considerable. The cumulative effects would be less than significant (Draft SEIR, page 4-10).

Cliy of iclscrn 2C35 Cenerai Plan Aniendrnents for lncr'eased Reslder*,iai Cacaciiy Pi"ctect Fir:dinqs arC iacts in Support of rinS,tnt 49

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asc.ent
7 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES

7.1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT REJECTED IN THE SEIR
As described above, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) provides that the range of potential alternatives for the project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. Alternatives that fail to meet the fundamental project purpose need not be addressed in detail in an ElR. (ln re Bay-DeLta Programmatic Environmental lmpact Report Coordin ated Proceeding s (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1165 -1167 .) ln determining what alternatives should be considered in an ElR, it is important to acknowledge the objectives of the project, the project's significant effects, and unique project considerations. These factors are crucial to the development of alternatives that meet the criteria specified in Section 15126.6(a). Although, as noted above, ElRs must contain a discussion of 'potentially feasible" alternatives, the ultimate determination as to whether an alternative is feasible or infeasible is made by lead agency decision-maker(s). (See Pub, Resources Code, 5 21081(a)(3).) At the time of action on the project, the decision-maker(s) may consider evidence beyond that found in this EIR in addressing such determinations. The decision-maker(s), for example, may conclude that a particular alternative is infeasible (i.e., undesirable) from a policy standpoint, and may reject an alternative on that basis provided that the decision-maker(s) adopts a finding, supported by substantial evidence, to that effect, and provided that such a finding reflects a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and other considerations supported by substantial evidence. (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401,417; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 99S.) The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected during the planning or scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination. The following two alternatives were considered in the SEIR but were not evaluated further:
> Reduced Units in the 27-inch Sewer Shed
> Relocated Units in the 27-inch Sewer Shed to 33-inch Sewer Shed

7.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE SEIR
Three alternatives, representing a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, were selected for detailed analysis. The goal for evaluating these alternatives is to identify ways to avoid or lessen the significant environmental effects resulting from implementation of the proposed project, while attaining most of the project objectives.

The following sections provide a general description of each alternative, its ability to meet the project objectives, and a qualitative discussion of its comparative environmental impacts. As provided in Section 15126.6(d)of the CEQA Guidelines, the significant effects of these alternatives are identified in less detailthan the analysis of the proposed project in the SEIR.

Atternative 1: No Project

SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE
Under Alternative 1, the No Project Alternative, the City would continue to implement the adopted 2035 General Plan.

No changes would be made to address the requirements of State law. Since the adoption of the 2035 General Plan, the City has been issued a RHNA by SACOG and is required by State lawto address its housing needs in the 2021- 2029 Housing Element. The General Plan land use and zoning designations would not be updated to address the City's housing needs under this alternative. The project planning area would retain the adopted General Plan land use and zoning designations.

Clty of :clscar 2035 Cene;-ai liar Ar"nencnenis icr increaseci Residentraj Caoac;ty Projeci Itncinqs anC i-acts in Supcor.t of liniirgs5C

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asceni
The No Project Alternative would result in the continuation of existing conditions and planned development of the City. No new significant environmental impacts or an increased severity of environmental impacts identified in the 2035 General Plan EIR would occur underthis alternative because it would retain the current General Plan land use and zoning designations.

FINDING
No new significant environmental impacts or an increased severity of environmental impacts identified in the General Plan EIR would occur under this alternative because it would retain the current General Plan land use designations and policy provisions. lmplementation of this alternative would reduce all identified impacts of the project. However, the No Project Alternative would not meet the project objectives. Therefore, the City of Folsom City Council rejects the No Project Alternative as undesirable as it fails the project's underlying purpose and does not meet any of the project objectives.

ANALYSIS
The No Project Alternative would not include land use or zoning amendments to plan for additional housing in the City or meet the direction from the State to meet the City's RHNA for housing. As part of the Housing Element update the City is required to establish and maintain sufficient multi-family and mixed-use land available to meetthe target housing demand at all income levels over an 8-year period. The City's RHNA obligation for the eight-year Housing Element cycle is 6,363 housing units, of which 3,567 units are to be affordable to low- and very low-income households (collectively referred to as the lower-income RHNA). Program H-2 of lhe 2021-2029 Housing Element directs the City to strategically increase residential capacity in the East Bidwell Mixed Use Overlay, SACOG Transit Priority Areas (Glenn and lron Point light rail stations), and the FPASP Town Center to address the no net loss requirements (Draft SEIR, page 5-3).

Under this alternative, 2021-2029 Housing Element Program H-2 lo increase opportunities for mixed-use and multi- family high density development would not be implemented and a new Transit Oriented Development overlay designation would not be established. This alternative would not include a roundabout prioritization policy in the General Plan that would promote reduced congestion and safety.

Atternative 2: Denser Devetopment Alternative

SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE
Under Alternative 2, multi-family development in the Glenn Station and Central Business districts would be reduced, specifically the development within the City's 27-inch sewer shed, and instead multi-family development in the College/Broadstone, lron Point Station district and the portion of the Glenn Station district outside the 27-inch sewer shed would be increased.

FINDING
For the reasons set forth below and more fully described in Final SEIR and in the record of proceeding, the City of Folsom City Council finds that Alternative 2 is undesirable as it would result in greater impacts to aesthetics, air quality, energy, noise, population and housing, and public services. The City of Folsom City Council also finds that although this alternative would reduce impacts to the City's 27-inch sewer shed the Denser Development Alternative would have a greater impact on the City's 33-inch sewer shed. Therefore, the City of Folsom City Council declines to adopt this alternative pursuant to the standards in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. ilty cf loisorn 2335 General Pian Amei':drnenis ror lncreased Residearial Caoacity Projeci :!noings anc iacts in Suopori cf iir:drngs 5i

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asceni

ANALYSIS
Denser development under Alternative 2 would result in an additional 49 units as part of the project. Although Alternative 2 would be consistent with the project objectives, Alternative 2 would not avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the General Plan EIR including aesthetics, airquality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise (Draft SEIR, pages 5-4through 5-7). As shown in Table 5-2 of the Draft SEIR Alternative 2 impacts to aesthetics, air quality, and noise would be increased under this alternative.

Alternative 3: Folsom Plan Area Alternative

SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE
Under the Folsom Plan Area Alternative all development proposed for the project needed to meet the target housing demand for the City's RHNA would be in the Folsom Plan Area. The Folsom Plan Area Alternative would include all proposed 6,046 additional multi-family residential units south of Highway 50 in the Folsom Plan Area. To achieve additional residential development in the Folsom Plan Area this alternative would allow for increased building height of two additionalstories, higher density, and greater FAR on sites designated as part of the project in the FPASP for development. Therefore, overall development under this alternative would be denser and taller than currently permitted in the Folsom Plan Area.

FINDING
For the reasons set forth below and more fully described in Final SEIR and in the record of proceeding, the City of Folsom City Council finds that Alternative 3 is undesirable as it would place all development in the Folsom Plan Area and thus would not meet the project objectives to increase opportunities for mixed-use and multi-family high density development in the East Bidwell Mixed Use Overlay or SACOG Transit Priority Areas. Additionally, the project objective to establish a new Transit Oriented Development Overlay would not be met. Therefore, the City of Folsom City Council declines to adopt this alternative pursuant to the standards in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

ANALYSIS
Program H-2 af the 2021-2029 Housing Element directs the City to strategically increase residential capacity in the East Bidwell Mixed Use Overlay, the SACOG Transit Priority Areas (Glenn and lron Point light rail stations), and the FPASP Town Center to address the no net loss requirements. Alternative 3, would not meet the requirements of Program H-2by increasing residential capacity only in the Folsom Plan Area. Furthermore, it would conflict with Program H-2, which states that the "City shall strive to disperse affordable housing opportunities and avoid fair housing issues related to overconcentration." Additionally, Alternative 3 would result in greater environmental impacts to aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise and would not reduce the significant and unavoidable findings from the General Plan EIR for these issue areas (Draft SEIR, pages 5-7 through 5-'10). See Table 5-2 of the Draft SEIR.

Cily ci -oiscrn 203: Genera! Plan A:'renc,.nenis icr increesec 'les;ieni:ai Cacac:ly Pi'cject lncir^qs anc !acis ;n Sirccor'l oi iiriir:qs52

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Exhibit 3
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION
CEeA and the State CEQA Guidelines (PRC Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091[d] and 15097) require public agencies "to adopt a reporting and monitoring program for changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment." A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is required forthe proposed project because the SEIR identifies potential significant adverse impacts related to the project implementation, and mitigation measure have been identified to reduce those impacts. Adoption of the MMRP would occur along with approvalof the proposed project that includes amendments to General Plan, the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan, and zoning code.

PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This MMRP has been prepared to ensure that all required mitigation measures are implemented and completed in a satisfactory manner priorto implementation of the project. The attached table has been prepared to assistthe responsible parties in implementing the mitigation measures. The table identifies the impact, mitigation measures, monitoring responsibility, mitigation timing, and provides space to confirm implementation of the mitigation measures. The numbering of mitigation measures follows the numbering sequence found in the SEIR. Mitigation measures that are referenced more than once in the Draft SEIR are not duplicated in the MMRP table.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The City will oversee monitoring and documenting the implementation of mitigation measures, as applicable. Project applicants and construction contractors are responsible for fully understanding and effectively implementing all of the mitigation measures contained within this MMRP. Certain mitigation measures also will require that project applicants coordinate or consult with one or more other public agencies in implementing mitigation measures specified herein.

CHANGES TO MITIGATION MEASURES
Any substantive change in the MMRP is required to be reported in writing. Modifications to the mitigation measure may be made by the responsible agency, subject to one of the following findings, and documented by evidence included in the public record:
> The mitigation measure included in the SEIR and the MMRP is no longer required because the significant environmental impact identified in the SEIR has been found notto exist, orto occur at a level which makes the impact less than significant as a result of changes in the project, changes in environment conditions, or other factors.

OR,
> The modified or substitute mitigation measure provides a level of environmental protection equal to, or greater than that afforded by the mitigation measure included in the SEIR and the MMRP; and > The modified or substitute mitigation measure or measures do not have significant adverse effects on the environment in addition to, or greater than those which were considered by the responsible hearing bodies in their decisions on the SEIR and the proposed project; and > The modified or substitute mitigation measure is feasible, and the responsible agency, through measures included in the MMRP or other procedures, can ensure implementation.

C:ly cf iciscrn
2035 Gerreral l,an Arneaci:rents ioi'inclease<i Res:certia! Caoac::y Frcieci VIMRr

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Mitiqation Monitcring anC Reportinq Prcqrarn Ascr:ni Environmentai

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TABLE
The categories identified in the attached MMRP table are described below. > Mitigation Measure - This column provides the verbatim text of the adopted mitigation measure. > lmplementation Responsibility - This column identifies the party responsible for implementing the mitigation measure.
> Timing - This column identifies the time frame in which the mitigation will be implemented. > Verification - This column is to be dated and signed by the person (either project manager or his/her designee) responsible for verifying compliance with the requirements of the mitigation measure.

Ciiy cf fcisom
2C35 Cenerai Plan Arnendments fcr lncreased Resicentiai Capacity Ptcjecl VMRe

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asr"errl
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
if: :t qa",-:c r Mo ni lo rr nq a r'ic iio0orli rro ? i r:q| air Mitigtion Measurs
Aesthetics
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.1{: Construct and Maintain a Landscape Corridor Adjacent to U.S. 50. The prolect applicant(s) for any particular discret onary development application adjacent to U.5. 50 shall fund, construct, and maintain a landscaped corridor within the 5PA, south of U.S 50 This conidor shalJ be 50 feet wide, except that the landscaped corridor width shall be reduced to 25 feet adjacent to the proposed regional mall. Landscaping plans and spectfications shall be approved by Calvans and the City of Folsom, and constructed by the prolect applicant(s) before the start of earthmoving activities associated wlth residential or commercral units. Landscaped areas would not be required within the preserved oak woodlands. As practicable, landscaping shall primarily contain native and/or drought tolerant plants. Landscaped corridors shall be marntained in perpetuity to the satisfaction of the City of Folsom
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.1-4: Screen Construction Staging Areas. The project applicant(s) for any partrcular discretionary development appl cation shall locate staging and material storage areas as far away from sensltive biologlcal resources and sensitive land uses (e.g., residential areas, schools, parks) as feasible. Staging and material storage areas shall be approved by the appropriate agency (identified below) before the approval ofgrading plans for aLl prolect phases and shall be screened from adjacent occup ed land uses ln earlier development phases to the maxrmum extent practrcable. Screens may include, but are not lirnited to, the use of such visua baniers such as berms or fences. The screen design shall be approved by the appropriate agency to further reduce vlsual effects to the extent possible.

Mitiqation for the off-site elements outside of the City of Folsom's.lurisdictiona boundaries shall be developed by the project applicant(s) of each applicable project phase in consultation with the affected oversight agency(ies) (i e., El Dorado and/or Sacramento Counties, and Ca trans) to reduce to the exieni feasible the visuaL effects ofconstruction activrties on adjacent project iand uses ihat have already been developed
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 34.1-5: Establish and Require Conformance to Lightlng Standards and Prepare and lmplement a Lighting Plan. To reduce impacts associated with lrght and g1are, the City shall:
> Establish standards for on-slte outdoor lighting to reduce high-intensity nighttime lighting and glare as part of the Folsom Specific Plan design guide ines/standards. Consideration shall be given to desrgn features, namely directiona shielding for street lighting, parking lot lighting, and other substantial I ht sources, that wou d reduce effects of httime I City oI i]r:;lson'r
2035 0orlcrai Dian Amendrrr'rnts icr ncrcaseci l<tlsicicniiai t-acar:tiy irclec-i MVliP ln
Timrnglmplemeniatbn Responsibility Verificatbn
Before approval of building
permits.

Before approval of grading plans
and durng construction for all
project phases.

Plans and specifications: before
approval of grading plans and
build ng permits.

Construction: before the approval
of occupancy permrts associated
with residential and commercial
units.

N/aintenance. in perpetuity
Project applicant(s) for any
particular discretionary
development application,
Prolect applicant($ for any
particular drscretionary
development appiicatron.

Pro.lect applicant($ for any
particular discretionary
developmeni application adjacent
toUS 50

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
limrglmplernentaticn Resporsibility
Miliqation Monitor-inq anC F.errcrtinq P r r:qr ant
Mitigation Measures
additlon, consideration shall be given to the use of automatic shutoffs or motion sensors for ighting features to further reduce excess nrghttime light. > Use shielded or screened public lighting flxtures to prevent the light from shining off of the surface intended to be llluminated.

To reduce impacts associated wlth light and glare, the project applicant(s) of a I project phases shall.
> Shield or screen lighting flxtures to directthe light downward and prevent light spi' on adjacert prope'ties.
> Flood and area lighting needed for construction activities, nighttime sporting activities, and/or security shall be screened or atmed no higher than 45 degrees above straight down (half-way between straight down and straight to the side) when the source is visiblefrom any off-site residential properh/ or pubiic roadway.
> For public lighting in residential neighborhoods, prohibit the use of light fixtures that are of unusually high intensity or brightness (e.9., harsh mercury vapor, low-pressure sodium, or fluorescent bulb$ or that b ink or flash. > Use appropriate building materials (such as iow-glare glass, low-glare building glaze or finish, neutral, earthtoned colored paint and roofing materia s), shielded or screened lighting, and appropriate signage in the office/commercial areas to prevent light and glare from adversely affecting motorists on nearby roadways
> Design exterior on-site lighting as an rntegral part of the building and landscape design in the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan area. Lighting fixtures shall be architecturally consistent with the overall site design. > Lighting of off-sjte facllities within the City of Folsom shall be consistent with the City's General Plan standards.
> Lighting of the off-site detention basin shall be consistent with Sacramento County General Plan standards
> Lighting of the two loca roadway connections from Fo som Heights off-site into El Dorado Hills shall be consistent with El Dorado County General Plan standards.

A lighting plan for all on- and off-site elements within each agency's jurisdictional boundaries (specified below) shall be submitted to the re evant jurlsdictional agenry for review and approval, which shal include the above e ements. The lighting plan may be submitted concurrently with other improvement plans, and shall be submitted AscenI
Verificafon
City cf lcisorn
2C.J: Oeneral Plan Amencme nls for incrcasetj iieside'nllai t-apacly Pro;ect MMRP4 before the installation of or the a of for each

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

TmingI mpbmenbtion Raponsibility
Asceni
Mfigatbn Measure
phase. The project applicant$) for any particular discretionary development application shall implement the approved lighting p an.

Mitigation for the off-site elements outside of ihe City of Folsom's.lurrsdictional boundaries must be coordinated by the project applicant(s) of each applicable prolect phase with the affected oversight agency(ieg (i.e., E1 Dorado and/or Sacramento Counties).

Air Quality
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.2-1a: lmplement Measures to Control Air Pollutant Emissions Generated by Construction of On-Site Elements. To reduce short-term consiruction emissions, the pro,1ect applrcant($ for any particular discretlonary development application shall require thetr contractors to implement SMAQMD's list of Basic Construction Emission Control Practices, Enhanced Fugitive PM Dust Control Practices, and Enhanced Exhaust Control Practices (list below) in effect ai the time individual portions of the stte undergo construction In addition to SMAQMD-recommended measures, construction operations shall comp y with a1l applicable SliIAQNID rules and regulations
Bas[c Construction Emlsston Control Practices
> Water all exposed surfaces two times daily. Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to sorl piles, graded areas, unpaved parking areas, staging areas, and access roads.
> Cover or maintatn at leasttwo feet offree board space on hau trucks transporting soil, sand, or oiher 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 sweep nq is prohibited.
> Limitvehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph). > Al 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 ln use or reducing the time of idllng to 5 mrnutes (as required by the state airborne toxics control measure lTitle 13, Section 2485 of the Caitfornia Code of Regulationsl). Provide clear signage that posts this requ rement for workers at the entrances to the site.

City cf i:oisori-i
2()35 Gene rai Plan Amencimenis ior lncreased i{esrdenhai Caparity Prcleci MitlRP f'liirr;aiion Mcnitcr;ng arrd Reoo;-tr rig P rogr an
Verifiotion
Before approval of all grading
plans by the City and throughout
project construction, where
applicable, for all project phases.

Prolect applicant$) for all pro;ect
phases.

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Iimirglmpbmentatirn Resporsibility
\l i l.iqat icrri iilo ni io r"i n g a n d ileoo r"ti nq il cqr arr Mitigation Measure
> Maintain all construction equtpment in proper working condition accord ng 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.

Enhanced Fugltive PM Dust Contro[ Practtces - Soi[ Disturbance Areas > Water exposed soil w th adequate frequency for continued moist soil However, do not overwater to the extent that sediment flows off the site. > Suspend excavation, grading, and/or demolition activity when wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
> P ant vegetative ground cover (fast-germinating native grass seed) in disturbed areas as soon as possible. Water appropriately untrl vegetation ls e$ablished Enhanced Fugltlve PM Dust Contro[ Practtces - Unpaved Roads > Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipmeni leaving the site
> Treat srte accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road with a 6 to l2-inch layer ofwood chips, mulch, or gravel to reduce generation of road dust and road dust carryout onto public roads.
> Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the construction site regarding dust complaints This person shall respond and take conective action within 48 hours. The phone number of SIVAQNID and the City contact person shall also be posted to ensuTe compliance.

En h anced Exha ust Co ntro[ P ractlces
> The project shall provide a p an, for approval by the City of Folsom Community Development Departrnent and SMAQMD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (50 horsepower lhpl or more) off-road vehicles to be used in the constructron project, including owned, leased, and subcontractor vehic es, wrlL achleve a pro.lect wide fleet-average 20% NOX reduction and 457o part culate reduction compared to the most current California Air Resources Board (ARB) fleet average that exists at the time of construction. Acceptable options for reducing emrssions may include use of late-model engines, low-emission dtesel products, alternative fuels, engine retrofit technology, after-treatment products, and/or other options as they become available The project applicant$) of each project phase or its representative shall submit to the City of Folsom Community Deve opment Department and SMAQMD a comprehensive inventory of all off-road construction equipment, equal to or greater than 50 hp, that would be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours dur ng any portion of the construction project. The inventory shall include the horsepower rating, engine production year, and prolected hours of use for Verficatbn
Crty of loisor'rr
2il;5 Ge nerai Plan /rrnendmer:is for" lncr'eased xesioenlia Cacar::ty Pr"c;;eci MMiiF6 each iece of ul The i shall be and submitted

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lisceni
Mitigation Measures
monthly throughout the duration of the pro.1ect, except that an inventory shalL not be required for any 30-day period in which no construction activlty occurs.

At least 48 hours prror to the use of heavy-duty off-road equipment, the projeci representative shall provide SMAQMD with the anticipated construction timeline including start date, and name and phone number of the pro.ject manager and on-site foreman. SMAQMD's Construction Mitlgation Calculator can be used to identify an equipment fleet that achleves this reduction (SIVAQN/D 2007a). The project shall ensure that emissions from ali off-road diesel-powered equipment used on the SPA do not exceed 40%opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be reparred immed ately, and the City and Slr/AQMD shall be notified within 48 hours of identification of non-compllant equipment A visual survey of all in-operation equrpment shall be made at leastweekly, and a monthy summary of the visual survey results shall be submitted throughout the duration of the project, except that the monthly sumrnary shall not be required for any 3O-day period in which no constructron activity occurs. The monthly summary shall include the quantity and type ofvehicles surveyed as well as the dates of each survey.

SMAQMD staff and/or other offtclals may conduct periodic site lnspections to determine compliance. Nothing in this mltigation measure shall supersede other SMAQMD or state rules or regulations
> lf at the time of constructlon, SMAQN/D has adopted a regulation or new guidance applicable to construction emissions, compliance with the regulation or new gurdance may completely or partially replace this mitigatlon if it rs equal to or rnore effective than the mitgation contained hereln, and if SN/AQMD so permits.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.2-1c Analyze and Disclose Projected PMro Emission Concentrations at Nearby Sensitive Receptors Resulting from Construction of On- Site Elements. Prior to construction of each discretionary development entitlement of on-site land uses, the pro.lect applicant shall perform a project-level CEQA analysis (e.g., supporting documentation for an exemptton, negative declaration, or project-specific EIR) that includes detailed dispersion modeling of construction- generated PMro to disclose what PMro concentrations wou d be at nearby sensitive receptors. The drspersion modeling shall be performed rn accordance with applicable SMAQIVD guidance that is in place at the time the analysis is performed.

At the time of writing this EIR/ElS, SIVAQN/D's most current and most detailed guidance for addressing construction-generated PlVro emissions is found in its Guide to Air Quallty Assessment in Sacramento County (SMAQMD 2009a). The pro.leci-level analysis shall incorporate detailed parameters of the constructlon ent and activities, incl the r duri which constructlon would be Ciiy of i;oisorr
2C35 Cr:re rai irlan Arnendrnertls fc.rr' increa-ceo Rc'stdenliar (,apaci'ty Frojecl MMRP lVit r:at:crr Mcnitcnnq aald il.eporlinq Pr::griiit.l
Verification
ui
Before the approval of all grading
p ans by the City
Timing
All detailed, project-level analysrs
shail be performed and funded by
the project applicant($ for each
discretionary development
entitlement. All feaslble mitigaiion
shall be also funded by the prolect
applicant($.
lmplementation Reponsbility

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Mitiqatron ilolricrirrg anc l:i.cf;orl. i':c )r'::Qratt Mitigation Memures
performed, as well as the proximity of potentaly affected receptors, including receptors proposed by the project that exist at the tlme the construction activrty would occur.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 34.2-2: lmplement All Measures Prescribed by the Air Quality Mitigation Plan to Reduce Operational Air Pollutant Emissions. To reduce operational emissrons, the pro;ect applicant for any pariicular discretionary developmeni application sha 1 tmplement all measures prescribed in the SMAQMD- approved Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan Air Quality N/itigation Plan (AQMP), a copy of which is included in Appendix C2 The AQMP is jntended to improve mobility, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and improve air quality as required by AB 32 and SB 375 The AQMP includes, among others, measures designed to provide bicycle parking at commercial land uses, an integrated pedestrian/bicycle path network, transit stops wrth shelters, a prohibition againstthe use of wood-burn ng f replaces, energy star.roofing materials, electric lawnmowers provided to homeowners at no charge, and on-site transportation alternatives to passenger vehic es (including lrght rail) that provide connectvty with other local and regional alternative transportation networks.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.2-4a: Develop and lmplement a Plan to Reduce Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Construction-Generated Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions
The pro.lect applicant for any particular discretionary development app icatron shal develop a plan to reduce the exposure of sensltive receptors to TACs generated by project construction activity assoctated with buildout of the selected aLternative.

Each plan shall be developed by the pro1ect applicantG) in consultation with SMAQN/D. The plan shall be submltted to the City for revtew and approval before the approval of any grading plans.

The plan may include such measures as scheduling activities when the residences are the least likely to be occupied, requiring equtpment to be shut off when not in use, and proh biting heavy trucks from idling. Applicable measures shall be included rn all project plans and specifications for al1 project phases.

The implementation and enforcement of all measures identified in each plan shall be funded by the project applicant(s) for the respective phase of deveiopment. *FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.2-1f lmplement SMAQMD's Enhanced Exhaust Control Practices during Construction of all Off-site Elements. lmplement SMAQN/D Enhances Exhaust Control Practices, whrch are listed ln N/itigation Measure 3A.2la, in order to control NOx emissions qenerated by construction of off-site elements (in Sacramento and El Dorado Counties, or Caltrans right-of-way) Verification
Crty of i r-liscrrr
2l:': Cry',eral Pian /irneidrnr:nis ici' incrcaseri ilesrdert:ai Caoactiy Prcjeci Mlt/1'li)8 Before the approval of all grading
plans from the respective air
distncts (i.e., SMAQMD or
EDCAQIVD).

Before the approval of a I grading
plans by the Clty and throughout
project construction, where
applicable, for all pro.lect phases.

Timing
Before issuance of subdlvtsion
maps or improvement plans.

Pro1ect applicant(s) responsible for
construction for construction of
each off-site element rn
Sacramento and El Dorado
counties.

Pro.lect applrcant(s) for any
particular dlscretionary
development.

Project applicant(s) for any
particular discretionary
development application.
lmplementation Responsibility

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent iV I ii<;aiiorr i\/o nirc r nq a r:C :iepo r-ti nq P t crtrr am Miti'galion Measures
Cuhural and Tribal Cultural Resources
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.5-1b: Perform an lnventory and Evaluation of Cultural Resources for the California Register of Historic Places, Minimize or Avoid Damage or Destruction, and Perform Treatment Where Damage or Destruction Cannot be Avoided. Management of cultural resources eligible for or listed on the CRHR under CEQA mirrors management steps required under Section 106. These steps may be comblned with dellverables and management steps performed for Section 106 provided that management documents prepared for the PA a so clearly reference the CRHR listing criteria and significance thresholds that apply under CEQA Prior to ground-disturbing work for each indivtdual deveiopment phase or off-site element, the app icable oversighl agency (City of Folsom, El Dorado County, Sacramento County, or Caltrans), or the project applicant(s) of all project phases, with applicable agency oversight, shall perform the following actions:
> Retain the services of a qualified archaeologist to perform an inventory of cultural resources withln each individual development phase or off-site element subject to approval under CEQA ldentified resources shall be evaluated for Listing on the CRHR. The inventory report shall also identi{y locations that are sensitive for undiscovered culturai resources based upon the location of known resources, geomorphology, and topography. The inventory report shall speci! the location of monitoring of ground-disturbtng work in these areas by a qualified archaeologist, and monitoring in the vicinity of identified resources that may be damaged by constructton, if appropriate. The identification of sensitive locations subject to monitoring during constructron of each individual development phase shall be performed in concert with monitoring actrvrtres performed under the PA to minimize the potentlal for conflicting requirements.
> For each resource that is determined eliglble for the CRHR, the appl cable agency or the project applicant(s) for any particular discretionary development (under the agency's direction) shall obtain the services of a qualified archaeoiogist who shall determine if implementation of the individual prolect development wouid result in damage or destructron of "significant" (under CEQA) cultural resources. These findings shall be reviewed by the app icable agency for consistency with the signiflcance thresholds and treatment rneasures provided in this EIR/ElS.
> Where possibe, the prolect shall be configured or redesigned to avoid impacts on eligible or isted resources. Alternatively, these resources may be preserved in place if possrble, as suggested under Callfornia Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. Avoldance of historic properties rs required under certain circumstances under the Public Resources Code and 36 CFR Part 800 Ciiy of i:ctscrr':
2035 Gene rai Plan ArnenrimenLs f ci' inc.,'r,:ased iiesrdi:nttai Capar,rty Prcjecl MMRP Timirglmplementation Resporsibility Verificatbn
Before issuance of building permits
and ground-disturbing activitres.

The applicable oversight agency
and the prolect(s) (at the agency's
drscretion) of al1 pro.lect phases.

I

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Miiic atron Moi'riicring and ilerioriino Prcoram
Mitigtion Memures
> Where impacts cannot be avoided, the applicable agency or the project applicant$) of al project phases (under the applicable agency's direction) shall prepare and implement treatment measures that are determined to be necessary by a qualified archaeologist. These measures may consist of data recovery excavatlons for resources that are e igible for listing because of the data they contarn (which may contribuie io research). Alternatvely, for historical architectural, engineered, or landscape features, treatment measures may consist of a preparatron of interpretve, narrative, or photographtc documentatron. These measures shall be reviewed by the applicable oversight agency for consistency with the significance thresholds and standards provided in this EIR/ElS.
> To support the evaluation and treatment required under thls mttigation measure, the archaeologist retarned by either the applicab e oversight agency or the project appl cant($ of all prolect phases shall prepare an appropriate prehistorrc and hrstonc context that identifles relevant prehlstoric, ethnographic, and historic themes and research questions agalnst which to determine the significance of ldentified Tesources and appropriate treatment. > These steps and documents may be combined with the phasing of management and documents prepared pursuant to the PA to minrmize the potential for inconststency and duplicative management efforts.

Mitigation for the off-site elements outside of the City of Folsom's jurisdictional boundaries mu$ be coordinated by the prolect applicant$) of each applicable project phase with the affected oversight agency(ie$ (1.e., El Dorado and/or Sacramento Counties, or Caltrans).
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.5-2: Conduct Construction Personnel Education, Conduct On-Site Monitoring if Required, Stop Work if Cultural Resources are Discovered, Assess the Significance of the Find, and Perform Treatment or Avoidance as Required. To reduce potential impacts to previously undiscovered cu tuTal resources, the project applicant(s) of all project phases shall do the following:
> Before the start of ground-disturbing activities, the project applicant($ of all project phases shall retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct training for construction workers as necessary based upon sensitivrty of the project APE, to educate them about the possibility of encountering buried cultural resources, and inform them of the proper procedures should culturaL resources be encountered.
> As a result of the work conducted for Mitgatron Measures 3A.5-1a and 34.5- 1b, lf the archaeoloqist determines that any portion of the 5PA or the off-site Vedfication
C"tr.:/ ci i: r:l;'crr''
2ij:5 Cr:neral Plan Anrendmcris icr rr:c;'r:aseri Resrie ntial lacac;ty Piolec'r ili\lRP d of
Before and during ground
disturbing activitres.

Timirg
Prolect applicant($ of all project
phases
lmpbmentation Responsibility
'10
elements should be monttored for -unknown

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
M'rtiSatbn I'rleasurc
cultural resources, the pro.lect applicant(s) of all pro.lect phases sha I implement such monitoring in the locations specified by the archaeologist. USACE should review and approve any recommendations by archaeologists with respect to monitoring.
> Should any cultural resources, such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, or architectural remains be encountered during any construction activities, work shall be suspended in the vrcinity ofthe find and the appropriate oversight agency(ie$ (identified be ow) shall be notrfied immediately. The approprtate oversight agency(ie$ shall retarn a qualified archaeologist who shall conduct a field lnvestigation of the specific site and shall assess the significance ofthe find by evaluating the resource for eligtbillty for isting on the CRHR and the NRHP. lf the resource is elig ble for llsting on the CRHR or NRHP and it would be subject to disturbance or destruction, the actions required in Mitigation Measures 3A 5-1a and 3A 5-1b shall be implemented. The oversight agency shall be responsible for approval of recommended mitlgation if tt is determined to be feasible ln light of the approved land uses, and shall implement the approved mitigation before resuming construction activities at the archaeological site Mitigation for the off-site elements outside of the City of Folsom's jurisdictional boundaries must be coordinated by the pro;ect applicant(s) of each applicable project phase with the affected oversight agency(ies) (i.e., El Dorado and/or Sacrarnento Co"'t'es, or Caltra'rs).
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 34.5-3: Suspend Ground-Disturbing Activities if Human Remains are Encountered and Comply with California Health and Safety Code Procedures. In accordance with the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are uncovered during ground-disturbing activities, including those associated wlth off-sjte e ements, the prolect applicant(s) of all prolect phases shall immediately halt all ground-disturbing actrvities in the area of the find and notifl7 the applicable county coroner and a professional archaeologist skilled ln osteological analysis to determrne the nature of the remalns. The coroner is required to examine all discoveries of human remains within 48 hours of receiving notice of a discovery on privateorpubliclands(CaiforniaHealthandSafe!CodeSection7050.5[b]) fthe coroner determines that the rematns are those of a Native American, he or she must contact the NAHC by phone within 24 hours of mak ng that determinailon (California Health and Safety Code Section 7050fcl).

After the coroner's findings are complete, the project applicant(s), an archaeologist, and the NAHC-desrgnated MLD shall determine the ultlmate treatment and disposition of the remains and take appropriate steps to ensure that additional human interments are noi disturbed The bilities for acti on notification City of irolsoirr
2035 6e rie rai P'ian Anendnnr,:nts ior lticrcasec l{esidenti;;i Capacriy Prrle ll ViVliP iV i iiq alr orr itzio nilo r'i nr; a rro iierponr rig p rcrj !"a n Verificatbn
Upon the discovery of suspected
human remains.

Tmng
Pro1ect appllcant$) of all project
phases
I mplemenbtlcn Responsilbil'rty
i

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

IimingI mplementaton Responsibility
Mil.iq31i,Jn Mc nitori ng and Reporiinq P rr:gr am
Mitigatnn Memures
of a discovery of Native American human remains are identified in Section 5097.9 of the California Public Resources Code.

Upon the discovery of Native American rematns, the procedures above regarding rnvolvement of the applicable county coroner, notifrcation of the NAHC, and identificationof anMLDshall befollowed Theprojeciapplicant($of all pro;ect phases shall ensure that the immediate vicinity (according to generally accepted cu tural or archaeological standards and practices) rs not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until consultation with the MLD has taken place The MLD shall have at least 48 hours after being granted access to the site to inspect the site and make recommendations. A range of possibLe treatments for the remains may be discussed: nondestructive removal and analysls, preservation in place, relinquishment of the remains and associated items to the descendants, or other culturally appropriate treatment. As suggested by Assembly Bill (AB) 2641 (Chapter 863, Statutes of 2006), the concerned parties may extend discussions beyond the lnitial 48 hours to allow for the discovery of additional remains. AB 2641(e) includes a list of site protection measures and states that the project applicant(s) shali comply with one or rnore of the followtng requirements:
> record the site wlth the NAHC or the appropriate lnformation Center, > use an open-space or conservatron zoning designation or easement, or > record a document with the county in which the property is located.

The pro.lect applicant(s) or its authorized representative of ali pro;ect phases shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a Location not subject to further subsurface disturbance rf the NAHC is unable to rdentify an MLD or if the l/LD falls to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site. The project appLicant($ or its authorized representative may also reinter the remains in a location not subject to further disturbance if it re.lects the recommendation of the MLD and mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner. Ground disturbance in the zone of suspended activity sha I not recommence without authorrzation from the archaeologist.

Mitigation for the off-site elements outside of the City of Folsom's jurisdictional boundaries must be coordinated by the prolect applicant($ of each applicable project phase with the affected oversight agency(le$ (i.e., El Dorado and/or Sacramento Counties, or Caltrans),
Verification
Iiiy cf l]olsoi'ir
20i:; Cene rat Pian l,,menomr:i'ri.s fc;r incr'easeci Res:cienliai Caoacity Pr'o.Jecl Mrili<P12

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Asceni il : i, q ar, o l iV o ni',c r nq a lic lienciii i'rc P i cet aii', Mitigation Measures
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.4-1: lmplement Additional Measures to Control Construction-General GHG Emissions. To further reduce construction-generated GHG emissions, the project applicant(s) for any part cular discretionary development application shall implement all feasible measures for reducing GHG emissions associated with construction that are recommended by SN/AQMD at the time indrvidual portions of the srte undergo construction. Such measures may reduce GHG exhaust emissions from the use of on-site equipment, worker commute trips, and truck trips carrying materials and equipment to and from the SPA, as well as GHG emissions embodled in the materials selected for construction (e.9., concrete).

Other measures may pertain to the materials used in construction. Prlorto releasing each request for bid to contractors for the constructlon of each discretionary development entitlement, the project appl cant(s) shall obtain the most current list of GHG reduction measures that are recommended by SMAQMD and stipulate that these measures be implemented in the respectve request for bid as well as the subsequent construction contract with the selected primary contractor The project appLicant(s) for any part cular discretionary deveLopment application may submit to the City and SMAQlvlD a report that substantiates why specific measures are considered infeasible for construction of that particular development phase and/or at that pornt in time. The reporl includrng the substantiation for not implementing particular GHG reduction measures, shall be approved by the Ci!, in consutaiion with SMAQMD prior to the release of a request for bLd by the project applicant(s) for seekinq a primary contractor to manage the construction of each development pro1ect. By requiring that the list of feasible measures be established prior to the selection of a primary contractor, this measure requires that the ability of a contractor to effectively implement the selected GHG reduction measures be inherent to the selection process.
5MAQMD's recommended measures for reducing construction-related GHG emissions at the time of writing this ElRlElS are listed below and the project applicant(s) shail, at a minimum, be required to lmplement the following:
r lmprove fuel efficiency from constructron equipment:
. reduce unnecessary idling (modifl7 work practices, install auxiliary power for driver comfort);
. perform equipment maintenance (inspections, detect failures ear1y, correctiont;
t train equipment operators in proper use of equipment; r use the proper size of equipment for the.lob; and
(-rty ol' i:olsr;rrr
2rJ35 Cicrie rai Pian /imencmenis ic;r' rnr:reaseo iiesiCenlial Capactty Prcle cl MVIRP TimingI mplementation Responsibility Verificafnn
Before approval of small-lot final
maps and bui ding permits for all
discretionary development
projects, including all on- and off-
site elements and implementatron
throughout project construction.

Project applicant(s) during all
discretionary development projects
and on-site and off-site elements.

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
iliiiqat iori rr4oniiori no and Rer.,oriini: Prorlrant
Mitigatlrn Memure
r use equipment with new technologies (repowered engines, electric drive trai ns).
r Use alternative fuels for electricity generators and welders at construction srtes such as propane or solar, or use electrical power. . Use an ARB-approved low-carbon fuel, such as biodiesel or renewable dresel for construction equipment. (Emlssions of oxldes of nitrogen [NOx] emissions from the use of low carbon fuel must be reviewed and rncreases mitigated.) Additional information about low-carbon fuels is available from ARB's Low Carbon Fuel Standard Program (ARB 2009b)
. Encouraqe and provide carpools, shuttJe vans, transit passes and/or secure bicycle parking for construction worker commutes.
. Reduce electricity use in the construction office by us ng compact fluorescent bulbs, powering off computers every day, and replacing heating and cooling units with more efficient ones.
. Recycle or salvage non-hazardous construction and demolition debris (9oal of at least 757o by weight).
' Use locally sourced or recycled materials for construction materials (goal of at least 207o based on costs for building materials, and based on vo ume for roadway, parking lot, sidewalk and curb material$.
. Minimize the amount of concrete used for paved surfaces or use a low carbon concrete option
. Produce concrete on-site if determined to be less emissive than transporting ready mix.
. Use EPA-certified SmartWay trucks for de iveries and equipment transport.

Additional information about the 5martWay Transport Partnership Program is available from ARB's Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas N4easure (ARB 2009c) and EPA (EPA 2009)
. Develop a plan in consultation with SMAQMD to efficiently use waterfor adequate dust control. This may consist of the use of non-potable water from a local source.
ln addrtion to SMAQMD-recommended measures, construction activity sha I comply with all applicable rules and regulations established by SMAQMD and ARB. *FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.4-2a: lmplement Additional Measures to Reduce Operational GHG Emissions. Each increment of new development within the project site requiring a discretionary approval (e.9., proposed tentative subdivision map, conditional use permit), sha I be subject io a project-specific environmental TCVICW n,
l\sceni
Vedfication
City cf lclson:
20:5 C,ener'ai Plan Arr're nrlmcnts fcr ini:rr-rasec Residentiai Capaciiy Pro;eci MiiliRt:
',4
Before approval of final maps and
building permiis for all project
phases, including all on-site and
off-srte elements.

Tming
The project applicant(s) for any
pariicular discretionary
development.
lmplenentation Respons'bility
could s an le exem ative or m

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Mitigatft:n Merures
negative declaratron or project-specific EIR) and will require that GHG emissions from operation of each phase of development, including supportlng roadway and infrastructure improvements that are part of the se ected action alternative, will be reduced by an amount sufficient to achieve the 2020-based threshold of siqnificance of 4 36 CO2elSP /year for development that would become operational on or before the year 2020, and the 2030-based threshold of signtficance of 2.86 CO2e/SP/year for deveLopment that would become operational on or before the year 2030.

The above-stated thresholds of significance may be sublect to change if SMAQN/D approves its own GHG significance thresholds, in which case, SMAQMD-adopted thresholds wlLl be used. The amount of GHG reductlon required to achieve the applicable significance thresholds wilL furihermore depend on existing and future regulatory measures (including those developed under AB 32).

For each increment of new discretionary development, the City shall submit to the project applicant(s) a list of potentially feasible GHG reduction measures to be considered n the development design. The City's list of potentially feasible GHG reductron measures shalL reflect the current state of the regulatory environment, available incentives, and thresholds of significance that may be developed by SMAQIVD, which will evolve under the mandate of AB 32 and Executive Order 5-3-

05. lf the pro;ect applicant(s) asserts li cannot meet the 2020-based goal, then the report shall also demonstrate why measures not seLected are consldered infeasib e.

The City shall review and ensure inclusion of the design features tn the proposed project before applicant(s) can receive the City's discretionary approval for the any increment of development 1n determining what measures should appropriately be imposed by ihe City under the circumstances, the City shall consider the following factors:
> the extent to which rates of GHG emissions generated by motor vehicles traveling to, from, and within the 5PA are projected to decrease over time as a result of regulatrons, policies, and/or plans that have already been adopted or may be adopted in the future by ARB or other publlc agenq/ pursuant to AB 32, or by EPA;
> the extent to which mobile-source GHG emissions, which at the time of wr ting this EiR/ElS comprise a substantial portion of the state's GHG inventory, can also be reduced through design measures that result in trip reductions and reductions in trip length;
> the extentto which GHG emissions emilted by the mix of power generation operated by SMUD, the electrical utility that wil serve the SPA, are pro.1ected to decrease pursuant to the Renewables Portfolio Standard required by SB 1078 and SB 107 as well as future lations, icies, and/or City oi I'oiscrr
2035 Gencrai Pian AmendrnenLs icr' lncr:ased Residential Capac.ity irtc.lect tviMRP lliirqaiion Mcniicr'i r'ir1 arici iiepcrti ng P r"cgiam VerifictllnTimnglmphmenbtion Responsibility
i)

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Timnqlmplemenffibn Responsibit'rty
Miriq aiion Monii.oring and lieporlnq Proqram
Mitigalion Mbazurs
adopted by the federal and state governments that reduce GHG emissions from power generation;
> the extent to which any stationary sources of GHG emissions that would be operated on a proposed land use (e.9., industrial) are already subjectto regulations, policies, and/or plans that reduce GHG emissions, particularly any future regulations that will be developed as part of ARB's implementation of AB 32, oi other pertinent regulations on stationary sources that havethe lndirect effect of reducing GHG emissions;
> the extent to which other mitigation rneasures imposed on the project to reduce other air pollutant emissions may also reduce GHG emissions; > the extent to which the feasibility of existing GHG reduction technologies may change in the future, and to which innovation in GHG reduction technologies will contrnue, effecting cost-beneftt analyses that determine economic feasibi ity; and
> whether the total costs of proposed mitlgation for GHG emissions, toqether with other mitigation measures required for the proposed development, are so great that a reasonably prudent property owner would not proceed with the pro.lect in the face of such costs.
ln considering how much, and what kind of, mitigation is necessary in light of these factors, the City shall consider the following list of options, though the list is not intended to be exhaustive, as GHG emission reduction strategies and thetr respective feasibility are likely to evolve over time. These measures are derived from multiple sources including the Mitigation Measure Summary in Appendix B of the California Air pollution Control Officeis Associatlon (CAPCOA) white paper, CEQA & Climate Change (CAPCOA 2009a); CAPCOA's Model policies for Greenhouse Gases in General Plans (CAPCOA 2009b); and the California Attorney General's Office publication, The California Environmental Quality Act Addressing Global Warming lmpacts at the Local Agency Level (California Attorney General's Office 2008).

Energy Efficiency
> lnclude clean alternative energy features to promote energy self-suffic ency (e.g., photovoltalc cells, solar thermal electrlcity systems, small wind turbines). > Design bui dings to meet CEC Tier 11 requirements (e.9., exceeding the requirements of the Tltle 24 las of 20071 by 357.).
> Site buildings to take advantage of shade and prevailing winds and design landscaprng and sun screens to reduce energy use.

Verification
Ii'.y ci : ois.ci'r'r
2C!,\ Ceteral pian /i!ne ndmeris fc.;r lncr"caserj Residerlral Lapac.i;,y Frol*ci ViltlxPi6

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascent
Mitigatlrn Meaure
> Install efficient lighting in all buildings (including residential), Also install lighting control systems, where practical. Use dayllght as an integral part of lighting systems in al buildings.
> Install iqht-colored "coo" pavements, and strategLcally located shade trees along all bicycle and pedestrian routes
Water Conservation ond Efficiency
> With the exception of ornamental shade trees, use water-efficient landscapes with native, drought-resistant species in all public area and commercial landscaplng. Use water-efficient turf in parks and other turf-dependent spaces. > lnstall the infrastructure to use reclaimed water for landscape irrigation and/or washing cars.
> lnstall water-efficjent irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture- based irrigation controis.
> Design bui dings and lots to be water-efficient. Only instal water-efficient fixtures and appliances.
> Restrict watering methods (e.9., prohibit systems that apply water to no vegetated surface$ and control runoff Prohibit businesses from ustng pressure washers for cLeaning driveways, parking lots, sidewalks, and street surfaces. These restrictions should be included in the Covenants, Condrtions, and Restrictions of the community.
> Provide education about water conservation and available programs and i ncentives.
> To reduce stormwater runoff, which typicaily bogs down wastewater treatment systems and increases their energy consurnption, construct drrveways to single{amily detached residences and parking lots and driveways of multifamily residential uses with pervious surfaces. Possib e designs include Hollywood drives (two concrete strips with vegetation or aggregate in between) and/or the use of porous concrete, porous asphalt, turf blocks, or pervious pavers.

Solid Waste Measures
> Reuse and rerycle construction and demolition waste (including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard). > Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste at ail buildings,
> Provide adequate recyc ing containers in public areas, including parks, school grounds, golf courses, and pedestrian zones in areas of mixed-use development.

City o{ foisoln
2035 General Plan Amendmr:nls {cr lncrr-,aserj Resicieniial Capac,ity Ptoject MivaRP ll itiqation Mo nltorinq ar-rd Repotinq P rcqr arn
VertficationTimrnglmpbrnentation Responsibility
1/

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
illir.i gat.ior llonirorrng and ram
Mitigaton Memures
> Provide education and pub icity about reducing waste and avaiJable rerycling seryices.

Transportat[on and Motor Vehrcles
> Promote ride-sharng programs and employment centers (e.9, by designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles, designating adequate passenger loading and unloading zones and waiting areas for rlde- share vehrcles, and providing a Web site or message board for coordinatlng ride-sharing).
> Provide the necessary faci ities and infrastructure in all land use types to encourage the use of low- or zero-emission vehrcles (e.9., electric vehic e charging facilities and convenlently located alternative fueling statlont. > At industria and commercial land uses, all forklifts, "yard trucks,' orvehicles that are predominately used on-site at non-residential land uses shall be electric-powered or powered by biofuels (such as biodiese lB1001) that are produced from waste products, or shal use other technologies that do not rely on direct fossil fuel consumption.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.4-2b: Participate in and lmplement an Urban and Community Forestry Program and/or Off-Site Tree Program to Off-Set Loss of On- Site Trees. The trees on the project site contain sequestered carbon and wouid contrnue to provide future carbon sequestration during their growing life. For all harvestable trees that are subject to removal, the pro;ect applicant$) for any particular discretionary deve opment application shal participate in and provide necessary funding for urban and community forestry program Guch as the Urban Wood program managed by the Urban Forest Ecosystems lnsittute [Urban Forest Ecosystems lnstitute 20091) to ensure that wood with an equivalent carbon sequestration value to that ofall harvestable removed trees ls harvested for an end- use that would retain lts carbon sequestration (e.9, furniture building, cabinet making). For all nonharvestable trees that are subject to removal, the pro.lect appllcant(s) shal develop and fund an off-slte tree program thai includes a level of tree planting that, at a minimum, tncreases carbon sequestration by an amount equiva ent to what would have been sequestered by the blue oak woodland during its lifetime. This program shall be funded by the project applicant(s) of each development phase and revrewed for comment by an independent Certified Arborist unaffiliated wlth the project applicant(s) and shall be coordinated with the requirements of Mitigation Measure 3.3-5, as stated in Section 3A.3, "Biological Resources - Land."Final approval ofthe program shall be provided bythe City.

Components of the program may rnclude, but not be Limlted to, providing urban tree canopy in the City of Folsom, or reforestation in suitable areas outside the City.

Reforestation in natural habitat areas outside the City of Folsom would simultaneous
l\5..efl
VerficationTimlng
Before approval of final maps
and/or building permits for all
project phases requiring
discretionary approval, including
all on- and off-site elements.

The project applicant(s) for any
particular discretronary
development applicatlon.
lmphnentation Responsibility
Cir-y cf iroi:or'n
2Ci5 Cencrat Pian /:,menr:me ni.s ir;r rcre asec iiesiderliai (,acar.iry Frole ci MMRP1Q rn ate the loss of oak woodland habitat while trees withln

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascen t
Mitigafnn Memures
the urban forest canopy would not. The California Urban Forestry Greenhouse Gas Reporting Protocol shall be used to assess this mitigation program (CCAR 2008) All unused vegetation and tree material shall be mulched for use in landscaptng on the project site, shipped to the nearest composting facility, or shipped to a landfi I that is equipped with a methane collecton system, orcombusted in a biomass power plant. Tree and vegetatve materral should not be burned on- or off-site unless used as fuel in a biomass power plant.

Noise and Vibration
Mitigation Measure 3.7{: Construction Noise Reduction Measure Add new lmplementation Program SN-2 17 Constructlon Noise Reduction:
> The City shall require the fol owing measures shall be implemented and specified on subsequent prolect building plans for deve opment north of Highway 50 within 560 feet of sensitive land uses to ensure construction noise does not exceed B0 dBA Leq at the nearest receptors:
r To the extent feasib e, alternative construction processes that generate lower noise levels sha be selected.
r Construction equipment stagtng areas shall be located at the farthest distance feasib e from nearby sensitive land uses.
r For projects with pile driving, with approval and supervision of a qualified structural engineer, pile holes shall be predrlled to minimtze the number of pile hammer drives necessary to seat piles, where feasible. Alternative to impact hammers, such as osci latinq or rotating pile installation systems shall be used where feasible
' Effective pile driving noise control may be achieved by utilizing pile driv ng shrouds that acoustically shield the pile hammer point of impaci, p actng resilient padding on top of the pile, and by reducing exhaust noise with sound absorbing mufflers.
. Post visible signs along the perimeter of the construction site that disclose construction times and duration, as wel as a contact number for a noise complaint and enforcement manager.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.11-1: lmplement Noise-Reducing Construction Practicet Prepare and lmplement a Noise Control Plan, and Monitor and Record Construction Noise Near Sensitive Receptors. To reduce tmpacts associated with noise generated during project-related construction activities, the pro.lect applicant(s) and their prlmary contractors for englneering design and constructlon of all project phases shall ensure that the following requirernents are implemented at each work site in any year of pro.lect construction to avoid and minimrze construdion noise effects on sensitive The and constructron
City cii:l;ison,

20.i5 [je;'icrai p jai Am0ncmeni.:; ior lric;casec iie stdenliai lapill.ity Pioicl,i VviRP il i'Lrq a i.r or: i\/c niic !'j nq a rrc ilcoc r'tr r-: g ) r cr; r arr, VerificationTimirglmplementation Responsibility
Before and during construct oq..
activitres on the 5PA and withrn El
Dorado Hills.

Noise reduction measures shal be
specified to project construction of
lndividual pro.1ects.

Noise reduction measures shall be
mo e-ented dur'^g constrr,ct on
of lndividual projects.

Pro.lect applrcant(s) and primary
contractor(s) of all prolect phases
City of Fo som to adopt
rmplementation measure.

Project applicant(s) to mplement
requirements of the proqram.
"t9

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

IimngI mphmentatbn Responsibil'rty
lliticaricn ilcnitorinq and k.eoo r"tinq P raqr etn
Mitigadon Memures
shal employ noise-reducing construction practices. Measures that shall be used to limit noise shall include the measures listed below:
> Noise-generating construction operations shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p m Monday ihrough Friday, and between B:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays.
> A1l constructron equipment and equipment staging areas shall be located as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitrve land uses.
> Al construction equipment shal be properly matntained and equipped with norse-reduction lntake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturers' recommendations. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.
> All motorized construction equipment shall be shut down when not ln use to prevent idling.
> lndividual operations and techniques shall be replaced wtth quieter procedures (e.g., using welding instead of riveting, mixing concrete off-site instead of on- site)
> Norse-reducing enclosures shall be used around stationary noise-generating equipment (e.g., compressors and generator$ as p anned phases are built out and future noise sensrtive receptors are located within close proximity to future constructron activities.
> Written notification of construction activities shall be provided to all noise- sensitive receptors located within 850 feet of construction actrvities.

Notiflcation shall include anticipated dates and hours during which construction activities are antrcipated to occur and contact information, including a daytime telephone number, for the project representative to be contacted rn the event that noise evels are deemed excessive.

Recommendatrons to assrst norse-sensiiive land uses in reducing tnterior noise levels (e.9., closing windows and doors) shall also be lncluded in the notification.
> To the extent feasible, acoustic barriers (e.9., lead curiains, sound barriers) shall be constructed to reduce construction-generated noise levels at affected norse-sensitrve land uses. The barriers shall be desrgned to obstruct the iine of sight between the noise-sensltive and use and on-site construction equipment. When lnstalled properly, acoustic baniers can reduce construction noise levels by approximately B-10 dB (EPA 1971)
> When future noise sensitive uses are within close proximlty to prolonged Veffcalion
Ciiy of i::clsonr
2C3> C'enerai Plan /\rrendmenls fcr lncreased lresiCent:ai Caoaciry Prc.;ect MMRP2.J constructron noise attenuati buffers such as structu truck trai

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Ascenl
Mitigation Measures
or soil pi es shal be located between noise sources and future residences to shieid sensitive receptors from construction noise.
> The primary contractor shall prepare and implement a construction noise management plan. This plan shall identify specrfrc measures to ensure compliance with the norse control measures specified above. The noise control plan shall be submitted to the City of Folsom before any noise-generating construction activity begins. Construction shal not commence until the construction noise management plan is approved by the City of Folsom.

Mitigation for the two off-site roadway connections into El Dorado County must be coordinated by the project applicant(s) of the applicable project phase with El Dorado County, sincethe roadway extensions are outside ofthe City of Folsom's jurisdictional boundaries.

Mitigatlon Measure 3.7-2: Develop and lmplement a Vibration Damage Control Plan Add new lmplementation Program SN-18 Construction Vibration Reduction:
> The City shall apply this lmp ementation Program to construction acttvity rnvolving pile-driving activitres located within 96 feet of any build ng and vibratory rollers located within 26 feet of any building to reduce the potent al for structural damage.
> Require project applicants with projects that lnvolve pile-driving acttvities located within 96 feet of any building and vibratory rollers located within 26 feet of any buiiding to deveiop a vibration control plan. The pLan shall consider all potentia vibration-inducing activities that would occur within the distance pararneters described above and include various measures, setback distances, precautions, monitoring programs, and alternative methods io traditional pile-driving or other vibration intensive activities with the potential to result in structural damage. The following vrbration contro measures (or other equally effective measures approved by the City) shall be lncluded in the plan:
. To prevent structural damage minimum setback requtrements for different types of ground vibration-producing actrvities (e.9., pile driving, vibratory roller) for the purpose of preventing damage to nearby strudures shall be established based on the proposed pile-driving activities and locattons, once determined. . All vibration-inducing activity within the dlstance parameters described above shall be monitored and documented for ground vibration noise and vibration noise levels at the nearest sensitlve land use and associated recorded data submitted to the City of Folsom so as not to exceed the recommended FTA vioratio^ darrage evels.
r Alternatives to traditional pi e driving (e.9, sonic pile driving, jetting, cast-in- cast non-dor ent cushion OT
City oi ir;isonr
2035 Gr:i'reral Plan /inrendmcnls icr lncr"eased Resicjr:nlial Caoacity Ptcjeci. \lMllP iliirqat:cn Monitcr nq arr0 ii€ipor"ti riq P I oqftir,
Verifiotbn
Vibration reduction measures shall
be implemented dunng
construction of indlvidual projects.

Timing
City of Folsom to adopt
implementat on measure.

Project applicant(s) to implement
requrrements of the program.
lmpbmenbtion Responsibility
li

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Mitiqation r'l<;niior'ing and ticporLinq Prcgrar.r
Mitigntion Meaures
hydraulic pileg shall be considered and implemented where feasible to reduce vibraiion levels.
. Limit pile-drivrng activities to the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p m. Monday through Friday and between B:00 a m and 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.
. Predrill pile holes to the maximum feasible depth to reduce the number of blows requrred to seat a pile.
. Operate all vibration inducing impact equipment as far away from vibration- sensrtive srtes as reasonably possible.

Phase pile-driving and high-impact activities so as notto occur simultaneously with other construction activiiies, to the extent feasible. The total vibration level produced could be significantly less when each vibration source is operated at separate times. *FPASP Mitigation Measure 34.11-3: lmplement Measures to Prevent Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Groundborne Noise or Vibration from Project Generated Construction Activities
> To the extent feaslble, blasting activities shall not be conducted within 275 feet of existing or future sensitive receptors.
> To the extent feasible, bulldozing activities shall not be conducted within 50 feet of exisiing or future sensrtive receptors.
> Al blasting shall be performed by a blast contractor and blasting personnel licensed to operate in the State of California.
> A blasting plan, including estimates of vibratlon levels at the resldence closest to the blast, shall be submitted to the enforcement agency for review and approval prior to the commencement of the first blast.
> Each blast shall be monltored and documented for groundborne noise and vibratlon levels at the nearest sensitive land use and associated recorded submitted to the enforcement agency.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 3A.1'1-4: lmplement Measures to Prevent Exposure of SensitMe Receptors to lncreases in Noise from Project-Generated Operational Traffic on Off-site and On-site Roadways. To meet applicable noise standards as set forth in the appropriate General Plan or Code (e.9, City of Folsom, County of Sacramento, and County of El Dorado) and to reduce increases in traffic-generated noise evels at noise-sensitive uses, the project applicant($ of all project phases shall implement the foilowing:
> Obtain the services of a consultant (such as a licensed engineer or licensed architect) to develop noise-attenuation measures for the proposed construction of on-site nolse-sensitive land uses (i.e, resldentia dwelltngs and 2?-
lis(:e ri
Verification
During project construction
activities at noise-sensltive
receptors on the 5PA; at the
existing noise-sensltive receptors
on Empire Ranch Road from
Broadstone Parkway to lron Point
Road; and at the existing noise-
sensitive receptors on Latrobe
Road from White Rock Road to
Golden Foothills Parkway
Tmrng
Before and during bulldozing and
blasting activities on the SPA and
within El Dorado Hills and the
County of Sacramento
Project applicant($ and primary
contracto(t of all project phases.

Project applicant$) of all project
phases
I mplementation Raponsibility
City oi jolsoi^rr
2'i.Jt (;!:netat Plan /'\rrre nOmeiris lcr nrrcaseo iiesroEr'ir-:ai (,asacrr-y Proje c'i l/lvi(p school that will a mtntmum Sound

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
/iscert
Mitigation Measures
Transmrssion C ass (STC) rating for buildings of 30 or greater, ind vtdually computed for the walls and the floor/ceiling construction of bui dings, for the proposed construction of on-site noise-sensitive land uses (i e., residential dwe lings and school classrooms).
> Prlor to submittal of tentative subdivision maps and improvement plans, the project applicant$) sha I conduct a site-specific acoustical analysis to determine predicted roadway noise impacts attributable to the projecl taking rnto account site-specrfrc condiiions (e.g , site design, location of structures, building characteristics). The acoustical analysis shall evaluate stationary- and mobile- source noise attributable to the proposed use or uses and impacts on nearby noise-sensitive land uses, in accordance with adopted City noise standards.

Feasible measures sha I be ideniifled to reduce project-related noise impacts.

These measures may inc ude, but are not limited to, the following:
r limiting noise-generating operational actlvities associated with proposed commercia land uses, including truck deliveries;
. constructing exterior sound walls;
r constructing barrier walls and/or berms with vegetationj . using "quiet pavement" (e.9., rubberized asphalt) construction methods on locaL roadways; and,
. using increased noise-attenuation measures in building construction (e.9., dual-pane, sound-rated wrndows; exterior wall insulation).

Mitigation Measure 3.7-4: Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling Noise Add new mplementation Program 5N-'19 Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling Noise Reduciion:
> TheCiryshal requireanacoustical assessmenttobepreparedaspartof subsequent land use development associated with deve opment if an HVAC would be located withln 55 feet of a sensitive receptor. The acou$ical assessment shal evaluate the potential operational noise impacts attributed to HVAC noise. The acoustical assessment shall be completed by a qualified acoustica consultant that shal veri{y that the chosen mechanica equipment for individual development projects would not exceed 45 dBA at the nearest sensrtive receptor, tn accordance wlth Ci! of Folsom norse standards. Where the acoustical analysis determines that noise levels would exceed applicable City noise standards, noise reduction measures shall be identifled and included in the subsequent project. Nosle reduction measures may inc ude, but are not limited to:
r Selecting equipment with norse specifications that do not exceed the 45 dBA HVAC norse standard at the nearest noise-sensitive receptor Crty of lorscnr

20.i5 Gcncial Plan Amcndmcnls ici inr.-rlosed Residentral Caoacity prcjcci ivlivlRP 'rM i rr oaii cr"i M c nirori nq ar'rd xe oo rti rrq ? r otir i*t, Verificatbn
An acoustical assessment shall be
prepared prior to project
construction.

Heatrng, ventilation and cooling
norse measures shall be
implemented prior to occupancy
Iimmg
City of Folsom to adopt
rmplementatron measure
Project applicant(s) to implement
requirements of the program
I mphmentation Responsiktil'rty
Z3

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lliricat;r;n llcniior"ing anc Rorrc'"1.r nc Pici; rai'rt Mitigtion lvlemures
. ldentili]ng the equipment's notse screening distance, ensuring that noise evels attenuate to below the 45 dBA HVAC noise standard at the nearest sensitive receptor, and installing the equipment at a distance no ess than the screening distance.
' Employing noise dampening techniques such as solid enclosures or parapets walls to block the line-of-sight between the noise souTce and the noise- sensitive receptors Blocking the line of sight with a solid barrier or enclosure would reduce noise levels by at least 5 dBA.
*FPASP Mitigation Measure 34.11-5; lmplement Measures to Reduce Noise from Project-Generated Stationary Sources. The prolect applicant(s) for any particular discretionar,y development pro.lect shall implement the following measures to reduce the effect of noise levels generated by on-site stationary noise sources that would be located within 600 feet of any noise-sensitive receptor:
> Routine testing and preventive maintenance of emergency electrical generators shall be conducted during the less sensitive daytime hours (i.e., 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.). All electrlcal generators shall be equipped with noise control (e g, muffler) devices in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. > External mechanical equtpment associated with buildings shall incorporate features designed to reduce noise emissions below the stationary noise source criteria. These features may include, but are not limited to, locating generators within equ pment rooms or enc osures that incorporate noise reduction features, such as acoustical louvers, and exhaust and intake siiencers. Equipment enclosures shall be oriented so that ma.1or openings (i.e., intake louvers, exhaust) are directed away from nearby noise-sensitlve receptors. > Parkrng lots sha I be located and designed so that noise emissions do not exceed the stationary noise source criieria established in this analysis (i.e., 50 dB for 30 minutes in every hour during the daytime [7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p m.] and ess than 45 dB for 30 minuies of every hour dulnq the ntght time 110:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.l). Reductlon of parking lot noise can be achieved by locating parking lots as far away as feasible from noise sensitive land uses, or using burldings and topographic features to provide acousttc shielding for noise- sensitive land uses.
> Loading docks shall be located and designed so that noise emissions do not exceed the stationary noise source criteria established in this analysis (i.e., 50 dB for 30 minutes in every hour during the daytime 17:00 a.m. to'10:00 p.m.l and less than 45 dB for 30 minutes of every hour durrng the night time ['10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a m.l). Reductron of loading dock noise can be achieved by locating loading docks as far away as possible from noise sensitive and uses, Verificatbn
(.iiy oi l:oiscn"r
2()"j5 Ccneral Plan Arnencrneril:; fcr increaseC Resloentiai Capar.ity Pro.;ecL VMiiP Before submlttal of improvement
plans for each pro.lect phase, and
during project operations for
testing of emergency generators
Timnglmplernenhtbn Resporsibility
Project applicant(s) of all project
phases.
24 constructl noise barriers between docks and noise-sensitive lanc

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

A-cceri i'l ; l:q a iir': r, Mo n i [o r'i nq a rrc ieoc r"ti rrq i] r cqr arn MiUgatlm Measures
uses, or usrng buildings and topographic features to provide acoustic shield ng for noise-sensitive land uses.

Utilities and Service
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2a: lmplement Localized lmprovements in the 33-lnch Shed Future development ln the 33-lnch shed in the project area shall be responsrble for the cost and preparation of a sewer study and'if that study shows that the pro1ect increases parcel specific wastewater generation beyond the parce specific wastewater qeneration analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Development Scenario), the project shal be responsible for providing fees to analyze and e+ construct localized wastewater rmprovements to address capacity issues in the sewer shed. Localized capacity improvements, such as upsizing pipes, shaLl be constructed and comp eted rn accordance with a time schedule defined in the development specific conditions of approval. This shall be a condrtion of approval for all prolects in the 33-rnch shed within the project area.

Mitigation Measure 3.11-2b Develop and lmplement a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan for the 27-lnch Shed
To address capacity concerns in the City's wastewater conveyance system the City shall develop a Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan for the 27-inch Shed prior to approval of development in the project area that exceeds the wastewater generation analyzed in the Crty of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Deveiopment Scenario) withln the 27-in Shed.

The Wastewater Conveyance Master P an shall identi! the finaL anticipated extent of pipelrne and pump station improvements as wel as any phasing improvements tied to residential development timing and/or location tn the 27-inch Shed. The Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall inc ude mechanisms and mprovements for addressing sewer capaciiy. The Wasiewater Conveyance Master Plan shall contain the goals ofthe plan, a description of proposed upgrades and features that would be implemented, a long-term maintenance and operatron strategy, and an approach for imp ementation of proposed rmprovements to the wastewater conveyance system. Potential improvements may include, but are not llmrted to:
> construction and operatlon of a new pump station near the intenection of Riley Street and East Bidwell Street,
> construction and operation of a new B-inch force main from the pump station to high point at Glenn Drlve and Sibley Street in order to divert flows from the 27-inch shed into the 33-inch shed,
> upsizing existing 8-inch pipelines on Glenn Drive and Sib ey Street to 12-inch, and
> identification of addition localized sewer rmprovements.

Ciiy cf irolscnr
20sl Gerrerai Plar: Ame nomcriLs fcr ir':cr"r--,aserl lte sidentiai Capat,rt.y Prcjeci MVtiP Timirglmplementatlcn Resporsibility Veffcat[on
Pnor to deve opment on parcels in
the 27-inch sewer shed.

Pr or to development on parcels rn
ihe 33-inch sewer shed
City of Folsom
City of Folsom
75

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Timrnghn$enrenWion Responsbllity
Mitigal.ion Monitoring and Reporting Prcgram
Mitigation Memues
Upon completion of the Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan, the City shall secure any required permits for implementation of identified improvement strategies, lmprovements ldentified ln the Wastewater Conveyance Master Plan shall be implemented prior to issuance of grading permits for future development that increases wastewater generatlon beyond that analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capacity Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Development Scenario) in the 27-inch Shed.

Future development in the 27-inch shed in the pro.lect area shall be responsible for the cost and preparation of a sewer study and if that study shows that the project increases parcel specific wastewater generatlon beyond the parcel specific wastewater generation analyzed in the City of Folsom 2017 Capactly Assurance Plan (Ultimate Build-Out Growth Development Scenario), the project shall be responsible providing fees to anaiyze and construct loca ized wastewater improvements to address capacity issues in the sewer shed. Localized capacity improvements, such as upsizing pipes, shall be constructed and comp eted in accordance wtth a time schedule defined in the development specific conditions of approval. This shall be a conditron of approval for all projects in the 27-inch shed within the project area. * = mitigation measure is from the Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan (FPASP) EIR/ElS and only applicable to development in the Folsom Plan Area. /\sceni
Verificailbn
City of Folsom
2035 Ceneral Plan AmendmenLs for lncreased Residential Caoacity Pro.lect MMRP25

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

ATTACHMENT 2
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Folsom Amending the 2035 City of Folsom General Plan as it Relates to the Increased Residential Capacity Project and Related Actions.

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

RESOLUTION NO. II25I

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOLSOM AMENDING THE CITY OF FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN AS IT RELATES TO THE

INCREASED RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY PROJECT AND RELATED ACTIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on July 24, 2024, held a public hearing on proposed General Plan Amendment as it relates to the City of Folsom 2035 General Plan Arnendments for the Increased Residential Capacity Project ("Project"), considered public comments, and based on the information and analysis provided determined that the project is consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the City of Folsom General Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project implements General Plan Housing Element Program H-2 to increase housing capacity for mixed-use, multi-family, and affordable development in three targeted areas of the city: the East Bidwell Street corridor, the transit priority areas around the Glenn and Iron Point light rail stations, and the Folsom Plan Area, particularly the Folsom Town Center, south of Highway 50; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project amends the Land Use Element of the General Plan, as shown in Exhibit 1 attached hereto, to establish a minimum density of 30 dwelling units per acre and maximum FAR of 2.0 in the three project targeted areas and amends the General Plan Land Use Map related to sites in the Folsom Plan Area to increase residential capacity, and will therefore help the City meet its lower income Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project amends the Mobility Element of the General Plan, as shown in Exhibit 2 attachedhereto, to include roundabout prioritization policies; and WHEREAS, the proposed Project amends the Implementation Element of the General plan, as shown in Exhibit 3 attached hereto, related to mobility, tribal cultural resources, noise, and vibration;'and
WHEREAS, the proposed Project complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 65352.3 in that the City of Folsom has consulted with all tribes requesting consultation on the Project; and
WHEREAS, a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), with the City as the lead agency; and
WHEREAS, a public scoping meeting to receive comments regarding the issues to be covered in the Draft SEIR was held on August 23,2023, and the Draft SEIR for Project was circulated for public review from April 22,2024 to June 6,2024 pursuant to CEQA; and Resolution No. 1 1251
Page I of5 Page 479
08/27/2024 Item No.17.

WHEREAS, the City accepted verbal and written comments on the Draft SEIR and provided written responses in the Final SEIR to the comments received during the comment period referenced above for the Draft SEIR; and
WHEREAS, the Final SEIR for the Project was released on July 17,2024; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on July 24,2024 considered the Final SEIR at a duly noticed public hearing prescribed by law, and recommended that the City Council certiff the Final SEIR (including Findings of Fact) and approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, all notices have been given at the time and in the manner required by State Law and City Code; and
WHEREAS, following review and consideration of the Final SEIR for the Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1 1250 on August 27 ,2024 and certified the Final SEIR for the Project, and said Resolution (including Findings of Fact) is incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Project and associated proposed Folsom 2035 General Plan Amendments referenced above, and once adopted, will amend the 2035 General Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Folsom that:

1. The above referenced recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.

2. If any section, subsection, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective ofthe fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following amendment to the Folsom General Plan include the Land Use Element amendments as shown in Exhibit 1 attached hereto, Mobility Element amendments as shown in Exhibit 2 attachedhereto, and Implementation Element amendments as shown in Exhibit 3 attached hereto, are hereby approved with the following findings:

Resolution No. I l25l

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

GENERAL FINDINGS
A. NOTICE OF HEARING HAS BEEN GIVEN AT THE TIME AND IN THE MANNER REQUIRED BY STATE LAW AND CITY CODE.

THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AND SPECIFIC PLAN

AMENDMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, POLICIES AND
OBJECTIVES OF THE FOLSOM GENERAL PLAN AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED.

THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS COMPLY WITH THE
REQUTREMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65352.3 IN THAT THE

CITY OF FOLSOM HAS CONSULTED WITH ALL TRIBES REQUESTING CONSULTATION ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

CEQA FINDINGS
D. THE CITY, AS LEAD AGENCY, PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED AN ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE FOLSOM PLAN AREA SPECIFIC PLAN ON JUNE 28,2OII'

THE CITY, AS LEAD AGENCY, ALSO PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN ON AUGUST 28, 20I8.

A FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS BEEN

PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA, AND

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT WITH PROPOSED MITIGATION WOULD

NOT RESULT IN ANY NEW SIGNIFICANT AND TINAVOIDABLE IMPACTS OR A

SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SEVERE FINDING FOR AN IMPACT THAT WAS DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IN THE 2035 GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.

B
C
E
F
G
H
I

THE CITY COTINCIL HAS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REGARDING THE PROJECT.

CONSIDERED THE FINAL

REPORT BEFORE MAKING

SUBSEQUENT

A DECISION

THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REFLECTS THE INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS OF THE CITY OF FOLSOM.

THE CITY COUNCIL HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED THE FINAL

SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR INCREASED

RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY PROJECT, AND FINDS THAT THE PROJECT WILL

NOT CAUSE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN Resolution No. 11251

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

MITIGATED TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL.

J THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS THAT THERE ARE PROJECT BENEFITS GIVEN

THAT THE PROJECT FURTHERS THE GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICES AS WELL AS THOSE OF THE CITY'S 202I-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT, AND ON THAT

BASIS, THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR INCREASED RESIDENTIAL

CAPACITY PROJECT, ADOPTED FINDINGS OF FACTS, AND ADOPTED A

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF FOLSOM 2035 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR INCREASED RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY PROJECT.

K THE LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF THE DOCUMENTS AND ALL MATERIALS

CONSTITUTING THE RECORDS OF THE PROCEEDINGS ARE IDENTIFIED AS FOLLOWS: COMMI.INITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, CITY OF FOLSOM, 50 NATOMA STREET. FOLSOM, CA 95630 AND ARE AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT \\ \\ \\ . firlsom.clt.r.ts,'ho r rsin gslrtrlr

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FINDINGS
L. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN ARE IN THE PUBLIC

INTEREST SINCE THE PROJECT DESIGNATES MORE LAND FOR HOUSING

OPPORTUNITIES ESPECIALLY FOR THE CITY'S WORKFORCE AND LOWER- INCOME RESIDENTS.

M. THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, POLICIES, AND OBJECTIVES OF THE FOLSOM 2035

GENERAL PLAN

N THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS IMPLEMENT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM H.2 TO CREATE ADDITIONAL LOWER-

INCOME HOUSING CAPACITY

THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS WILL NOT RESULT IN A NET LOSS OF RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY.

THE PROPOSED LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH

THE GOALS, POLICIES, AND OBJECTIVES OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF

THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO INFILL,

DEVELOPMENT IN DISTRICTS AND CORRIDORS AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTH OF 50 TOWN CENTER.

A. THE PROPOSED MOBILITY ELEMENT AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH Resolution No. I 1251

o
P

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

THE GOALS, POLICIES, AND OBJECTIVES OF THE MOBILITY ELEMENT OF

THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO TRAFFIC, PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY AS WELL AS LEVEL OF SERVICE.

R. THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMS ARE

CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND HELP THE CITY ACHIEVE ITS GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES.

Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Land Use Element Amendments
Exhibit 2: Mobility Element Amendments
Exhibit 3: Implementation Element Amendments
pASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of August,2024, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Councilmember(s):

Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR
ATTEST
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 1 l25l

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Exhibit 1: Land Use Element Amendments

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LAND USE I 2
Final Draft | )uty ZOZ+ 2-1

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

FffiF-S{FEE2055
GENERAL PI.AN Hm=6
Land Use Diagram and
Standards
The Land Use Diagram depicts proposed land uses for Folsom through the year 2035 and beyond. The tand uses are represented using designations-districts that speciry the type and intensity of allowed land uses. The boundary lines between land use designations are delineated as specifica[ly as possible, in most cases fo[[owing parce[ [ines.

The fottowing sections describe the tand use designations appearing on the Land Use Diagram (figure LU-t), and standards of residential density and buitding intensity for the land use designations.

Development Standards
These are [ega[ standards of density for residential uses and standards of buitding intensity for nonresidentiat and mixed use. Specific plans, such as the Fotsom Ptan Area Specific Ptan (FPASP), must match the [and use development intensities and standards outlined in the Folsom Genera[ Plan. The foltowing explains how these standards operate.

Density. Standards of building intensity for residentiaI uses are stated as a range (i.e., minimum and maximum) of attowable number of dwelting uniG per gross acre. Residential development that is part of a mixed-use development or standalone residentiat devetopment within a mixed-use overlay designation, such as the East Bidwett Corridor Overlay, Transit-Oriented Development Overlay, or Town Center Overlay, is subject to the minimum density standard, but the maximum intensity of the devetopment is based on the maximum floor area ratio rather than maximum density. The diagram below shows various building configurations representing different density ranges. Standards of poputation density can be determined based on an assumption of persons per household.

Floor Area-Ratio (FAR). Standards of buitding intensity for residential mixed- use development and nonresidential uses, such as commercial, office, and industriatdevelopment, are stated as a range (i'e., minimum and maximum)of FARs. ln the case of mixed-use developments that include residentiat uses as we[[ as standatone residential uses in an area with a mixed-use overtay designation, the FAR includes residentiat buitding square footage, and the devetopment must meet both minimum residentia[ density and maximum FAR standards.
2-2 Final Draft | )uly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LAND USE I 2
An FAR is the gross buitding area on a site, excluding structured parking, to the net developable area of the site. The net devetopable area is the total area of a site exctuding portions that cannot be devetoped (e.g., right-of-way, pubtic parks). A site inctudes all contiguous parcels that witt share parking or access.

For example, on a lot with 25,000 square feet of [and area, a FAR of 0.50 witl a[[ow 12,500 square feet of useable buitding floor area to be buitt, regardless of the number of stories in the buitding (e.g., 6,250 square feet per ftoor on two floors or 12,500 square feet on one floor). On the same 25,000-square-foot [ot, a FAR of 1.00 woutd a[[ow 25,000 square feet of useable ftoor area, and a FAR of 2.00 wou[d a[[ow 50,000 square feet of useable floor area. The diagram below shows various buitding configurations representing FARs of 0.50, 1'00, and 2.00
White FAR provides for the overall development size and intensity, it does not specify the form or character of the buitding. Different interpretations of the same FAR can result in buitdings of very different character and variable residentia[ densities. The diagram below corretates the residential densities and FARs across a range of housing types. Examples of housing devetopments across a spectrum of FARs and residential densities are shown on page 2-5. 4du/ac
o.4z FAR
8du/ac
o.85 FAR
e6du/ac
o.98 FAR
36du/ac
r.z7 FAR
Sodu/ac
r.67 FAR
Finaf Draft | luly Zoz+ 2-3

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
,'F',SlL,'*$}VJ2G35 --.-*
GENERJ{L P!-A'{ xrFn=6

HOUSI NG DEVELOPMENT EXAMPLES
Density 12 dulac
FAR 0.8
Density 40 du/ac
FAR 1.65
p 'ltla
il
I 14,000 SF Commerciat
Fensity 55 dulac
FAR 2.32
.: ::.

Density *7 du/ac
FAR 2.13
Density 56 dulac
FAR 1.6
,. -r'- {.'rr I I,Lj
2-4 Final Draft | )uly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LAND UsE I 2
Iland Use Designations
Table LU-l: Residentlal Designations
Single ramity (SF)
This designation provides for single-famity detached homes.

Single Family High Density (srxo)
This designation provides for single-famity detached homes and single- ' family attached homes that include duptexes, halfptexes, and zero-lot-line homes. This designation also provides for mobile home parks.

Density/ lntensity Range*
2-4 Dwetling Units per Acre
4-7 Dwetting Units per Acre
7-12 Dwetting Units per
Acre
12-20 Dwetting Units per
Acre
20-30 Dwe[[ing Units per
Acre
Multifamily Low oensity (trtttD)
This designation provides for single-famity and multifamity residential units, inctuding smatl-lot SF detached, zero-[ot-[ine homes, duplexes, halfplexes, townhouses, condominiums, and apartments.

Muttifamily Medium Density (t'ttto)
This designation provides for muttifamity residential units, inctuding townhouses, condominiums, and apartments.

Muttifamily High Density (MHD)
This designation provides for muttifamily residential units in apartment buitdings.

Final Draft I Juty zoz+ 2-5

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
s'fflLgffi&4t2035GENgRAL PLAN HFH=ru
General Commercial (GC)
This designation provides for a wide range of retail, office, lodging, and service uses. Typica[[y, generaI commerciaI parcels accommodate power centers, lifestyte centers, and freestanding stores or offices.

Regional Commercial Center (Rcc)
This designation provides for highway-oriented, [arge-scale regionaI retail, entertainment, business, lodging, and pubtic uses. Uses in this district witt serve the entire region.

Auto-Oriented Com mercial (AOC)
This designation provides for vehicutar sales and service.

Table LU-2: Commercial Designations
Community Commercial (CC)
This designation provides for community-based retaiI and service uses intended to serve residential neighborhoods within the city.

Table LU-3: ttrlixed-Use Designations
Density/lntensity Range*
FAR: 0.2-0.5
FAR:0.2-0.5
FAR: 0.2-1.0
FAR: 0.1-0.3
Density/ lntensity Range+
20-30 Dwetting Units per
Acre
FAR:0.5-1.5
20-30 Dwelting Units per
Acre
FAR:0.5-2.0
Mixed-Use (trlU)
This designation provides for a mixture of commercial and residential uses that are mutually compatible by encouraging high-quality, innovative site design. This designation attows for muttifamity housing as wetl as shops, restaurants, services, offices, hospitality, and other compatible uses.

Historic Folsom Mixed-use (HF)
This designation provides for a mixture of commercial and residential uses designed to preserve and enhance the historic character of Fotsom's old town center.
2-6 Final Draft | ]uly 2024Page 490
08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LAND USE I 2
lnd ustriaUOffice Park (lN D)
This designation provides for office, research and development, wholesale, tight industriat and similar uses. Uses that support the primary uses, such as restaurants, are atso altowed.

Table LU-rr: Emptoyment/lndustrial Designations
Professional office (Pol
This designation provides for [ow-intensity business and professional offices that are compatibte with higher-intensity residentia[ uses.

Tabte LU-S: Pubtic Designatlons
Density/ lntensity Range*
FAR:0.2-1.2
FAR:0.2-0.5
Density/lntensity Range*
FAR:0.2-1.0
FAR:0.0-0.1
FAR:0.0-0.1
Public and Quasi-Public Facitity (PQP)
This designation supports the needs of the community by providing for governmental, civic, cultura[, health, education, and infrastructure uses.

Parks (P)
Tlre Parks land use designation provides for activc and passivc rocreational opportunities in Folsom.
open Space (oS)
The Open Space tand use designation encompasses the preserved natural open space areas of Folsom.

Final Draft I )utY zozlt 2-7

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
:F''i$lt. ft* f$s4{
2C35GENERAL PLAN HFR=6
East Bidwell Corridor (tgc) overlay
This overlay designation gives property owners along the East Bidwell Corridor the ftexibitity to devetop sites as mixed-use. lt provides for a mixture of commercial and residential uses that are mutualty compatibte along East Bidwett Street. This designation balances existing commerciaI uses with future mixed-use development. This designation allows for multifamity housing as wet[ as shops, restaurants, services, offices, and other compatible uses.

For mixed-use devetopment that includes residential uses as wetl as standalone residentialdevelopments within this overlay, buitding intensity standards are established by minimum residential density and maximum FAR. lntensity of non-residentialdevelopment is regulated by minimum and maximum FAR.

Folsom Boulevard Transit-Oriented Development (fOOl Overlay This overlay designation altows property owners alongthe Fotsom Boutevard corridor, anchored by Gtenn and lron Point tight raiI stations, to develop sites with higher intensity residential or mixed-use projects to capitalize on the proximity to high-frequency transit service. For development that includes residentiat uses, building intensity standards are established by minimum residential density and maximum FAR. lntensity of non-residential devetopment is regutated by minimum and maximum FAR standards.

Tabte LU-6: Overlay Designations Density/lntensity Range* FAR:0.2-1.5
Minimum Density: 30
d u /acre
FAR: 0.2-2.0
Minimum Density:30
du/acre
Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan Town Center (fC) Overlay Combining District This overlay designation attows property owners in the Town Center district of the Fotsom Ptan Area to develop Muttifamity High Density (mn0)and Mixed-Use (MU) zoned sites at a higher intensity to capitalize on the proximity to ptanned commercial centers and high-frequency transit service.

For development that inctudes residentiaI uses, buitding intensity standards are established by minimum residential density and maximum FAR. lntensity of non-residentiat development is regutated by minimum and maximum FAR. *Note: Density or FAR calculations that result in a fractional number due to the lot size shall be rounded to the closest whole number. For example, a project site with a density of 7.5 du/ac would be rounded to a density of 8.0 du/ac while a project with a density of 7.2 du/ac would be rounded to7 du/ac.

FAR:0.2-2.0
Minimum Density:30
d u /acre
2-B Final Draft | luly zoz+

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LAND USE I 2
General Plan Planning Area
The ptanning Area is the geographic area for which the General Ptan estabtishes poticies about future urban growth, long-term agricultural activity, and naturat resource conservation. State law requires each city to include in its General ptan att territory within the boundaries of the incorporated area as we[[ as "any [and outside its boundaries which in the ptanning agency's judgment bears relation to its planning" (Catifornia Government Code Section 65300).

The ptanning Area for the Fotsom 2035 Generat Plan inctudes the entire city limits and approximately 5,600 acres of unincorporated tand outside the city [imits, as shown in Figure LU-1.

The ptanning Area includes two projects that have been approved by Sacramento County: Glenborough and Easton place. Gtenborough at Easton is a 1,208-acre mixed-use community providing a variety of land uses, transportation options, emptoyment opponunities, housing diversity, and active and passive recreationaI uses. The project has been approved by the County for3,239 housing units, 699,500 square feet of commercialand office space, and 513 acres of parks and open space. The 2.6-mite,27}-acre Atder Creek open space area offers habitat for many riparian ptant and animal species, as we[[ as wildtife and trail connections to the American River Parkway system.

Easton place consists of 183 acres centered on the existing Hazel Avenue tight raiI station on Fotsom Boutevard. The majority of Easton place is [ocated within a hatf-mite radius of the tight rail station, which witt also serve as a center for local and regional bus transit service. Easton Place is a mixed-use, transit-oriented community close to Highway 50, Hazel Avenue, and Fotsom Boulevard. The project has been approved by the County for 1,644 housing units, 3,527,gOO square feet of commercial and office uses, and 7.5 acres of parks and open space.

Combined, Easton Place and Gtenborough at Easton represent 1,391 acres, 4,883 housing units, and over 4,2 million square feet of commercial and office space. Approximatety 37 percent of the combined acreage (Szt acres) is devoted to parks and open space and, in addition to the Alder Creek corridor, includes 165 acres of additional open space, 60 acres of parks, a 26-acre community resource area, and over nine miles of trails. Three schools, two fire stations, one pubtic safety center, and a tibrary are also included, as is parattel road capacity to Highway s0' The projects are fu[ty entitted, inctuding the certification of the EIR; the 404 permit has been obtained; the water suppty is estabtished and witl be provided by the City of Folsom; schooI mitigation and park development agreements have been approved; Phase 1 improvement ptans have been prepared; and the structures for CFD financing districts have been approved.

The area south of White Rock Road within the GeneraI P[an Planning Area is outside the city [imits and Sphere of lnftuence, and within unincorporated Sacramento County. The area [argety consists of grazing land, but also includes graveI quarries and a section of the Prairie City State Vehicular Recreation Area. The City is exploring potentially retocating the City Corporation Yard within this area. The Sacramento County 2030 General Ptan designates this area as GeneraI Agriculture. However, the 2050 Sacramento Regionat Blueprint identifies this area as "vacant urban designated land." Given the location adjacent to Folsom City timits, the potentiaI impacts of truck traffic from the q uarries, and the pro posed location of the city corporation yard, it is im portant that the City stay abreast of activities within this area for potential impact on the City of Folsom.

Since 1996, the City of Fotsom has been in a Memorandum of Understanding (ttitoU) with the Local Agency Formation Commission and Sacramento County. The MoU guarantees that the City witt be notified of any land use changes in the Area of Concern adjacent to the southern edge of the current Sphere of lnfluence, as any land use changes or other governmental actions taken by Sacramento County wit[ impact the City of Fotsom.

Finat Draft | )uly ZOZ+ 2-9

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

F(}LFI(}n[2035GENERAL PLAN maru
This page is intentionally left blonk.
2-10 Final Draft | )uly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

F&d{*[oee
ttgure LrII-l: Land Use Diagrranr
s*a*aur,',ro't
t&.rhh@
,4
Et DORADO HILIS
rAiro usE | 2
l-J-..j Folsom City Umits
O Light Rait station
- - -' Light Rail Line
-. - countyline
Ell3 Historic District Boundary
E Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan (FPASP) Eoundary
Genefal Plan Land Use Designations
I AOc - Auto-oriented Commerical
,. :r . CC - Community Commerciai
I cc - Genenl commercial
n# HF - Historic Folsom Mixed use
n IND - lndustrial/Office Park
n MHD - Multitumily High D€nsity
I MMD - Multifamily Medium Density
I MLD - Multifamily Low Density
-
MU - Mixed Use
n OS - Open Space
I P-Parks
ffi PO - Professional/Office
I PQP - Public and Quasi-Public Facility
I RCC - Regional Commercial Center
SF - Single Family
Fri&qrl SFHD - Single Family High Density
Overlays
lffi Folsom Boulevard Transit-oriented OoD)
Development Overlay
WV FPASP"lom Cente. OC) Overlay
@ Eastgidwell Corridor (EBQ overlay
t
{eb*o^t *:,
t^o
oooo_
-22
2^)-
RANCHO
(ORDOVA
202m20.& Gts
FinaL Draft I Juty 2024
a z2ffi 4& ,a\
--l-rFst
qg/
2-11

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lFCIr-9CIl${I
6EN€RI\L PLAN HFT=6
This poge is intentionally Ieft blonh.
2'12 Finai Draft I July 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Growth and Change
uruo usr lz
Folsom has grown considerably since its founding in the 1800s and incorporation in 1946. Throughout its history Fotsom's growth has led to prosperity, and poticies in this section aim to continue that legacy. Some poticies are continuations of successfu[ long-standing City policies, while others are new and reftect contemporary ptanning practices and anticipate future chatlenges and opportunities.

Goal LU l.l
Retain and enhance Folsom's quatity of tife, unique identity, and sense of community while continuing to grow and change.

LU 1.1.1 Zoning Ordinance
Ensure that the Folsom Zoning Ordinance is consistent with the poticies and programs of the General ptan. Fl8
LU 1.1.2 Land Use CooPeration
Coordinate with Sacramento, Placer, and E[ Dorado Counties, as wetl as the Sacramento Area Council of Governments
(SACOG) and Sacramento LocatAgency Formation Commission (mfco), on land use decisions that may impact lotsom. K LU 1.1.3 Annexation and Services
Require appticants applying for annexation of lands to the city to demonstrate the financial benefit to the city. Ml
LU 1.1.4 Sphere of lnfluence for Corporation Yard
Coordinate with LAFCO to revise the Sphere of lnftuence to permit the new corporation yard. @l
LU 1.1.5 Specific Plans
Require the adoption of specific ptans for new growth areas. @
LU 1.1.6 Compact Development Patterns
Encou rage com pact development patterns that su pport wa\in g, bicycting, transit usage, and more efficient use of tand. ffiFl LU 1.1.7 Concentrated Development
Attow project appticants to concentrate the proposed
development on a portion of the site through the ctustering of Finaf Draft | luly 2024 2-13

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
;F (}r-Sffie4t
2035GENERAL PLAN AIEffi
LU 1.1.8
LU 1.1.9
LU 1.1.10
LU 1.1.11
LU 1.1.12
buitdings to encourage the preservation of open spaces, cultural resources, and natural features of the landscup.. Ffil
Preserve Natural Assets
Maintain the existing natural vegetation, landscape features, open space, and viewsheds in the design of new
developments. Mil
Preserve H istoric Resou rces
Recognize the imponance of history in the City of Folsom, and preserve historic and culturaI resources throughout the city, to the extent feasibte. ffi
Network ofOpen Space
Ensure designated open space is connected wheneverfeasibte with the larger community and regiona[ network of natural systems, recreationaI assets, and viewsheOt. H
Vacant and Underutilized Sites
Monitor residential and non-residential development and make adjustments as necessary to the amount of land
designated for various uses and the rate of project approvals to promote a reasonabte citywide balance between new
emptoyment-generating devetopment and housing
development. ilEEH
lnfill Development
Coordinate with the real estate development community to encourage infitt development in key parcets north of U.S' Highway 50. I nfi lt devetopment shoutd fo[tow these guidelines:

1. Respect the local context. New development should
improve the character and connectivity of the
neighborhoods in which it occurs. Physicat design
shoutd respond to the scate and features ofthe
su rrou nd i ng com mun ity, wh ite im provi ng critical elements such as transparency and permeabitity.

2. Work with neighbors.lnfitt 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 white futfitting the community's larger goats for watkabitity and compact devetopment E
2-14 Finat Draft | luly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LU 1.1.13
LU 1.1.14
LU 1.1.15
LU 1.1.16
LU 1.1.17
LU 1.1.18
Sustainable Buitding Practices $)
Promote and, where appropriate, require sustainable buitding practices that incorporate a "whole system" approach to designing and constructing buitdings that consume less
energy, water and other resources; facititate natural
ventilation; use daytight effectively; and, are healthy, safe, comfortable, and durable. FEE
Promote Resiliency @
Continue to co[[aborate with nonprofit organizations,
neighborhoods groups, and other community organizations, as wetl as upstream, neighboring, and regional groups to effectivety partner on and promote the issues relating to air quality, renewable energy systems, sustainable land use, adaptation, and the reduction of greenhouse gas (cttc)
emissions. l[
SACOG Blueprint Principles
Strive to adhere to the Sacramento Regional Blueprint Growth Principtes (see Appendix e). |E0
Community Engagement in the Planning Process
Engage the community in the ptanning process. Ensure the pubtic has access to accurate and timely information and has convenient and meaningfuI ways to contribute ideas. fEH lnfill Below Minimum Standards
The City shatt at[ow renovations and expansions of existing development that fatt below the atlowed minimum density or floor area ratio (fRR), provided that the density or FAR is not reduced. F8
lnterim Zoning Consistency
ln areas where zoning has not been brought into conformity with the General Plan, the City shatt a[[ow property owners to devetop consistent with the existing zoning if onty a
ministerial permit is required. For property owners requiring a discretionary permit, the City shall altow property owners to either:
(t) Devetop consistent with the existing zoning, provided the City makes a fi nding that approval of the project wou [d not interfere with the long-term development of the area
consistent with the General Plan, or
LAND USE I 2
Final Draft I ]uty zoZ+
a aEz- tJ

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
vffirL€$$s4r2035GENENAL PLANffimM
LU 1.1.19
Ratio
LU 1.1.20
(z) Devetop under the General Ptan designation, in which case the City witt facititate rezoning consistent with the General Ptan. FN
Development lntensity at Less than the Minimum Floor Area The City shat[ permit devetopment at less than the required minimum FAR if onty a ministerial permit is required. Where a discretionary permit is required, a devetopment with a FAR at less than the required minimum may be deemed consistent with the General Plan if the City finds that:
(t) the initia[ site development is being phased and an overal[ devetopment ptan demonstrates compliance with the FAR
standard, or
(Z) tfre use involves no buitding or by its nature normally conducts a substantial amount of its operations outdoors, or (s) the use is temporary and would not interfere with [ong- term development of the site consistent with the FAR
standard, or
(+) the buitding size or lot coverage is constrained beyond what is otherwise altowed by the zoning designation of the site, due to the existence of an overlay zone or because of environmentaI features, such as slopes or wetlands, or
(s) tne site is less than one acre and the project includes commercialuses. M
GeneraI Plan Density Regulations for Mixed-Density Proiects Where a developer proposes a multi-parcel devetopment
project with more than one residential density or FAR, the City may, at the discretion of the Community Development
Director, appty the appticabte density or FAR range of the Specific Plan Land Use Designation to the net devetopabte area of the entire project site rather than individual parcels within the site. Some parcels may be developed at
densities/intensities that exceed the maximum attowed
density/intensity of the project site's Land Use Designation, provided that the net density of the project as a whote is within the altowabte range. FEFI
2-16 Final Draft I ]uty zoz+

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Urban Genters
ln 2015, Folsom is a city with two distinct urban centers. Historic Fotsom, the long-time heart of the city, is the first urban center. The Broadstone District, with the Pattadio at the center, is a newer urban town center. Between now and 2035 the South of Highway 50 Town Center witt begin construction. Folsom has other important centers of activity;the three identified here serve [arge, geographicatty-distinct areas and offer a wide range of amenities.

With three distinct centers, Folsom wi[[ have gathering places near every Fotsom resident. Residents can attend an event, shop, and dine within a short walk, bike ride, or drive from their homes. Po[icies in this section consider this overall city structure and support and enhance urban centers. This focus on creating and enhancing urban centers reflects the broader goal ofthe General Ptan, which is that people, and not the automobite, are at the center of Folsom's ptanning today.

Historic Folsorn
Historic Folsom has been a center for the city since Catifornia's Gold Rush and its compact, interconnected streets are an example of 'otd urbanism.' ln recent years the City has undertaken severaI projects to rejuvenate the district. The City buitt a new parking garage and refurbished a historic railroad turntable. ln 2011 the city worked with area merchants to revitalize historic sutter street.

Historic Folsom is also the finat stop on the Gotd Line tight rail that takes passengers as far as Downtown Sacramento.

LAND USE I 2
l-. Historic Folsom; 2.

Broadstone District; 3. South
of Highway 50 Town Center
Finaf Draft I luty zoz+ 2-17

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
trm]LF$$S4to3s - -GENERAL PI-49.C HFT=6
Broadstone District
The Broadstone District is Folsom's newest shopping and entertainment district. The Pattadio, a "lifestyle center" that arranges shopping, dining, and entertainment options in a watkable layout, forms the heart of the Broadstone District. The Pattadio is ringed by other new shopping and dining options and as the District grows, additionat offerings, connections, and housing witt attow it to mature into a true mixed-use center.

South of Highuray SOTown Genter
This urban center is stitt in the ptanning stages. The Folsom Plan Area Specific Plan sets the course for development south of Highway 50 and describes the town center as a place with a mix of retail, high-density housing, and emptoyment uses. This town center wi[[ serve as a community focal point for the entire new development south of Highway 50. ln order to execute the vision of the Town Center as a thriving urban center, the TC overlay combining district atlows for higher intensity devetopment on mixed-use and high- density residential sites as shown on the Land Use Diagram. 2-18 Final Draft | )uLy 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

God IrU 2.1
Devetop and support thriving urban centers that serve as community gathering ptaces.

LU 2.1.1 Historic Folsom
Maintain the existing street fabric and pattern and enhance the tourist-oriented, historic commercial uses in the Historic Folsom commercia[ areas to preserve the unique character of Fotsom's historic center and support [oca[ business. FEH Ltl2.1.2 BroadstoneDistrict
Encourage a mix of uses, including an emphasis on high- density residentia[, and pedestrian- and bicycte-friendty street patterns in the Broadstone District to increase its functionatity as a vibrant gathering place for the community' @
LU 2.1.3 South of 50 Town Center
Encourage the establishment of a town center south of
Highway 50 that serves as a community gathering place. The town center shoutd be easily accessible by att modes of transportation and have a fine-grained mix of uses, including retail, service, residentia[, public, entertainment, and recreation uses that creates a walkable environment $Q$ LAND USE I 2
Final Draft | luty ZOZ+ 2-19

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
:F(}]LSffi&€20356ENERAL PI-AN ffi86
Mixed-Use Districts
Poticies in this section support the devetopment of mixed-use districts in appropriate areas, particutarty along East Bidwett Street. Mixed-use districts consist of three or more different uses, including office, retail, entertainment, civic, and housing. They are nodes of activity that support walkable, urban tifestytes. Mixed-use districts provide a diversity of housing types, the kind that often attracts young, educated workers, a demographic criticaI to the continued economic vitatity of Folsom. Empty nesters, who want to stay in their community but no longer want the maintenance or costs associated with a detached home, are attracted to mixed-use districts. Mixed-use designations give property owners additionat flexibitity. lf they choose to redevelop their property, they can choose a range of uses to meet existing or growing market needs. Or they can maintain the existing site uses until the market demands a more diverse and intense land use.

Goal LU 3,1
Encourage mixed-use development projects that create vibrant, walkabte districts.

LU 3.1.1 Mixed-Use Nodes i9
Encourage mixed-use devetopment in nodes located at major intersections that inctude housing, open space, and offices.

This devetopment pattern shoutd reflect best practices in mixed-use development, in contrast to strip retail
developments along corridors. @{
LU 3.1.2 Districts and Corridors
Encourage devetopment of diverse mixed-use districts and corridors that address different community needs and market sectors, provide a variety of housing opportunities, and create distinct and unique areas of the city. FE
LU 3.1.3 Mixed-Use Design
Encourage mixed-use devetopments to limit the number of access driveways, minimize buitding setbacks, and require active edges on ground floor spaces adjacent to sidewalks. @
2-20 Finat Draft | luly zOZ+

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LU 3.1.4
LU 3.1.5
LU 3.1.6
LU 3.1.7
LU 3.1.8
Compatibitity with. Adioining Uses
En cou rage d evelo pment an d redevetopm ent of h igh er-d ensity mixed-use development within districts and along corridors to be compatibte with adjacent [and uses, particutarly residential utes. FEE
East Bidwetl Street (T)
Encourage new devetopment along East Bidwett Street by
creating a stronger mixed-use devetopment pattern, both horizontal and verticat, with an emphasis on medium- and higher-density housing, while also addressing [ocaI and citywide demand for retail and services [!$
Central Commercial District O
Encourage devetopment of mixed-use projects that create a walkabte, vibrant district along East Bidwett Street between Coloma Street and Blue Ravine noad. M
Creekside District
Encourage development of a medical and assisted tiving
district centered around Mercy Hospital Fotsom and East Bidwett Street that includes a mix of uses, inctuding medical offices, housing, and retated retait and service uses. FEE| Cottege District
Encourage devetopment of a vibrant, walkable district
centered around Folsom Lake Cotlege and East Bidwett Street adjacent to the Broadstone District that includes higher density residential, retait, and daity service uses for emptoyees and residents as well as students, faculty, and statf. FEE
LAND USE I 2
Finat Draft I )uly zoz+ 2-21

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
s"{39-ffi{pe6203sGENERAL PLAN HAlEru
Transit-Oriented
Development
Transit-oriented devetopment (tOO) is development that combines street patterns, parking management strategies, and building density to take advantage of nearby transit service. Typicatty, TOD works best with high- frequency transit [ines such as tight rait and frequent bus service. Folsom is served by Regionat Transit's Gold Line tight rait that connects Historic Folsom to the Sacramento Vattey Station in downtown Sacramento. There are three Gotd Line stations in Folsom, each with a different amount of existing surrounding development and commuter parking nearby. The Folsom Boulevard TOD overtay, as shown on the Land Use Diagram, atlows for higher intensity, mixed-use and residential devetopment alongthe Gold Line tight rait around Glenn Station and lron Point Station.

Historic Folsom Station
Historic Folsom Station is at the west end of Sutter Street, the spine of the historic district. The City's corporation yard is within a quarter mile of the station, and the City is ptanning on vacatingthe site by 2035. The site south of Leidesdorff Street and north of Sutter Street is vacant. Both sites could be appropriate for transit-oriented devetopment. The Historic District differs from the rest of Folsom, and white the policies in this section appty to alt the stations, development that is appropriate at the Gtenn Station or lron Point Station might not be appropriate around the Historic Folsom Station.

Glenn Station
Glenn Station is at the intersection of Folsom Boulevard and Glenn Drive. A park-and-ride lot and the Kikkoman Foods facitity surround the east side of the station, making it a usefuI station for peopte commuting in and out of town.

The State Department of Parks and Recreation and the United States Bureau of Reclamation manage the tand to the west of Folsom Boulevard, inctuding the dredge taitings that cover most of the site. The American River Bike Trait runs on the west side of the site. Any changes in this area woutd require close coordination with the State Department of Parks and Recreation' fron Point Station
The Folsom Premium Outtets anchor the lron Point Station. Other retail options, inctuding a hotet and movie theater, help create a shopping and retaiI hub. On the northwest side of Folsom Boutevard, the American River Bike Trait weaves through the Wittow Creek Recreation Area. New transit-oriented 2-22 Final Draft | July zoZ+

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
development, particutarly mixed-use development, woutd likely occur onty if existing retaiI sites were redevetoped.

Folsom may also be served by new transit lines and stations in the future. A frequent bus [ine may be buitt in the area south of Highway 50. ln addition, the Gotd Line may be expanded to serve other areas in Folsom. Folsom has development opportunities around existing stations and possible d eveto p ment o p po rtu n ities arou nd futu re statio ns.

Goal IrII 4.1
Estabtish transit-supported mixed-use districts near rapid transitstationsthat support the needs of commuters, residents, emptoyees, business-owners, and patrons.

LAND USE I 2
LU 4.1.1
LU 4.1.2
Public/Private Pannerships
Coordinate with other pubtic agencies and members of the business and reaI estate communities when supporting
transit-oriented devetopment in Folsom. $!![|
Mix of Uses Near Station r$
Encourage new deve[opment around transit stations that mix retait with a variety of housing and employment options to transform Folsom stations into destinations that take
advantage of pubtic investment in transit. Ffll
Finat Draft | luly 202a 2-23

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

CEQA BENEFITS PROVIDED BY SB 375
The CEQA benefits provided by SB 375 appty to three types of projects. Below is a summary of the types of development projects eligible for these ofCEQA benefits, speeiflc for each and the of CEQA streamlining avaitable to each :F {il) }L F* {*)}4i
2035
6FNERAL PLAN ffiffiEffi
Environmental documents are not required to
reference, describe or discuss: 1) growth-inducing
impacts,2) impacts on transportation or climate
change of increased car and truck VMT induced by
project,,3) red uced-density alternative to project.

Mixed Use
Residential
r At least 75% oftotat buitding square footage for residential use
. consistentwith the use designation, density, buitding intensity, and applicable policies ofthe sACoG MTP/SCS
OR
. A Transit Priority Project as defined below
Benefits described above PLUS option to review under
a "sustainabte Communities Environmental
Assessment"
o An lnitial Study is prepared identiflTing significant or potentiatly sign ifi cant i mpacts.
. Where the tead agency determines that cumulative
impacts have been addressed and mitigated in the
MTP/SCS, they witl not be "considerable."
r off-site alternatives do not need to be addressed.
. Deferential review standard - the burden of proof
for legal challenge is on the petitioner/plaintiff.
o Traffic controumitigation may be covered by the
MTP/SCS.

Transit Priority
eroiect
r At least 50% of total bu itd ing square footage for residentiat use OR
. lf 26-5o% of totat buitdingsquarefootage is non-residential, a minimum FAR of 0.75
r Minimum net density of 20 dulacre
. Within 0.5 mites of major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor included in the regiona[ transponation plan (tllo parcel irore than 25% further, and less than 10% of units or no more than 100 units further than 0.5 mites)
r Consistentwith the use designation, density, building intensity, and applicabte policies ofthe SACOG MTP/SCS
Exempt from CEQASustainable
Communities
Project
Everything for Transit Priority Proiect PLUS:
. Served by existing utilities
r Does not contain wetlands or riparian areas
o Does not have significant value as a wildlife habitat and does not harm any protected species
. Not on the Cortese List
o Not on developed open space
r No impacts to historic resources
. No risks from hazardous substances
. No wildfire, seismic, flood, pubtic health risk
. 15% more energy-efficient than CA requirements and 25% more water-efiicient than average for com mu nity
. No more than I acres
. No more than 200 units
. No building greaterthan 75,000 square feet
o No net loss of affordable housing
. Compatibte with surrounding industrial uses
. Within 1/2-mite of rail/ferry or 1/4-mile of high quality bus line
r Meets minimum affordable housing requirements as
prescribed in SB 375 OR in-lieu fee paid OR 5 acres of open space per 1,000 residents provided
ProjectType I Quatifications I Streamtining Benefits
2-24 Finat Draft I luty zozq

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LU 4.1.3
LU 4.1.4
LU 4.1.5
LU 4.1.6
LV 4.1.7
Maximize ToD-Related CEQA Streamtining Benefits O
Assist property owners and devetopers interested in building high-density housing and emptoyment within SACOG Transit Priority Areas (i.e., one-hatf mite of tight rait stations) to maximize CEQA streamtining benefits available through
SACOG'S MTP/SCS. EEn
Restrict Auto-Oriented Uses Around Transit Stations
Restrict new auto-oriented uses (e.g., automobile repair, gas station, car wash, drive through restaurants, mini storage facitities) within one-quarter mite of tight rait stations' Ml Connections Between Modes
Encourage transit transfer points to be located at rapid transit stops to facititate connections between transit modes. ln addition, the City should require stations to be pedestrian- and bicycte-friend ty. [S
Parl<ing Management
Develop tong-term parking management approaches that
decrease the amount of [and dedicated to surface parking white maintaining parking capacity. Solutions may inctude parking structures, shuttles to nearby parking, shared par{ng, or the use of transit passes for employees and residents. FEI Corporation Yard Special StudY
Prepare a study of the existing Fotsom corporation yard site to determine the best use for the site when Folsom moves its corporation yard. NSI
LAND USE I 2
Final Draft | )uly 2024 2-25

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lF{l)Lsffie4l2035
G€NERAL PLAN HAE!ffi
River District
The riverfront areas of Folsom are great assets that are currently underutilized. White they offer recreationaI opportunities for Folsom residents, access to the river is [imited. Folsom has the opportunity to make the river a more integral part of the community fabric by turning its attention to the river and increasing access. The General Ptan policies in this section catl for the preparation of a River District Master P[an. Much of the land surrounding the river is controtled by the California State Parks Department, so increasing access to the river wi[[ require ctose coordination with the State.

Poticies in the Parks and Recreation Etement provide further guidance on the enhancement of riverfront areas and increased access for recreation. -
PlanningA,rea
rrn LightRail
Light Rail Stations
tf Historic Distfict
Folsom River District Study Area

DISTRICTVEROM R

Y AR EA
FOL$
STUD
(Ar(E cRos$Ns
per.SO&
gd
4 &kt'sAuq
I
- otuto"to
- \)w

CRAMENTOUNTY
cREEilBACX Lll
MAD|SoHAvE

ORAIIGEVALE
$l
u
!!. SA
co
2-26 Finat Draft | July 202a

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

God IrU 5.1
Support the appropriate enhancement of Fotsom's riverfront areas for cUrrent and future residents in order to increase pubtic access, recreationat opportunities, and economic development in consultation with federa[, state, and regionat pubtic tand management agencies.

LU 5.1.1 Vision for the River District
Engage the community, stakehotders, and federa[, state, and regiona[ land management agencies in establishing a vision for Folsom's River District. ilm
LU 5.1.2 River District Master Plan
Consider the preparation of a River District Master Ptan for Fotsom's riverfront area, that is based on widespread
community engagement as we[[ as coordination with the U.S.

Bureau of Reclamation, California Department of Parks and Recreation, and Sacramento County RegionaI Parks
oepartment. Fffi
LU 5.1.3 Enhance Lake Natoma with Compatible Recreation Uses Enhance the rote of Lake Natoma as a ptace to recreate and an amenity for Folsom residents, and elevate Lake Natoma's role in supporting [oca[ and regiona[ business and commerce, inctuding tourism, recreation and leisure, while maintaining compatibitity with the Folsom Lake State Recreation Area General Plan. lnvest in strategicalty-tocated sites atong the tength of Lake Natoma for a diverse mix of passive and active recreation and tourism activities that are compatible with nearby land uses, historicatty and culturally important sites, significant habitat areas, restoration sites, and native fish and witdtife usag". @
LU 5.1.4 Honor Folsom's Heritage
The River District Master Plan shoutd inctude a means of honoring and interpreting Fotsom's heritage within the
Historic District. @
LAND USE I 2
Final Draft | luly 202a
1_aa

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lF'{slL,sc}Mi2035 -'-GTNERA,L P'.AN GIMEffi
Residential
Neighborhoods
SuccessfuI and stable neighborhoods are key to Folsom's [ong-term prosperity and quatity of life. Folsom's historic neighborhoods fan out in a grid south of Sutter Street. Most of Folsom's neighborhoods outside of the historic district were designed and developed as part of a master ptan, planned unit devetopment, or specific ptan. Poticies in this section provide for the protection, maintenance, and enhancement of Fotsom's residential neighborhoods.

God LU 6,1
Attow for a variety of housing types and mix of uses that provide choices for Fotsom residents, create comptete and livable neighborhoods, and encourage watking and biking.
tu 6.1.1
LU 6.1.2
LU 6.1.3
LU 6.1.4
Comptete Neighborhoods
Encourage the establishment of "complete neighborhoods" that integrate schools, chitdcare centers, parks, shopping and emptoyment centers, and other amenities. M
Historic Folsom Residential Areas
Preserve and protect the residentiaI character of Historic Folsom's residentiaI areas. Ml
Efficiency Through Density
Support an overa[[ increase in average residentiaI densities in identified urban centers and mixed-use districts. Encourage new housing types to shift from lower-density, large-tot devetopments to higher-density, smatl-lot and multifamity developments, as a means to increase energy efficiency, conserve water, reduce waste, as we[[ as increase access to services and amenities (e.g., open space) through an emphasis of mixed uses in these higher-density devetopmentt. FEEI Open Space in Residentia[ Developments
Require open space in each residential devetopment except the fottowing: developments located within a Specific Plan Area that has atready dedicated open space, on muttifamily parcels of less than 10 acres and, or parcels of less than 20 acres for singte famity uses surrounded by existing
devetopment. Open space inctudes parktands, common areas, 2-28 Final Draft | ]uly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

LU 6.1.5
LU 6.1.6
LU 6.1.7
LU 6.1.8
landscaped areas, paths and trails, and ptazas. Open space does not inctude areas devoted to vehicle parking, streets, and landscaped streetscapes. To achieve the open space
guidelines, a developer may be al[owed to group the homes at smaller lot sizes around shared open space features, as long as the average gross density does not increase. M
Off-Street Parking
Require sufficient off-street parking for residents be inc[uded in the design of atl residential projects. Off-street parking for guests shatt be included in the design of atl muttifamily projects. The City sha[[ a[[ow for reduced parking
requirements for high-density residential and mixed-use developments near transit stations. ESI
Senior and convalescent Housing
Encourage the development of independent living, assisted [iving, and convalescent housing facitities that provide heatth care for seniors. Proposed facitities shatl be evaluated based on the location and impacts on services and neighboring properties, and not on a density basis. lndependent tiving facitities should be [ocated in watkabte environments to improve the heatth and access of residents. Fl8
Residential Densities in Area Ptans and Specific Plans
Attow residential densities within an area plan or specific plan to vary, provided that the overal[ dwetting unit buitdout within the plan area sha[[ not exceed that authorized by the Generat ptan. FEH
Home-Based Businesses
With issuance of a home occupation permit, atlow home
offices and home-based businesses that are compatibte with the character of the residentiaI unit and do not significantly impact the neighborhood. Fllil
LAND USE I 2
FinaI Draft | )uly 2024 2-29

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
s'ffig-9ffi&e2035G€NERAL FLAN Hm=ffi
tu 6.1.9
tu 6.1.10
Religious lnstitutions
Require retigious institutions in residentiaI neighborhoods be designed to be compatibte with the residential character of the neighborhood and include:

1. Access to the property via an arterial or collector
street;

2. The screening of parking with [andscaping and/or
materials that witt btend with surrounding natural
and constructed features ofthe neighborhood; and

3. The shielding of adiacent residentia[ properties from direct tight and glare from the propeny. M
Enhanced Wall<ing and Bil<ing
Where volume-to-capacity analysis demonstrates that bike lanes and pedestrian improvements can be inctuded in the pubtic right-of-way, encourage opportunities to promote watking and biking in existing suburban neighborhoods
through improvements such as:
. introducing new pedestrian and bicycle connections;
. adding bike lanes and designating and signing bike
routes;
. narrowing streets where they are overty wide;
. introducing ptanting strips and street trees between
the curb and sidewatk;or
r introducing appropriate tralfic-calming
improvemen". M E
2-30 FinaL Draft | luly 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Gommercial Genters
Commercial centers consist of office, retait, service, and entertainment uses.

Folsom's commercia[ centers meet the needs of residents and attract shoppers from the entire region. Commercial centers create jobs for Folsom's workforce and provide criticatsales tax revenue to fund the City's efforts to ensure a high quatity of tife for residents. Poticies in this section support Folsom's commerciaI centers and ensure their long-term success.

God IrU Z,l
Provide for a commerciat base of the city to encourage a strong tax base, more jobs within the city, a greater variety of goods and services, and businesses compatible with Fotsom's quatity of tife.

LU 7.1.1 Standards for Commercial Uses
Require new commercial uses to be subject to design and parking standards for:

1. The number and [ocation of altowed curb cuts;
LAND USE I 2

2. Landscaping or parking areas;

3. The location, size, number, and construction of signs; and

4. The configuration and design of commercia[
buitdings.

5. Provision of designated, defined bicycte routes from pubtic right-of-way to bicycle parking/pedestrian
corridors. Ffi
Enhance Vitatity of Commercial Areas
Encourage development of underutitized and vacant parcels in commercial zones to improve the aesthetic appearance and enhance the vitatity of commerciat areas. M
Commercial Expansion
Support the expansion of Folsom's commercial sector to meet the needs of Fotsom residents, emptoyees, and visitors. NE LU7.1.2
LU 7.1.3
Finat Draft | luly ZOZ+ 2-31

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

FGr,ffiffiR4I2035GENERAL PLAN Hm=6
LU7.1.4
tu 7.1.5
LU 7.1.6
LU7.1.7
"Strip" Commercial Uses
Prohibit new "strip" center devetopment patterns along
arterial streets. Strip centers are characterized by low-density commercial frontage with parking in front of the buitding and muttipte access driveways. NE
Open Space
Req u i re a[[ commerciaI d evetopm ent and com merciaI portions of mixed-use development to contain at least 10 percent of land area in naturat, improved, or functional open space, exclusive of roadways and parking [ots. Developments in mixed-use designations in the FPASP sha[[ provide at least five percent of land area in naturat, improved, or functional open space, exclusive of roadways and parking tots. EHI
Regional Commercial Centers
Require regional commercial centers to be located ctose and accessible to U.S. Highway 50, preferabty near an interchange. @
Hotels
Encourage the devetopment of hotels and related convention facitities within commercial and mixed-use districts, with an em ph asis o n h igh -q ua tity deveto p ment. [EiliDH
2-32 FinaL Draft | )uly 202a

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Emp I oym enl lIndu str ial
Uses
Folsom's exceltent quatity of tife depends on a strong local economy with good paying jobs that are stable for both the existing and future economy.

Supportive land use poticies can hetp attract and retain emptoyers. Policies in this section create a land use poticy framework aimed at retaining and attracting new employers white mitigating any negative impacts of emptoyment uses on the rest of the community.

Goal LU 8.1
Encourage, facilitate, and support the location of office, creative industry, technology, and industrial uses and retention of existing industry in appropriate [ocations.

LU 8.1.1 Industrial Expansion
Promote and assist in the maintenance and expansion of
Folsom's employment sector in areas where services are
readity available, including: adequate water, wastewater, and storm drainage facilities as we[[ as easy access to multiple modes of transportation. fW
LU 8.1.2 Smatl-Scate lndustrial
Ensure the Zoning Ordinance allows opportunities for sma[[- scale industriat and service commercial uses (e.g., auto repair) white considering impacts on nearby residential
neighborhoods. ilFlSl
LU 8.1.3 Clusters
Encourage complementary businesses and businesses from
the same industry to locate in Folsom. These business clusters witt benefit from shared resources, a pool of skitted
employees, secondary support industries, and concentrated marketi n g efforts' Mltfitlffi{
LU 8.1.4 Adiacent Uses and Access
Discourage industriaI devetopment in locations where access confticts with neighboring land ,t.t. FHHI
LAND UsE I 2
Final Draft | )uty ZOZ+ 2-33

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
s'{}Lg$h{2(}35
GENERJ\L PL/[N HAlEru
LU 8.1.5
LU 8.1.6
Transit
Encourage new employment uses to locate where they can be easity served by pubtic transit. Transit centers should be incorporated into the project, when appropriate. EEO
lnternaI Circulation
Require industriat/office parks be designed with internal circulation and incorporate buffering and [andscaped
setbacks to minimize potential adverse impacts on adjacent land uses. EEE
2-34 FinaLDraft | JulyZozq

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

GomurnifyDesign
LAND UsE I 2
Fotsom has a strong tradition of high-quatity design that establishes a unique identity. Policies in this section further sotidify and advance Folsom's overatl community look and fee[. The policies buitd on Folsom's design heritage and continue to push the boundaries of good community design.

God IrU 9.1
Encourage community design that results in a distinctive, high-quatity buitt environment with a character that creates memorable places and enriches the quatity of life of Fotsom's residents.

LU 9.1.1 Combine Driveways
Encourage property owners in retaiI corridors to reduce the number of driveways along arteriaI roads. When possible, property owners should cooperate through reciprocal access and parking or similar agreements tinking parking lots to minimize traffic congestion on the arterial road. @
LU 9.1.2 Retail Development Design Standards
Devetop, maintain, and imptement design standards for retail devetopment to ensure retaiI districts have wett-devetoped [andscape buffers, decorative treatments to buitding facades, and a variety of buitding heights and roof tines. FEfil ilffi LU 9.1.3 Eliminate Large Blocks
Encourage the insertion of new streets or pedestrian ways in [arge "super btocks" that do not have pubtic streets bisecting them. These [arge blocks are common in retaiI corridors and can reduce pedestrian and bicycle connections to these areas.

M
LU 9.1.4 Gateways
Continue to estabtish key gateways to Fotsom through
landscape design, appropriately-scated signage, buitding form, and historic themes to create a unique sense of place. @
LU9.1.5 Pedestrian-FriendtyEntrances
Encourage automobile-oriented business districts to provide clear and tegibte entry features, connected by pedestrian- friendty watkways. filif{
r*.
:i-_. ari
These two strip malls in
another community have four
driveways nearty adjacent to
each other. This creates an
unsafe and unpleasant
environment for pedestrians
and drivers.

FinaL Draft | luly ZOZ+ 2-35

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

F@F-g{3&€2035GENERAL PLAN HME6
LU 9.1.6
tu 9.1.7
LU 9.1.8
LU 9.1.9
Community Beautifi cation
Encourage the tandscaping of pubtic rights-of-way and
ptanting of street trees to beautify Fotsom consistent with water-wise poticies. g @
District ldentity
Encourage efforts to estabtish and promote district identities (e.g., urban centers, East Bidwell Street) through the use of signage, wayfinding signage, streetscape and building design standards, advertising, and site-specific historic ttremes. EEI Coo[ Paving
ldentifu opportunities to use cooI paving materials and consider the use of permeable pavement for streets and trai[s, where feasibte. pp| s$
Passive Solar Access
Ensure, to the extent feasible, that sites, subdivisions, landscaping, and buildings are configured and designed to maximize passive solar access [@
Some communities use arches
or highly visibte signage to
signify a community gateway.

The Johnny Cash Bridge serves
as a gateway into Folsom.
2-36 FinalDraft | )u|y2024Page 520
08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Exhibit 2: Mobility Element Amendments

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
,t, {g
MOBILITY I3
t
v\
This Element contains goats, policies, and imptementation programs that ensure a safe, efficient, and convenient transportation network for Fotsom residents and visitors.

Fotsom's transportation network is designed to serve a[[ modes, including walking, bicycting, driving, and riding mass transit. A strong transportation road network supports tocal business and industry, and trails and paths provide facitities for passive recreation.

Mobitity
Final Draft | )uly 2024 3-1

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

F(}L$(}n{2035GEI{ENAL PLAN
This page is intentionally left blanh.
tr
3-2 FinaI Draft | lulY 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

General Mobility
MOBITITY I3
Fotsom's transportation system serves both regionaI and locaI travel needs across a broad spectrum of modes. A multi-moda[ transportation system can relieve roadway congestion, better serve the needs of all residents, and improve the heatth and wett-being of those who choose to watk and ride a bicycle. Folsom uses a comptete streets approach to the design of its transportation facitities. Comptete streets are designed with att users in mind, and may include sidewa[ks, bikeways, dedicated transit [anes, light railservice, and intersectionswith enhanced safetyfeaturesfor bicyclists and pedestrians' Policies in this section guide the overall provision of a batanced mutti-modal system of transportation facitities and services in Fotsom.

Figure M-1 shows the General Plan Circulation Diagram depicting the roadway ctassifications used in Folsom.

FinaL Draft | )uly 2024 3-3

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

F(}L€I()M2035GENERAL PLAN HFTT!@
This page is intentianally lefi blanh.
3-4 FinaI Draft | July 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Figure M-t: Girculation Diagrart
E! DORAOO
COUNTY
MoBrLtw l3
Figure M-1:

City of Folsom
Folsom 2035 Circulation Diagram
El Fdsocrytudry
i: j [email protected]
C ulhrid9no
cltrush.ighls
PLAC ER COUilTY

SACRAMENIO
COUNTY

00.5 1 2
r
Miles
Dat€ 10-4.2018
Sder &S eeDt 2Ot6; Ory ol wm 2016:
tutu d sc'atuN,2@q sAcoc,2tu
*
l'--lfl-llL
ACR€S
Finai Draft I July 2024 3-5

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
s"((}iLs(}sd
G€NERAL PLAN Hm=6
This page is intentionally Ieft blonh.
3-6 Final Draft I Juty 2024

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

GodM l.l
Provide a comprehensive, integrated, and connected network of transportation facitities and services for all modes of travel that also incorporates emerging transportation technologies and services to increase tra nspo rtation system efficien cy.

MOBITITY I3
M 1.1.1
M 1.1.2
M 1.1.3
M 1.1.4
Complete Streets
Devetop its streets to serve the needs of a[[ users, including bicyclists, pubtic transit users, children, seniors, persons with disabitities, pedestrians, motorists, and movers of commercial goods. [Q
Adequate Rights-of-Way
Ensure that att new roadway projects and major
reconstruction projects provide appropriate and adequate rights-of-way for att users including bicyctists, pedestrians, transit riders, and motorists, except where pedestrians and bicyctists are prohibited by law from using a given facitity.

Dedication and improvements of futt rights-of-way sha[[ fo[[ow City design standards by roadway ctassification except in existing developed areas where the City determines that such improvements are either infeasible or undesirable. Other deviations from these standards shatt be permitted upon a determination that safe and adequate access and circulation are preserved by such deviations. F0
Accessibility
Strive to ensure that all streets are safe and accessibte to peopte with timited mobitity and other disabitities. New and reconstructed facilities sha[[ meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabitities Act. pQ
Existing Streets Retrofits O
Activety pursue funding to enhance existing streets and intersections with bikeways, sidewalks, roundabouts, and exc[usive transit [anes, where these facilities are designated in the Bikeway Master Plan, Pedestrian Master Plan, Transit Master Plan, or by General Ptan Policy.

What are Complete Streets?
Complete streets are streets
designed with att users in mind.

There is no one single design
for a complete street; complete
streets are context-sensitive
and respond to the needs of
users at a particutar location.

Comptete streets may include
sidewalks, bike [anes, transit
lanes, freq uent crossings,
narrow automobile [anes,
median islands, curb
extensions, rou ndabouts, and
other transportation facilities.

Complete streets make it easY
for Folsom residents to use
transportation modes other
than a car, resutting in a
healthier, happier city.

What is Transportation System
l'lanagement?
Transportation system
management (TSM) is a cost-
effective planning tool that
increases the efficiency of the
transportation system by
provid ing strategies that
include: intersection
improvements, freeway
bottleneck red uction, and
speciat event traffic strategies.

Final Draft I )uty z.oz+ 3-7

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Fffi]LS{}S4t2035GENEEAL PLAN m=6
M 1.1.5
M 1.1.6
M 1.1.7
M 1.1.8
M 1.1.9
M 1.1.10
M.1.1.11
connected Neighborhoods $r
Require the continuation of the street network between
adjacent development projects to promote watkabitity and altow easier access for emergency vehictes. F0
lntermodal Connections t$
Provide connections between modes, inctuding bicycte and pedestrian connections to transit stops, buses that can accommodate bicycles, and park-and-ride tots. @
Transportation System Management
Require a transportation system management (TSM) program that appties to existing as wet[ as future development and wilt ensure the assumed reduction in peak hour vehicle trips. @
lntetligent Transportation Systems (lTS) Master ptan
Prepare, adopt, and maintain an ITS Master P[an to prioritize the deptoyment of technotogy designed to maximize the
efficiency of the City's traffic signa[ systems. Require that att devetopment projects incorporate ITS infrastructure where feasibte and consistent with the City's adopted ITS Master eLan. @ ilEH
Transponation Demand Management @
Develop a citywide Transportation Demand Management
Program, which provides a menu of strategies and programs for devetopers and employers to reduce singte-occupant
vehicte traveI in the city. Mffi
Facilities for Emerging Technologies t9
Assist in the provision of support facilities such as advanced fueting stations (e.g., electric and hydrogen) for emerging technotogies. FEI
Historic Southern Pacific Rail Right-of-way
Facititate use of the Southern Pacific Rait right-of-way for mutti-modaI transportatio n. g
What are lntelligent
Transportation Systems?
I ntetti gent transportation
systems (trs) use technology to
effectively manage traffic ftows
in real time and help people
make smart travel choices.

Many systems are atready in
use around the world, including
traffic controI centers, reat-
time bus and train arrivat
information, and real-time
traffic visualizations on ontine
apptications such as Google
Maps. Agencies are rapidty
developi ng new tech nologies
that witl continue to improve
transportation networks
without buitding or widening
roads.

What is Transportation Demand
Management?
Transportation Demand
Management helps people
watk, bike, ride transit, and
telecom m ute usi ng incentives,
information, and
encou ragement programs.
3-B Final Draft | )uty zoZq

08/27/2024 Item No.17.

Pedestrians and Gyclists
MoBILITV I3
Poticies in this section support the devetopment of facitities designed to keep cyclists and pedestrians safe whi[e offering a convenient way of traversing Folsom. Fotsom's existing pedestrian and bicycte network, panicularly its trail system, is a significant community asset that contributes to Folsom's high quatity of tife. A watkabte, bikeable community, designed at a pedestrian scate, encourages neighborhood interaction, and atlows people to safety and easily reach [oca[ destinations such as schools, parks, and [oca[ commercial areas.

GoaI M 2.1
Maintain and expand facitities and programs that encourage peopte to walk and bike in safety and comfort, and support the lifestyte and amenities that Fotsom residents value.

M 2.1.1
M2.1.2
M 2.1.3
M 2.1.4
M 2.1.5
Active Transportation Plan
Prepare, adopt, and maintain an active transportation ptan that guides the development of a pedestrian and bikeway network that tinks residential developments with employment centers, pubtic open spaces, parks, schools, shopping districts, and other major destinations. ilffi|
New Sidewall<s 19
Sidewatks shatt be buitt atong a[[ new arterial, co[tector, and [oca[ roads when ultimate street improvements are instatled.

M
Pedestrian and Bicycle Linl<ages in New Development i$t Require developers to provide a system of sidewatks, traits, and bikeways that tink att [and uses, provide accessibility to parks and schools, and connect to atl existing or planned externaI street and traitfacititiet. FElt
Sidewalk Network ft)
Strive to fitt gaps in the city's existing sidewatk network. F0 Birycle Facility Classifi cations
Maintain the foltowing ctassification of bicycte facitities consisting of the following:

1. Class I bikeways: separated bicycle paths. These wi[[ be the preferred bikeway, whenever feasible.

Final Draft | luly ZOZ+ 3-9

08/27/2024 Item No.17.
lF$lLsffis4t2035
GENERAL PLAN maru
M 2.1.6
M2.1.7
M 2.1.8
M 2.1.9

2. Ctass ll bikeways: bike [anes. These wit[ be required in areas where on-street parking is tikety to occur and in atl coltector and arterial streets where feasibte. Such areas would be in the vicinity of apartment comptexes
and condominium complexes.

3. Ctass lll bikeways: bike routes. These will be required in low-traffic areas where it is safe for bicycles to share the lane with autos and a class 1 or ctass 2 facitity is not feasible.

4. Class lV bikeways: bicycte-only paths, or "cycle tracks." These are a version of separated bicycte paths that are designed for and timited to bicycte use onty, and
include a separation between bikeway and through
traffic lanes. These wi[[ onty be installed in special
cases where right-of-way is constricted, or there is
other significant need to provide a separate facitity for bicycte use. @
Design Guidelines
Maintain design guidetines for bicycte facitities that result in the construction of bicycte improvements that are attractive, functiona[, and accessibte. fiFlfl
Road Repair
Consider the impact to bicycte routes when conducting any major repair, atteration, or construction of roads. Alternate routes or other accommodations should be provided as wetl as any upgrades to City-owned pedestrian facitities to comply with the current standards of the Americans with Disabilities nct (nDA). EE
Bicycle Safety Education
Provide pubtic education on bicycte safety and encourage bicycte safety programs for cyclists and motoristt. @
Bicycle Parking
Require adequate short- and long-term bicycle parkingfor a[[ land uses, except for singte famity and singte famity high- density residentia[ uset. MHI
Bicycle Parking at City Facilities
Provide bicycte parking at att City parks and pubtic facitities (e.g., tibrary, City Halt) suflicient to accommodate anticipated demand for spaces. F0
3-1 0
M 2.1.10
FinaL Draft | )uLY zozr+