Rancho Cordova City Council
November 21, 2022

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-29 Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level by requiring cessation of work, implementation of proper data recovery, and/or preservation procedures upon discovery of previously unknown resources.
c) Substantially disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant. Based on documentary research, no evidence suggests that any prehistoric or historic-era marked or un-marked human interments are present within or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. However, the location of grave sites and Native American remains can occur outside of identified cemeteries or burial sites.

Therefore, there is a possibility that unmarked, previously unknown Native American or other graves could be present within the project site and could be uncovered by project-related construction activities.

California law recognizes the need to protect Native American human burials, skeletal remains, and items associated with Native American burials from vandalism and inadvertent destruction. The procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains are contained in California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097.

These statutes require that, if human remains are discovered during any construction activities, potentially damaging ground-disturbing activities in the area of the remains shall be halted immediately, and the Sacramento County coroner and Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be notified immediately, in accordance with to PRC Section 5097.98 and Section 7050.5 of California’s Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined by NAHC to be Native American, the guidelines of the NAHC shall be adhered to in the treatment and disposition of the remains.

Following the coroner’s findings, the archaeologist, the NAHC-designated Most Likely Descendant, and the landowner shall determine the ultimate treatment and disposition of the remains and take appropriate steps to ensure that additional human interments are not disturbed. The responsibilities for acting upon notification of a discovery of Native American human remains are identified in PRC Section 5097.94.

The City’s General Plan, Action CHR 1.3.2, states the City will incorporate the following condition in applicable permits for all discretionary projects:

The Planning Department shall be notified immediately if any human remains are uncovered and all construction must stop in vicinity of the find. The Planning Division shall notify the County Coroner according to Section 7050.5 of California’s Health and Safety Code. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the procedures outlined in CEQA Section 15064.5 (d) and (e) shall be followed.

Compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and PRC Section 5097, as directed by the conditions of approval required through application of General Plan Action CHR 1.3.2, would provide an opportunity to avoid or minimize the disturbance of human remains, and to appropriately treat any remains that are discovered.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-30 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.6 ENERGY

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VI. Energy.

Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?

3.6.1 Environmental Setting
California relies on a regional power system composed of a diverse mix of natural gas, petroleum, renewable, hydroelectric, and nuclear generation resources:
 Natural gas: Almost two-thirds of California households use natural gas for home heating, and about half of California’s utility-scale net electricity generation is fueled by natural gas (EIA 2021).  Petroleum: Petroleum products (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel), which are consumed almost exclusively by the transportation sector, account for almost 99 percent of the energy used in California by the transportation sector, with the rest provided by ethanol, natural gas, and electricity (Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2017). Between January 2007 and May 2016, an average of approximately 672 billion gallons of gasoline were purchased in California (California State Board of Equalization 2016). Gasoline and diesel fuel sold in California for motor vehicles is refined in California to meet specific formulations required by the CARB (EIA 2021).  Electricity and renewables: The California Energy Commission estimates that 34 percent of California’s retail electricity sales in 2018 was provided by Renewable Portfolio Standard-eligible renewable resources (EIA 2021).  Alternative fuels: Conventional gasoline and diesel may be replaced (depending on the capability of the vehicle) with many alternative transportation fuels (e.g., biodiesel, hydrogen, electricity). Use of alternative fuels is encouraged through various statewide regulations and plans (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, 2017 Scoping Plan).

Electricity service in the City of Rancho Cordova is provided by Sacramento Municipal Utility District and natural gas service is provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

3.6.2 Discussion
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant. The proposed project would increase energy use from existing conditions from both construction and operational activities.

Construction
Energy would be required to operate and maintain construction equipment and transport construction materials. The one-time energy expenditure required to construct the physical buildings and infrastructure associated with the ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-31 Project would be nonrecoverable. Most energy consumption would result from operation of off-road construction equipment and on-road vehicle trips associated with commutes by construction workers and haul trucks trips.

Table 3.6-1 summarizes the levels of energy consumption associated with the construction of the project by construction year. Most of the construction-related energy consumption would be associated with off-road equipment and the transport of equipment and waste using on-road haul trucks for all phases of construction. An estimated 91,194 gallons of gasoline and 41,964 gallons of diesel fuel would be used during construction of the project (see Appendix D).

Table 3.6-1 Construction Energy Consumption
Year Diesel (Gallons) Gasoline (Gallons)
2022 14,524 5,372
2023 18,115 37,039
2024 1,377 36,759
2025 7,948 12,024
Total 41,964 91,194
Notes: Gasoline gallons include on-road gallons from worker trips. Diesel gallons include off-road equipment and on-road gallons from worker and vendor trips.

Source: Calculations by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

The energy needs for project construction would be temporary and are not anticipated to require additional capacity or substantially increase peak or base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy.

Associated energy consumption would be typical of that associated with commercial and residential projects of this size in an urban setting. Automotive fuels would be consumed to transport people to and from the project site. Energy would be required for construction elements and transport construction materials. The one-time energy expenditure required to construct the physical infrastructure associated with the project would be nonrecoverable. There is no atypical construction related energy demand associated with the proposed project.

Non-renewable energy would not be consumed in a wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary manner when compared to other construction activity in the region.

Operation
The project would increase electricity consumption in the region relative to existing conditions. However, the new facilities would, at a minimum, be built to 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which are 53 percent more efficient than 2016 Standards (CEC 2018). In addition, all buildings (residential and non-residential) would participate in SMUD’s SolarShares program, increasing the amount of clean/renewable energy sources compared to projects that do not participate in the SolarShares program. Further, the residential buildings would be electric-only and the natural gas use associated with the community center would be limited to two outdoor fire pits, cooking appliances (i.e., grills), and heating for the pool/spa; thus, natural gas use would be minimal. Table 3.6-2 summarizes the levels of energy consumption associated with the operation of the project for the first full year (2026) of operations compared to the existing land uses.

Table 3.6-2 Operational Energy Consumption
Energy Type Energy Consumption Units
Electricity 1,597 MWh/year
Natural Gas 14,081 Therms/year
Gasoline 196,025 gal/year
Diesel 6,770 gal/year
Notes: MWh/year = megawatt-hours per year; gal/year = gallons per year.

Source: Calculations by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-32 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study Operation of the project would be typical of residential and commercial uses requiring electricity for lighting, climate control, kitchen facilities, and miscellaneous appliances. Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would be integrated into the project to reduce the projects energy demands. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 3.17, “Transportation”, the project is in an area where the VMT is lower than 15 percent of the regional household average.

The net fuel consumption associated with project-related vehicle trips would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar developments in the region. State and federal regulations regarding fuel efficiency standards for vehicles in California are designed to reduce wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of energy for transportation
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency
No Impact. Relevant plans that pertain to the efficient use of energy include the Energy Efficiency Action Plan, which focuses on energy efficiency and building decarbonization (CEC 2019); as well as the City’s General Plan, which seeks to reduce per capita energy consumption through education and development of energy efficiency buildings.

As discussed in Impact 3.6-1, although implementation of the project has the potential to result in the overall increase in consumption of energy resources during construction and operation of new buildings and facilities, implementation of the project would ensure various energy conservation and generation features would be incorporated into new development including the installation of renewable energy features and the installation of energy efficient appliances and features, which would align with the Energy Efficiency Action Plan and City’s General Plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-33

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
LessThan
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VII. Geology and Soils.

Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? (Refer to California Geological Survey
Special Publication 42.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

3.7.1 Environmental Setting
According to the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan EIR, there are no known active faults or Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones in Sacramento County (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b). Based on mapping by California Geologic Survey, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones include the Cordelia and Green Valley Faults, over 50 miles west of the project site (CGS 2021). The nearest active fault (i.e., faults with activity within the last 10,000 years) is the Dunnigan Hills fault, approximately 40 miles northwest of the project site. The project site is within an area that can expect to experience ground motion of low severity (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b).

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-34 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study According to the Rancho Cordova General Plan EIR, most soils in the city are the result of alluvial deposits, or river and lake deposits on various geomorphic surfaces. The majority of soil units within the City have low to moderate water holding capacities, slight to moderate erosion potential, very low to medium runoff rates, and high shrink-swell characteristics (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b).

The geology of the project site and surrounding area is characterized by dredge spoil sediments composed of gravels, cobbles, and boulders (CSS Environmental Services, Inc. 2020a). The site was dredged for gold recovery, resulting in gravel and cobble ridges, commonly referred to as "tailings windrows," and clays and silts were washed overboard and deposited in ponds between the ridges, referred to as "slickens deposits." Soil conditions are not uniform due to past dredging operations, and include potentially compressible clays and silts in the former slickens ponds as well as potential for buried undocumented debris. The project site slopes gently from east to west, but is generally flat. The depth to groundwater at the project site is expected to range from 50 to 100 feet below ground surface (bgs) (MPE 2020).

Based on the soil characteristics, flat topography, depth to groundwater, and distance to active faults, there is low potential for geologic hazards from landslides, steep areas, rock falls, mud flows, liquefaction, and expansive soils at the project site. Review of recent geologic maps and data finds that the Project Area is underlain by Middle-to-Late Pleistocene (450 to 130 thousand years ago) alluvium of the Riverbank Formation. The Riverbank Formation is well represented by important paleontological remains. According to the Cultural and Paleontological Assessment prepared for the Residences Project, University of California Museum of Paleontology records indicate that no unique geologic features, fossil-bearing strata, or paleontological sites have been previously recorded within or near the Residences project site. Additionally, no paleontological resources of any kind were observed within the Residences project site during the field survey undertaken for the assessment (Natural Investigations Company 2022).

3.7.2 Discussion
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to California Geological Survey Special Publication 42.)
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.7.1, the project site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone and is located over 50 miles east of the nearest Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones (CGS 2021). Therefore, the project would not cause substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant The California Supreme Court decision in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District has resulted in changes to CEQA with regard to the effects of existing environmental conditions (such as seismic hazards) on a project’s future users or residents. The effects of the environment on a project are generally outside the scope of CEQA unless the project would exacerbate these conditions, as concluded by the California Supreme Court (see California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District [2015] 62 Cal.4th 369, 377 [“we conclude that agencies generally subject to CEQA are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents. But when a project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or conditions that already exist, an agency must analyze the potential impact of such hazards on future residents or users.”]). Changes to the State CEQA Guidelines to reflect this decision were adopted on December 28, 2018. CEQA cannot be used by a lead agency to require a developer or other agency to obtain an EIR or implement mitigation measures solely because the occupants or users of a new project would be subjected to the level of hazards specified.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-35 As described in Section 3.7.1, the project site is not within an active fault zone; however, earthquakes in the region have potential to cause seismic ground shaking of low severity at the project site. Construction and building design of the project is subject to the City’s Building Code (Chapter 16.04 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code), which incorporates the 2019 California Building Code and 2018 International Building Code standards. The City’s Building Code requires implementation of seismic design standards in new development projects to reduce seismicallyinduced building damage and public safety risks. Project construction and operation would not create new seismic events or exacerbate existing seismic hazards, because the improvements would involve limited excavation that would not alter seismic and fault conditions in the region. Therefore, the project would not cause substantial adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant. Liquefaction is the process in which water is combined with unconsolidated soils, generally from ground motion and pressure, which causes the soils to behave like quicksand. Liquefaction potential is determined from a variety of factors, including soil type, soil density, depth to the groundwater table, and the duration and intensity of ground shaking. Liquefaction is most likely to occur in deposits of water-saturated alluvium or areas of considerable artificial fill. Other types of seismic-related ground failure include ground lurching, differential settlement, and lateral spreading.

The potential for liquefaction and other seismic-related ground failure is considered low because the depth to groundwater is greater than 50 feet bgs and the distance to the nearest active fault is over 40 miles from the project site. The site is not located within a State Designated Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction (MPE 2020). Therefore, the project would not cause substantial adverse effects from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv) Landslides?
No Impact. The project site is an infill property surrounded by urban development. The potential for landslides to occur is negligible because the topography is generally flat and there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the project would not cause substantial adverse effects from landslides. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant. Soil erosion refers to the process by which soil or earth material is loosened or dissolved and removed from its original location. Erosion can occur by varying processes and may occur in the project site where bare soil is exposed to wind or moving water (both rainfall and surface runoff). The processes of erosion are generally a function of material type, terrain steepness, rainfall or irrigation levels, surface drainage conditions, and general land uses.

All projects that result in a disturbance area of more than 1 acre (43,560 square feet [sq. ft.]) are required to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ). The Construction General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which BMPs for erosion and sediment control. The Construction General Permit is issued and enforced by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The project site is within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB and the project would be subject to all existing regulations associated with the protection of water quality, including erosion and sediment control.

Project-related construction activities that include ground disturbance, such as excavation, grading, and trenching would increase the potential for erosion to occur. The project would involve the disturbance of 22.9 acres of soil; therefore, the project must comply with the provisions of the NPDES Construction General Permit issued by the Central Valley RWQCB. The project would require preparation of a SWPPP with BMPs to control erosion. These requirements are consistent with the land grading and erosion control requirements outlined in Chapter 16.44 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code. Furthermore, the Project would comply with the SMAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), which requires daily watering of unpaved areas to stabilize soil and prevent wind erosion events.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-36 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study Once operational, the project site would be developed with approximately 15.2 acres of impervious area (70 percent of the total area), including buildings, asphalt parking lots, and concrete walkways (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a:

Appendix C). As described in the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project would be designed to meet the stormwater quality and low impact development (LID) requirements of the Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). Proposed stormwater features, which include stormwater planter facilities, underground stormwater treatment devices, and disconnected roof drain systems, would reduce erosion potential from operational runoff. Furthermore, landscaping would reduce erosion potential in unpaved areas. With adherence to applicable rules and regulations and implementation of BMPs and LID practices, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to erosion and loss of topsoil. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than Significant. Refer to Sections 3.7.2(a)(iii) and (iv) above. The project site is underlain with dredge spoil sediments composed of gravels, cobbles, and boulders (CSS Environmental Services, Inc. 2020a). The potential for on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, liquefaction, or collapse is considered low because the topography of the project site and surrounding area is generally flat, the depth to groundwater is greater than 50 feet bgs, and the distance to the nearest active fault is over 40 miles from the project site.

The soils in the former slickens ponds are not considered suitable for support of proposed improvements and engineered fill, due to the risk of excessive settlement associated with the low-density soils. Deep deposits of clay and silt exist beneath proposed building footprints could result in settlement in response to fill and structural loads.

Therefore, slickens materials will require complete removal and recompaction. However, these soils would be suitable for use in engineered construction, if they are excavated, mixed with on-site gravels and cobbles, moisture conditioned and properly compacted. The project would include over excavation of soils within the building pads and placement of engineered fill to improve the uniformity of support and bearing capacity of the native soils, and to reduce the risk of differential settlement. The specific requirements will be developed in a design-level geotechnical investigation (MPE 2020).
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant. Expansive soils are typically associated with fine-grained clayey soils that have the potential to shrink and swell with repeated cycles of wetting and drying. Laboratory testing of the on-site clays indicates they possess a medium expansion potential when tested in accordance with the ASTM D4829 test method. These soils experience volume changes with varying soil moisture contents and are capable of exerting moderate expansion pressures upon foundations and concrete slabs-on-grade, including sidewalks (MPE 2020).

The Residences Project would be subject to California Building Code standards, which include common engineering practices requiring special design and construction methods that reduce or eliminate potential expansive soil related impacts. Therefore, substantial risks to life or property would not occur. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. The Sacramento Area Sewer District (SASD) provides sewer services within the City and operates utility lines within the roadways adjacent to the project site. In addition, the project site is within the service area of Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (Regional San), which provides regional wastewater conveyance and treatment services. Wastewater within the Regional San service area is treated at the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP) in the City of Elk Grove. The Residences Project would be served by SASD and Regional San and does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. Therefore, ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-37 there would be no impact related to soils incapable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant. As described in Section 3.7.1, no unique geologic features, fossil-bearing strata, or paleontological sites have been previously recorded or observed within or near the project site. Furthermore, excavation during project construction would occur in an area overlain by thick deposits of mining tailings and associated soils. The historic mining activities have so severely affected the condition of soils on the project site, the potential to encounter intact Pleistocene deposits is low (Natural Investigations Company 2022). Although unlikely, ground-disturbing activities during project construction may result in the unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources. The City’s General Plan, Action CHR 1.3.2, requires that the following condition be incorporated in permits for all discretionary projects:

The Planning Department shall be notified immediately if any cultural resources (e.g., prehistoric or historic artifacts) or paleontological resources (e.g., fossils) are uncovered during construction. All construction must stop in vicinity of the find and an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical archaeology or a paleontologist shall be retained to evaluate the finds and recommend appropriate action.

The project would be required to comply with all permit conditions imposed by the City, including the above procedures to follow in the event of an unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources; therefore, the project would not destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-38 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?

3.8.1 Environmental Setting
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space. Most solar radiation passes through GHGs; however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is instead “trapped,” resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth.

Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. GHG emissions contributing to global climate change are attributable, in large part, to human activities associated with on-road and off-road transportation, industrial/manufacturing, electricity generation by utilities and consumption by end users, residential and commercial on-site fuel usage, and agriculture and forestry. It is “extremely likely” that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in GHG concentrations and other anthropogenic factors together (IPCC 2014:5).

Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants because even local GHG emissions contribute to global impacts. GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes (one to several thousand years) and persist in the atmosphere long enough to be dispersed around the globe. Although the lifetime of any particular GHG molecule is dependent on multiple variables and cannot be determined with any certainty, it is understood that more CO2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered by ocean uptake, vegetation, and other forms of sequestration (IPCC 2013:467).

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION SOURCES AND SINKS
As discussed previously, GHG emissions are attributable in large part to human activities. CO2 is the main byproduct of fossil fuel combustion. Methane, a highly potent GHG, primarily results from off-gassing (the release of chemicals from nonmetallic substances under ambient or greater pressure conditions) and is largely associated with agricultural practices, organic material decomposition in landfills, and the burning of forest fires (Black et al. 2017). Nitrous oxide emissions are largely attributable to agricultural practices and soil management. CO2 sinks, or reservoirs, include vegetation and the ocean, which absorb CO2 through sequestration and dissolution (CO2 dissolving into the water); respectively, these are the two of the most common processes for removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-39

REGULATORY SETTING
Statewide GHG Emission Targets and the Climate Change Scoping Plan Reducing GHG emissions in California has been the focus of the state government for approximately two decades (State of California 2018). GHG emission targets established by the state legislature include reducing statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32 of 2006) and reducing them to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (Senate Bill [SB] 32 of 2016). EO S-3-05 calls for statewide GHG emissions to be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. EO B-55-18 calls for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter. These targets align with the scientifically established levels needed globally to limit the rise in global temperature to no more than 2 degrees Celsius, the warming threshold at which major climate disruptions, such as super droughts and rising sea levels, are projected; these targets also pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius (UN 2015).

The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan), prepared by the CARB, outlines the main strategies California will implement to achieve the legislated GHG emission target for 2030 and “substantially advance toward our 2050 climate goals” (CARB 2017b). It identifies the reductions needed by each GHG emission sector (e.g., transportation, industry, electricity generation, agriculture, commercial and residential, pollutants with high global warming potential, and recycling and waste). The State has also passed more detailed legislation addressing GHG emissions associated with industrial sources, transportation, electricity generation, and energy consumption. In May 2022, CARB released the Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update; however, at the time of preparing this checklist, CARB has not adopted the final version of this update.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District SMAQMD is the primary agency responsible for addressing air quality concerns in Sacramento County–its role is discussed further in Section 3.2, “Air Quality.” SMAQMD also recommends measures for analyzing project-generated GHGs in CEQA analyses and offers multiple potential GHG reduction measures for land development projects.

SMAQMD developed thresholds of significance to provide a uniform scale to measure the significance of GHG emissions from land use and stationary source projects in compliance with CEQA, SB 32, and the 2017 Scoping Plan.

SMAQMD’s goals in developing GHG thresholds include ease of implementation, use of standard analysis tools, and emissions mitigation consistent with SB 32 (SMAQMD 2020b).

The City of Rancho Cordova is currently developing its Climate Action Plan in alignment with state GHG emission reduction goals. Therefore, the assessment of GHG emissions in this analysis is based on guidance from SMAQMD. In its 2020 Greenhouse Gas Thresholds for Sacramento County Justification Report, SMAQMD outlines the consistency between its thresholds of significance and the targets of the 2017 Scoping Plan. SMAQMD prepared an inventory for Sacramento County in 2030 and developed local emission reduction targets by sector in line with the local reductions needed to meet the goals of SB 32 and the 2017 Scoping Plan. In its Justification Report, SMAQMD states that to “demonstrate consistency with the GHG targets by sector for new developments…project proponents shall commit to a menu of best management practices” (SMAQMD 2020b:39). These best management practices (summarized below) are intended to apply to all new land use development projects and are sufficient to mitigate a project’s long-term, operational emissions to the degree that it would not conflict with the long-term goals of the 2017 Scoping Plan and SB 32.

Based on SMAQMD’s guidance, which includes a tiered approach to determining project significance, the project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to climate change if it would:

Construction
Result in construction emissions that exceed 1,100 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year.

Operation
Be inconsistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan by not implementing SMAQMD GHG reduction measures or equivalent on/off site mitigation. The following tiered approach shall be used to determine consistency:

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-40 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study  Tier 1 GHG Reduction Measures
 Projects shall be designed and constructed without natural gas infrastructure.  Projects shall meet the current CalGreen Tier 2 electric vehicle (EV) charging standards except all EV capable spaces1 shall instead be EV ready2
.
 Projects that exceed 1,100 MTCO2e after implementation of Tier 1 GHG reduction measures must implement Tier 2 GHG reduction measures.
 Tier 2 GHG Reduction Measures
 Residential projects shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in VMT per resident and office projects shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in VMT per worker compared to existing average VMT for the county, and retail projects shall achieve no net increase in total VMT to show consistency with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) SB 743.

3.8.2 Discussion
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant. GHG emissions associated with the project would be generated during construction and operation, discussed separately below.

Construction
Project-related construction activities would result in the generation of GHG emissions from the use of heavy-duty off-road construction equipment, delivery trucks associated with materials transport, and vehicle use during worker commute during construction. As indicated in Section 3.3, “Air Quality,” of this checklist, the project would comply with SMAQMD’s construction BMPs for exhaust emissions control including, reducing idling to no more than 5 minutes and certification of compliance for CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. Project-related construction emissions are confined to a relatively short period (i.e., 36-months) in relation to the overall life of the project and would be considered temporary. Table 3.8-1 provides a summary of the total construction-related emissions that would occur as a result of new land uses.

Table 3.8-1 Construction-Generated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Construction Year Total GHG MTCO2e per Year
2022 284
2023 663
2024 660
2025 243
SMAQMD Threshold of Significance 1,100
Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding.

MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; GHG = greenhouse gas.

Source: Modeled conducted by Ascent Environmental in 2022. 1 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen, Title 24, Part 11) requires EV capable parking spaces to install a “raceway” (the enclosed conduit that forms the physical pathway for electrical wiring to protect it from damage) and adequate panel capacity to accommodate future installation of a dedicated branch circuit and charging station(s). 2 2019 CALGreen, Title 24, Part 11 requires EV ready parking spaces to be equipped according to EV capable standards plus the installation of dedicated branch circuit(s) (electrical pre-wiring), circuit breakers, and other electrical components, including a receptacle (240-volt outlet) or blank cover needed to support future installation of one or more charging stations.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-41 As shown in Table 3.8-1 the project’s emissions would not result in an exceedance of the SMAQMD construction threshold and would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in GHG emissions.

Operation
Operation of the project would result in mobile-source GHG emissions from vehicle trips (i.e., project-generated VMT), area-source emissions from the operation of landscape maintenance equipment, energy use emissions from consumption of electricity and natural gas, water-related energy consumption associated with water use and the conveyance and treatment of wastewater, and waste-generated emissions from the transport and disposal of solid waste. Regarding building-related energy use, the modeling assumed that all buildings would be electric-only, with the exception of natural gas use for up to two outdoor fireplaces, outdoor grills, heating the pool/spa associated with the club houses, and cooking appliances at the proposed restaurant. Table 3.8-2 below summarizes the project’s operational emissions for the buildout year of 2026. Based on the proposed land uses and using project-specific information where available (e.g., traffic study), operational emissions were estimated to be 2,322 MTCO2e/year.

Table 3.8-2 Unmitigated Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source Total MTCO2e per Year
Area 7
Electricity 404
Natural Gas 76
Mobile (Vehicular) 1,616
Waste 182
Water 37
Total 2,322
SMAQMD Screening Level Threshold 1,100
Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding.

MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; GHG = greenhouse gas.

Source: Modeled conducted by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

As explained above, SMAQMD uses a two-tiered approach to determining consistency with state targets intended to reduce the environmental impacts of GHG emissions. To satisfy Tier 1, projects should not include natural gas use and must meet the current CalGreen Tier 2 EV charging standards except all EV capable spaces shall instead be EV ready.

SMAQMD determined that by not eliminating natural gas from new development the project would not be consistent with the reduction targets of the 2017 Scoping Plan. Additionally, development is required to support zero emissions vehicles to help achieve 2017 Scoping Plan reduction targets. To be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan, emissions from natural gas consumption must be mitigated and the project must ensure that it can be converted to all-electric in the future. The project also needs to ensure that CalGreen EV ready spaces are installed, or emissions must be mitigated off-site. The following project-design features would suffice SMAQMD’s Tier 1 GHG Reduction Measure, as demonstrated below.

Landscape and Shading
 The project includes 804 new tree plantings
Bicycle Parking/Storage
 The project will exceed CalGreen bike parking standards for short- and long-term bike parking/storage Building Energy
 All project buildings will participate in SMUD’s SolarShare program  All non-residential buildings will be designed with electrical capacity sufficient to support future electrification  All new structures will include cool roofs
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-42 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study  At least 25 percent of paved area will have an albedo of no less than 0.25 EV Charging
 At least 12 EV Chargers
 At least 218 EV Ready Stalls (23 percent of total)
Considering the above project features, GHG reductions were applied as credits to the project for measures that are not required by other existing local or State law. Specifically, regarding EV charging, the project would meet and exceed the EV-ready SMAQMD requirement by including 218 EV Ready Stalls and at least 12 EV chargers. GHG reductions associated with the 12 chargers were estimated and applied to the project. Regarding building energy, participation in SMUD’s SolarShares program and considering SMUD’s 2030 carbon neutrality goals, electricity- GHG emissions would become zero in the future. Last, the inclusion of 804 trees on the project site would result in GHG reductions in the form of a credit from natural sequestration capacity. Table 3.8-3 summarizes these onsite GHG reductions applied to the project.

Table 3.8-3 Adjusted Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emissions Source Total MTCO2e per Year
Area 7
Electricity 404
Natural Gas 76
Mobile (Vehicular) 1,616
Waste 182
Water 37
GHG Reductions
Electricity -404
EV Chargers (12) -59
Sequestration -28
Total Onsite Reductions -491
Adjusted Project Total GHG Emissions 1,831
Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding.

MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; GHG = greenhouse gas.

Source: Modeled conducted by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

Therefore, although the project would include use of natural gas, the modeling illustrates that project features would offset the emissions associated with this use. Therefore, Tier 1 GHG Reduction Measures would be satisfied.

Tier 2 reduction measures are triggered when projects exceed the 1,100 MTCO2e screening threshold after implementation of Tier 1 GHG reduction measures. Because the project emissions would be 1,831 MTCO2e after implementation of Tier 1 GHG reduction measures (see Table 3.8-3), the Tier 2 threshold also applies. Tier 2 is demonstrated to be achieved by adherence to the local VMT guidance for demonstrating consistency with SB 375.

The project is located in a VMT efficient area (in an area with at least 15 percent below the base year regional average household VMT per capita). This was determined based on screening maps prepared by the City using the focused version of SACOG’s SACSIM19 regional model. Therefore, no further action would be required to achieve consistency with the Tier 2 GHG Reduction Measure.

Because the project would include EV-Ready stalls that exceed CalGreen requirements and would be designed to allow the future electrification of non-residential buildings, the project would be consistent long-term climate goals outlined in the 2017 Scoping Plan and justified in SMAQMD’s CEQA guide, as summarized above under the heading “Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.” The inclusion of onsite EV charges and 804 trees would ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-43 offset emissions associated with natural gas. Last, the project was identified as being within a VMT efficient area consistent with SMAQMD Tier 2 GHG Reduction Measure and, therefore, would be consistent with the OPR SB 743 technical advisory de minimis criteria for VMT (Lum, pers. comm. 2022).

The 2017 Scoping Plan and SB 32 establish target emission levels under the presumption that achieving these targets through GHG emissions reduction would avoid or substantially lessen significant impacts on the environment. Based on the evidence provided in SMAQMD’s Justification Report linking the application of best management practices in new development to consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan, the project’s consistency with SMAQMD’s Tier 1 and Tier 2 GHG Reduction Measures indicates that it would not conflict with the State’s 2017 Scoping Plan. Moreover, consistency with SMAQMD’s Tier 1 and Tier 2 GHG Reduction Measures would result in GHG emission levels that do not have a significant impact on the environment. This impact would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
See response in item (a) above.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-44 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and/or accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?

3.9.1 Environmental Setting

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESA) were completed for the 7.28-acre property encompassing APNs 072- 068-065 and 072-068-068 (CSS Environmental Services, Inc. 2020a) and for the 14.54-acre property encompassing APNs 072-026-051, 072-026-054, and 072-026-056 (CSS Environmental Services, Inc. 2020b). The Phase I ESAs were performed to evaluate whether recognized environmental conditions (REC) exist at the properties. A REC is defined by the American Society for Testing and Materials as the “presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-45 threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property.” No evidence of a REC was identified in connection with the properties. However, the following environmental conditions were identified:
 Land use restrictions have been recorded on APN 072-026-056.  Buried inert waste, concrete, and other debris were found on at least one parcel, and may need to be removed if underground construction activities are planned.
 Two offsite properties that are greater than 0.25-mile from the Residences project site (the Former Purity Oil Sales/Delta Gunite Site and the Aerojet General Corporation Site) have plumes of groundwater contamination that present the risk of creating a REC at the Residences project site. The groundwater contamination originating from these properties has potential to migrate to the subject property, potentially degrading groundwater quality and limiting the future use of groundwater.
 Soils impacted with oils were identified on APNs 072-026-054 and 072-026-056, and appropriate removal/remedial actions have been completed. If previously unidentified contamination is discovered at the property, additional assessment, investigation, and/or remediation may be required.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES
The parcel in the northwest corner of the project site (APN 072-026-056) is listed as a voluntary cleanup site on the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database (DTSC 2022). The Project Applicant established a voluntary agreement to investigate, remediate, and/or evaluate any hazardous substance that may be present at the parcel, under the oversight of DTSC (Ridenour, pers. comm., 2021). The voluntary agreement was intended to remedy the parcel to accommodate the uses proposed under the Residences Project.

Soil investigations completed at the parcel revealed elevated concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbon, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), perchlorate, and lead in site soils. Cleanup actions included the removal of impacted soil to a depth of 4 feet below grade. However, further testing revealed that total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil still exceeded the cleanup target levels and may be disturbed by future construction activities at the parcel. In 2013, subsequent remediation activities were performed at the parcel, which resulted in the removal of approximately 126 cubic yards of contaminated soil to approximate depth of 4 feet bgs (Wallace-Kuhl & Associates 2021).

In June 2010, a Land Use Covenant was established for the 3.02-acre parcel, which prohibits the following land uses:
residences, hospitals for humans, public and private schools for persons under 21 years of age, and day cares for children. The Land Use Covenant also requires preparation of a Soil Management Plan for future soil disturbances.

The Project Applicant prepared a Soil Management Plan for the parcel in August 2021, which includes procedures to be followed during site grading, excavation, stockpiling, soil sampling and laboratory analyses (if required), and backfilling activities associated with the handling of suspected or known contaminated soil (Wallace-Kuhl & Associates 2021). DTSC also identified the potential for adverse health effects from vapor intrusion at the parcel and recommended assessment of soil gas if human occupation of enclosed buildings may occur at the parcel (Amador, pers. comm., 2021).

SCHOOLS
There are no existing or proposed schools within 0.25 mile of the project site. The nearest school is Capitol Academy, a private educational institution located at 3063 Gold Canal Drive in the City Rancho Cordova, approximately 0.3 mile north of the project site.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-46 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

AIRPORTS
The Mather Airport is a public airport approximately 1.3 miles south of the project site. The project site is within the airport influence area of the Mather Airport, which is the area where noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight notification policies and compatibility criteria may affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses (SACOG 2020).

EMERGENCY RESPONSE
The City adopted the Sacramento County Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan (SCMDP), which was established to address planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters and technological incidents.

The SCMDP focuses on operational concepts relative to large-scale disasters, which can pose major threats to life and property requiring unusual emergency responses. The SCMDP was designed to include Sacramento County as a part of the California Standardized Emergency Management System, which assigns responsibilities to support implementation of the SCMDP and to ensure successful response during a major disaster.

WILDLAND FIRE RISKS
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is within a non-very high fire hazard severity zone (VHFHSZ) in a local responsibility area (CAL FIRE 2008).

3.9.2 Discussion
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant. A hazardous material is defined as any material that due to its quantity, concentration, physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health or to the environment if released. Project-related construction may involve the temporary use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials in the form of inorganic and organic chemicals, solvents, paints, oil, gasoline, cleansers. However, the constructionrelated transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials would be temporary, occurring over approximately 36 months. All materials would be used, stored, and disposed of in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and manufacturers’ instructions. Furthermore, any emissions from the use of such materials would be temporary in nature and localized to the project site.

Land uses that involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials include but are not limited to manufacturing plants, dry cleaning facilities, gas stations, agricultural properties, recycling centers, refineries, and shipyards. Once constructed, the proposed residential and commercial land uses would not involve activities that involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Any hazardous materials needed for ongoing maintenance and landscaping activities (e.g., solvents, paints, and pesticides) would be used, stored, and disposed of in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and manufacturers’ instructions. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant. Refer to Section 3.9.2(a) above. Project-related construction and operation activities would involve the temporary use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. The project would be required to comply with federal, state, Sacramento County, and City of Rancho Cordova regulations relating to control of hazardous materials. Compliance with these regulations would reduce the likelihood of accidents and risks associated with ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-47 release of hazardous materials. Potentially hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations.

As identified in the Phase I ESAs, no RECs were identified in connection with the project site. The environmental conditions described in Section 3.9.1 would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment for the following reasons:
 Proposed development on APN 072-026-056 would be compatible with the land use restrictions recorded for the parcel.
 All buried inert waste, concrete, and other debris encountered during ground-disturbing activities would be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations.  Groundwater contamination from offsite properties has potential to migrate to the Residences project site; however, this groundwater is not used for water supply and there is no exposure pathway to human receptors. It is not likely that groundwater would be encountered during construction activities because the depth to groundwater at the project site is expected to range from 50 to 100 feet bgs. Although over excavation of clay and silt soils may be required, the maximum depth of these soils identified in the Geotechnical Engineering Report (MPE 2020) is 21 feet bgs. If future remediation of contaminated groundwater is warranted, the property owners of the Former Purity Oil Sales/Delta Gunite Site and the Aerojet General Corporation Site would be responsible for remediation costs.
 Construction activities would be conducted in accordance with the 2021 Soil Management Plan, as required by the land use covenant, which includes procedures to be followed during site grading, excavation, stockpiling, soil sampling and laboratory analyses (if required), and backfilling activities associated with the handling of suspected or known contaminated soil (Wallace-Kuhl & Associates 2021).

Once operational, the proposed residential and commercial land uses would not involve activities that often give rise to concerns regarding hazardous materials. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.9.1, there are no existing or proposed schools within 0.25 mile of the project site.

Therefore, the project would have no impact related to the emission or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.9.1, a portion of the Residences Project site (APN 072-026-056) is listed as a voluntary cleanup site on the DTSC EnviroStor database (DTSC 2022) and is subject to land use restrictions established in a 2010 Land Use Covenant. The proposed land uses that would be constructed on APN 072-026-056 would include the following: community swimming pool, community open space, community park/playground, community dog park, community parking, community clubhouse, and commercial development. These land uses are allowed under the Land Use Covenant for the parcel. All proposed residential uses would be located outside of the boundaries of the Land Use Covenant. In addition, all construction activities occurring on this parcel would be conducted in accordance with the 2021 Soil Management Plan and to the satisfaction of DTSC. Furthermore, all enclosed buildings intended for human occupation would be located outside the area where vapor intrusion may occur.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-48 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
Less than Significant. The project would result in the development of residential and commercial uses within the Airport Influence Area of Mather Airport. According to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (SACOG 2020), the project site is partially within Safety Zone 6 (Airport Traffic Pattern Zone). Within Safety Zone 6, residential and commercial development are considered compatible land uses, and there are no limits on the density, intensity, or lot coverage for this type of development. Furthermore, the project site is outside of the 60 to 75+ decibel Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise exposure range for Mather Airport. The acceptable level of aircraft noise for persons living in the vicinity of airports is a CNEL of 65 decibels. Because the project would be consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Mather Airport, impacts related to safety hazards or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area would be less than significant. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant. The SCMDP addresses planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters and technological incidents. The SCMDP focuses on operational concepts relative to large-scale disasters, which can pose major threats to life and property requiring unusual emergency responses. The Residences Project would develop housing and commercial uses in a manner consistent with the existing zoning for the site and planned population growth for the region. There is no element of the project that would impair or physically interfere with implementation of the SCMPD (e.g., no alteration of project area roadways that could hinder emergency response or evacuation). Furthermore, as addressed in Section 3.17.2, the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District (SMFD) would review the proposal to ensure traffic safety and adequate emergency access. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. As described in Section 3.9.1, the project site is within a non-VHFHSZ and is not in an area susceptible to wildland fires. The surrounding properties are fully developed. Vegetation associated with adjacent development consists of ornamental landscaping that is regularly irrigated and maintained and is not considered a fire hazard.

Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-49

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X. Hydrology and Water Quality.

Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or
siltation;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?

3.10.1 Environmental Setting
According to the U.S. Geological Survey Watershed Boundary Dataset, the project site is in the American River Watershed and the Lower American River Subwatershed. The nearest surface water is the Folsom South Canal, located immediately east of the project site. Other nearby surface waters include the American River and Morrison Creek, approximately 2.5 miles north and 2.3 miles south of the project site, respectively.

The project site is within the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin, South American Subbasin (SASb). This subbasin has been designated by the California Department of Water Resources as high priority, but is not critically overdrafted.

Groundwater quality in the SASb is generally of good quality and meets local needs for municipal, domestic, and agricultural uses. Groundwater levels in the western portion of the SASb have been generally increasing since the ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-50 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 1980s despite a turn towards drier conditions and increasing population. The recent increase in groundwater levels has been largely attributed to a combination of conjunctive use projects (i.e., the combined use of groundwater and surface water sources), construction of the Freeport diversion facility and Vineyard surface water treatment plant, urban conservation plans, and changes in use of previous agricultural land. Groundwater levels in some areas of the eastern portion of the SASb, where the project site is located, show decreases in groundwater levels despite the lack of significant changes in land or water use. The causes of these declines are not well understood but may be attributed to the combination of remediation activities at the Inactive Rancho Cordova Test Site, Aerojet Superfund Site, and Kiefer Landfill and the aquifer becoming thin and low-yielding in this area. Areas of groundwater recharge to the subbasin include the American River to the north, the Sacramento River to the west, and the Cosumnes and Mokelumne Rivers to the south (South American Subbasin et al 2021).

The key finding of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the subbasin released in 2012 is that the basin will be sustainable over the next 20 years as long as planned recycled water, recharge and other projects are implemented.

These projects are anticipated to raise groundwater above current levels; maintain storage volumes; and protect ecosystems, interconnected surface water, and shallow well users. Although projected climate change conditions will increase groundwater use, these effects are not expected to cause the SASb to become unsustainable or to cause notable decreasing trends in groundwater conditions (South American Subbasin et al 2021).

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Residences project site is within an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA 2012). The project site is not within a tsunami hazard area (Cal OES 2021) and is not in proximity to an enclosed body of water that is susceptible to seiche.

3.10.2 Discussion
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project site is under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley RWQCB. The Central Valley RWQCB adopted the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan) in 1975, and the most recent edition reflects amendments through May 2018. The purpose of the Basin Plan is to designate beneficial uses of waters within the Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins, establish water quality objectives to protect those beneficial uses, and implement a program needed to achieve those objectives. The Basin Plan establishes water quality standards for both surface and ground waters (Central Valley RWQCB 2018).

The City of Rancho Cordova, along with the cities of Citrus Heights, Folsom, and Galt, and the County of Sacramento, operate under a NPDES municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit to discharge stormwater runoff from storm drains within their jurisdictions (NPDES No. CAS082597). The NPDES MS4 Permit establishes waste discharge requirements needed to attain water quality standards and protection of beneficial uses consistent with the Basin Plan. To comply with the NPDES MS4 Permit, the City imposes water quality and watershed protection measures for all new development projects. The Stormwater Quality Design Manual (SQDM) for the Sacramento Region (2018) includes guidance for the selection, siting, design, operation, and long-term maintenance of stormwater quality control measures implemented to meet the standards established in the NPDES MS4 Permit.

The Residences Project would include development of approximately 15.2 acres of new impervious cover, which is approximately 70 percent of the project site. According to the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project design would include stormwater planter facilities, disconnected roof drains (i.e., drains to pervious areas), and other treatment devices (Contech Stormfilters and Filterra units) to treat stormwater runoff from the project site (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). The proposed stormwater infrastructure would fulfill the requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region (2018), ensuring that project operations would not violate water quality standards or otherwise degrade water quality.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-51 Construction activities that include ground disturbance, such as excavation, grading, and trenching increase the potential for degradation of water quality. All projects that result in a disturbance area of more than 1 acre (43,560 sq. ft.) are required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ). The Residences Project would involve the disturbance of 22.9 acres of soil; therefore, the project must comply with the provisions of the NPDES Construction General Permit issued by the Central Valley RWQCB. The project would require preparation of a SWPPP with BMPs to prevent stormwater contamination, control sedimentation, and erosion, and comply with stormwater discharge requirements. These requirements are consistent with the stormwater management and discharge control requirements outlined in Chapter 15.12 and the land grading and erosion control requirements outlined in Chapter 16.44 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code. Furthermore, the Residences Project would protect water quality through daily watering of unpaved areas to stabilize soil and prevent erosion during construction. Through compliance with the NPDES MS4 and Construction General Permits, the Residences Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant. Interference with groundwater recharge typically occurs with introduction of new impervious surfaces. The Residences Project would include development of approximately 15.2 acres of new impervious cover, which is approximately 70 percent of the project site. According to the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project design would include stormwater planter facilities, disconnected roof drains (i.e., drains to pervious areas), and other treatment devices (Contech Stormfilters and Filterra units) to treat stormwater runoff from the project site and allow it to percolate back into the soil (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). The proposed stormwater infrastructure would fulfill the requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region (2018). Therefore, the Residences Project would not interfere with groundwater recharge.

Groundwater levels in the eastern portion of the SASb, where the project site is located are affected by ongoing remediation of several large contaminant plumes. Refer to Section 3.10.2(e), below, for further discussion of sustainable management of the basin. Refer to Section 3.20, “Utilities and Services Systems,” for discussion of groundwater demand associated with the project. Water would be provided by the local water purveyor, which manages a portfolio of water supplies.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or siltation; Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.7.2(b), project-related construction activities that include ground disturbance, such as excavation, grading, and trenching would increase the potential for erosion to occur. The project would involve the disturbance of 22.9 acres of soil; therefore, the project must comply with the provisions of the NPDES Construction General Permit issued by the Central Valley RWQCB. The project would require preparation of a SWPPP with BMPs to control erosion. These requirements are consistent with the land grading and erosion control requirements outlined in Chapters 15.12 and 16.44 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code. Furthermore, the Project would comply with Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD (Fugitive Dust), which requires daily watering of unpaved areas to stabilize soil and prevent wind erosion events.

Once operational, the project site would be developed with approximately 15.2 acres impervious area, including buildings, asphalt parking lots, and concrete walkways. As described in the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project would be designed to meet the stormwater quality and LID requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). Proposed stormwater features, which include stormwater planter facilities, underground stormwater treatment devices, and disconnected roof drain systems, would reduce erosion ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-52 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study potential from operational runoff. Furthermore, landscaping would reduce erosion potential in unpaved areas. With adherence to applicable rules and regulations and implementation of BMPs and LID practices, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to erosion and siltation. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.10.2(b) above, the Residences Project would include development of approximately 15.2 acres of new impervious cover, which is approximately 70 percent of the project site. According to the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project design would include stormwater planter facilities, disconnected roof drains (i.e., drains to pervious areas), and other treatment devices (Contech Stormfilters and Filterra units) to treat stormwater runoff from the project site and allow it to percolate back into the soil (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). The proposed stormwater infrastructure would fulfill the requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region. Therefore, the Residences Project would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site.
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.10.2(b) above, the Residences Project would include development of approximately 15.2 acres of new impervious cover, which is approximately 70 percent of the project site. According to the Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report, the project design would include stormwater planter facilities, disconnected roof drains (i.e., drains to pervious areas), and other treatment devices (Contech Stormfilters and Filterra units) to treat stormwater runoff from the project site and allow it to percolate back into the soil (RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a). The proposed stormwater infrastructure would fulfill the requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region. Therefore, the Residences Project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.1, the project site is within an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA 2012).

Therefore, the Residences Project would not result in impacts related to impeding or redirecting flood flows. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.1, the Residences project site is not within a flood hazard zone, a tsunami hazard area, or in proximity to an enclosed body of water that is susceptible to seiche (FEMA 2012; Cal OES 2021).

Therefore, the Residences Project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project would be designed to meet the stormwater quality and LID requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region. In addition, BMPs would be implemented during construction activities to prevent stormwater contamination, control sedimentation, and erosion, and comply with stormwater discharge requirements. Because the Residences Project would comply with the requirements of the NPDES MS4 and Construction General Permits, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan.

As described above, the SASb has been designated by the California Department of Water Resources as high priority but is not critically overdrafted. The project site is not within or near the key areas of groundwater recharge to the subbasin (i.e., the American River, Sacramento River, and Cosumnes River). Further, the project would not conflict with ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-53 the projects identified in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan as important to raise groundwater above current levels; maintain storage volumes; and protect ecosystems, interconnected surface water, and shallow well users. Although projected climate change conditions will increase groundwater use, these effects are not expected to cause the SASb to become unsustainable or to cause notable decreasing trends in groundwater conditions.

Water supplied to the project would be sourced from a diverse water portfolio, including groundwater. As described in Section 3.20, “Utilities and Services Systems,” the project is consistent with the population projections assumed in Golden State Water Company’s water management planning. The Residences Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-54 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XI. Land Use and Planning.

Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

3.11.1 Environmental Setting
The project site is a vacant infill property in the City’s Capital Center and is surrounded by residential uses, park facilities, and office and industrial uses. Specific uses include the San Juan Soccer Club complex to the north, industrial development (including Costco, office, laboratory, and automotive industries) east of the Folsom South Canal, single family development to the south, and medical office buildings to the west. The project site is designated as OMU in the City’s General Plan Land Use Diagram and the zoning designation for the project site is OPMU.

3.11.2 Discussion
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. As described in Section 3.11.1, the project site consists of a vacant infill property surrounded by residential uses, park facilities, and office and industrial uses. All project improvements would be contained within the existing privately-owned parcel. The project would be compatible with surrounding land uses and would not include physical features that would restrict access to neighboring communities. Therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.11.1, the project site is designated for OMU land uses and is zoned OPMU.

According to the City’s General Plan Land Use Element, the OMU land use designation encourages the integration of commercial and/or residential use in conjunction with office use of a site (City of Rancho Cordova 2015). According to Chapter 23.313 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, the OPMU zoning district is intended for the development of larger office buildings and business parks; however, commercial service and residential uses may be integrated into office buildings or as freestanding buildings. The Residences Project would consist of a modern mixed-use infill residential development with a destination commercial-retail component. The proposed multifamily units, townhome rental units, and commercial space would be an allowed use of the OPMU district.

In addition, as demonstrated through this environmental checklist, the project would be consistent with all applicable General Plan policies. See, for example, Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” Section 3.8, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” and Section 3.17, “Transportation.” In addition, the project would be conditioned to require compliance with the SSHCP, City and State water quality control standards, and would be reviewed by SMAQMD for consistency with the SIP. Because the project would be consistent with existing land use and zoning designations for the project site and all applicable policies from the City’s General Plan, the project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-55

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XII. Mineral Resources.

Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

3.12.1 Environmental Setting
The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 requires the State Geologist to classify land into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) according to the known or inferred mineral potential of that land. Areas classified as MRZ-2 include areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. The process is based solely on geology, without regard to existing land use or land ownership. The primary goal of mineral land classification is to ensure that the mineral resource potential of land is recognized by local government decision-makers and considered before land-use decisions that could preclude mining are made.

The site was extensively dredged for gold recovery sometime between 1947 and 1952. Large, floating dredges excavated river deposited sediments as they moved across the site in a north-south direction. Gravel and cobbles were screened off and deposited with sand in long ridges, and clays and silts were washed overboard and deposited in ponds between the ridges. The site was mined for aggregate from at least 1981 through at least 1984 (MPE 2020).

According to the City of Rancho Cordova General Plan EIR, the project site is within an area classified as MRZ-2 (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b). Based on mapping completed by the Division of Mines and Geology (now known as the California Geological Survey), the project site is within an area where Portland cement concrete-grade aggregate operations have occurred (Division of Mines and Geology 1999). However, the project site is currently vacant and no active mining operations occur on the project site.

3.12.2 Discussion
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Less than Significant. As described in Section 3.12.1, mining has occurred on the site and recoverable deposits of gold and aggregate have been removed. The project site is zoned for office professional mixed-use land uses and is surrounded by urban development that precludes mineral resource extraction. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of regional value or of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a land use plan.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? See response in item (a) above.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-56 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.13 NOISE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIII. Noise.

Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other
applicable local, state, or federal standards?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?

3.13.1 Environmental Setting

ACOUSTIC FUNDAMENTALS
Acoustics is the scientific study that evaluates perception, propagation, absorption, and reflection of sound waves.

Sound is a mechanical form of radiant energy, transmitted by a pressure wave through a solid, liquid, or gaseous medium. Sound that is loud, disagreeable, unexpected, or unwanted is generally defined as noise. Noise is typically expressed in decibels (dB), which is a common measurement of sound energy. Definitions of acoustical terms used in this section are provided in Table 3.13-1.

Table 3.13-1 Acoustic Term Definitions
Term Definition
Noise Noise is generally defined as sound that is loud, disagreeable, unexpected, or unwanted.

Decibel (dB) Sound levels are measured using the decibel scale, developed to relate to the range of human hearing. A decibel is logarithmic; it does not follow normal algebraic methods and cannot be directly summed. For example, a 65-dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65-dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB (i.e., doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by 3 dB). A sound level increase of 10 dB corresponds to 10 times the acoustical energy, and an increase of 20 dB equates to a 100-fold increase in acoustical energy.

A-weighted
decibel (dBA)
The human ear is not equally sensitive to loudness at all frequencies in the audible spectrum. To better relate overall sound levels and loudness to human perception, frequency-dependent weighting networks were developed, identified as A through E. There is a strong correlation between the way humans perceive sound and A-weighted sound levels.

For this reason, the A-weighted sound levels are used to predict community response to noise from the environment, including noise from transportation and stationary sources, and are expressed as A-weighted decibels. All sound levels discussed in this section are A-weighted decibels unless otherwise noted.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-57 Term Definition
Equivalent Noise
Level (Leq)
The average noise level during a specified time period; that is, the equivalent steady-state noise level in a stated period of time that would contain the same acoustic energy as the time-varying noise level during the same period (i.e., average noise level).

Maximum Noise
Level (Lmax)
The highest instantaneous noise level during a specified time period.

Source: Caltrans 2013a.

Noise Generation and Attenuation
Noise can be generated by many sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and airplanes and stationary sources such as activity at construction sites, machinery, and commercial and industrial operations. As sound travels through the atmosphere from the source to the receiver, noise levels attenuate (i.e., decrease) depending on ground absorption characteristics, atmospheric conditions, and the presence of physical barriers. Sound from a localized source (i.e., a point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. Noise from a line source, such as a road or highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source. Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective-wave canceling provides additional attenuation associated with geometric spreading. For acoustically absorptive sites such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees, additional ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the attenuation rate associated with cylindrical spreading, the additional ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance. This would hold true for point sources, resulting in an overall drop-off rate of up to 7.5 dB per doubling of distance.

Atmospheric conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, turbulence, temperature gradients, and humidity also alter the propagation of noise and affect levels at a receiver. Furthermore, the presence of a barrier (e.g., topographic feature, intervening building, and dense vegetation) between the source and the receptor can provide substantial attenuation of noise levels at the receiver. Natural (e.g., berms, hills, and dense vegetation) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) may function as noise barriers.

To provide some context to noise levels described throughout this section, common sources of noise and associated noise levels are presented in Table 3.13-2.

Table 3.13-2 Typical Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dB) Common Indoor Activities 110 Rock band
Jet flyover at 1,000 feet 100
Gas lawnmower at 3 feet 90
Diesel truck moving at 50 mph at 50 feet 80 Food blender at 3 feet, garbage disposal at 3 feet Noisy urban area, gas lawnmower at 100 feet 70 Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet, normal speech at 3 feet Commercial area, heavy traffic at 300 feet 60
Quiet urban daytime 50 Large business office, dishwasher in next room Quiet urban nighttime 40 Theater, large conference room (background) Quiet suburban nighttime 30 Library, bedroom at night, concert hall (background) Quiet rural nighttime 20 Broadcast/recording studio
10 Threshold of human hearing 0 Threshold of human hearing Notes: dB = A-weighted decibels; mph = miles per hour
Source: Caltrans 2013a.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-58 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study Effects of Noise on Humans
Exposure to excessive noise may result in physical damage to the auditory system, which may lead to gradual or traumatic hearing loss. Gradual hearing loss is caused by sustained exposure to moderately high noise levels over a period of time; traumatic hearing loss is caused by sudden exposure to extremely high noise levels over a short period. Non-auditory behavioral effects of noise on humans are primarily subjective effects such as annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction, which lead to interference with activities such as communications, sleep, and learning.

EXISTING NOISE SOURCES AND LEVELS
The predominant noise sources in the area are the San Juan Soccer Club, vehicular traffic along the surrounding roadways, and commercial truck traffic from the retail land uses nearby. The traffic noise levels along Kilgore Road, White Rock Road, and Sunrise Boulevard are 66 dBA, 72 dBA, and 76 dBA, respectively (Appendix E).

NOISE- AND VIBRATION-SENSITIVE LAND USES AND RECEPTORS
Noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses generally include those uses where noise exposure could result in healthrelated risks to individuals, places where a quiet setting is an essential element of the intended purpose (e.g., schools and libraries), and historic buildings that could sustain structural damage due to vibration. The project is in a sparsely populated area where land is generally undeveloped. Noise- and vibration-sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project area include nearby residents and the Charter School of Morgan Hill. The closest sensitive receptor to the project area are the existing residences across International Drive, which are a minimum of 200 feet south of the project area.

AIRPORTS AND PRIVATE AIRSTRIPS
There are no public airports or private airstrips within the project vicinity. The nearest airport is the Mather Airport, which is located approximately 1.5 miles southwest of the project area.

REGULATORY SETTING
Federal Regulations
Federal Transit Administration
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) provides guidance on evaluating human response to ground vibration. The FTA has set forth guidelines for maximum-acceptable vibration criteria for different types of land uses where people live or work. These guidelines are presented in Table 3.13-3.

Table 3.13-3 Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria for Human Response Land Use Category
Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Levels for Human Response (VdB re 1 microinch/second)
Frequent Events1 Occasional Events2 Infrequent Events3
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations. 654 654 654 Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep. 72 75 80 Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime uses. 75 78 83 Notes: VdB re 1 microinch/second = vibration decibels referenced to 1 microinch/second and based on the root mean square velocity amplitude. 1 “Frequent Events” is defined as more than 70 vibration events of the same source per day. 2 “Occasional Events” is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. 3 “Infrequent Events” is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same source per day. 4 This criterion is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes. Vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research would require detailed evaluation to define acceptable vibration levels.

Source: FTA 2018.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-59 State Regulations
California Department of Transportation
In 2013, Caltrans published the Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual, which provides general guidance on vibration issues associated with construction and operation of projects in relation to human perception and structural damage (Caltrans 2013b). Table 3.13-4 presents recommendations for levels of vibration that could result in damage to structures exposed to continuous vibration.

Table 3.13-4 Structural Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels Structure and Condition Transient Sources PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources PPV (in/sec) Extremely Fragile Historic Buildings, Ruins, Ancient Monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile Buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and Some Old Buildings 0.5 0.25
Older Residential Structures 0.5 0.3
New Residential Structures 1.0 0.5
Modern Industrial/Commercial Buildings 2.0 0.5
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

Source: Caltrans 2013b.

Local Regulations
Rancho Cordova General Plan
The General Plan Noise Element identifies noise criteria for various stationary and transportation noise sources.

Performance standards for stationary noise sources and maximum allowable noise exposure from transportation noise sources, are included below in Tables 3.13-5 and 3.13-6, respectively.

Table 3.13-5 City of Rancho Cordova Performance Standards for Stationary Noise Sources Source Nosie Level Descriptor Daytime (7 a.m. – 10 p.m.) Nighttime (10 p.m. – 7 a.m.) Typical Hourly Leq dB 55 45
Tonal, impulsive, repetitive, or consist
primarily of speech or music Hourly Leq dB 50 40
Notes: dB = decibels; Leq= energy-equivalent noise level.

Source: City of Rancho Cordova 2006a
Table 3.13-6 City of Rancho Cordova Maximum Transportation Noise Exposure Land Use Outdoor Activity Areas1
Ldn/CNEL, dB
Ldn/CNEL, dB Leq, dB2
Residential 603 45 -
Residential subject to noise from railroad tracks,
aircraft overflights, or similar noise sources which
produce clearly identifiable, discrete noise events
(e.g., the passing of a single train)
603
405 -
Transient lodging 604 45 -
Hospitals, nursing homes 603 45 -
Theaters, auditoriums, music halls - - 35
Churches, meeting halls 603 - 40
Office Buildings - - 45
Schools, libraries, museums - - 45
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-60 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study Land Use Outdoor Activity Areas1
Ldn/CNEL, dB
Ldn/CNEL, dB Leq, dB2
Playgrounds, neighborhood parks 70 - -
Note: CNEL = community equivalent noise level; dB = decibels; Ldn= day-night average noise level; Leq = energy-equivalent noise level 1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land use. Where it is not practical to mitigate exterior noise levels at patio or balconies of apartment complexes, a common area such as a pool or recreation area may be designated as the outdoor activity area. 2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use. 3 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dB Ldn/CNEL or less using a practical application of the best available noise reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dB Ldn/CNEL may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. 4 In the case of hotel/motel facilities or other transient lodging, outdoor activity areas such as pool areas may not be included in the project design. In these cases, only the interior noise level criterion will apply. 5 The intent of this noise standard is to provide increased protection against sleep disturbance for residences located near railroad tracks.

Source: City of Rancho Cordova 2006a.

Rancho Cordova Noise Ordinance
The City Noise Ordinance establishes maximum allowable exterior and interior noise levels for affected land uses. The ordinance limits exterior noise levels (measured at residential land and agricultural land uses) to a maximum of 55 dBA during any cumulative 30-minute period during the daytime hours (7 a.m.–10 p.m.), and 50 dBA during any cumulative 30-minute period during the nighttime hours (10 p.m.–7 a.m.). Daytime construction activities are generally exempt from the noise standards.

3.13.2 Discussion
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards? Less than significant. Project-related noise would be generated by heavy equipment used onsite during project construction and by increased vehicle trips associated with project operation. These types of noise sources are discussed separately below.

Construction
In the project area, the dominant noise source is roadway traffic, primarily from vehicles along White Rock Road and International Drive and events at the San Juan Soccer Club field. The project would result in temporary increase in noise levels during construction as a result of heavy equipment movement and pavement removal, but no permanent increases in ambient noise levels would occur during operation. Construction-related noise sources would include both mobile and stationary on-site equipment (e.g., dozers, loaders, generators). Construction noise would be shortterm and temporary, and operation of heavy-duty construction equipment would be intermittent throughout the day during construction.

Within the City of Rancho Cordova, the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 6.68 exempts certain activities, including construction, from the City’s noise standards as long as the activities are limited to the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on weekdays and Friday commencing at 8:00 p.m. through and including 7:00 a.m. on Saturday; Saturdays commencing at 8:00 p.m. through and including 7:00 a.m. on the next following Sunday and on each Sunday after the hour of 8:00 p.m. This exemption provides that construction equipment must include appropriately maintained exhaust and intake silencers. However, the City does not specify limits in terms of maximum noise levels that may occur during the allowable construction hours.

Project construction activities would involve the use of heavy equipment, such as graders, cranes, dozers, tractors, forklifts, generator sets, paving equipment, rollers, welders, mixers, and air compressors. However, the specific construction equipment used would vary depending on the project phase and specific activities occurring. The loudest ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-61 pieces of equipment that would be used during construction would be dozers, graders and tractors, all which generate noise levels ranging from 84 to 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet (FHWA 2006:3). Noise modeling conservatively assumed the simultaneous operation of the three loudest pieces of heavy construction equipment (i.e., a grader, a dozer, and a tractor) operating at the boundary of the project area (see Appendix E). At a distance of 140 feet to the nearest structure, construction related activities could result in hourly average noise levels of approximately 77 Leq and 81 Lmax.

There is noise generated by traffic on International Drive, which separates the southern boundary of the project site from the nearest sensitive receptors and an existing sound wall between those existing residences and International Drive. Construction activities would occur within the timeframe identified by the City’s noise ordinance when construction noise is exempt from noise standards. Thus, the project would not generate a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in excess of allowable standards in the vicinity of the project.

Operation
Traffic Noise
Project-generated vehicle trips would result in an increase in average daily traffic volumes and associated increases in traffic noise levels along affected roadway segments near the site. To analyze the impact of project-generated operational transportation noise sources, traffic noise levels under existing and existing-plus-project conditions were modeled for affected roadway segments. For further details on traffic volumes and conditions, see Section 3.16, “Transportation.” Refer to Appendix E for detailed noise modeling input parameters.

Table 3.13-7 summarizes the modeled traffic noise levels at the nearest applicable offsite receptors from the roadway centerlines under existing and existing plus project conditions, along with the overall net change in noise level as a result of project-generated traffic. As shown in Table 3.13-7, the addition of project-generated traffic to the surrounding roadway network would not result in any of the roadway study segments experiencing noise increases above 3 dBA. Thus, the project would not result in a perceptible noise increase as a result of new vehicle trips generated from the project.

Table 3.13-7 Summary of Modeled Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment Segment Description Existing Condition
Noise Levels (Ldn)
Existing plus Project
Conditions (Ldn)
Traffic Noise
Level Increase
Zinfandel Dr White Rock Rd to International Dr 72.9 72.9 0.0 Zinfandel Dr US-50 EB Ramps to White Rock Rd 75.3 75.4 0.1 Zinfandel Dr US-50 EB Ramps to US-50 WB Ramps 74.5 74.6 0.1 Zinfandel Dr Folsom Blvd to US-50 WB Ramps 73.4 73.5 0.0 White Rock Rd Zinfandel Dr to Kilgore Rd 71.8 72.1 0.3
White Rock Rd Kilgore Rd to Sunrise Blvd 71.9 72.2 0.3
Kilgore Rd Folsom Blvd to White Rock Rd 68.4 68.4 0.0
Kilgore Rd White Rock Rd to International Dr 67.9 70.0 2.2 White Rock Rd Sunrise Blvd to Grant Line Rd 68.9 69.1 0.2 Sunrise Blvd White Rock Rd to Douglas Rd 76.3 76.3 0.0
Sunrise Blvd Folsom Blvd to White Rock Rd 77.8 77.9 0.1 Sunrise Blvd US-50 EB Ramps to Folsom Blvd 78.2 78.2 0.1 Sunrise Blvd US-50 WB Ramps to US-50 EB Ramps 76.7 76.8 0.1 Sunrise Blvd US-50 EB Ramps to Coloma 79.6 79.7 0.0
Notes: Ldn = Day-Night Level
All modeling assumes average pavement, level roadways (less than 1.5% grade), constant traffic flow, and does not account for shielding of any type or finite roadway adjustments. All noise levels are reported as A-weighted noise levels. For additional details, refer to Appendix E for detailed traffic data, and traffic-noise modeling input data and output results.

Source: Data modeled by Ascent Environmental in 2022.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-62 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study Stationary Noise
The loudest operational noise from non-transportation sources is often generated by onsite mechanical equipment such as HVAC equipment. Noise levels generated from HVAC equipment vary substantially depending on unit efficiency, size, and location. Generally, HVAC equipment generates noise levels of 60 dBA at six meters (19.6 feet).

The specific location of the HVAC equipment relative to adjacent sensitive receptors are not known at this time.

HVAC equipment at the project site could exceed the City’s nighttime Leq standard (Table 3.13-5) if located within 75 feet of noise-sensitive land uses during nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) occurring for more than 30 minutes. The nearest sensitive receptor is 200 feet south of the site. Noise levels generated from HVAC equipment at the nearest noise-sensitive land use would be 34 dBA at 200 feet and below the City’s stationary noise standard. As a result, operation of the HVAC equipment would not exceed the City’s threshold for stationary noise sources. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant. Project construction would not involve the use of ground vibration–intensive activities, such as pile driving or blasting. Pieces of equipment that generate lower levels of ground vibration, such as dozers and pavers, would be used during construction. These types of common construction equipment do not generate substantial levels of ground vibration that could result in structural damage, except at extremely close distances (i.e., within at least 10 feet). The most ground vibration–intensive activity performed during project construction would be use of a roller. Rollers generate a ground vibration level of 0.21 in/sec PPV and 94 VdB at 25 feet (FTA 2018:184).

Vibration from rolling could exceed the threshold of significance of 0.2 in/sec PPV for building structural damage within 26 feet of activities and the threshold of significance for human annoyance of 80 VdB within 73 feet of activities. No sensitive land uses or permanent structures are located within 140 feet of areas where construction activity would take place at the site. No rolling would occur within 26 feet of an existing building or within 73 feet of a residence. Operation of the project would not include any substantial vibration sources. Therefore, construction and operational generated vibration would not result in structural damage or human annoyance. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project site is not located within the 60 dB CNEL contour for Mather Airport (SACOG 2021), and as such, on-site residences would not be exposed to airport-related noise in excess of City standards.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-63

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. Population and Housing.

Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

3.14.1 Environmental Setting
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the 2020 population in the City of Rancho Cordova was 79,332 residents. Based on the 2015-2019 American Community Survey, there were approximately 25,508 households and the average household size was 2.85 residents (U.S. Census Bureau 2021).

According to the City’s General Plan Land Use Element, approximately 60 percent of the existing housing is single-family and the remaining 40 percent is predominately multi-family. To meet housing demands, the Land Use Element identifies the need for a more diverse, higher-density housing supply, including townhomes, condominiums, and mixed-use housing above ground floor retail or office spaces (City of Rancho Cordova 2015). According to the Housing Element, the 2014-2018 American Community Survey vacancy rate in the City of Rancho Cordova was 0.6 percent for homeownership and 3.9 percent for rental housing, which is considered low to very low (City of Rancho Cordova 2021a).

3.14.2 Discussion
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project would result in the construction of 417 residential units, comprised of 240 multifamily units and 177 townhome rental units. Based on the City’s average household size of 2.85 residents, the project would have a residential population of approximately 1,043 residents. These residents could include people relocating from other cities in the region or from within the City of Rancho Cordova itself.

The project site is a vacant infill property within an area planned for development. As discussed in Section 3.11, “Land Use,” residential development in conjunction with office uses is consistent with the land use and zoning designation for the project site. Although the Residences Project could contribute to population growth in the City of Rancho Cordova, the project is intended to provide diverse rental housing opportunities to meet current and future housing demand. Because the City has low to very low vacancy rates and identified the need for a more diverse housing supply, the Residences Project is anticipated to be growth-accommodating rather than growth-inducing. Therefore, the Residences Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The project site is currently vacant and does not contain existing housing units. Therefore, the project would not displace people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-64 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XV. Public Services.

Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, or the need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?

3.15.1 Environmental Setting
SMFD provides fire protection services, fire suppression, inspection, plan checking, emergency transportation and medical services, public education, advanced life support, and rescue services to the City of Rancho Cordova.

According to SMFD’s Community Annual Report for the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the fire district served a population of approximately 757,000 residents over an area of 359 square miles. SMFD operated 41 stations and employed approximately 552 fire, medical, and rescue personnel in the 2019-2020 fiscal year. According to the City’s General Plan EIR, SMFD established a goal for a response time of 5 minutes or less for 80 percent of the time in the urbanized portions of the city (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b). Response times for the 2019-2020 fiscal year averaged 4 minutes and 28 seconds for structure fires and 6 minutes and 8 seconds for medical aid (SMFD 2020). SMFD Station 66 is the closest fire protection facility, located immediately west of the project site at 3180 Kilgore Road.

Police protection services within the City of Rancho Cordova are provided by the City of Rancho Cordova Police Department (RCPD), which is contracted through the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department Patrol Services. RCPD employs 55 officers to enforce State statutes and City codes and ordinances (RCPD n.d.). According to the City’s General Plan EIR, RCPD established a goal of providing one police officer for every 1,000 citizens and of achieving a response time of 5 minutes or less for Priority One calls (i.e., calls for violent crimes or emergencies requiring an immediate response to save a life) (City of Rancho Cordova 2006b). The Rancho Cordova Police Station is located at 2897 Kilgore Road, approximately 0.7 mile north of the project site.

The project site is within the boundaries of the Folsom Cordova Unified School District (FCUSD). FCUSD enrolls approximately 20,800 students at 22 elementary schools, 4 middle schools, 3 high schools, 6 alternative schools, and 1 charter school (FCUSD n.d.). The enrollment capacity for City of Rancho Cordova schools is 9,972 students and the enrollment capacity for the overall district is 21,527 students (FCUSD 2021). The Residences Project would be within the attendance boundaries of the FCUSD schools listed in Table 3.15-1.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-65 Table 3.15-1 Public School Facilities Serving the Residences Project Site Name Address Distance to Project Site 2018-2019, 2019-2020 Student Enrollment1
2013 Student
Capacity2
Navigator
Elementary School
10679 Bear Hollow Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 1.1 miles southwest of the project site 374 558 W.E. Mitchell Middle
School
2100 Zinfandel Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 1.6 miles north of the project site 885 843 Cordova High School 2239 Chase Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 2.1 miles northwest of the project site 1,855 1,951 1 Student enrollment data is based on the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 school years and was obtained from U.S. News & World Report in 2022 2 Student capacity data is based on the district optimal capacity from the FCUSD 2013 Facilities Master Plan, Appendix B, “Facility Inventory” Source: Compiled by Ascent Environmental in 2022
The Cordova Recreation and Park District (CRPD) provides and maintains public recreation facilities and services within the City of Rancho Cordova. CRPD operates over 600 acres of open space and over 43 parks and recreational facilities, which include neighborhood and community parks, a community barn, a dog park, a sports complex, community pools, community centers, and a golf course (CRPD 2022). CRPD parks and recreational facilities within 1 mile of the Residences project site are summarized in Table 3.15-2.

Table 3.15-2 Public Parks and Recreational Facilities in Proximity to the Residences Project Site Name Address Distance to Project Site Amenities
Renaissance Park 3125 Mowbray Way,
Rancho Cordova, CA

0.4 mile southwest of
the project site
Neighborhood park with picnic pavilion, playground, half-court basketball court, and open grass area
Tuscany Park 3460 Corvina Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA

0.4 mile south of the
project site
5-acre park with a playground, basketball court, soccer field, picnic areas, and open green space
The Village Green 3141 Bridgeway Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA

0.5 mile west of the
project site
Park with large outdoor amphitheater, splash pad plaza, open grass area, and picnic areas
Cobblestone Park
10900 Barden Dr,
Rancho Cordova, CA
95670

0.6 mile southwest of
the project site

1.6-acre neighborhood park with shade trees, an open grass area, picnic areas, a playground, a fitness station, and a multiuse field
Stone Creek
Community Park
3625 Spoto Drive,
Rancho Cordova, CA

0.9 mile southwest of
the project site
21 acres of open space and recreational amenities, which include an open-air amphitheater, aquatic splash park, skate park, playgrounds, picnic areas, and athletic fields
Source: Information obtained from the CRPD and compiled by Ascent Environmental in 2022 Other public facilities in proximity to the project site include the Rancho Cordova Library, which is part of the Sacramento Public Library System. The Rancho Cordova Library is located at 9845 Folsom Boulevard in the City of Sacramento, approximately 3.2 miles west of the project site.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-66 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.15.2 Discussion
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project would not result in the need for new or expanded fire protection facilities because the Residences project site is within a developed area and would be served by the SMFD. As discussed in Section 3.14, “Population and Housing,” the Residences Project is anticipated to have a residential population of approximately 1,043 residents. In addition, the Residences Project would add new commercial-retail development that could accommodate some additional visitors to the project site at any given time. This increase in population would increase the demand for SMFD services, which could adversely affect SMFD service ratios and response times.

Plans for proposed development projects are subject to review and approval by the City’s Development Services Team, which is made up of multiple City departments and partner agencies, including the SMFD. The project design would be required to comply with the most current building and fire codes, which include requirements for hydrant spacing, fire flow, access and roadway requirements, and limitations on materials used. Compliance with these requirements would reduce fire-related hazards associated with the proposed development.

Furthermore, new construction and development projects served by the SMFD are required to pay a Capital Fire Facilities Fee. This fee is intended to finance capital improvements for fire protection and emergency medical services that are needed to accommodate a growing service population. The project proponent would be required to pay a Capital Fire Facilities Fee as a condition of project approval, which would offset any impacts to SMFD service ratios, response times, or performance objectives.

The City’s General Plan provides policies for ensuring adequate fire protection in accordance with projected growth and development. The population growth from the Residences Project would be consistent with the type of growth anticipated in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the Residences Project could be served by existing fire protection facilities and new facilities proposed under the City’s General Plan. Based on the discussion above, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection and emergency services facilities.

Police protection?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project would not result in the need for new or expanded fire protection facilities because the project site is within a developed area and would be served by the RCPD. As discussed in Section 3.14, “Population and Housing,” the Residences Project is anticipated to have a residential population of approximately 1,043 residents. In addition, the Residences Project would add new commercial-retail development that could accommodate up to some additional visitors to the project site at any given time. This increase in population would increase the demand for RCPD services, which could adversely affect RCPD service ratios and response times.

Plans for proposed development projects are subject to review and approval by the City’s Development Services Team, which is made up of multiple City departments and partner agencies. The City would coordinate with RCPD during the review of the Residences Project development plan. In addition, the City encourages the incorporation of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles in the design and siting of new buildings. Incorporation of these design principles would reduce crime and improve security within the proposed development.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-67 Furthermore, new construction and development projects served by the RCPD are required to pay a development impact fee. This fee is intended to finance capital improvements for law enforcement related services that are needed to accommodate a growing service population. The project proponent would be required to pay this fee as a condition of project approval, which would offset any impacts to RCPD service ratios, response times, or performance objectives.

The City’s General Plan provides policies for ensuring adequate police protection in accordance with projected growth and development. Population growth from the Residences Project would be consistent with the type of growth anticipated in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the Residences Project could be served by existing police protection facilities and new facilities proposed under the City’s General Plan. Based on the discussion above, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities.

Schools?
Less than Significant. The Residences project site is within the district boundaries of FCUSD. Based on student yield factors from the FCUSD Facility Master Plan (2013), the Residences Project would generate approximately 162 students. This increase in the student population would increase student enrollment at FCUSD schools, which could cause enrollment to reach or exceed capacity or adversely affect student to teacher ratios.

Table 3.15-1 Student Yield Rates for the Residences Project School Type Number of Students
177 Single-Family Attached Units 240 Multi-Family Units All Units Elementary School (K-5) 57 (0.32/unit) 27 (0.11/unit) 84 Middle School (6-8) 18 (0.10/unit) 20 (0.08/unit) 38
High School (9-12) 25 (0.14/unit) 8 (0.03/unit) 33
Special Education 4 (0.02/unit) 3 (0.01/unit) 7
Total 104 58 162
Source: FCUSD 2013; Page E-2
Government Code Section 65995 and 65996 require payment of development impact fees to offset the overcrowding of schools from new elementary, middle, and high school students generated from the project. The project proponent would be required to pay this fee as a condition of project approval, which would offset any impacts to FCUSD enrollment.

The City’s General Plan provides policies for ensuring adequate school facilities in accordance with projected growth and development. Student population growth from the Residences Project would be consistent with the type of growth anticipated in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the Residences Project could be served by existing schools and new schools proposed under the City’s General Plan. Based on the discussion above, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities.

Parks?
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.14, “Population and Housing,” the Residences Project is anticipated to result in a population of approximately 1,043 residents. This increase in population would increase the use of existing CRPD parks and open spaces.

According to the City’s General Plan, the City requires all new residential development to dedicate 1.75 acres of open space land and 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 population. The City reviews proposals for new residential development to ensure compliance with the City’s minimum open space and parkland standards. As described in Section 2, “Project Description,” the Residences Project would provide recreational amenities for residents, including a central green space; pedestrian pathways and paseos; two clubhouses, each with a pool and fitness center; dog parks; a children’s playground; and barbeque and lounge areas. These recreational amenities are intended to meet City ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-68 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study requirements for open space and parkland. Furthermore, the City may require payment of development impact fees to fund CRPD park improvements to offset the increased use of parks from new residential development. Because the Residences Project would be subject to City requirements for minimum open space and parkland standards, the Residences Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public park facilities.

Other public facilities?
Less than Significant. The Residences Project does not propose new or expanded public facilities because the Residences project site is within a developed area and would be served by existing City facilities, such as the Rancho Cordova Library. The anticipated population of approximately 1,043 residents would increase the use of existing public facilities, such as libraries, in the City. The Residences Project would be subject to development impact fees to fund public facilities improvements to offset their increased use from new residential development. Therefore, the Residences Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-69

3.16 RECREATION

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVI. Recreation.

Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?

3.16.1 Environmental Setting
Section 3.15.1 includes a summary of the existing public parks and recreational facilities within 1 mile of the project site.

3.16.2 Discussion
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Less than Significant. As discussed in Section 3.15.2(a), the Residences Project is anticipated to have a residential population of approximately 1,043 residents that could increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities.

According to the City’s General Plan, the City requires all new residential development to dedicate 1.75 acres of open space land and 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 population. The City reviews proposals for new residential development to ensure compliance with the City’s minimum open space and parkland standards. As described in Section 2, “Project Description,” the Residences Project would provide recreational amenities for residents, including a central green space; pedestrian pathways and paseos; two clubhouses, each with a pool and fitness center; dog parks; a children’s playground; and barbeque and lounge areas. These recreational amenities are intended to meet City requirements for open space and parkland. Furthermore, the City may require payment of development impact fees to fund CRPD park improvements to offset the increased use of parks from new residential development. Because the Residences Project would be subject to City requirements for minimum open space and parkland standards, the Residences Project would not cause substantial physical deterioration of existing parks or recreational facilities to occur or be accelerated.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant. As described in Section 3.16.2(a), the Residences Project would provide recreational amenities for residents. The environmental impacts associated with construction of these recreational amenities are evaluated in Sections 3.1 through 3.21 of this Initial Study and no significant adverse physical effects were identified.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-70 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.17 TRANSPORTATION

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVII. Transportation.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

3.17.1 Environmental Setting
The transportation impact analysis presented in this section is based primarily on the Residences at Capital Center Transportation Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Kimley Horn (2022). The TIS, which is included as Appendix F, provides additional data and information related to the transportation analysis.

ROADWAY NETWORK
Access to the Residences Project site is provided by the surrounding roadway network which includes highway United States Route (U.S. 50), Sunrise Boulevard, Zinfandel Drive, and White Rock Road.

Highways
The following highway is operated and maintained by Caltrans and provides regional access to the Residences Project site:
 U.S. 50 is an east-west freeway that traverses the United States from Sacramento, California to Ocean City, Maryland. In the vicinity of the Residences Project, U.S. 50 connects the City of Rancho Cordova with the City of Sacramento to the west and the County of El Dorado to the east. Located approximately three quarters of a mile north of the Residences Project site, U.S. 50 can be accessed via the Sunrise Boulevard and Zinfandel Drive interchanges. U.S. 50 has five lanes in each direction within the vicinity of the Residences Project site.

Roadways
The primary roadways in the vicinity of the Residences Project site include:
 Sunrise Boulevard is a bidirectional six-lane arterial roadway east of the Residences Project site connecting to north Rancho Cordova and Placer County while providing access to U.S. 50. The speed limit on Sunrise Boulevard is 45 miles per hour (mph).
 Zinfandel Drive is a bidirectional six to eight-lane arterial roadway that serves travel in the north-south directions connecting the Residences Project site to U.S. 50 via White Rock Road. The speed limit is 40 mph.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-71  White Rock Road is a six-lane east-west arterial roadway. White Rock Road connects Sunrise Boulevard and Zinfandel Drive within the southern half of City’s jurisdictional limits. White Rock Road is located north of the Residences Project site. There are no bicycle facilities present on White Rock Road between Zinfandel Drive and Sunrise Boulevard; however, pedestrian facilities exist along the roadway.  Kilgore Road is a bidirectional, four-lane roadway with no median accommodating north-south travel. Kilgore Road is located along the west boundary of the Residences Project site and has a posted speed limit of 40 mph.

Primary vehicle access to the Residences Project would be provided from Kilgore Road. Class II bike lanes and pedestrian facilities are present on each side of Kilgore Road.  International Drive, located south of the Residences Project site, is an east-west bidirectional six-lane roadway.

Emergency vehicle access would be provided to International Drive. Class II bike lanes and pedestrian facilities are located along each side of International Drive.
 Crawford Drive is an existing bidirectional, two-lane private roadway located just north of the existing commercial building. Crawford Drive would provide access to the multi-family residential portion of the Residences Project.

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The bicycle network in the City is composed of pathways, bike lanes, and bike routes. These bicycle facilities are classified in the Bicycle Master Plan as follows:
 Class I Pathways are off street facilities dedicated exclusively to use by bicyclists, pedestrians, and in some cases, equestrians, and other non-motorized travel such as roller skating and skateboarding.  Class II Bike Lanes delineate a portion of the street for bicyclists.  Class III Bike Routes are routes where the travel lane is shared by drivers and bicyclists. Class III routes are generally designated on roadways with low levels of motor vehicle traffic where bicycles may share the travel lane.

As of 2016, the City had 235 total miles of roadways and 17 miles of on-street bikeways and 14 miles of off-street paths (City of Rancho Cordova 2016:2-3). In the vicinity of the Residences Project site, Class II bike lanes exist on Kilgore Road and International Drive. Pedestrian facilities exist on Kilgore Road, International Drive, White Rock Road, and Zinfandel Drive. Sunrise Boulevard has pedestrian facilities present on the west side of the roadway between the U.S. 50 eastbound and westbound ramps. The Folsom South Canal bike path, a 15.5-mile Class I bicycle facility, is located east of the Residences Project site.

TRANSIT SYSTEM
Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) provides transit services in the Sacramento region. SacRT operates over 80 bus routes, 43 miles of light rail, and provides paratransit services for individuals who are American with Disabilities Act certified.

Bus routes 175, 176, and 177, also known as CordoVan, operate in the vicinity of the Residences Project site. Bus route 175 operates between the hours of approximately 6:30 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday with one-hour headways. Bus route 176 operates between the hours of approximately 5:30 a.m. and 7:30 p.m., Monday through Friday with one-hour headways. Bus route 177 operates between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday with 15-minute headways. Bus routes 175, 176, and 177 do not provide service on Saturday or Sunday.

Bus routes 175, 176, and 177 connect riders originating south of U.S. 50 near the Zinfandel Drive exit with the Zinfandel light-rail station. The Zinfandel light-rail station is served by the SacRT light rail Gold Line which provides service to both Sacramento and Folsom in either direction, and is approximately 1.5 miles north of the Residences Project site. The Sunrise Station and Cordova Town Center Station are both 1.6 miles north of the Residences Project site.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-72 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

REGULATORY SETTING
Senate Bill 743
SB 743, passed in 2013, required OPR to develop new State CEQA guidelines that address traffic metrics under CEQA. As stated in the legislation, upon adoption of the new guidelines, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” In December of 2018, OPR published the most recent version of the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) which provides guidance for VMT analysis. The Office of Administrative Law approved the updated State CEQA Guidelines and lead agencies had an opt-in period until July 1, 2020 to implement the updated guidelines as they related to VMT. As of July 1, 2020, implementation of Section 15064.3 of the updated CEQA Guidelines is required statewide.

The OPR Technical Advisory states that lead agencies may screen out VMT using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing. Many agencies use these screening thresholds to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. These screening thresholds are identified below:
 Small Project – Projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to result in a less-than-significant transportation impact.
 Map-Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects – Residential and office projects located in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.
 Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Stations – Lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor will have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.
 Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development – Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT. Further, low-wage workers in particular would be more likely to choose a residential location close to their workplace if one is available. In areas where existing jobs-housing match is closer to optimal, low-income housing nevertheless generates less VMT than market-rate housing. Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

City of Rancho Cordova Transportation Impact Guidelines The City developed and adopted the Transportation Impact Guidelines following the passage of SB 743, which shifted the evaluation of transportation impacts from LOS to VMT. The Transportation Impact Guidelines describe the CEQA analysis for transportation impacts that shall be used in the City including the following screening criteria applicable to the Residences Project which describes project-types that can be presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact pertaining to VMT:
 Residential Located in a VMT Efficient Area: The project is a residential project located in a VMT “efficient area” (in an area with 15% or more below the base year regional average household VMT/capita) based on locationbased screening maps prepared by the City using the focused version of SACOG’s SACSIM19 regional model.  Office/Business Professional Employment Project Located in a VMT Efficient Area: The project is an office/business-professional project located in a VMT “efficient area” (15% or more below the base year city-wide ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-73 average VMT/employee) based on the location-based screening maps prepared by the City using its focused version of SACOG’s SACSIM19 regional model.
 Proximity to Transit: A residential, retail, and office/business professional projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses, that are located within ½ mile of an existing or planned major transit stop (or along a highquality transit corridor).  Small Project: The project is a small project defined as generating less than 237 daily unadjusted trips ends using the latest ITE trip generation rates/procedures or a project-specific trip generation analysis reviewed and accepted by the City.
 Local-Serving Retail Project: A retail (or recreational) project is local-serving if it is consistent with the land uses listed in Appendix A and has a gross floor area no more than the following:
 125,000 sq. ft., if located within the City’s Infill Area  200,000 sq. ft., if located within the City’s Growth Area A retail project may also be defined as local-serving if a market study demonstrates that it is based on the size of its market area. Adding retail square footage (even if it is less than the gross floor area listed above) to an existing “regional” retail shopping area is not screened out. Hotels and motels are not considered local serving retail.  Affordable Housing: The project is affordable based on the City’s criteria for affordable housing. Only the portion of the project that meets the City’s criteria is screened out. For example, if the project is 100 units with 10 affordable housing units, transportation VMT analysis would not be necessary for the 10 affordable units but would be necessary for the remaining 90 units (unless they meet one of the other screening criteria). For purposes of applying the small project screening criteria, the applicant would only include the trip generation for the nonaffordable housing portion of the project (since the affordable housing portion is screened out).  Mixed Use Project Screening Considerations: The project’s individual land uses should be compared to the screening criteria above. It is possible for some of the mixed-use project’s land uses to be screened out and some to require further analysis. For purposes of applying the small project screening criteria, the applicant would only include the trip generation for portions of the project that are not screened out based on other screening criteria. For example, if a project includes residential and retail, and the retail component was screened out because it is locally serving; only the trip generation of the residential portion would be used to determine if the project meets the definition of a small project (City of Rancho Cordova 2020:Table 1).

City of Rancho Cordova General Plan
The Circulation Element, updated in 2015, provides goals, policies, and actions regarding the City’s transportation network. The policies and actions within the General Plan relevant to the Residences Project are provided below:
 Policy C.2.1: Create a system of on- and off-street trails and multi-use paths, as generally illustrated on Figure C2, that are used for walking and bicycling and that are attractive, natural, and safe transportation corridors.  Policy C.2.2: Require bicycle and pedestrian connections to public transit systems at stops, stations, and terminals; carpool/vanpool park-and-ride lots; and activity centers (e.g., schools, community centers, medical facilities, senior residences, parks, employment centers, high-density residential areas, commercial centers).  Policy C.2.3: In designing development projects, design for the pedestrian first.  Action C.2.3.1: Require pedestrian circulation routes to be designed into all land plans and subdivisions to ensure that access for the pedestrian is provided. Pedestrian routes shall be interconnected and may include open spaces, parks, and trails as otherwise required by the City.  Action C.2.3.2: Require and site pedestrian crossings of major roads at key intersections and at locations that provide priority and efficiency to the pedestrian, even at the expense of improved vehicular circulation.  Action C.2.3.3: Ensure safe, efficient pedestrian connections are made between the sidewalk, parking areas, and entrances to stores, offices, and other uses as part of development design review.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-74 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study  Policy C.2.8: Promote bicycling and walking as a safe and attractive activity. Educate all road users to share the road and interact safely.
 Action C.2.8.5: Provide signage, alternative routes, etc. during construction activities affecting bikeways to ensure the safety of cyclists.
 Policy C.3.3: Promote the integration of transit facilities into new development.  Action C.3.3.1: Require new development and redevelopment to include public transit stations, especially light rail stations, and to promote pedestrian activity and connection between public transit and retail, office, and residential uses.
 Action C.3.3.2: Consistent with the Transit section of the Circulation Plan and the Transit Master Plan, require development to dedicate the necessary right-of-way needed to accommodate planned transit services.

City of Rancho Cordova Bicycle Master Plan
The Bicycle Master Plan presents existing conditions, proposes infrastructural and programmatic improvements, and recommends funding mechanisms to increase bicycle safety and use in the City. The following policies are relevant to the Residences Project:
 Policy 1.1: Ensure all bicycle facilities, including grade separated crossings, meet the City of Rancho Cordova’s design and construction standards.
 Policy 2.2: All development projects shall be reviewed by City staff for consistency with the goals, policies and actions of the Bicycle Master Plan.
 Policy 2.2: Where construction is adjacent to Class II or Class III bikeways, require the developer or contractor to maintain a clear and clean travelway for cyclists.
 Policy 2.4: Ensure bicycle trail projects minimize environmental impacts, to the extent feasible.  Policy 3.2: All development projects shall include bicycle support facilities, to the extent feasible.  Policy 3.3: Bicycle parking shall be provided at all major employment and retail sites.  Policy 3.3: Encourage all employers to offer showers and changing facilities.  Policy 7.2: Encourage development projects that make bicycling a convenient and desirable form of transportation by providing a mix of land uses in close proximity to one another, and safe bicycle network connections and support facilities (City of Rancho Cordova 2016:A-2).

3.17.2 Discussion
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Less than significant.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The Residences Project would provide green space and pedestrian pathways throughout the project site connecting bicyclists and pedestrians with the Class I Folsom South Canal bike path to the east of the project site. Additionally, the Residences Project would provide off-site improvements on Kilgore Road to accommodate a pedestrian crosswalk providing access to a future pathway which would lead to Capital Village that include employment and retail uses. As required by Municipal Code Section 23.719.110 (Bicycle Parking Requirements), the Residences Project would provide bicycle parking stalls for short term use in the commercial area and secure bicycle parking stalls in the residential portion for long-term tenant use, satisfying City Bicycle Master Plan Policy 3.3. The Residences Project does not involve any additional bicycle facility improvements; however, the project would enhance the environment for pedestrians and bicyclists in the vicinity of the project and facilitate connections between visitors, residents, and ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-75 the regional bicycle network. The Residences project would construct a mix of residential and retail uses within the project site aligning with City Bicycle Master Plan Policy 7.2, which encourages the use of active transportation by locating different land uses within close proximity of one another and providing safe connections for people walking and bicycling in the area. Therefore, the Residences Project would not conflict with any programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Transit Service
The Residences Project is located approximately 1.6 miles from the nearest Gold Line light rail transit station along Folsom Boulevard. From the Residences Project site, visitors and residents would have access to the Gold Line light rail service via CordoVan bus routes 175 and 176 operated by SacRT. The Residences Project would encourage transit use in the area due to it being mixed-use, infill development. The Residences Project would promote pedestrian activity and connection between commercial and residential uses as described in General Plan Action C.3.3.2 and comply with the policies regarding transit service. Additionally, the Residences Project would not reconstruct or reconfigure the surrounding roadway network including the alteration of any existing transit stops. Therefore, the Residences Project would not conflict with any programs, plans, ordinances, or policies addressing transit service or facilities.

Summary
The Residences Project would provide an enhanced environment for pedestrians by including open space and pathways within its internal circulation design. The pathways would integrate with the existing bicycle network including the Class I Folsom South Canal bike path to the east of the Residences Project site. Additionally, the Residences Project would provide supporting bicycle facilities such as bicycle parking in the commercial area to comply with municipal code requirements and Bicycle Master Plan policies. The Residences Project would not conflict with transit facilities and all nearby bus stops would remain as is. For these reasons, the Residences Project would not conflict with the programs, plans, policies, or ordinances addressing the circulation system. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b), which pertains to vehicle miles travelled?
Less than Significant. As described below, construction of the Residences Project is not expected to substantially increase regional VMT. In addition, the City has determined that the project satisfies two of the screening criteria in the City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines, indicating that the project would result in less-than-significant operational VMT impacts.

Construction
The VMT of construction workers is not newly generated; instead, it is redistributed throughout the regional roadway network based on the different work sites to which workers travel to each day. Therefore, construction workers are not generating new VMT each day, only redistributing it. Additionally, even if the trips generated during construction were considered to be new trips, construction workers are expected to generate an average of 99 trips per day, assuming that construction workers would not carpool and would generate two trips per worker per day. Therefore, the number of daily construction trips generated would be fewer than the City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines screening threshold for small projects (i.e., 237 trips per day) and OPR’s Technical Advisory threshold of 110 daily trips.

Further, Residences Project construction activities would be temporary and intermittent in nature occurring over 3 years; and thus, would not result in long-term increases in vehicular trips. Therefore, construction activities are not expected to substantially increase VMT in the region.

Operation
As presented above, the City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines describe project-types that can be presumed to cause a less than significant VMT impact. The City has determined that the Residences Project satisfies two of the screening criteria; it would be located in a VMT-efficient area and is in proximity to transit. As detailed above, the Residences Project site would be served by CordoVan bus routes 175, 176, and 177. Bus route 177 operates on weekdays with 15-minute headways providing direct access to the Gold Line light rail service at Zinfandel Station. The City’s Transportation Impact Guidelines screen projects within 0.5 mile of an existing or planned major transit stop or ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-76 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor. A high-quality transit corridor is defined as “a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours” (City of Rancho Cordova 2020:8). The nearest Route 177 bus stop is located at the intersection of International Drive and Prospect Park Drive approximately 0.4 miles west of the Residences Project site’s proposed southern access point along International Drive. Moreover, an analysis performed in 2020 using location-based screening maps prepared by the City determined that the project site is in a residential area with less than significant VMT impact based on proximity to transit and VMT per capita less than 85 percent of the regional average (Lum, pers. comm. 2022). c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant. As described below, construction and operations of the Residences Project would be required to follow all local regulations related to design and safety. The Residences Project design is subject to plan review and an encroachment and traffic control permit is required for all off-site improvements. Additionally, the TIS found that the Residences Project would result in minimal turn movement and ingress/egress conflicts at the project’s access points.

Construction
Construction activities are anticipated to occur over a 3-year period beginning in August of 2022. The Residences Project applicant is required to obtain an encroachment permit for any construction activity within roadway right of way (City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Section 12.08.020) including off-site improvements, such as the proposed pedestrian crosswalk on Kilgore Road. The encroachment permit requires the submittal of a traffic control permit for review and approval by the City Public Works Department for any work requiring modification of existing traffic patterns. The traffic control permit would demonstrate appropriate traffic handling during construction activities for all work that will or may impact the traveling public and mandates that pedestrian and bicycle access must be maintained at all times (City of Rancho Cordova 2010). Therefore, the Residences Project would not substantially increase hazards during construction.

Operation
The Residences Project would include a 240-unit multi-family development, 177-units of townhomes, and a commercial-retail component with open space and pathways provided throughout the project site. Internal circulation for vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians would be required to follow the City’s Design Guidelines: Provisions for a Quality Community. Additionally, the Residences Project would follow site design standards set forth in the City Municipal Code including those in Section 23.707.040 pertaining to pedestrian access and open space, Section

23.719.090 regarding parking design standards, and Section 23.722.050 related to on-site pedestrian pathway standards. Vehicular access would be provided via two separate gated entrances from side streets off of Kilgore Road. As identified by the TIS, minimal turn movement/access conflicts are anticipated for the analysis scenarios as both entrances are set back from Kilgore Road. Access to the Residences Project commercial component would be provided via a dedicated driveway on the northern edge of the site connecting directly to Kilgore Road. The Residences Project would provide adequate site distance at all access points. Additionally, the Residences Project plans are subject to review by the City Building & Safety Division and Public Works Department ensuring City standards including those pertaining to site accessibility and safety are met. Therefore, the Residences Project would not substantially increase hazards during operations.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant. The project site is in an urban area with an established roadway network. The surrounding roadways provide adequate circulation and access for emergency response. Project-related construction activities have the potential to result in short-term, temporary impacts to surrounding roadways from partial lane closures or the presence of construction vehicles, which may cause temporary traffic slowdown. Any impacts associated with construction activities would be temporary in nature and would be generally confined to the project site.

Furthermore, construction activities would not affect access on any major roadways that may serve as emergency evacuation routes for the region, such as U.S. 50. All construction activities would be subject to emergency access standards and requirements of SMFD to ensure traffic safety. Chapter 33 of the 2019 California Fire Code contains ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-77 applicable standards for fire safety during construction and demolition including required provisions for emergency access. As detailed in item c, the Residences Project is required to obtain an encroachment permit and submit a traffic control plan for work within public right of way which would demonstrate safe traffic handling during construction including maintaining adequate emergency access. Additionally, emergency access would be subject to review by the City and responsible emergency service agencies; thus, ensuring the project would be designed to meet all applicable emergency access and design standards.

The final site plan for the project would also be subject to approval by the SMFD. Three emergency vehicle access points are provided for the residential components of the Residences Project including access to International Drive and Crawford Drive. The Residences Project design is required to follow the standards and regulations set forth in the 2019 California Building Standards Code, Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9 (2019 California Fire Code) as adopted by the City (City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Chapter 17.04). Appendix D of the 2019 California Fire Code provides minimum dimensions and design standards for fire apparatus roads in order to maintain adequate emergency access during operations of commercial and residential developments. For these reasons, the Residences Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-78 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources.

Has a California Native American Tribe requested
consultation in accordance with Public Resources Code
section 21080.3.1(b)?
Yes No
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k)?
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe?

3.18.1 Environmental Setting
AB 52, signed by Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr., in September 2014, established a new class of resources under CEQA:
“tribal cultural resources.” AB 52, as provided in Public Resource Code Sections 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, and 21082.3, requires that lead agencies undertaking CEQA review must, upon written request of a California Native American Tribe, begin consultation once the lead agency determines that the application for the project is complete, prior to the issuance of a NOP of an EIR or notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration.

The NAHC was contacted to request a Sacred Lands File search for known cultural resources within or near the project site. The results of the search returned by the NAHC on December 28, 2021 were positive for Native American cultural resources in the project vicinity. The NAHC provided contact information for tribal members and organizations affiliated with the region, and recommended that they be contacted for more information on the potential for Native American cultural resources within or near the project area. The following tribes were contacted on February 1, 2022, for consultation under AB 52:
 United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria  Ione Band of Miwok Indians
 Wilton Rancheria
Wilton Rancheria replied on February 15, 2022. Coordination with the tribe indicated no knowledge of tribal cultural resources that may be affected by the project, however, because the NAHC Sacred Lands File search was positive, Wilton Rancheria did request mitigation measures, discussed below. No other tribe responded and, therefore, no tribal cultural resources have been identified in the project area.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-79

3.18.2 Discussion
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a,b) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less than significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Although consultation under AB 52 did not result in the identification of tribal cultural resources as defined by PRC Section 21074, the NAHC Sacred Lands File search was positive. Therefore, the possibility exists that tribal cultural resources could be encountered during constructionrelated ground disturbing activities. This impact is potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure 3.18-1: Retain a Native American Tribal Monitor The Applicant shall contact Wilton Rancheria at least 30 days prior to ground disturbance to retain a Native American Tribal monitor. The Tribal monitor shall be approved by the Wilton Rancheria and listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the Project area. A minimum of seven days prior to ground disturbance, the Applicant shall notify Wilton Rancheria of the impending groundwork. Construction activities shall proceed if no response is received within 48 hours.

The Tribal monitor shall only be present onsite during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities.

The Tribal monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that describe each day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The onsite monitoring shall end when the grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal representatives and monitor have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting tribal cultural resources. The Applicant shall compensate the Tribal monitor for services.

Mitigation Measure 3.18-2: Protection of Known and Unknown Archaeological Resources Implement Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 above.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.18-1 and 3.18-2 would reduce impacts to tribal cultural resources to a lessthan-significant level by requiring the retention of a tribal monitor and, in the case of a discovery, appropriate treatment (including options for data recovery, mapping, capping, or avoidance) and proper care of significant tribal cultural resources.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-80 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems.

Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand, in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
e) Fail to comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?

3.19.1 Environmental Setting
The project site is an infill property surrounded by urban development and is already within the service areas of providers for water, wastewater, electricity, solid waste, and telecommunications. Existing utility lines for water, sewer, electricity and gas, and telecommunications, and are located in a joint trench within the roadway right-of-way adjacent to the project site.

WATER
Th project site is within the approximately 12-square-mile Cordova Service Area of the Golden State Water Company (GSWC). GSWC adopted the Cordova Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (2020 UWMP) in 2021. The UWMP assumes that development and redevelopment of the existing service area will occur as incremental infill in existing commercial areas along major thoroughfares. Growth is based on the growth rates established in SACOG’s 2020 MTP/SCS.

GSWC Cordova’s water supply portfolio consists of pre-1914 appropriative right from the South Fork of the American River established by the Natoma Water Company in 1851; groundwater supplies from the South American Subbasin of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin; Aerojet GET Settlement Agreement remediated water supply, treated by Carmichael Water District (CWD); and contingent replacement Aerojet supplies. Active management of this diverse ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-81 water portfolio and implementation of the water shortage contingency plan provide GSWC Cordova with stable and reliable water service to meet its current and 2045 projected water demands in normal, single dry, and five consecutive dry year scenarios.

In 2020, the agency’s public water supply served a total of 14,759 connections (GSWC 2021: 1-2) for a population of approximately 44,050 people. In 2020, the water demand for the service area was 14,206 acre-feet (AF) (GSWC 2021:
4-1). In 2025 and 2045, the projected water demand for normal (non-drought conditions) is estimated to be 13,605 acre-feet per year (AFY) and 15,032 AFY, respectively (GSWC 2021: 4-6), for population estimates of 45,162, and 49,900. The UWMP determined that the agency would have sufficient water supply to meet projected demand for the service area through 2045, even in the event of multiple dry year conditions (GSWC 2021: 5-1).

WASTEWATER
Wastewater conveyance is provided by SASD, which manages and maintains the region’s sewer systems. Wastewater collected in SASD’s system is processed at the SRWTP, which is managed by Regional San located at 8521 Laguna Station Road in the City of Elk Grove. The network of pipelines comprising the sewer system collection pipelines are categorized based on their size, function, and flow capacity.  Collectors generally receive flow directly from individual homes and businesses, are generally 6-8 inches in diameter, designed to carry less than 1 million of gallons per day (mgd) wastewater flow.  Trunk sewers collect flows from collectors and are generally 12-36 inches in diameter, have a flow capacity between one and 10 mgd.
 Interceptors are between 36 and 144 inches in diameter and have a flow capacity of 10 mgd or greater.

DRY UTILITIES
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District would provide electricity and Pacific Gas and Electric would provide natural gas. AT&T would provide telecommunications services.

SOLID WASTE
Republic Services, Inc. would provide solid waste collection services to the project site, and Waste Management (WM) manages local recovery stations and landfills. The Kiefer Road Landfill is classified as a major landfill, which is defined as a facility that receives more than 50,000 tons of solid waste per year and is the only facility in Sacramento County that accepts solid waste from the public (City of Rancho Cordova 2021b: 4-180). Kiefer landfill currently has 117 million cubic yard (58 million tons) total capacity and is divided into 11 modules (City of Rancho Cordova 2021b: 4-180. To date, Kiefer has placed approximately 40 million cubic yards of waste into Modules 1-3, leaving 77 million cubic yards (38 million tons) of available capacity. The maximum tons per day (tpd) allowed at the Kiefer Road Landfill is 10,815 tpd, with an average intake of 6,362 tpd. Currently, the Kiefer Road Landfill is operating below permitted capacity and would have capacity for the next 30 to 40 years based on current disposal rates (City of Rancho Cordova 2021b).

Chapters 6.20, “Solid Waste Requirements,” 6.21, “Business and Multifamily Recycling and Organics Recycling” describe City requirements related to the provision of solid waste disposal services including collection and transport, waste diversion, and container requirements for commercial, single family residential, and multifamily residential waste generators. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) required a diversion of a minimum of 50 percent of discarded materials away from disposal in landfills.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-82 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study

3.19.2 Discussion
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant. The project would result in the construction of 417 housing units, consisting of 240 multifamily units and 177 townhome units, supporting community facility uses, and 5,000 sq. ft. of commercial space in a vacant parcel surrounded by existing urban development. The residential land use on the vacant project site would result in demand for water, wastewater, electricity, and telecommunications facilities. Connections to main lines for water, sewage, telecommunications, and electricity exist in the right-of-way of the roadways adjacent to the project site. For example, an existing water main is located along Kilgore Road, adjacent to the west side of the project site.

Utility infrastructure improvements to the site would consist of placing pipe connections from the project site to the existing water main, sanitary sewer interceptors, and existing storm drainage features. Other improvements would include the connection of fire hydrants and related water connections, manholes to access utility lines, and water meters.

The effects of constructing on-site utility connections and stormwater drainage are included in the analysis of other ground-disturbing construction activities associated with development of the project. Impacts pertaining to grading, soils, and stormwater are addressed in Section 3.7, “Geology and Soils,” and 3.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality.” As discussed in items b) through c) below, the capacity of off-site infrastructure for utilities including water supply, sewage treatment plant capacity, and landfill capacity supporting the project site would be sufficient to accommodate the project. Impacts pertaining to energy are discussed in Section 3.6, “Energy”- the construction of new or expanded energy production facilities would not be required. New capacity for utility services including water, wastewater, electricity and gas, and solid waste disposal would not be required and, therefore, the construction of new, off-site utility infrastructure that could result in significant environmental effects would not be required. b) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than Significant. As described above, GSWC Cordova’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) assumed infill development and population growth based on SACOG population projections. The Residences Project is the type of development anticipated in the plan and represents approximately 18 percent of the population growth assumed in the UWMP between 2020 and 2045.

The 2020 UWMP identified the following average Unit Demand Factors based on the 2016 to 2020 period: 3.46 AFY for multifamily connections and 3.50 AFY for commercial/industrial connections demand (GSWC 2021: 4-5). The project would construct 177 single-family townhomes and 240 multi-family apartment units with an estimated 29 total connections and a commercial component for which two connections are assumed. The estimated annual water demand would be 107.34 AFY. The water demand from the Residences Project would be approximately 13 percent of the increase in water demand anticipated during normal years between 2020 and 2045.

The 2020 UWMP estimated that, in the event of multiple-year drought conditions, the supplier would have reliable water supplies for the service area through 2045 for a projected population of 49,900. Due to conjunctive management and a Water Shortage Contingency Plan, the 2020 UWMP projects adequate supply to meet demand in all water years through 2045.

The proposed project is consistent with the type of infill development assumed in GSWC Cordova’s 2020 UWMP.

Normal water year demand is assumed in increase by 826 AFY (from 14,206 to 15, 032 AFY) between 2020 and 2045.

Based on the historic demand per connection factors used in the UWMP, the project would require 107.34 AFY of water. This is accounted for in the projected increase in water demand evaluated in the UWMP, which concludes that there is sufficient supply to serve anticipated development through 2045. Therefore, while the project would result in ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-83 additional demand for water, existing water supplies are estimated to be sufficient to serve the project site, even within the event of multiple dry-year conditions.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Less than Significant. The project is located within the service area of SASD, which manages the sewer system and serves much of Sacramento County, including the City of Rancho Cordova. Wastewater treatment services are provided by the SRWTP. An upgrade of the SRWTP is currently under way. The upgrade, known as the EchoWater Project, must be built by 2023 to meet new water quality requirements that were issued by the Central Valley RWQCB as part of Regional San’s 2010 NPDES permit. The requirements are designed primarily to help protect the Delta ecosystem downstream by removing most of the ammonia and nitrates and improving the removal of pathogens from wastewater discharge. The upgrade will include deployment of new treatment technologies and facilities, and will increase the quality of effluent discharged into the Sacramento River and ensure that the SRWTP discharge constituents are below permitted discharge limits specified in the NPDES permit. Flows to the SRWTP have decreased as a result of water conservation efforts over the last 10 years. Further, adequate capacity for wastewater is anticipated well into the future. Flows in 2014 were approximately 141 million gallons per day (mgd), compared to the current permitted capacity of 181 mgd. It is not anticipated that Regional San will need to consider further improvements to the SRWTP until after 2050. The SRWTP has a permitted dry weather flow design capacity of 181 mgd (Rancho Cordova 2006b: 4.12-38).

Wastewater would be conveyed off the project site using a network of collectors (up to 1 mgd flow capacity) and trunk sewers (1-10 mgd flow capacity). These sanitary sewer lines would then connect to the district’s sewer system by connecting to an existing interceptor line located along Kilgore Road that is 72 inches in diameter (RSC Engineering, 2021b), which has a flow capacity of greater than 10 mgd.

The project would construct 417 housing units and 5,000 sq.ft. (or 0.1149 acres) of commercial space. The City’s 2006 general plan identified that a single-family dwelling generated approximately 310 gallons per day of wastewater flows, called Equivalent Single-Family Dwellings, and that commercial development generated approximately 6 Equivalent Single-Family Dwelling worth of wastewater flows per acre. Using these factors, the project is estimated to generate approximately 129,500 gallons per day, which is equivalent to 0.13 mgd.

The project would collect the 0.13 mgd generated wastewater from each connection through the series of collectors and trunk sewer lines, which would flow into the existing interceptor along Kilgore Road with a flow capacity of greater than 10 mgd. The wastewater generated by the project would be 0.01 percent of a 10 mgd flow capacity.

Therefore, existing utility infrastructure, including the interceptor sewer line on Kilgore Road and the SRWTP would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the wastewater flows that the project is estimated to generate. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant. Municipal waste services to the project site are provided by WM and Republic Services, Inc.

Municipal and commercial waste generated at the site would be disposed of at the Kiefer Road Landfill. The project would generate household and commercial solid waste, including organic waste and recyclable material.

CalRecycle determined that the average disposal rate, after waste diversion efforts occur in compliance with state regulations, was 4.2 pounds per person per day (CalRecycle 2021). The project is estimated to add an additional population of 1,126 people which would produce 4,729 lbs/day or 2.4 tons per day (tpd). Since the number of employees resulting from the proposed commercial spaces are not yet determined, a per area generation rate is used.

CalRecycle (2019) provides a generation rate of 5 pounds (lbs)/1000 sq.ft./day for commercial land uses. Per this estimate, 5,000 sq.ft. of commercial space would generate approximately 25 lbs/day. The total solid waste produced from the project would be approximately 4,750 lbs/day, or approximately 2.4 tons/day. The Keifer Landfill receives approximately 6,300 tpd, and is permitted to accept up to 10,800 tpd (City of Rancho Cordova 2019: 3.14-20) and is ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-84 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study expected to accept waste until 2064. The project would not generate waste in excess of local standards or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure and would not impair the attainment of the City’s per capita waste reduction goals. e) Fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant. Municipal solid waste services to the project site are provided by WM and Republic Services, Inc.

Municipal and commercial waste generated at the site would be disposed of at the Kiefer Road Landfill. The project’s residential and commercial land uses would be provided with trash, recycling, and organics disposal services in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. The project would, therefore, comply with regulations including the City’s ordinances and AB 939. The Project would not fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction regulations related to solid waste.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-85

3.20 WILDFIRE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XX. Wildfire.

Is the project located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as high fire hazard severity zones? If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Yes No
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary
or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?

3.20.1 Environmental Setting
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is within a non-VHFHSZ in a local responsibility area (CAL FIRE 2008). The project site is not in an area susceptible to wildland fires and the surrounding properties are fully developed. Vegetation associated with adjacent development consists of ornamental landscaping that is regularly irrigated and maintained and is not considered a fire hazard. The topography of the project site is generally flat and there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project site.

As discussed in Section 3.9.1, the City adopted the SCMDP to address planned response to emergency situations.

Major roadways, such as U.S. 50, may serve as emergency evacuation routes for the region.

3.20.2 Discussion
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones; therefore, no impact would occur. As discussed in Section 3.9.3(f), the project site is in an urban area with an established roadway network. The surrounding roadways provide adequate circulation and access for emergency response. Project-related construction activities have the potential to result in short-term, temporary impacts to surrounding roadways from partial lane closures or the presence of construction vehicles, which may cause temporary traffic slowdown. Any impacts associated with construction activities would be temporary in nature ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-86 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study and would be generally confined to the project site. Furthermore, construction activities would not affect access on any major roadways that may serve as emergency evacuation routes for the region, such as U.S. 50. All construction activities would be subject to emergency access standards and requirements of SMFD to ensure traffic safety.

The project would not permanently modify any roads, result in permanent road closures, or otherwise affect emergency response times. Therefore, the project would not impair or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.10.1, the project site is not in an area susceptible to wildland fires and the surrounding properties are fully developed. Vegetation associated with adjacent development consists of ornamental landscaping that is regularly irrigated and maintained and is not considered a fire hazard. The topography of the project site is generally flat and there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project site. Because the Residences project site does not contain features that would exacerbate wildfire risks, and the project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, the project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. c) Require the installation of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact. The Residences Project would involve the construction of residential and commercial land uses in a developed and urban area. No roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, or new power lines are proposed. The project design would be required to comply with the most current building and fire codes, which include requirements for hydrant spacing, fire flow, access and roadway requirements, and limitations on materials used.

Compliance with these requirements would reduce fire-related hazards associated with the proposed development.

The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones and would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones; therefore, no impact would occur. As discussed in Section 3.7.2(a)(iv), the potential for landslides to occur is negligible because the topography is generally flat and there are no steep slopes within or adjacent to the project site. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.10.1, the Residences project site is within an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA 2012). The Residences Project would change the drainage patterns of the project site by increasing impervious surfaces; however, the proposed development would be designed to meet the stormwater quality requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region to prevent drainage, flooding, and erosion impacts from site runoff (see Section 3.10.2[c] for additional information). Therefore, the Residences Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks from runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 3-87

3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XX. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number
or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or
threatened species, or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?

3.21.1 Environmental Setting
The environmental setting for this section is presented above in the environmental settings for each of the checklist issue areas. No additional environmental setting is necessary.

3.21.2 Discussion
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on evaluations and discussions contained in Sections 3.1 through 3.20 of this Initial Study, the Residences Project is not anticipated to substantially degrade the quality of the environment. As discussed in Section 3.4, “Biological Resources,” the Residences Project would implement the SSHCP through Mitigation Measure 3.4-1. Therefore, the Residences Project would not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.5, “Cultural Resources,” and Section 3.7, “Geology and Soils,” no historical, ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
3-88 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study archaeological, or paleontological resources were identified on the Residences Project site. Although unlikely, grounddisturbing activities during project construction may result in the unanticipated discovery of archaeological or paleontological resources; however, the City requires that specific procedures be followed in the event of unanticipated discoveries (refer to Sections 3.5 and 3.7 for additional information) as a condition of project approval. Therefore, the project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Residences Project would not result in significant cumulatively considerable impacts for the following reasons:
 The Residences Project would not contribute to the cumulative condition for agricultural and forest resources, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and mineral resources due to the lack of Important Farmland and forest land, known mineral resources, known historic and archaeological resources, and sensitive species or habitat at the project site.
 Impacts related to geology, soils, hazards and hazardous materials are generally site-specific and would not contribute to the cumulative condition.
 The project would be consistent with existing land use and zoning designations for the project site, the City’s Municipal Code and ordinances, and the City’s Design Guidelines. In addition, population growth from the Residences Project would be consistent with the type of growth anticipated in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the Residences Project would not contribute to the cumulative condition for aesthetics, land use and planning, population and housing, public services, recreation, and wildfire.  The Residences Project would increase impervious surfaces and change drainage patterns within the watershed; however, the Residences Project would not contribute to the cumulative condition for hydrology and water quality because the proposed development would be designed to meet the stormwater quality requirements of the SQDM for the Sacramento Region.
 With respect to air quality, energy, noise, transportation, and utilities, the project would be a infill development in a VMT-efficient area that is consistent with the existing land use designation and the population assumptions for the area. GHG emissions impacts, which are inherently cumulative, would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project’s potential effects on the way residents experience the existing environment (aesthetics) and plans for future use of the area (land use and population and housing) would be less than significant. Elements of the project that could physically affect sensitive populations, including air quality impacts and generation of noise, were also found less than significant. GHG emissions, which are understood to result in global warming, would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the implementation of mitigation.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 4-1
4 REFERENCES
Amador, Fernando. Sacramento Responsible Parties Unit Chief. Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, CA. August 25, 2021—letter to Michael Brady of Brady & Vinding regarding termination of the Standard Voluntary Agreement for Purity Oil – Revised Parcel C.

Black, Carolyn, Yohannes Tesfaigzi, Jed A. Bassein, and Lisa A. Miller. 2017. Wildfire Smoke Exposure and Human Health: Significant Gaps in Research for a Growing Public Health Issue. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 55 pp. 186–195.

Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 2017. Transportation Statistics Annual Report 2017. Available:
https://www.bts.dot.gov/sites/bts.dot.gov/files/docs/browse-statistical-products-and-data/transportationstatistics-annual-reports/215041/tsar-2017-rev-2-5-18-full-layout.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.

Cal OES. See California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2021. California Emission Estimator Model Version 2020.4.0. Available:
http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/. Accessed March 8, 2022.

California Air Resources Board. 2003. HARP User Guide. Sacramento, CA. ———. 2017a. Sacramento Region Air Quality Plans. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/californiastate-implementation-plans/nonattainment-area-plans/sacramento-region. Accessed March 8, 2022. ———. 2017b. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf?_. Accessed March 8, 2022.
———. 2018. Attainment Designations by County. Last Updated December 28, 2018. Available:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm. Accessed March 8, 2022.

California Department of Conservation. 2016. California Important Farmland Finder. Available:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. Accessed January 10, 2022.

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1999. Open File Report 99-09: Selected Historic and Active Mining Operations in Sacramento County.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2022. California Natural Diversity Database. Commercial Version. Dated February 27, 2022. Report printed on Wednesday, March 2, 2022.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2008 (July). Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA as Recommended by CAL FIRE, Sacramento County. Available:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6758/fhszl_map34.pdf. Accessed January 13, 2022.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Calrecycle). 2019. Estimates Solid Waste Generation Rates. Available: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed February 16, 2022.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Calrecycle). 2021. Jurisdiction Per Capita Disposal Trends report: Rancho Cordova from 2007 to 2021. Available:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/ReviewReports. Accessed: February 17, 2021.

California Department of Transportation. 2013a. Technical Noise Supplement. Division of Environmental Analysis.

Sacramento, CA. Prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes, Sacramento, CA. ———. 2013b. (September). Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Noise, Division of Environmental Analysis. Sacramento, CA. Available: http://website.dot.ca.gov/env/noise/docs/tcvgmsep2013.pdf. Accessed: December 2020.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

References Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
4-2 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study
California Department of Water Resources. n.d. SGMA Data Viewer. Available:
https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#currentconditions. Accessed January 25, 2022.

California Energy Commission. 2018 (March). 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked Questions.

Available:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ.pdf.

Accessed March 8, 2022.
———. 2019. 2019 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan. California Energy Commission. Publication Number:

CEC400-2019-010-SF. Available: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/business_meetings/2019_packets/2019-12- 11/Item_06_2019%20California%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Action%20Plan%20(19-IEPR-06).pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.

California Geological Survey. 2021 (September). EQ Zapp: California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Available:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp. Accessed January 11, 2021.

California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2021. MyHazards. Available: https://myhazards.caloes.ca.gov/.

Accessed January 25, 2022.

California Native Plant Society. 2022. CNPS Rare Plant Inventory Search Results. Retrieved March 2, 2022.

California State Board of Equalization. 2016. Net Taxable Gasoline Gallons. Available: https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxesand-fees/MVF-10-Year-Report.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.

Caltrans. See California Department of Transportation.

CAPCOA. See California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB. See California Air Resources Board.CDOC. See California Department of Conservation.

CEC. See California Energy Commission.

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2018. The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, The Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin. Adopted July 25, 1975; reflects amendments through May 2018. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_201805.pdf. Accessed January 26, 2022.

Central Valley RWQCB. See Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board.

City of Rancho Cordova. 2005 (September). Design Guidelines. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/11071/635900957304900000.

Accessed January 10, 2022.
———. 2006a (March). City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/departments/community-development/planning/planning-divisiondocument-library ———. 2006b (March). Rancho Cordova General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. State Clearinghouse No. 2005022137. Available: https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/departments/communitydevelopment/planning/planning-division-document-library ———. 2010 (April). Application for Encroachment Permit. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/9923/637437216093370000. Accessed:

February 7, 2022.
________. 2015 (January). City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Land Use Element. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/departments/community-development/planning/planning-divisiondocument-library. Accessed January 11, 2022.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Ascent Environmental References
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 4-3
———. 2016 (April). Bicycle Master Plan. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/11416/635996042085130000.

Accessed: February 7, 2022.
________.2019 (August). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the The Ranch project. SCH: 2018072011. Rancho Cordova, CA. Prepared by De Novo Planning Group. El Dorado Hills, CA. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/14711/637015358159730000 ———. 2020 (June). City of Rancho Cordova Transportation Impact Guidelines. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showdocument?id=16663. Accessed: February 7, 2022. ________. 2021a (June). City of Rancho Cordova General Plan Housing Element. Available:
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/17875/637721567810800000. Accessed January 11, 2022.
________.2021b (September). Easton Research Park West Tentative Subdivision Map Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. SCH No.: 2021090544. Rancho Cordova, CA. Prepared by ECORP Consulting Inc.

Rocklin, CA. Available: https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2021090544 Cordova Recreation and Park District. 2022. Map/District Boundaries. Available: https://crpd.com/mapboundaries/.

Accessed January 26, 2022.

County of Sacramento, City of Rancho Cordova, City of Galt, Sacramento County Water Agency, Southeast Connector Joint Powers Authority. 2018 (January). Final South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Plan. Sacramento, CA.

CRPD. See Cordova Recreation and Park District.

CSS Environmental Services, Inc. 2020a (October). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Two Parcels of Land on International Drive and Kilgore Road, Rancho Cordova, CA, APNs 072-068-065 and 072-068-068.

Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2022. Purity Oil – Revised Parcel C (60003029). Available:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=60003029. Accessed January 18, 2022.

DTSC. See Department of Toxic Substances Control.

DWR. See California Department of Water Resources.

EIA. See U.S. Energy Information Administration.

EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

FCUSD. See Folsom Cordova Unified School District.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2012 (August). Flood Insurance Rate Map, Panel 0209H. Available:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed January 25, 2022.

Federal Highway Administration. 2006 (January). Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. Washington, DC.

Prepared by Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Cambridge, MA.

Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123. Prepared by John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA. Available:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-andvibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.FEMA. See Federal Emergency Management Agency.

FHWA. See Federal Highway Administration.

Folsom Cordova Unified School District. n.d. District Boundaries and Population. Available:
https://www.fcusd.org/domain/739. Accessed January 26, 2022. ———. 2013 (November). Folsom Cordova Unified School District Facility Master Plan.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

References Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
4-4 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study
———. 2021 (April). 2021 School Facility Needs Analysis.

FTA. See Federal Transit Administration.

Golden State Water Company Cordova 2021 (June). Cordova Service Area 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.

Rancho Cordova, CA. Prepared by Tully&Young and Zanjero. Available:
https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/public/uwmp_attachments/9589902579/GSWCCordova%202020%20UWMP%20Final%20Draft%20%288.6.21%29.pdf Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. Chapter 6, Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. Pages 465– 570 in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Available:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022. ———. 2014. Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers. Available:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.

IPCC. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Kimley Horn. 2022 (February). Residences at Capital Center Transportation Impact Study. Prepared for: Cole Partners Development Company. Rancho Cordova, CA.

Lum, Gordon. Contract TE. City of Rancho Cordova. Rancho Cordova, CA. February 24, 2022. Email to Jessica Babcock of Ascent Environmental regarding the City’’s VMT evaluation.

MPE. See Mid Pacific Engineering.

Mid Pacific Engineering, Inc. 2020 (October). Geotechnical Engineering Report: Rancho Cordova Proposed Development, Kilgore Road and International Drive, Rancho Cordova, California.

Natural Investigations Company. 2022 (January). Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment: The Residence at Capital Center in Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, California. Prepared by Tim Spillane and Dylan Stapleton for Ascent Environmental.

Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 2022. Web Soil Survey. Available online at the following link: http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/. Accessed March 3, 2022.

OEHHA. See Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2015. Risk Assessment Guidelines: Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. Available:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/2015guidancemanual.pdf. Accessed March 8, 2022.

Rancho Cordova Police Department. n.d. About Us. Available: https://www.ranchocordovapd.com/about-us. Accessed January 26, 2022.

RCPD. See Rancho Cordova Police Department.

Ridenour, Charlie. Site Mitigation and Restoration Program Branch Chief. Department of Toxic Substances Control, Sacramento, CA. March 8, 2021—letter to Michael Brady of Brady & Vinding regarding the Executed Standard Voluntary Agreement for Purity Oil – Revised Parcel C.

RSC Engineering, Inc. 2021a (December). Preliminary Stormwater Quality Report for Kilgore Ranch Apartments. ———.2021b (December). Preliminary Plans: Preliminary Utility Plans for The Residences at Capital Center, Sheet UT-2.

Rancho Cordova, CA.

SACOG. See Sacramento County Association of Governments.

Sacramento County Association of Governments. 2020 (September). Mather Airport, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Prepared by ESA, Sacramento, CA. Available: https://www.sacog.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/mather_draft_alucp.pdf?1601659275. Accessed January 12, 2022.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Ascent Environmental References
City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 4-5
———. 2021 (February). Mather Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Prepared by ESA.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2016. Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County. Available: http://www.airquality.org/Residents/CEQA-Land-Use-Planning/CEQA-Guidance-Tools.

Accessed March 8, 2022.
———. 2020a (October). Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Sacramento, California. Prepared by Ramboll US Corporation. San Francisco, California.
———. 2020b. Greenhouse Gas Thresholds for Sacramento County. Available: Accessed http://airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/SMAQMDGHGThresholds2020-03-04v2.pdf. March 8, 2022.

Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District. 2020. Community Annual Report 2020. Available:
https://metrofire.ca.gov/media/FINANCE/CAR/FY2019-20%20CAR%20FINAL.pdf. Accessed January 26, 2022.

Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (Regional San). 2022. A Guide to the Sacramento Region’s Sewer Services. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://www.regionalsan.com/sites/main/files/fileattachments/guidetoservices_1.pdf. Accessed February 2022. SMFD. See Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District.

SMAQMD. See Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District South American Subbasin, North Delta Groundwater Sustainability agency, Sloughhouse Resource Conservation District, Sacramento County, Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority, and Omochume – Hartnell Water District, Reclamation District 551. 2021 (October). South American Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan:

Final. Available: http://sasbgroundwater.org/assets/pdf/resources/complete/SASbGSP_FINAL_01212022.pdf.

Accessed March 2022.

State of California. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. Available:
http://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/state/. Accessed March 8, 2022.

UN. See United Nations.

United Nations. 2015 (December 13). Historic Paris Agreement on Climate Change: 195 Nations Set Path to Keep Temperature Rise Well Below 2 Degrees Celsius. Available: https://unfccc.int/news/finale-cop21. Accessed March 8, 2022.U.S. Census Bureau. 2021 (July). QuickFacts, Rancho Cordova city, California. Available:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/ranchocordovacitycalifornia. Accessed January 11, 2022.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2021. QuickFacts: Rancho Cordova City, California.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2021. California State Profile and Energy Estimates. Available:
https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA#115. Accessed March 8, 2022.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2016. Criteria Air Pollutants. Available: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-airpollutants#self. Last updated October 19, 2016. Accessed March 8, 2022. ———. 2019. Current Nonattainment Counties for All Criteria Pollutants. Last Updated April 30, 2019. Available:
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/ancl.html. Accessed March 8, 2022.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2022a. Information for Planning and Conservation. Available online at:
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed March 02, 2022.
———. 2022b. National Wetlands Inventory Wetlands Mapper Online Viewer. Accessed March 02, 2022.

USFWS. See U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service.

Wallace-Kuhl & Associates. 2021 (August). Revised Soil Management Plan, 3181 Kilgore Road, Parcel C Development.

Prepared for GGH HWY 50 LLC, Sacramento, CA.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

References Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
4-6 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

City of Rancho Cordova
Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study 5-1
5 REPORT PREPARERS
Pat Angell ...............................................................................................................................................................................Principal in Charge Jessica Babcock.........................................................................................................................................................................Project Manager Nicole Greenfield.........................................................................................................................................................Environmental Planner Jazmin Amini ..........................................................................................................................Transportation and Environmental Planner Zachary Miller...........................................................................................................Senior Transportation and Environmental Planner Alyssa Way ................................................................................................................................Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist Dimitri Antoniou........................................................................................ Senior Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Noise Specialist Alta Cunningham........................................................................................................... Architectural Historian/Environmental Planner Carlos Alvarado ........................................................................................................................................................................Wildlife Biologist ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Report Preparers Ascent Environmental
City of Rancho Cordova
5-2 Residences at Capital Center Project Initial Study
This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix A
Architectural Exhibits
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix B
Aquatic Resources Assessment
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix C
South Sacramento Habitat
Conservation Plan Avoidance
and Minimization Measures
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix D
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas,
and Energy Modeling
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix E
Noise Modeling
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix F
Traffic Impact Study
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix B
Aquatic Resources Assessment
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

8421 Auburn Blvd., Suite 248
Citrus Heights, CA 95610
www.madroneeco.com
(916) 822-3230
22 October 2021
Darcy Goulart
Planning Manager
City of Rancho Cordova
Planning Division
2729 Prospect Park Dr.

Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Subject: Aquatic Resources Assessment for the Capital Center Project, City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, California
Dear Ms. Goulart:

This letter presents the results of an aquatic resources assessment of the Capital Center Project site (Study Area) performed by Madrone Ecological Consulting, LLC (Madrone) at the request of GGC HWY 50 LLC. The approximately 25-acre Study Area is located generally northeast of the intersection of Kilgore Road and International Drive in the City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, California (38.586954, -121.268263). The Study Area consists of APNs 072-0260-053, 072- 0260-054, 072-0260-056, 072-0260-051, 072-0680-065, and 070-0680-068.

Methodology
Madrone senior biologist Dustin Brown conducted an aerial photograph review and preformed a visit the site to on 14 October 2021 to determine if aquatic resources were present within the Study Area.

The assessment was performed in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2008a), A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (USACE 2008b), and the Sacramento District’s Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Preliminary Wetlands Delineations (USACE 2016b). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulations (33 CFR 328) were used to determine the presence of Waters of the United States other than wetlands. The most recent National Wetland Plant List, which went into effect on 18 May 2020, was used to determine the wetland indicator status of plants observed in the Study Area (USACE 2020). The Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora Project 2020) was used for plant nomenclature, except where ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Aquatic Resources Assessment
Capitol Center

it conflicted with the nomenclature in the National Wetland Plant List, which was given priority.

During the 14 October 2021 site visit Mr. Brown walked the entire Study Area to determine the presence or absence of aquatic resources. During the survey Mr. Brown also noted the soils and vegetation present.

Results
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers makes legal determinations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or waters of the U.S. on any given property. However, in our professional opinion, aquatic resources are not present within the Study Area. The Study Area consists of gently rolling terrain. Soils onsite are cobbly loam and appear to be very well drained.

Vegetation onsite consists upland non-native annual grasses and forbs associated with fallow and previously disturbed areas such as wild oat (Avena fatua), tarplant (Holocarpha virgata), soft brome (Bromus hordeacious), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitalis), and bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare). No evidence of ponding or saturated soils were observed within the Study Area.

Please contact me with any questions about this survey at (916) 822-3230 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Sarah VonderOhe
Senior Biologist/Principal
cc: Dan Cole/Cole Partners
Rob Cole/Cole Partners
Richard Weng/Cole Partners
Jeremy White/The Grupe Company
References
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87- 1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Miss.

Google Earth. 2021. Aerial photographs of the Study Area from 1985 through 2021.

Historic Aerials. 2021. Aerial photographs and topographic maps of the Project Area from 1915 through 2018. Accessed on-line at: https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer in October 2021.

Jepson Flora Project (eds.) 2021. Jepson eFlora, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/ [accessed in April 2021].

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency. Dated 30 May 2007.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Aquatic Resources Assessment
Capitol Center

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble.

ERDC/EL TR-08-28. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. A Delineation Manual. Prepared by R. W. Lichvar and S. M. McColley. ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District. Dated January 2016.

Available online at: http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/regulatory/jd/ minimum-standards/Minimum_Standards_for_Delineation_with_Template-final.pdf U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2016a. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program. Dated February 10, 2016. Available online at:
http://www.spd.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Public-Notices-andReferences/Article/651327/updated-map-and-drawing-standards/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2020. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2018 National Wetland Plant List, version 3.4. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Appendix C
South Sacramento Habitat
Conservation Plan Avoidance
and Minimization Measures
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

5.4.1 General Avoidance and Minimization Measures
General AMMs are designed to avoid or minimize effects of Covered Activities on SSHCP land cover types and Covered Species.

Condition 1. Avoid and Minimize Urban Development Impacts to Watershed Hydrology and Water Quality
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits are issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board to jurisdictions in the region, including the jurisdictions that are also SSHCP Land Use Authority Permittees (i.e., County of Sacramento, and Cities of Rancho 16 In a situation like this, the Local Land Use Authority Permittee will suspend one or more local permits (e.g., grading permit, building permit) until compliance with terms of all SSHCP requirements is demonstrated. 17 Post-construction monitoring by the Land Use Authority Permittee could continue for several years.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Cordova and Galt). The National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit is issued to each of the Land Use Authority Permittees every 5 years, and is referred to as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. MS4 permits contain specific design measures required for all projects constructed within the region. The Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento and South Placer Regions (Stormwater Manual) outlines planning tools and requirements to reduce urban runoff from new development and redevelopment projects within the region (Sacramento Stormwater Quality Partnership 2007). The Stormwater Manual is used as a general guidance document to aid with the selection, siting, design, operation, and long-term maintenance of stormwater quality control measures. The Stormwater Manual contains control measures intended to meet the standard of “reducing pollutants in urban runoff to the maximum extent practicable” set forth in the local agencies’ MS4 permits issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. AMM LID-1 (see below) is designed to ensure compliance with MS4 requirements by requiring Third-Party Project Proponents to minimize increases of peak discharge of stormwater and to eliminate or reduce runoff of pollutants.

Development Covered Activities may adversely alter watershed hydrology and degrade water quality, which, in turn, could diminish or eliminate the conservation benefits provided by the SSHCP Preserve System. Condition 1 is designed to conserve and/or rehabilitate on-site natural creeks and streams. This condition will require the provision of BMPs and low-impact development (LID) drainage control measures to ensure that runoff from developed lands will closely mimic the pre-development hydrograph and retain most pre-development hydrologic functions. Condition 1 will accomplish the hydrograph and hydrologic objectives through application of the listed AMMs to all UDA Covered Activities that occur at the parcel, subdivision, or master plan scale.

LID-1 (Stormwater Quality): When the size of a Covered Activity project exceeds the thresholds established by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (see the most recent Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento and South Placer Regions, or future SWRCB-approved design manuals applicable to the Plan Area), incorporate stormwater management into site design to satisfy the requirements outlined in the most recent Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento and South Placer Regions. Stormwater management may include groundwater recharge (LID-2) and natural site features (LID-3).

LID-2 (Groundwater Recharge): When siting SSHCP Preserves containing Riparian, Open Water, or Freshwater Marsh SSHCP land cover types, the Implementing Entity will prioritize locations that are suitable for groundwater recharge.

LID-3 (Natural Site Features): Incorporate preservation of a site’s natural aquatic features (such as creeks and streams) into project design to retain natural hydrologic patterns and to retain habitat that might be used by Covered Species.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Condition 2. Avoid and Minimize Urban Development Direct and Indirect Impacts to Existing Preserves and SSHCP Preserves
Development Covered Activities adjacent to Preserves may adversely impact species that use the Preserve, and erode or eliminate the conservation benefits provided by the Preserve. Condition 2 seeks to avoid or minimize the following Covered Activity environmental stressors that may result in direct and indirect impacts to the SSHCP Preserve System:
 Alterations to landscape hydrology from new impervious surfaces may adversely affect natural communities in the lower watershed, the ecology of a Preserve, and/or downstream aquatic resources.
 Water runoff from development or from roadways directed into Preserves may introduce harmful substances into Preserves. Unseasonal and/or additional water entering a Preserve may eliminate vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands native to the region by converting them to low-functioning perennial wetlands.
 Development adjacent to Preserves may partially to fully remove the soil’s “perched aquifer” (see Chapter 3) and reduce or eliminate the micro-watersheds that support the hydrology of vernal pools within the Preserve boundary. These changes may adversely affect the existing hydrologic regime of vernal pools by changing the timing, depth, and/or duration of vernal pool saturation and/or ponding, causing long-term changes to a suite of vernal pool functions. For example, changes to water chemistry could adversely affect species habitat. Although the vernal pools remain, the environmental conditions of the pools may no longer provide habitat for vernal pool Covered Species, or provide the benefit of other wetland functions (e.g., stormwater attenuation) compared to pre-project conditions.
 Introduction or proliferation of non-native or invasive plant and wildlife species may displace native species.
 Landscaping in the interface of a development and a Vernal Pool–Grassland Preserve often includes native or non-native trees and other plant species that are not found in California grasslands and, therefore, cannot survive on the Vernal Pool–Grassland Preserve border without intensive irrigation and cultivation. In addition to adverse effects from irrigation and landscape maintenance, adult trees may become landscape barriers that inhibit species movement and may act to isolate individual Preserves from the larger SSHCP Preserve System.
 Recreational use of Preserves near developed areas may compact soils, eliminate vegetation, impair hydrologic functions, introduce weeds or invasive plant species, and disturb plants and wildlife.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 Introduction of light, noise, or vibrations may disrupt normal nocturnal and diurnal cycles of native species.

AMMs associated with Condition 2 must be applied to all UDA Covered Activities that border an existing Preserve or planned SSHCP Preserve.

EDGE-1 (Compatible Land Uses): To the maximum extent practicable, development project Covered Activities will locate compatible land uses (e.g., designated open space such as parks and ball fields, detention basins, and other land uses with lessintensive human activity) in areas immediately adjacent to existing or planned Preserve boundaries. The compatible land use will provide additional buffering of Preserves from potential indirect effects of adjacent urban development. The soil surfaces in a compatible land use area may be re-contoured provided that the soil restrictive layer remains undamaged and most of the soil profile above the restrictive layer remains intact. The Land Use Authority will determine when it is not practicable to locate a compatible land use adjacent to existing or planned Preserve boundaries.

EDGE-2 (Single-Loaded Streets): To the maximum extent practicable, the design of Urban Development Covered Activities will locate single-loaded streets adjacent to existing or planned Preserve. The Land Use Authority will determine when single-loaded streets are not practicable.

EDGE-3 (Preserve Setbacks): Urban Development Covered Activities constructed adjacent to existing or planned Preserves must establish a minimum 50-foot-wide setback outward from the boundary of any existing Preserve or planned SSHCP Preserve.

This minimum 50-foot-wide setback will function as a transition between Urban Development and the Preserve, and must be managed to maintain the natural community of vegetation present in the adjacent Preserve. As much of the setback as possible should remain in the same natural habitat as the Preserve.

However, as discussed in Section 5.2.5, Covered Activities in Preserve Setbacks in the UDA, where an existing or planned Preserve is adjacent to an existing roadway (e.g., collectors, arterials, thoroughfares), the 50-foot Preserve Setback will not be required, and any bicycle or pedestrian trail will be established in the road right-of-way. In addition, where a planned roadway crosses an existing or planned Preserve, no Preserve Setback will be required, and any bicycle or pedestrian trail will be established in the road right-of-way.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

EDGE-3a (Setback Recreational Trails): Trails are best suited outside of the setback; however, certain types of recreational trails or facilities (e.g., benches, trash receptacles, shade structures, fencing) that can be constructed with minimum ground disturbance and in compliance with EDGE-7 may be allowed within a Preserve Setback, as specified in Section 5.2.5, Covered Activities in Preserve Setbacks in the UDA. Preserve Setback design must locate trails on the side nearest development, away from the Preserve boundary. Trails may be permeable or semi-permeable hiking trails or paved community trials. The maximum trail width will be 16 feet total, including 2-foot-wide shoulders. Post and cable fencing, split rail, or other open fencing will be installed adjacent to recreation trails to keep pedestrians on the trail.

EDGE-3b (Setback Firebreaks): If approved by the local authorities, the Preserve Setback trail may also be used as a firebreak. In instances where a trail cannot act as a firebreak, the firebreak will be located between the trail and the Preserve boundary (see Section 5.2.7). Firebreaks allowed inside the setbacks must be created by methods that will not disturb the soil’s restrictive layer, such as mowing, minor scraping of surface vegetation, or shallow tilling, to comply with EDGE-7. Firebreak width within Preserve Setbacks is the minimum width needed to comply with applicable local codes.

EDGE-3c (Setback Shade Trees and Landscaping): To prevent potential impacts from irrigation water or from accumulation of leaf litter onto the grasslands or vernal pools of a Preserve, planting of shade trees or landscaping vegetation will be limited to the area of the Preserve Setback located between the recreation trail and the adjacent urban development (i.e., away from Preserves).  Only drought-tolerant plant species will be planted. The planting pallet used for Preserve Setback landscaping will not include invasive plant species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) California Invasive Plant Inventory Database or listed in the Cal-IPC California Invasive Plant Watch List (see http://www.cal-ipc.org/paf/). Any shade trees planted along Preserve Setback trails will be native species that are found in California grasslands and that can survive in the Vernal Pool–Grassland border without long-term irrigation or fertilization (e.g., valley oak, black oak, blue oak, oracle oak). In general, no more than 30% of any 1,000-footlong segment of a Preserve Setback trail will have canopy cover from tree plantings (to be consistent with maximum tree densities naturally found within native California grasslands and savanna).

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 Drip irrigation will be allowed for a maximum of 5 years to establish shade trees or landscape vegetation between the recreation trail and adjacent urban development. The Implementing Entity has the discretion to allow irrigation to continue past 5 years if extenuating circumstances necessitate it (e.g., during a drought) and the continuance of irrigation will not affect the Preserve. Any irrigation systems located within Preserve Setbacks will be inspected quarterly to determine if such systems are affecting soils or vegetation not part of the intended plantings. Irrigation system repairs will be completed immediately if it is determined that the irrigation system is affecting vegetation or soil moisture not part of the intended tree planting.  If, during annual monitoring of the adjacent Preserve (see Chapter 8), adverse indirect effects (e.g., leaf litter accumulation, irrigation runoff, plant encroachment) of the Preserve Setback’s planted vegetation are detected, then the SSHCP Implementing Entity, the Preserve Manager, and the entity responsible for the Preserve Setback will identify appropriate adaptive management of the Preserve Setback tree or landscape plantings in accordance with the Preserve Setback Easement (see Section 5.2.5 and Chapter 9).

EDGE-4 (Locate Stormwater Control Outside Preserves): Roads, sidewalks, and other impermeable surfaces of Urban Development Covered Activities adjacent to existing or planned Preserves will slope away from Preserves and Preserve Setbacks or intercept drainage with swales or curbs and gutters to preclude drainage from entering Preserves and Preserve Setbacks. Stormwater flows must be directed away from Preserves and Preserve Setbacks and directed into stormwater control facilities inside the development (outside Preserves and Preserve Setbacks)18 (see EDGE-6 for exception to EDGE-4 in certain SSHCP Linkage Preserves).

EDGE-5 (Stormwater Control in Preserve Setbacks): If trails are established in any Preserve Setback in compliance with EDGE-3, the trail must be sloped away from the Preserve, and rainwater leaving the trail surface must flow into an adjacent lowvelocity bio-retention swale or cell to keep rainwater runoff and trail contaminants from entering the Preserve. Low-velocity bio-retention swales or cells are typically small linear features placed on one or both sides of a trail. As required by EDGE-3, trails and their adjacent bio-retention swales or cells must be located on the side of the Preserve Setback nearest development. 18 Detention basins are allowed in some Linkage Preserves consistent with the requirements of EDGE-6. At the time of SSHCP preparation, seven Linkage Preserves with drainages are planned SSHCP Preserves: L1, L2, L4, L7, L8, L9, and L10 (see Section 5.2.7 and Section 7.5). Also see project-specific measures in Section 5.5.1.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

EDGE-6 (Detention Basins in Linkage Preserves): Because planned SSHCP Linkage Preserves L1, L2, L4, L7, L8, L9, and L10 (see Section 7.5) surround natural creeks or streams that must receive stormwater from planned adjacent Urban Development Covered Activities, a limited number of stormwater detention basins will be allowed on those Linkage Preserves. Detention basins within Linkage Preserves (see Section 5.2.7) will be designed and constructed with fill material to build up the perimeter of the detention basin so as not to impact the soil restrictive layer (duripan or hardpan) and function of the soil perched aquifer.

Detention basins within Linkage Preserves will capture stormwater flows and runoff, and will discharge water to the stream/creek or percolate collected water to the soil perched aquifer. Detention basin structures that collect stormwater entering the basin or convey stormwater leaving the basin must be designed to avoid and minimize effects to Covered Species habitat in the Linkage Preserve.

EDGE-7 (Hardpan/Duripan Protection): To protect the soil perched aquifer and the microwatersheds supporting existing vernal pool hydrology, activities that have the potential to cut into, disrupt, or remove the soil’s restrictive layer (hardpan or duripan) will not occur within Preserves or Preserve Setbacks. However, in certain circumstances, the Covered Activities defined in Section 5.2.6, Covered Activities in Stream Setbacks in the UDA, and Section 5.2.8, Covered Activities in the Laguna Creek Wildlife Corridor of the Preserve System, may result in punctures19 or other minor disruptions of the soil hardpan or duripan if approved by the Implementing Entity and the Technical Advisory Committee according to the process described in Chapter 9 of the SSHCP. If a Covered Activity on a Preserve or Preserve Setback results in a puncture or other disruption to the soil hardpan or duripan, the puncture will be sealed using bentonite clay or other material that maintains the functionality of the soil’s restrictive layer and associated perched aquifer.

EDGE-8 (Outdoor Lighting): All outdoor lighting in Urban Development Covered Activity projects will be designed to minimize light pollution into existing and planned Preserves, except where a Land Use Authority Permittee determines lighting is necessary for public safety or security. Minimization measures may include light fixture placement (e.g., as low to the ground as possible), lamp designs (e.g., shielding, low glare, or no lighting), directing light away from Preserves, or other means to avoid or minimize light pollution. The Third-Party Project Proponent will use the best information available at the time of project design to minimize effects of light pollution on target SSHCP Covered Species (e.g., western spadefoot (Spea 19 Punctures may include small holes that penetrate the soil hardpan or duripan such as might occur when digging or drilling holes for the installation of fence posts, sign posts, or trees.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

hammondii), Valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), and Ricksecker’s water scavenger beetle (Hydrochara rickseckeri)).

EDGE-9 (Livestock Access to Preserves): Urban Development Covered Activity projects that include on-site Preserves will include in their design an adequate number of access points and facilities for delivery and pick up of grazing animals (livestock), such that these activities will not significantly alter the Preserve’s habitat and are consistent with the protection of livestock and protection of adjacent public property, and include adequate public safety measures.

EDGE-10 (Prevent Invasive Species Spread): Completed Covered Activities (including roads) will be maintained in a manner that avoids the spread of invasive species into Preserve and Open Space areas. Such maintenance measures will include the following:
 To prevent the transport of non-native invasive species onto Preserves, before bringing any equipment onto an SSHCP Preserve or Preserve Setback, equipment must be cleaned of mud, dirt, and plant material. Cleaning will occur in the infested area or another appropriate location as approved by a Plan Permittee.
 Mowing rotation will start in un-infested areas and move to infested areas.  Invasive plant prevention techniques will be incorporated into maintenance plans.  The SSHCP Implementing Entity will survey road shoulders, ditches, and rights-of-way that border SSHCP Preserves for invasive weeds or other exotic plant species. Where roadside weed infestations have reached a critical control point, the Implementing Entity or Land Use Authority Permittee will apply the appropriate manual, mechanical, or chemical treatment.

Condition 3. Implement Construction Best Management Practices AMMs associated with Condition 3 must be applied to all UDA Covered Activities.

BMP-1 (Construction Fencing): Orange construction fencing will be installed to ensure that ground disturbance does not extend beyond the allowed construction footprint (i.e., the limit of project construction plus equipment staging areas and access roads). Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing grounddisturbing Covered Activities will mark the outer boundary of any Preserve Setback or Stream Setback adjacent to or within the project site with orange construction fencing prior to ground disturbance. This fencing will remain in place until project completion, as identified by the Plan Permittee.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

BMP-2 (Erosion Control): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing grounddisturbing Covered Activities will install temporary control measures for sediment, stormwater, and pollutant runoff as required by the Plan Permittee to protect water quality and species habitat. Silt fencing or other appropriate sediment control device(s) will be installed downslope of any Covered Activity that disturbs soils.

Fiber rolls and seed mixtures used for erosion control will be certified as free of viable noxious weed seed. As discussed in Section 5.4.2, Covered Species Take Avoidance and Minimization Measures, erosion controls installed in or adjacent to Plan Area modeled habitat for giant gartersnake (Thamnophis gigas), western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata), California tiger salamander (California tiger salamander), or western spadefoot (see Chapter 3) must be of appropriate design and materials that will not entrap the species (e.g., not contain mesh netting). Regular monitoring and maintenance of the project’s erosion control measures will be conducted until project completion to ensure effective operation of erosion control measures.

BMP-3 (Equipment Storage and Fueling): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing ground-disturbing Covered Activities will ensure that equipment storage and staging will occur in the development footprint only (not sited in any existing on-site Preserve, planned on-site Preserve, Preserve Setback, Stream Setback, or aquatic land cover type). Fuel storage and equipment fueling will occur away from waterways, stream channels, stream banks, and other environmentally sensitive areas within the development footprint.

However, certain equipment storage and fueling activities can be allowed on Preserves within habitat re-establishment/establishment sites (refer to Section

5.2.7) if no location outside of the site is available. If a Covered Activity results in a spill of fuel, hydraulic fluid, lubricants, or other petroleum products, the spill will be absorbed and waste disposed of in a manner to prevent pollutants from entering a waterway, Preserve, Preserve Setback, or Stream Setback.

BMP-4 (Erodible Materials): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing Covered Activities must not deposit erodible materials into waterways. Vegetation clippings, brush, loose soils, or other debris material will not be stockpiled within stream channels or on adjacent banks. Erodible material must be disposed of such that it cannot enter a waterway, Preserve, Preserve Setback, Stream Setback, or aquatic land cover type. If water and sludge must be pumped from a subdrain or other structure, the material will be conveyed to a temporary settling basin to prevent sediment from entering a waterway.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

BMP-5 (Dust Control): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing ground-disturbing Covered Activities will water active construction sites regularly, if warranted, to avoid or minimize impacts from construction dust on adjacent vegetation and wildlife habitats. No surface water will be used from aquatic land covers; water will be obtained from a municipal source or existing groundwater well.

BMP-6 (Construction Lighting): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing ground-disturbing Covered Activities will direct all temporary construction lighting (e.g., lighting used for security or nighttime equipment maintenance) away from adjacent natural habitats, and particularly Riparian and Wetland habitats and wildlife movement areas.

BMP-7 (Biological Monitor): If a Covered Activity includes ground disturbance within Covered Species modeled habitat, an approved biologist will be on site during the period of ground disturbance, and may need to be on site during other construction activities depending on the Covered Species affected. After grounddisturbing project activities are complete, the approved biologist will train an individual to act as the on-site construction monitor for the remainder of construction, with the concurrence of the Permitting Agencies. The on-site monitor will attend the training described in BMP-8. The approved biologist and the on-site monitor will have oversight over implementation of Avoidance and Minimization Measures, and will have the authority to stop activities if any of the requirements associated with those measures are not met. If the monitor requests that work be stopped, the Wildlife Agencies will be notified within one working day by email. The approved biologist and/or on-site monitor will record all observations of listed species on California Natural Diversity Database field sheets and submit them to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The approved biologist or on-site monitor will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a Covered Species or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped individual. The approved biologist and on-site monitor’s names and telephone numbers will be provided to the Wildlife Agencies prior to the initiation of ground-disturbing activities. Refer to speciesspecific measures for details on requirements for biological monitors.

BMP-8 (Training of Construction Staff): A mandatory Worker Environmental Awareness Program will be conducted by an approved biologist for all construction workers, including contractors, prior to the commencement of construction activities. The training will include how to identify Covered Species that might enter the construction site, relevant life history information and habitats, SSHCP and ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

statutory requirements and the consequences of non-compliance, the boundaries of the construction area and permitted disturbance zones, litter control training (SPECIES-2), and appropriate protocols if a Covered Species is encountered.

Supporting materials containing training information will be prepared and distributed by the approved biologist. When necessary, training and supporting materials will also be provided in Spanish. Upon completion of training, construction personnel will sign a form stating that they attended the training and understand all of the Avoidance and Minimization Measures. Written documentation of the training must be submitted to the Implementing Entity within 30 days of completion of the training, and the Implementing Entity will provide this information to the Wildlife Agencies.

BMP-9 (Soil Compaction): After construction is complete, all temporarily disturbed areas will be restored similar to pre-project conditions, including impacts relating to soil compaction, water infiltration capacity, and soil hydrologic characteristics.

BMP-10 (Revegetation): Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing ground-disturbing Covered Activities will revegetate any cut-and-fill slopes with native or existing non-invasive, non-native plants (e.g., non-native grasses) suitable for the altered soil conditions and in compliance with EDGE-2 and EDGE-8, if applicable.

BMP-11 (Speed Limit): Project-related vehicles will observe the posted speed limits on paved roads and a 10-mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved roads and during travel in project areas. Construction crews will be given weekly tailgate instruction to travel only on designated and marked existing, cross-country, and project-only roads.

Condition 4. Avoid and Minimize Impacts that May Result from Implementation of Covered Transportation Projects
Urban Development transportation project and Rural Transportation Project Covered Activities, including bridge projects, can affect Covered Species. AMMs included for Condition 4 seek to avoid or minimize direct and indirect impacts that may result from construction of roadways or roadway improvements. Condition 4 applies to all transportation-related Covered Activities (see Sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.3).

Plan Permittees and Third-Party Project Proponents implementing Urban Development transportation or Rural Transportation Project Covered Activities must comply with the roadway siting, design, and construction AMMs described below.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

ROAD-1 (Road Project Location): Road projects will be located in the least environmentally sensitive area to avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, impacts on Covered Species, Covered Species habitat, and waters of the United States. Road project alignments will follow existing roads, road easements, and rights-of-way, or be sited in disturbed areas to minimize habitat loss and additional habitat fragmentation.

ROAD-2 (Wildlife Crossing Structures): Road projects that are Urban Development Covered Activities (see Section 5.2.1) (including the Capital Southeast Connector, see Section 5.2.1.1) or are Rural Transportation Covered Activities (see Section 5.2.3) will include an adequate number of wildlife crossing structures, as depicted in Figure 5-10. An adequate number of wildlife crossing structures within the Urban Development Area (UDA) and outside the UDA will provide for continued dispersal and movement of native wildlife throughout the SSHCP Plan Area, as required by the SSHCP Biological Goals and Objectives (see Chapter 7).

The Plan defines “wildlife crossing structure” as a physical structure specifically designed or retrofitted to facilitate undercrossing for target wildlife species. The Plan further classifies wildlife crossings as hydrologic crossings and dry crossings. Hydrologic crossings are built where there is an existing stream, creek, or intermittent drainage to maintain existing hydrologic connectivity within the Plan Area. As described below, hydrologic crossings require specialized features to be built into the crossing structure, such as elevated platforms to allow wildlife to pass under a crossing structure when it is inundated with water. Dry wildlife crossings are built where there is no hydrologic feature but where a crossing is needed to provide for overland connectivity. SSHCP wildlife crossing structures may include structures such as bridges, arches, or box and pipe culverts.

Plan Permittees expect that future wildlife movement and dispersal within the UDA will occur almost entirely within the boundaries of the future interconnected SSHCP Preserve System (see Section 7.5). Therefore, wildlife crossings are needed wherever a roadway crosses (bisects) the conceptual SSHCP Preserve System (see Figure 5-10). Wildlife crossing structures inside the UDA will be sized to accommodate movement of a highly mobile native indicator species (i.e., coyote (Canis latrans)). By designing UDA wildlife crossing structures to meet the movement and dispersal requirements of coyote, the Plan Permittees anticipate that the crossing structure will also accommodate most native wildlife species that currently occupy the UDA (see Chapter 3).

The Plan Permittees expect that most of the Plan Area outside of the UDA will remain as Open Space over the 50-year Permit Term (see Chapter 4). Therefore, ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

the Plan Permittees expect that the Rural Transportation Project Covered Activities proposed outside the UDA will have a relatively small effect on the movement and dispersal of larger or more mobile native wildlife species, including coyote. Consequently, the Plan Permittees anticipate that the design of Rural Transportation Project Covered Activities outside the UDA will need to include wildlife crossing structures primarily where the Rural Transportation Project Covered Activities occur within California tiger salamander modeled habitat (see CTS-3 and also Chapter 3, Figure 3-16).

The design and location of wildlife crossing structures both inside the UDA and outside the UDA will be determined by collaboration between the Third-Party Project Proponent, the Land Use Authority, and the Implementing Entity.

Crossing design will use the best available scientific and commercial information for the target species. The design of crossing structures will be based on demonstrated effectiveness of design for the target species when such information is available, or will be designed with a high level of certainty of success based on studies of similar taxa in similar environmental settings. The proposed wildlife crossing structures designs will be reviewed and approved by the Implementing Entity prior to final design.

The Implementing Entity will develop a Wildlife Crossing Maintenance Manual to be provided to the entity responsible for maintaining the wildlife crossing. The Wildlife Crossing Maintenance Manual will identify vegetation management, clearing of obstructions, and other techniques to maintain the desired movement and hydrologic connectivity, and to avoid effects to adjacent Preserves.

All SSHCP wildlife crossing structures in the UDA will include the following design elements:
 Open-bottom bridges or arches where the roadway crosses a river or stream. Where an open-bottom bridge or arch is used, the span of the crossing will be at least 1.2 times the bankfull width of the stream and span the banks to allow for dry wildlife passage along each side of the stream and to avoid or minimize piers or footings within the stream. (Bankfull width refers to the width of a stream channel at the point where over-bank flow begins during a flood event.)
 Any wildlife crossing structure that also maintains hydrologic connectivity will be designed to maintain pre-construction water capacity, depth, and velocity. The crossing structure will not restrict or impede normal flows or flood flows, unless a primary purpose of the structure is to manage such ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

flow(s). Wildlife crossing structures must be designed to provide a dry passage (e.g., a platform ledge) higher than flows for a 10-year storm event to allow wildlife to pass through an inundated crossing structure.  Wildlife crossing structures in the UDA will be designed and sized to accommodate movement of at least medium-sized mammals (e.g., coyote).

The opening must be at least 3 feet high and the crossing structure must have a minimum openness ratio of at least 0.4.
 Vegetation leading up to the entrance of a crossing structure and the substrate leading into and within the crossing structure will be natural and appropriate to provide for continuity of habitat, attract the target animal species for which the crossing is designed, and facilitate use of the crossing structure.  A wildlife crossing under six-lane roads or larger will be designed to provide ambient light and temperature in the longer crossing structures (e.g., either by providing a larger opening or a grate at the top of the structure to improve the attractiveness of the crossing to certain Covered Species and wildlife that may hesitate to cross through dark, confined structures or one with a temperature gradient (Jackson and Griffin 2000)). If a road is less than six lanes in width, these designs will be optional.
 Lighting will not be placed at or near the entrance of a wildlife crossing structure to maintain natural ambient light conditions at night and to increase chances of wildlife use. However, a Land Use Authority Permittees may allow lighting if necessary for human health or safety.

Outside the UDA, wildlife crossing structures may be required for California tiger salamander (refer to CTS-1), and could also be required for other native species.

ROAD-3 (Roadside Pesticide Use20): If pesticide use is necessary along roadsides, the appropriate SSHCP Permittee will ensure that the pesticide application strictly complies with the pesticide label and all other applicable federal, state, and local authorities pertaining to the use, safety, storage, disposal, and reporting of the pesticide. Where roadside weed infestations have reached a critical control point, the Implementing Entity or a Land Use Authority Permittee will apply the appropriate manual, mechanical, or chemical treatment. In addition, the Implementing Entity or appropriate Land Use Authority Permittee will post signs along road shoulders adjacent to sensitive areas that are within the SSHCP 20 Use of pesticides (including rodenticides and herbicides) is not an SSHCP Covered Activity. However, pesticide use specified in Section 5.3 is an allowed land management tool, provided the pesticide application is otherwise legal and conforms to all conditions in Section 5.4.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Preserve System (e.g., California tiger salamander breeding ponds, endemic plant populations, vertebrates that rely on insects for part of their diet). The signs will identify pesticide use restrictions or other roadside maintenance restrictions.

Condition 5. Avoid and Minimize Impacts that Result from Public Use of Low-Impact Nature Trails in Preserves
Preserves within the UDA are likely to be surrounded by urban development. As discussed in Section 5.2.7, allowing limited use of SSHCP Preserves will help to foster a sense of community ownership and will provide an opportunity to educate the community about the natural resources to be protected within the SSHCP Preserve System.

Low-impact nature trails will be designed following the AMMs outlined below.

NATURE TRAIL-1 (Nature Trail Plan): A nature trail plan must be prepared for each Preserve where a trail is allowed by the Preserve Management Plan. Nature trails will be unpaved trails that vary in width depending on terrain and existing constraints, but will never exceed 4 feet in width. Where a trail crosses a swale, wooden walkways elevated to a height no greater than 2 feet will be installed.

Trail improvements may include mowing vegetation to create or maintain a trail, minor grading to remove trip hazards, and signs providing directional and educational information. Public access to land acquired for preservation will be prohibited until a trail plan can be prepared by the Implementing Entity and approved by the Permitting Agencies. A trail plan will include the following:
 Maps identifying areas that contain sensitive habitats or species occurrences.  Maps that show the location and footprint of proposed trails.  Methods used to control public access.
 Trail and use monitoring methods, schedules, and responsibilities.  Trail operation and maintenance guidelines and responsibilities.  Clear triggers for use restrictions or closure based on sensitive biological indicators (e.g., seasonal closures of some trails on the basis of activity periods of Covered Species or sensitive species).

NATURE TRAIL-2 (Nature Trail Protection of Duripan): Nature trails will be sited and constructed so as not to interfere with existing soil duripan and the perched aquifer that support the existing hydrologic regime of the Vernal Pool–Grassland, and will not interfere with existing pool hydrology. Trails within Preserves will not be paved.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

Rancho Rancho
Cordova Cordova
Florin Florin
99 50
WHITE

ROCK RD

JACKSON RD

DILLARD RD

WHITE ROCK RD

SUNRISE BLVD

JACKSON RD

GRANT LINE RD
FIGURE 5-10
Wildlife Crossings

SOUTH SACRAMENTO HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN DRAFT
SOURCE: ESRI, County of Sacramento 2014, USFWS 2015
Path: Z:\Projects\Sacramento_County\j7384_SSHCP\MAPDOC\MAPS\HCP\Chapter 5\Figure 5-10_WildlifeCrossings.mxd 02 1
Miles
SSHCP Plan
Urban Development Area
Approximate Location of Road
Crossing within the UDA
Hydrologic crossing
Dry wildlife crossing
Existing Conservation

EXISTING PRESERVE
Proposed Conservation

CORE PRESERVE

SATELLITE PRESERVE

LAGUNA CREEK WILDLIFE

CORRIDOR

LINKAGE
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

NATURE TRAIL-3 (Nature Trail Location): Nature trails will be located away from sensitive natural resources (e.g., vernal pools, riparian habitat, woodland habitat, Covered Species occurrences, raptor nesting sites, tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) colony sites). The Wildlife Agencies will determine the distance necessary to avoid impacts to sensitive natural resources.

NATURE TRAIL-4 (Biological Studies Prior to Nature Trail Design): Biological studies will be conducted within the area being considered for nature trail construction prior to project design. The studies will include land cover type mapping and focused species surveys and/or wetland delineations. The biological studies will include assessments of potential effects of trail construction on Preserve System resources, and recommendations for avoidance and minimization that may be incorporated into project siting, design, construction, and operation.

NATURE TRAIL-5 (Monitoring of Nature Trail Impacts): Impacts that could result from use of a nature trail within a Preserve will be monitored according to the Preserve Management Plan (Chapter 8) to ensure that uses do not conflict with the individual Preserve Management Plan. If use of a trail is found to conflict with the individual Preserve Management Plan, use of that trail will be discontinued until adjustments in the use can be made to reduce or eliminate conflicts. The Implementing Entity will make decisions about discontinuing or modifying use of a trail in consultation with the Preserve Manager or other applicable Preserve management agency or organization.

Condition 6. Avoid and Minimize Impacts When Re-Establishing or Establishing Wetlands As discussed in Chapter 7, the Plan Permittees anticipate that 389 acres of Vernal Pool habitat will be re-established or established21 within the Plan Area as part of the SSHCP Conservation Strategy.

Although re-establishment or establishment of vernal pools is a Measurable Objective under this Plan, if not done correctly, the action could have an adverse impact on existing vernal pools.

RE-ESTABLISHMENT/ESTABLISHMENT-1 (Vernal Pool): Re-establish or establish Vernal Pool Wetland according to the following guidelines:
 Re-establishment will always take priority over establishment of vernal pools.

Establishment will be permitted only after it has been determined that sites with the potential to re-establish vernal pools no longer exist in the Plan Area or cannot be acquired through a willing seller/buyer agreement. 21 In the context of this Plan, “establish” is synonymous with “create.” ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 When possible, re-established or established sites will be located adjacent to an existing Preserve(s) to maximize connectivity and Preserve area.  Re-establishment or establishment will not result in direct or indirect adverse impacts to the hydrologic regime of existing vernal pools. Vernal pool reestablishment or establishment actions will not remove more than 10% of any existing vernal pool watershed, as defined by the SSHCP LIDAR analysis (see Section 3.3 and Conservation Action VPI1.2 in Table 7.1).  Vernal pool re-establishment will attempt to restore the historical density and range of vernal pool sizes to the maximum extent feasible using historical aerial photography of the site, if available. Where aerial photography of the site’s historical conditions is not available, vernal pool re-establishment will include a range of pool sizes (area and depth) to accommodate the different habitat needs and life history characteristics of the vernal pool invertebrate Covered Species.
 Established vernal pools must be located on sites with vernal pool soils, defined as any Plan Area soil type where vernal pools currently exist.  Established vernal pool sites will include a range of pool sizes to accommodate the different habitat needs and life history characteristics of the three vernal pool invertebrate Covered Species.
 The total density of vernal pools will not exceed 10% of the suitable soil areas in any vernal pool re-establishment and/or establishment site, unless it can be shown that the suitable areas of that site historically supported greater densities.
 Re-establishment or establishment may include inoculation when it is likely that no seed or cyst bank of vernal pool species remains at a site. Vernal Pool inocula will come from nearby vernal pools that are on the same geologic formation and soil type.

RE-ESTABLISHMENT/ESTABLISHMENT-2 (Vernal Pool Inocula Bank): Vernal pool reestablishment or establishment may include “soil inoculation” when it is likely that no seed or cyst bank of vernal pool species remains at a re-establishment or establishment site.
 During conversion of Urban Development Area vernal pools to a developed land cover type, project proponents will excavate and retain soil from vernal pools following protocols developed by the SSHCP Technical Advisory Committee (Chapter 9).

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 Inocula applied in re-established or established vernal pools must be harvested from a vernal pool that is on the same geologic formation and soil type shown on the County General Soil Map as the re-establishment/establishment site.

Geologic formations and soil types will follow U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service’s 1993 Soil Survey of Sacramento County, California. Proposed off-site inocula sources must be approved by the Wildlife Agencies.

RE-ESTABLISHMENT/ESTABLISHMENT-3 (Re-Establishment/Establishment of Freshwater Marsh or Open Water Near Airports): During review of proposed re-establishment/establishment projects for freshwater marsh or open water on SSHCP Preserves, the Implementing Entity shall consider the potential for the location of the re-establishment/establishment projects to increase the risk of wildlife strikes or generation of ground fog at airports. If a re-establishment/ establishment project would result in (1) a net increase in open water or freshwater marsh acreage over baseline conditions22 within 5 miles of Mather Field, Sacramento Executive Airport, or Franklin Field; or (2) replacement of open water/freshwater marsh habitat that is located 2 or more miles from Mather Field or Sacramento Executive Airport with open water/freshwater marsh habitat that is located less than 2 miles from those airports, a qualified biologist shall prepare a concise letter report. The letter report shall summarize the biologist’s findings regarding (1) the species likely to use the re-established/established habitat, (2) a rough order of magnitude estimate on the peak number of birds that might use the re-established/established habitat, and (3) potential movement patterns for birds using the re-established/established habitat and whether they might cross through the airport safety zones (e.g., to reach foraging habitat or another wildlife attractant). The letter report will also provide recommendations to the Implementing Entity on how they could reduce any of the identified wildlife hazards if there are any feasible means to do so that would not conflict with the biological goals and measurable objectives of the Conservation Plan.

Condition 7. Avoid and Minimize Impacts to Streams and Creeks AMMs associated with Condition 7 must be applied to all Covered Activities where a stream or creek is located within a project footprint.
22 For purposes of establishing baseline conditions, Freshwater Marsh and Open Water acreages will be calculated using that version of the SSHCP Land Cover Type Map in existence as of the date that the SSHCP permit was issued to the Plan Permittees by the USFWS.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

STREAM-1 (Laguna Creek Wildlife Corridor): A 150-foot setback measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream will be applied to Laguna Creek within the Urban Development Area (minimum 300-foot corridor width). If trails are located within the Laguna Creek Wildlife Corridor, the nearest edge of the trail will be located at least 80 feet from the top of the bank.

STREAM-2 (UDA Stream Setbacks): A 100-foot setback measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream channel will be applied to all streams listed in Table 5-1 (see also Figure 2-4). If a stream reach supports woody riparian vegetation, the setback will be equal to the riparian edge plus 25 feet or will be the setback defined above, whichever is greater. If trails are located within the Stream Setback, the nearest edge of the trail will be located at least 50 feet from the top of the bank.

Table 5-1
Stream Setback Minimum Requirements in the Urban Development Area Stream Minimum Setback (from the Top of Bank Measured in Aerial Perspective) on Both Sides of the Stream Elder Creek 100 feet
Frye Creek 100 feet or as depicted as part of the NewBridge development project hardline Preserve (see Appendix K) Gerber Creek 100 feet
Morrison Creek 100 feet
Central Paseo 100 feet or as depicted as part of the Cordova Hills development project hardline Preserve (Appendix K) Sun Creek 100 feet or as depicted as part of the Sun Creek development project hardline Preserve (see Appendix K) STREAM-3 (Minor Tributaries to UDA Streams): A 25-foot setback measured from the top of the bank on both sides of the stream channel will be applied to all avoided first and second order tributaries to the streams listed in Table 5-1 and Laguna Creek.

Refer to Objective W6 in Chapter 7 (Table 7-1) regarding avoided first and second order tributaries. Trails are not permitted within headwater ephemeral Stream Setbacks.

STREAM-4 (Minimize Effects from Temporary Channel Re-Routing): When an Urban Development Covered Activity temporarily re-routes a stream, creek, or drainage, the re-routing will be completed in a manner that minimizes impacts to beneficial uses and habitat. The following measures will be employed to minimize disturbances that will adversely impact water quality:
 No equipment will be operated in areas of flowing or standing water.  Construction materials and heavy equipment must be stored outside of the active flow of any waters.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 When work within waters is necessary, the entire stream flow will be diverted around the work area.
 In the event of rain, the disturbed in-water work area will be temporarily stabilized before water body flow exceeds the capacity of the diversion structure. The disturbed water body will be stabilized so that the disturbed areas will not come in contact with the flow.
 Once construction is complete, all project-introduced material (e.g., pipes, gravel, cofferdam, sandbags) must be removed, leaving the water as it was before construction. Excess materials will be disposed of at an appropriate disposal site.
 All work areas will be effectively isolated from stream flows using suitable control measures before commencement of any in-water work. The diverted stream flow will not be contaminated by construction activities. Structures for isolating the in-water work area and/or diverting the stream flow (e.g., cofferdam, geo-textile silt curtain) will not be removed until all disturbed areas are cleaned and stabilized.
 Any flow diversion used during construction will be designed in a manner to prevent pollution and minimize siltation, and will provide flows to downstream reaches. Flows will be maintained to support existing aquatic life, riparian wetlands, and habitat that may be located upstream and downstream from any temporary diversion.
 All surface waters, including ponded waters, will be diverted away from areas undergoing grading, construction, excavation, vegetation removal, and/or any other activity that may result in a discharge to waters.  All temporary dewatering methods will be designed to have the minimum necessary impacts to waters to isolate the immediate work area. All dewatering methods will be installed such that natural flow is maintained upstream and downstream of the diversion area. Any temporary dams and diversions will be installed such that the diversion does not cause sedimentation, siltation, or erosion upstream or downstream of the diversion area. All dewatering methods will be removed immediately upon completion of diversion activities.
 A method of containment must be used below any bridge, boardwalk, and/or temporary crossing to prevent debris from falling into the waters through the entire duration of a project.

ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

 If temporary surface water diversions and/or dewatering are anticipated, the Third-Party Project Proponent will develop and maintain on site a surface water diversion and/or dewatering plan. The plan(s) must be developed prior to initiation of any water diversions and will include the proposed method and duration of diversion activities. The plan(s) must be made available to Central Valley Water Board staff upon request.
 When work in a flowing stream is unavoidable and any dam or other artificial obstruction is being constructed, maintained, or placed in operation, sufficient water will be allowed at all times to pass downstream to maintain beneficial uses of waters below the dam. Construction, dewatering, and removal of temporary cofferdams will not violate the turbidity, settle-able matter, pH, temperature, or dissolved oxygen requirements of any Water Quality Control Plan.  Any temporary dam or other artificial obstruction will only be built from clean materials such as sandbags, gravel bags, water dams, or clean/washed gravel that will cause little or no siltation. Stream flow will be temporarily diverted using gravity flow through temporary culverts or pipes, or pumped around the work site with the use of hoses.

STREAM-5 (Design for Stream Channel Re-Routing, Widening, or Deepening): When an Urban Development Covered Activity alters a stream, creek, or drainage by re-routing, widening, or deepening a channel, the project design will include the following:
 The main channel of a re-routed channel will be free to migrate laterally over its active and terrace floodplain.
 Channel geometry (plan, profile, and cross-section) of the site will be appropriate for the watershed location and physical/hydrologic condition.  Local, native materials will be used as fill material to the extent practicable.  Bioengineering techniques will be used for construction and maintenance of bank stabilization. Bioengineered bank stabilization structures will use vegetation in combination with bank reshaping; biodegradeable geotextile materials; and, in some cases, a minimal amount of rock or wood to the extent practicable to dissipate erosive energy. Third-Party Project Proponents will consult a professional engineer when considering using bioengineering techniques.  All re-routed, widened, or deepened streams are required to establish Stream Setbacks with minimum widths required under STREAM-1, STREAM-2, or STREAM-3. All re-routed, widened, or deepened streams must re-establish/ ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1

establish and maintain native Woody Riparian land cover and/or native Grassland Riparian land cover in the entire Stream Setback.

Condition 8. Avoid and Minimize Impacts to Covered Species from Utility and Utility Maintenance Covered Activities
AMMs associated with Condition 8 must be applied to all Covered Activities associated with construction and maintenance of infrastructure projects.

UTILITY-1 (Avian Collision Avoidance): Installation of new, or relocation of existing, utility poles, lines, and cell towers located within the Preserve System or within 1,000 feet of a Preserve boundary will be coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The applicant or relevant utility/service provider will install utility poles, lines, and cell towers in conformance with Avian Powerline Interaction Committee (APLIC) standards for collision-reducing techniques, as outlined in Reducing Avian Collisions with Power Lines: State of the Art in 2012 (APLIC 2012), or any superseding document issued by the APLIC.

UTILITY-2 (Utility Maintenance on Preserves): Utility maintenance inside SSHCP Preserves and SSHCP Preserve Setbacks containing vernal pools will occur only when vernal pools have been dry for 30 days, except in emergency situations related to human health and safety.

UTILITY-3 (Trenchless Construction Methods): Where a pipeline or conduit crosses an existing or planned Preserve or will be located between adjacent Preserves (e.g., under a roadway that has a Preserve on both sides), trenchless construction methods will be used to minimize impacts to the existing soil profile (including impacts to a hardpan or duripan) to maintain the perched aquifer in Vernal Pool Grassland land cover type.

UTILITY-4 (Siting of Entry and Exit Location): The entry and exit locations for the trenchless construction method (see Utility-3) will be sited to avoid impacts to vernal pools and Riparian Woodland, and to avoid direct take of SSHCP Covered Species.

Condition 9. Avoid and Minimize Impacts That Might Result From Removing or Breaching Levees to Establish or Re-establish Riparian Habitat LEVEE-1 (Preparation of Hydrologic Analysis): Prior to approving a draft Preserve Management Plan that includes (1) modifying or breaching an existing levee, or (2) would place a potential impedance to high-water event flood-flows on the water side of an existing levee (including new riparian vegetation plantings or ITEM 11.1 ATTACHMENT 1