Rancho Cordova City Council
February 20, 2024

ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

5396302.2
ITEM 9.3.

ATTACHMENT 2

MEMORANDUM

City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.4.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Ka Vang, Management Analyst
Stefan Heisler, Housing Manager

SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

AN AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

ENERGY TO RECEIVE GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$138,900 FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF

ADDITIONAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGERS AT CITY HALL

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

Adoption of the Resolution would allow the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Department of Energy to receive $138,900 in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds for the purchase and installation of additional electric vehicle (EV) charging units to the existing units at City Hall.

BACKGROUND

The EECBG program was enacted to assist states, local governments, and Tribes in implementing strategies to reduce energy use, to reduce fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency. To meet the national carbon emissions reduction goals the EECBG program provides federal funding to increase local efforts to achieve these goals. There is $550 million in funding provided through the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to jurisdictions on a noncompetitive basis. The City of Rancho Cordova’s allocation is $138,900.

In December 2023, staff applied for the EECBG voucher program, successfully securing the maximum amount of the allocation, totaling $138,900 to add additional EV charging units to the existing charging units at City Hall. The project will add 4-5 new EV charging parking spaces at City Hall. The installation will be complete in 2024. The project aligns with the transportation strategy outlined in Transportation 5.3 of the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan to install EV chargers on public property.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE

There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENT(S)

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

1. Resolution

ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 2

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA

RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY TO RECEIVE THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $138,900 FOR

THE ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING EXPANSION PROJECT AT CITY HALL

WHEREAS, in 2007 the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program was enacted by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) to provide funding to state and local agencies and Tribes to increase implementation strategies to reduce energy use, reduce fossil fuel emissions, and improve energy efficiency; and

WHEREAS, the EECBG program was allocated $550,000,000 by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 in the form of formula and competitive grants to states, tribes, and local governments; and

WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cordova’s (City) EECBG formula allocation amount is $138,900; and

WHEREAS, the DOE issued Program Guidance for the EECBG program on April 25, 2023, and opened the voucher application portal for applications in September 2023; and

WHEREAS, City staff submitted an application for funding in December 2023 for additional electric vehicle (EV) charging stations at City Hall (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the DOE awarded the City the maximum amount of $138,900 requested in December 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova desires to enter into an agreement with the DOE for $138,900 to receive funding for the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the categorical exemption for in-fill development projects (CEQA Guidelines § 15332).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA:

Section 1: Finds that the Project is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, In-Fill Development. The City Council further finds that the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, and the City’s Zoning Code. The City certified an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the General Plan and conducted additional environmental review for the Zoning Code. Therefore, no additional CEQA environmental review is required.

Section 2: Authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to take all actions and to execute and/or file all documents reasonably necessary to implement the above-referenced Project, in a form approved by the City Attorney, including, without limitation, taking such actions and executing and/or filing such documents as are reasonably necessary to receive DOE

ITEM 9.4. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 2 EECBG funding for and on behalf of the City of Rancho Cordova, and to make any reasonably necessary revisions or changes to those documents.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 20th day of February 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

MEMORANDUM

City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 9.5.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Ka Vang, Management Analyst
Stefan Heisler, Housing Manager

SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PROHOUSING INCENTIVE PILOT PROGRAM ROUND 2 FUNDING

AND ALLOCATING PROGRAM FUNDS TO THE MATHER
VETERANS VILLAGE PHASE 4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt the Resolution.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

Adoption of the Resolution would authorize staff to apply to the Prohousing Incentive Pilot Program for Round 2 funding and would allocate the funding to the Mather Veterans Village Phase 4 affordable housing project.

BACKGROUND

The Prohousing Designation Program was established by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) in 2019 to help meet California’s housing goals.

The Prohousing Designation makes affordable housing projects more competitive for state and federal funding and may help accelerate the timeline for future projects. The Prohousing Incentive Pilot (PIP) Program encourages cities and counties to secure the Prohousing Designation, making them eligible for PIP grant funding. The City applied for and received the Prohousing Designation on March 23, 2023. Staff applied for PIP Round 1 funding and on May 9, 2023, the Department awarded the City $960,000.

On January 23, 2024, the Department announced the release of PIP Round 2 funding and issued a Notice of Availability (NOFA) for approximately $9,483,000. Funding allocations are based on each jurisdiction’s population size and Prohousing Designation score as determined by the Department. Based on the City’s Prohousing Designation score, the City is eligible to apply for a maximum of $960,000.

Adoption of the Resolution is required to apply for the PIP Round 2 funding. With adoption of the Resolution, staff would submit the PIP Round 2 application requesting the full $960,000.

Staff recommends allocating this one-time funding to the Mather Veterans Village Phase 4

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

affordable housing project, which will be used to pay for predevelopment costs, such as engineering and design costs, or construction phase project costs.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE

There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 2

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA

RESOLUTION NO. XX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE

OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, PROHOUSING INCENTIVE PILOT PROGRAM ROUND 2 FUNDING AND ALLOCATING PROGRAM FUNDS TO THE MATHER VETERANS VILLAGE PHASE 4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

WHEREAS, pursuant to Health and Safety Code 50470 et. Seq, the California Department of Housing and Community Development ("Department") is authorized to issue Guidelines as part of an incentive program (hereinafter referred to by the Department as the Prohousing Incentive Program or “PIP”); and

WHEREAS, the City submitted the Prohousing Designation application on February 21, 2023, and was awarded the Prohousing Designation on March 23, 2023; and

WHEREAS, the Department has issued a Notice of Funding Availability ("NOFA"), Guidelines and Application on January 23, 2024, in the amount of $9,483,402.17 for the second round of PIP funding ("PIP Round 2"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova (“City”) desires to submit a PIP Round 2 grant application package (“Application”), on the forms provided by the Department, for approval of grant funding for eligible activities toward planning and implementation activities related to housing and community development as a result of meeting eligibility criteria including but not limited to Prohousing Designation; and

WHEREAS, the Mather Veterans Village Phase 4 is a multi-family housing project consisting of 70 affordable rental units for veterans households earning up to 50% area median income (“AMI”), that requires local funding support to complete predevelopment activities and enhance the project’s competitiveness for needed state housing funding; and WHEREAS, the City Council approves the PIP Round 2 funds to be allocated to the Mather Veterans Village Phase 4 affordable housing development project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA ("Applicant") as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Manager of the City of Rancho Cordova is hereby authorized and directed to submit an Application to the Department in response to the NOFA, and to apply for the PIP Round 2 grant funds in a total amount not to exceed $960,000; and SECTION 2. In connection with the PIP Round 2 grant, if the Application is approved by the Department, the City Manager of the City of Rancho Cordova is authorized and directed to enter into, execute, and deliver on behalf of the Applicant, a State of California Agreement ("Standard Agreement") for an amount of up to $960,000, and any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to evidence and secure the PIP Round 2 grant funds for the Mather Veterans Village Phase 4 affordable housing development project, the Applicant’s obligations related thereto, and all amendments thereto; and

ITEM 9.5. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 2 SECTION 3. The Applicant shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the Guidelines, and the Standard Agreement provided by the Department after approval. The Application and any and all accompanying documents are incorporated in full as part of the Standard Agreement. Any and all activities funded, information provided, and timelines represented in the Application will be enforceable through the fully executed Standard Agreement. Pursuant to the Guidelines and in conjunction with the terms of the Standard Agreement, the Applicant hereby agrees to use the funds for eligible uses and allowable expenditures in the manner presented and specifically identified in the approved Application; and
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 20th day of February 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:

David Sander, Mayor

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

City Council Staff Report – Page 1 of 5

MEMORANDUM
ITEM 10.1.

DATE:February 20, 2024
TO:Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM:Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: SUNRIDGE PARK III –TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (CEQA EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15183. PROJECTS

CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN, GENERAL PLAN OR ZONING) – PROJECT PLND-0822-0050 – LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CANYONLANDS DRIVE AND TIMBERLAND DRIVE; APN: 067-0650-052- 0000
PROPERTY OWNER:

Sunridge Park, LLC (Brian Vail)
2410 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Suite 110
Sacramento, CA 95825
APPLICANT/DEVELOPER:

RJA Engineering (Sean Davis)
2541 Warren Drive, Suite 100
Rocklin, CA 95677
PROJECT: The Applicant is seeking approval of the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the subject property into 55 lots and a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Public/Quasi Public (P/QP) to Low Density Residential (LDR) to be consistent with the current zoning designation of RD-5 (SDSP).

FILE: PLND-0822-0050
LOCATION: Southwest Corner or Canyonlands Drive & Timberland Drive APN:

ZONING:
067-0650-052-0000
RD-5 (Sunridge Specific Plan)
PLANNER: Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION
Determine the project Exempt per Section 15183 Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning and adopt the Resolution approving the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map and General Plan Amendment subject to the findings contained in the Resolution and Conditions of Approval.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would determine the project exempt per Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning) per the CEQA Guidelines and approve the Applicant’s request for a Tentative Subdivision Map and General Plan Amendment to subdivide the subject property into 55 lots.

City Council Staff Report – Page 2 of 5
JANUARY 10, 2024, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on January 10, 2024. During the meeting, the owner was asked clarifying questions on previous plans to build a school on the site. The owner of the parcel explained there was a previous agreement with Elk Grove Unified School District to hold the property for a future school site that has since expired, and the district has discontinued plans to purchase the site for a future school. Four public comments were made at the meeting. The Planning Commission discussed the importance of planning for more schools in the City. The Planning Commission introduced a motion recommending the City Council find the project exempt from further CEQA analysis and approve the requested entitlements. The motion passed on a 5-1 vote.

BACKGROUND
The project site is located within the Sunridge Specific Plan area at the southwest corner of Canyonlands Drive and Timberland Drive as shown in Figure 1: Project Location.

Figure 1: Project Location
The Sunridge Specific Plan was approved in 2002 prior to City incorporation and zoned the parcel RD-5. In 2006, the City of Rancho Cordova completed a General Plan update that designated the subject parcel “Public/Quasi-Public” in the Land Use Map to accommodate future plans for a school at the project site. The zoning for the site was not updated after the General Plan update to be consistent with the land use designation and remained RD-5.

City Council Staff Report – Page 3 of 5
At a recent board meeting, the Elk Grove Unified School District has indicated that there are no longer plans to pursue the development of a school on the project site. The EGUSD Board stated that future plans for a school would focus on the area known as Grantline 208 in Rancho Cordova.

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
The Applicant is requesting the approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the subject parcel into 55 residential lots. A typical interior lot would measure 60 feet x 105 feet and a typical corner lot would measure 67.5 feet x 105 feet. Figure 2: Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map shows the proposed subdivision layout plan. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with requirements and procedures of a subdivision map application.

Section 66474 of the California Subdivision Map Act requires a City to deny approval of a parcel map if specific findings are found to be true. As shown in Attachment 1, all applicable findings have been met supporting the tentative subdivision map request.

Figure 2: Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The applicant is also requesting a General Plan Amendment to change the current land use designation of the project site from “Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP)” to “Low Density Residential (LDR)” to be consistent with the existing zoning of RD-5 and the proposed single-family residential use.

City Council Staff Report – Page 4 of 5
The proposed amendment would revise Figure LU-5 in the General Plan Land Use Element as shown in Figure 3: Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation.

Figure 3: Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Current GP Land Use Designation Proposed GP Land Use Designation

Chapter 23.155.060 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code requires specific findings to approve a General Plan Amendment. As shown in Attachment 1, all applicable findings have been met supporting the General Plan Amendment.

GENERAL PLAN
The proposed project is within the Sunridge Specific Plan area and currently has a land use designation of “Public/Quasi Public.” The applicant is seeking an amendment to the General Plan land use map to change the subject parcel’s land use designation to “Low Density Residential” to be consistent with the current zoning of RD-5 (Sunridge Specific Plan).

ZONING CODE
The proposed residential project is consistent with the current zoning of RD-5 (Sunridge Specific Plan). The tentative subdivision map results in a project density of approximately 5 dwelling units per acre.

FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map and General Plan Amendment would allow the applicant to submit final maps, necessary improvement plans, and permits.

While the project will generate additional demands for municipal services, the project will be subject to existing and new funding mechanisms to pay fair share costs for ongoing operations, maintenance, and services that will offset City costs.

City Council Staff Report – Page 5 of 5

ENVIRONMENTAL
The Applicant is seeking approval of the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the subject parcel into 55 lots and a General Plan amendment to change the parcel’s land use designation from Public/Quasi-Public (P/QP) to Low Density Residential to be consistent with the current parcel zoning of RD-5 (Sunridge Specific Plan).

The Sunridge Park Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report was approved prior to City incorporation. Subsequently, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2003112052) was approved for Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J in 2002 to analyze proposed land uses and zoning within the Specific Plan area. The proposed residential subdivision and RD-5 zoning was analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND identified issues determined to have no impact or a less-than-significant impact and provides analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. The document also includes mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant.

The General Plan amendment is a cleanup action to maintain consistency between the General Plan Land Use Map and existing zoning. When the land use designation of the project site was changed to “Public/Quasi Public” in the General Plan update, no subsequent rezoning occurred thus the parcel maintained the zoning of RD-5. The RD-5 zoning designation was analyzed as part of the MND prepared for Sunridge Park and Sunridge Lot J. The proposed project is consistent with the project analyzed in the MND and is therefore exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 “Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan or Zoning.”

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A to the Resolution - Project Maps

3. Exhibit B to the Resolution - Conditions of Approval

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 5

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. XXX-2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE

OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
PROJECT NO. PLND-0822-0050
WHEREAS, Sunridge Park, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as Applicant) filed an application with the City of Rancho Cordova for the Tentative Subdivision Map for Sunridge Park III, located within the Sunridge Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is located on real property in the incorporated portions of the City more particularly described as APN: 067-0650-052-0000; and WHEREAS, the project site was previously analyzed as a part of the Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2003112052) adopted by the City of Rancho Cordova, thereby satisfying the requirements for the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is in conformity with what was reviewed as part of the Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J Mitigated Negative Declaration, and therefore is exempt under CEQA Exemption 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova has conducted a properly noticed public hearing pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and has duly considered all written and verbal testimony presented during the hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA adopts a Resolution approving the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map (attached hereto as Exhibit A), subject to the following findings, and attached Conditions of Approval (attached hereto as Exhibit B):

1.The City Council finds the project was adequately analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2003112052) approved in 2002 and is exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 “Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan or Zoning.” The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) identifies issues determined to have no impact or a less-than-significant impact and provides analysis of potentially significant and significant impacts. The document also includes mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant. The proposed project is consistent with the project analyzed in the MND.

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 5

2.Approve the Tentative Subdivision Map, subject to the Project Maps (Exhibit A) and the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B). In accordance with Government Code Section 66473.5, the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is consistent with the applicable General and Specific Plan objectives, policies, land uses and programs. Section 66474 of the Government Code requires a City to deny approval of a tentative map if any of the findings are found to be true. In the case of the proposed maps, none of the required findings were found to be true:

A.Finding: That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.

Evidence: The Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map for 55 residential lots is consistent with the zoning designation of RD-5 identified in Sunridge Specific Plan.

The proposed General Plan amendment will update the land use designation of the subject parcel to Low Density Residential to make it consistent with the existing zoning of RD-5. The Low-Density Residential land use designation is characterized by residential densities of 2.1 to 6.0 dwelling units per acre and represents the traditional single-family neighborhood with a majority of single-family detached homes.

B.Finding: That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

A.Evidence: The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map for 55 residential lots is consistent with the zoning designation of RD-5 in the Sunridge Specific Plan. The proposed General Plan amendment will update the land use designation of the subject parcel to Low Density Residential to make it consistent with the existing zoning of RD-5. The Low-Density Residential land use designation is characterized by residential densities of 2.1 to 6.0 dwelling units per acre and represents the traditional single-family neighborhood with a majority of single-family detached homes. The proposed residential subdivision is adjacent to other residential uses and is similar in scale and design.

C.Finding: That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.

Evidence: The site is physically suitable to subdivide. The project area is undeveloped land with relatively poor agricultural soil and there are no existing structures. The project site is adjacent to other residential subdivisions with the same land use designation and zoning.

D.Finding: That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

Evidence: The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

The proposed project of 55 lots results in an approximate density of 5 dwelling units per acre consistent with current RD-5 zoning and the proposed Low Density Residential land use designation. The project site is adjacent to other residential subdivisions with the same land use designation and zoning.

E.Finding: That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 3 of 5
Evidence: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND; SCH# 2003112052) was prepared for Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J where single-family lots for the subject property were addressed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND contains a description of the environmental setting, identification of impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant. The proposed project is consistent with the project analyzed in the MND; therefore no further analysis is required.

F.Finding: That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems.

Evidence: The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map is for 55 residential lots and will include all the necessary improvements to serve the project. The proposed residential subdivision is adjacent to other residential uses and is similar in scale and design. No public health problems will result from approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map.

G.Finding: That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the legislative body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.

Evidence: The applicant has provided preliminary grading and utility plans for review by the Public Works Department. Subsequent submittal of complete improvement plans will ensure that infrastructure improvements for the proposed subdivision do not conflict with public easements and related necessary access throughout the project area.

AND IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council adopts a Resolution approving a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the subject parcel from “Public/Quasi-Public” to “Low Density Residential” as shown in the Project Maps (Exhibit A), based upon the following findings and evidence:

A. Finding: The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the General Plan.

Evidence: The Low-Density Residential land use designation is characterized by residential densities of 2.1 to 6.0 dwelling units per acre and represents the traditional single-family neighborhood with a majority of single-family detached homes. The density of the proposed residential subdivision is consistent with the density range of the Low Density Residential Land Use designation in the General Plan Land Use Element.

General Plan Element II Land Use Element, Goal LU.1 states the desire to achieve a balanced and integrated land use pattern throughout the community. Policy LU.1.5 addresses the need to maintain consistency between the land use categories of the General Plan and the Zoning Code. The proposed General Plan amendment to change the land use designation of the subject parcel from “Public/Quasi Public” to “Low Density Residential” would make consistent with the subject parcel’s current zoning of RD-5.

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 4 of 5
B. Finding: The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the city.

Evidence: The proposed amendment to the General Plan to change the land use designation of the subject parcel from “Public/Quasi Public” to “Low Density Residential” is to maintain consistency between the General Plan Land Use Map and the existing zoning. Elk Grove Unified School District no longer has plans to pursue the development of a school on this site. This proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

C. Finding: In the case of amendments to the General Plan map, the site is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provisions of utilities) for the requested/anticipated land use developments.

Evidence: The proposed amendment to the General Plan to change the land use designation of the subject parcel from “Public/Quasi Public” to “Low Density Residential” will enable the subdivision of the land into 55 residential lots. The site is physically suitable to subdivide. The project area is undeveloped land with relatively poor agricultural soil and there are no existing structures. The project site is adjacent to other residential subdivisions with the same land use designation and zoning.

D. Finding: The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA.

Evidence: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND; SCH# 2003112052) was prepared for Sunridge Park & Sunridge Lot J where single-family lots for the subject property were addressed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND contains a description of the environmental setting, identification of impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts found to be significant. The proposed project of 55 residential lots is consistent with the project analyzed in the MND and is exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 “Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning.”
The General Plan amendment is a cleanup action to maintain consistency between the General Plan Land Use Map and existing zoning. When the land use designation of the project site was changed to “Public/Quasi Public” in the General Plan update, no subsequent rezoning occurred thus the parcel maintained the zoning of RD-5. The RD-5 zoning designation was analyzed as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for Sunridge Park and Sunridge Lot J approved in 2002.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the 20 th day of February 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 5 of 5
____________________________
David Sander, Mayor
ATTEST:

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

58' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEG

22.0'8.0' 4.0'

33.0' 10.0' PE
SWK
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC
PL/RW

3.0' 22.0' 3.0'
PL/RW

6.0'

58.0'

25.0'12.5' PUE

22.5' PUE
(16' @ SIDEYARD)(EXISTING)
(EX)
SWK
(EX)
(EX) TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

4.0'
SWK

4.0'
TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

12.5' PUE 3.0' BCBC
40' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEF

1.5%

32.0'4.0' 4.0'

40.0'

1.5% 2.0%2.0%

12.5' PUE
SWK SWK (6' PUE* @ SIDES)
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC BC

PL/RWPL/RW
TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)
TYPE 1A CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

7.0'8.5'8.5'7.0'

LANE LANEPARKING
(TO FC)

PARKING
(TO FC)
40' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEA

1.5%

7.0'

4.0' 4.0'

40.0'

1.5% 2.0%2.0%

12.5' PUE 12.5' PUE
SWK SWK(6' PUE* @ SIDES) (6' PUE* @ SIDES)
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC BC

PL/RWPL/RW
TYPE 1A CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

32.0'

8.5'8.5'7.0'

LANE LANE PARKING
(TO FC)

PARKING
(TO FC)

SUNRIDGE PARK III

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA

SUNRIDGE PARK III IN-LIEU FEE PROGRAM

LAND EQUALIZATION TABLE
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III

EXISTING CONDITIONS

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

TYPICAL GRADING SECTION

NOT TO SCALEB

TYPICAL GRADING SECTION
-NOT USED-ETYPICAL GRADING SECTION

NOT TO SCALED

TYPICAL GRADING SECTION

NOT TO SCALEC
40' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEA

1.5%

7.0'

4.0' 4.0'

40.0'

1.5% 2.0%2.0%

12.5' PUE 12.5' PUE
SWK SWK(6' PUE* @ SIDES) (6' PUE* @ SIDES)
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC BC

PL/RWPL/RW
TYPE 1A CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)
40' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEF

1.5%

32.0'4.0' 4.0'

40.0'

1.5% 2.0%2.0%

12.5' PUE
SWK SWK (6' PUE* @ SIDES)
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC BC

PL/RWPL/RW
TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)
TYPE 1A CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)
58' RIGHT OF WAY

NOT TO SCALEG

22.0'8.0' 4.0'

33.0' 10.0' PE
SWK
* WIDTH AS REQUIRED BY SERVICING UTILITIES (12.5' MAX)
BC
PL/RW

3.0' 22.0' 3.0'
PL/RW

6.0'

58.0'

25.0'12.5' PUE

22.5' PUE
(16' @ SIDEYARD)(EXISTING)
(EX)
SWK
(EX)
(EX) TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

4.0'
SWK

4.0'
TYPE 2 CURB &

GUTTER PER COUNTY
STANDARDS (TYP.)

12.5' PUE 3.0' BCBC

32.0'

8.5'8.5'7.0'

LANE LANE

7.0'8.5'8.5'7.0'

LANE LANEPARKING
(TO FC)

PARKING
(TO FC)

PARKING
(TO FC)

PARKING
(TO FC)
60'x105'

SUNRIDGE PARK III

TYPICAL LOTS & CROSS SECTIONS

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III
SUBDIVISION LAYOUT PLAN - L.1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III
GRADING PLAN - G.1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III
UTILITY PLAN - U.1

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, CALIFORNIA
ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

General Plan Amendment
“P/QP (Public/Quasi Public)” to “LDR (Low Density Residential)” APN: 067-0650-052-0000

Current GP Land Use Designation Proposed GP Land Use Designation

ITEM 10.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Resolution

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring

1. The approved entitlement is for the Sunridge Park III Tentative Subdivision Map (APN 067-0650-052) as described in the City Council staff report dated February 20, 2024 and subject to the conditions of approval herein, for project number PLND 0822-0050 (“Project”).

Project Description On-Going Planning

2. Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel selected by City and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, officials, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs incurred by City or awarded to plaintiffs) and liability incurred by the City and/or awarded to any plaintiff in any legal or equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any third party challenging the validity of any provisions of this permit.

General On-Going Planning

3. The Tentative Subdivision Map approval is valid for three years from the date of City Council approval, unless an extension of time is subsequently approved per Government Code Section 66452.6.

Time/
expiration
On-Going Planning

4. Applicant/Developer shall not carry a negative account balance with the City for the processing of the project. If a negative account balance occurs, it will be the developer’s responsibility to pay the balance due, in order to avoid delays in the processing of future permits or recordation of maps. Please e-mail the Finance Department at [email protected] for the status of your account with the City.

General On-Going Planning

5. Noise sources associated with construction, repair, remodeling, demolition, paving and/or grading of any real property must adhere to the development standards outlined within the City’s Noise Element, RCMC 6.68 and RCMC 16.18.1407(F).

Noise On-Going Code
Enforcement/Police

6. Applicant shall be responsible for all damage to City streets associated with construction of the project and shall repair any damage as soon as possible.

Infrastructure On-Going Public Works

7. Water supply will be provided by Sacramento County Water Agency Water Supply On-Going Sacramento County

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Water Agency

8. SacSewer will provide additional Conditions of Approval when it is requested at a later date.

Sewer On-Going Sacramento Area
Sewer District

9. The Developer shall pay a Community Renovation Fee in the amount of $1,364.68 per Single Family unit when each building permit for a residential unit is issued within the project. The Community Renovation Fee will be adjusted on January 1, 2024 and annually thereafter by the method provided by using the City Construction Cost Index as applied by the City.

Fees On-Going Community
Development
Department

10. The Developer shall pay a Community Places Fee in the amount of $1,727.26 per Single-Family unit when each building permit for a residential unit is issued within the project. The Community Places Fee will be adjusted on January 1, 2024, and annually thereafter by the method provided by using the City Construction Cost Index as applied by the City.

Fees On-Going Community
Development
Department

11. The Developer shall pay a Supplemental Transportation Fee in the total amount of $2,042.00 per lot which will be collected at the rate of $865 per lot at final map and $1,177.00 per lot due at building permit.

Fees On-Going Community
Development
Department
Prior to Recordation of the Final Subdivision Map

12. Based on the anticipated increase of 55 residential units, the Sunridge Park III Subdivision is required to provide 0.24 acres of Quimby Parkland. The Developer shall provide the Quimby Park Land as follows:

The Sunridge Park III project will require 0.24 acres of Quimby parkland dedication. The Developer will dedicate 0.04 acres of parkland and apply a credit for the remaining 0.20 acres. The Developer has a balance of credit available from the Sunridge Phase 2 Park Development Agreement.

Parks Prior to
recordation of the
final small lot map
that contains the
park parcel(s)
Cordova Recreation
& Park District

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Dedicate land through an irrevocable deed of dedication or pay in- lieu fees or a combination of both for park purposes, as described above and in accordance with the Development Agreement between the City and the Developer and the Park Development Agreement between the Park District and the Developer.

13. The District shall provide, and the developer shall deliver to City Public Works a certificate from the Cordova Recreation and Park District stating that all fees as required by the District have been paid and a Park Development Agreement has been executed.

Parks On-going, Prior to
approval of the
tentative map and
prior to
recordation of the
small lot final map
Cordova Recreation
& Park District

14. Provide Fire Access Agreement between all parcels connected to and served by fire access. Fire Access Agreement shall be recorded with the Public Recorders Office having jurisdiction.

Fire Prior to
recordation of
final map
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

15. Provide Fire Access Roadway Maintenance Agreement (RMA) between all parcels connected to and served by the fire access roadway. The Fire Access Roadway Maintenance Agreement shall be recorded with the Public Recorders Office having jurisdiction. The roadway maintenance agreement shall include the following:
a) Provisions for the necessary repair and maintenance of the roadway surface
b) Removal of vegetation overgrowing the roadway and
infringing on the roadway clear vertical height of thirteen feet six inches (13’ 6”) or width of twenty feet (20’)
c) Provisions for the maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of NO PARKING-FIRE LANE signage or striping
d) Provisions for the necessary repair and maintenance of vehicle and pedestrian access gates and opening systems Fire Prior to
recordation of
final map
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

16. Property owner hereby agrees to record Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) against the property in a form as approved by the City Attorney. The City shall be named a third-party beneficiary to the duties and covenants imposed therein and shall be entitled to, CC&Rs Prior to
recordation of
final map
Planning

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
without obligation, take appropriate legal action to enforce the CC&Rs. If an action is commenced, the City shall be entitled to recover costs including reasonable attorney’s fees.

17. All Tentative Map cross sections shall reflect current City cross section standards as approved by the City Engineer.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of the
subdivision map
Public Works

18. Property Owner/Applicant shall participate in or provide a funding mechanism for maintenance services for the project’s stormwater drainage and flood protection system. This may be accomplished through annexation to the City’s Stormwater Utility Fee District, or other financial mechanism as may be proposed and provided by the Property Owner for the same purpose of providing a funding mechanism to fund the operation and maintenance of the Project’s stormwater drainage and flood protection system. Costs associated with the annexation shall be borne by the Property Owner/Applicant through payment of the annexation costs in the amount of $7,000 per annexation. Contact Dalia Fadl at (916) 851-8718 with regard to the process to satisfy this condition of approval.

Public Works The annexation
shall occur prior
to the recordation
of any small lot
final map. The
annual fee
commences
when a building
permit is issued.

Public Works

19. Property Owner/Applicant shall participate in or provide a funding mechanism for maintenance services for the fair share of existing and all new public improvements associated with the project including, but not limited to, streets, bridges/culverts, traffic signals, traffic signs, striping and legends, ITS operations, street lights and safety lighting, public frontage and median and landscape improvements, and trails. This may be accomplished through annexation to the City’s Community Facilities District No. 2014-2 (Street, Lighting and Landscape Maintenance), or other financial mechanism as may be proposed and provided by the Property Owner for the same purpose of providing a financial mechanism to fund the operation and maintenance of the Project’s public improvements. Costs associated with the annexation shall be borne by the Property Owner/Applicant through payment of the annexation Public Works The annexation
shall occur prior
to the recordation
of any small lot
final map. The
annual fee
commences
when a building
permit is issued
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
costs of the CFD annexation in the amount of $5,000 per annexation. Contact Dalia Fadl at (916) 851-8718 with regard to the process to satisfy this condition of approval.

20. Property Owner/Applicant shall participate in or provide a funding mechanism for maintenance services for the fair share of existing and all new community places and neighborhood greens as required by the City’s Open Space Standards. This may be accomplished through annexation to the City’s Community Facilities District No. 2018-1 (Maintenance of Community Places and Neighborhood Greens), or other financial mechanism as may be proposed and provided by the Property Owner for the same purpose of providing a financial mechanism to fund the operation and maintenance of the Project’s public improvements related to community places and neighborhood greens. Costs associated with the annexation shall be borne by the Property Owner/Applicant through payment of the annexation costs of the CFD annexation in the amount of $7,000 per annexation. Contact Dalia Fadl at (916) 851-8718 with regard to the process to satisfy this condition of approval.

Public Works The annexation
shall occur prior
to the recordation
of any small lot
final map. The
annual fee
commences
when a building
permit is issued.

Public Works

21. The Landowner shall support the annexation of the Project into the Police Services CFD and cover Landowner’s fair-share costs of the CFD annexation, not to exceed $7,000 for the Property. City agrees that the CFD will provide that on lands designated for all residential land use categories, the base year Police Special Tax shall be $450.00 annually per residential dwelling unit, including multi-family units. The special tax imposed by the CFD will be payable on a parcel within the Property only after a building permit has been issued by City for the construction of a building on that particular parcel, and there will be no undeveloped land tax imposed by the CFD. The CFD shall further provide that on each July 1 commencing July 1, 2012, the Police Special Tax shall be escalated by the increase, if any, in the City CPI Index. However, in no event shall the tax per parcel for any fiscal year be less than the amount Finance The annexation
shall occur prior
to the recordation
of any small lot
final map. The
annual fee
commences
when a building
permit is issued.

Finance

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
established for the prior fiscal year. The CFD shall specify that the Police Special Tax shall commence being payable annually following the issuance of a building permit for each parcel subject to the Police Special Tax.

22. Fee Program shall be fully implemented to the satisfaction of the City prior to recordation of any final map.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of any
small lot final map
or issuance of a
building permit
Public Works

23. Add requirement for easement for placement of mail delivery units. Public Works Prior to recordation of
subdivision map
Public Works

24. The final Map shall show an irrevocable offer of Dedication (IOD) as required by Public Works and utility agencies.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of
subdivision map
Public Works

25. Enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and provide a performance bond and labor and material bond.

Public Works Prior to
recordation
of the
ubdivision Map
Public Works

26. Prior to recordation of a final map or certificate of compliance, dedicate land or pay in lieu fees, or both, for park purposes, as required by and in accordance with the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 22.40, Title 22 of the City of Rancho Cordova Zoning Code.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of
subdivision map
Public Works

27. Dedicate public utility easements, for the installation and maintenance of water, gas, sewer, drainage facilities, traffic control devices and dry utilities as shown on the tentative map.

Public Works Prior to
recordation
of the applicable
small lot final map
Public Works

28. Dedicate to the City all the right-of-ways as shown on the Tentative Map and install or bond for public street improvements, consistent with the City adopted cross sections to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Prior to
recordation
of the
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
Engineer. subdivision Map

29. Property Owner/Applicant shall participate in or provide a funding mechanism for the provision of a variety of transportation demand management (TDM) services to implement an overall strategy that will contribute to the goal of reducing vehicle trips to improve mobility and coincidentally reduce air quality impacts. This may be accomplished by the participation in the City of Rancho Cordova Transit-Related Services Special Tax Area through a landowner election to approve a transit –related services special tax or other financial mechanism as may be proposed and provided by the Property Owner for the same purpose of providing a financial mechanism to provide transit-related services. All costs associated with the process for the special tax or other financial mechanism as may be proposed shall be borne by the Property Owner/Applicant.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of the
final map.

Public Works

30. Current drainage easement for drainage basin and associated temporary construction to be abandoned.

Public Works Prior to
recordation of the
subdivision map.

Public Works
Prior to Submittal or Approval of Improvement Plans

31. When the park site abuts a land use other than a public street frontage or a school, the developer shall construct a 6-foot-high masonry wall or other approved fencing material along the common property line. The wall/fence shall be 6 feet high as measured above the grade of the abutting land use and shall not be constructed on the park site, but on the adjoining property.

Parks Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Cordova Recreation
& Park District

32. Drainage Study: Applicant shall prepare and submit an amendment to the subdivision specific drainage study that includes but is not limited to: a pre- and post-project drainage analysis of the project impacts, identification of offsite project impacts or required offsite improvements, and identification of proposed connections to the City’s Storm Drainage System with adequate supporting
calculations. The drainage study shall conform to the requirements Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
of the Sacramento City/County Drainage Manual (Volume 2), County of Sacramento Improvement Standards (Section 9), and all other applicable City standards. The drainage study must be developed and stamped by a Professional Engineer and determined by the City to be accurate and adequate.

33. If the project area includes any critical habitat or wildlife species, the applicant shall obtain applicable California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and other required state and federal permits. The conditions of such permits must be reviewed and considered acceptable by the City. The City will not accept any conservation or other conditional easements on the drainage courses to be conveyed to the City.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

34. Stormwater Quality- Post Construction
The improvement plans shall incorporate all applicable post construction stormwater quality measures; including source control (loading docks, waste management areas), treatment control, hydromodification management, low impact development, and full capture trash control measures into the site improvement plans in conformance with the most recent version of the Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region. The applicant shall prepare and submit a Post-Construction Stormwater Quality Control Plan that includes details and sizing calculations of all the proposed post construction stormwater quality measures. In addition, a maintenance covenant is required for all proposed post construction stormwater quality measures, as detailed in Appendix B of the Stormwater Quality Design Manual for the Sacramento Region.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

35. Stormwater Quality– During Construction:

SWPPP – the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be executed through all phases of grading and project construction. The SWPPP shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that potential water quality impacts during construction phases are minimized. These measures Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
shall be consistent with the City’s Improvement Standards and Land Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance. During construction, the applicant shall implement BMPs in accordance with the SWPPP and the City’s Improvement Standards.

Construction General Permit
The project applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit For Storm Water Discharges Associated With Construction And Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit). Permits are issued by the State Water Resources Control Board.

36. The SWPPP for the site shall include a contingency plan for the implementation of a process to remove fine clay sediments prior to discharge to the City of Rancho Cordova’s storm drain system and/or Waters of the State (e.g., creeks, rivers) to the satisfaction of the City of Rancho Cordova. A polymer treatment system or comparable process shall be incorporated in the erosion and sediment control plan as part of the improvement plans submittal.

This system shall be implemented by qualified professionals with training and proven experience in this field.

Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

37. Drainage System Design:

The applicant shall submit and obtain City approval of plans and specifications for the construction of public improvements and all grading. The drainage system shall be designed in accordance with the approved amended Drainage Study to accommodate runoff from the ultimate development and shall meet the City of Rancho Cordova’s Improvement Standards, construction standards, and Floodplain Management Ordinances in effect at the time of improvement plans approval.

Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

38. All development within the City must comply with the City of Rancho Cordova’s Floodplain Management Ordinance. All new structures Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
shall be protected from the 100-year (1 percent) flood event.

Certified pad elevations (certified by a registered Civil Engineer or licensed Land Surveyor) shall be set at least one and two tenths foot (1.2') above all sources of 100-year flooding (see Section 9-1 of improvement standards). The overland release path must be shown on the improvement plans and hydraulic computation must be provided to estimate the flow depths along the overland release paths. The calculations must be in conformance with Section 9-15 of the Improvement Standards.
plans

39. Provide a permanent concrete stamp, or other permanently applied message to the satisfaction of the City not including paint, which reads “No Dumping-Flows to Creek” or other approved message at each storm drain inlet.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

40. All storm drain facilities within private lots shall be privately maintained and shall be clearly labeled as “private” in the improvement plans.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

41. Fees:

Pay the drainage impact fees to the satisfaction of the City of Rancho Cordova’s Public Works Department.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

42. All landscape corridor walls shall be designed of masonry construction using graffiti resistant materials. Wall design and materials shall be subject to City’s approval and design standards.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works and
Planning

43. A final landscape plan shall be submitted in conjunction with improvement plan and or building permit submittal and approved by the planning and public works departments prior to issuance of permits and/or any installation of landscape materials RCMC

23.716.020. The final landscape planting and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a registered licensed landscape architect and include the following items per RCMC 22.180.060:
•Planting plan to scale that indicate slope
•Irrigation Plan
Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
•Soils Test
•Water Use Calculations
•Irrigation Schedule
•Permeability test for LID facilities’ locations
Soil media specifications (LID features)

44. All landscape strips, medians, etc. that contain trees shall be designed to include continuous root barriers. Trees shall be appropriately sized for their proposed planters.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

45. Developer shall coordinate with Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) and Cordova Recreation and Parks District (CRPD) for the relocation of the bus stops (SacRT and Cordovan) on the southwest corner of Timberland Drive and Canyonlands Drive to be relocated just west of Branigan Lake Way near the ADA ramp on Canyonlands Drive on the frontage of Exploration Park. Developer shall secure necessary easements for the bust stop relocation, if still required.

Public Works Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Public Works

46. Installation of a public cleanout is required at the right-of-way. These improvements must be shown on plans.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

47. Each owner is responsible for installing collector sized sewer pipeline and appurtenance across the parcel frontage as a condition of approval. These improvements must be shown on the plans.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

48. To obtain sewer service, construction of SacSewer sewer infrastructure will be required. Current SacSewer Standards and Specifications apply to any offsite or onsite public sewer construction or modification. These improvements must be shown on the plans.

Field modifications to new or existing precast manhole bases are not allowed.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

49. SacSewer requires each building on each lot with a sewage source to have a separate connection to SacSewer’s sewer system. If there is more than one building in any single parcel and the parcel is not proposed for split, then each building on that parcel must have a Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
separate connection to a private onsite sewer line upstream of any connection to the SacSewer sewer. These improvements must be shown on the plans.

50. Lower Laterals must not directly connect to main lines more than 19 feet deep / directly to trunk lines (lines with flow greater than 1 MGD).

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

51. SacSewer Design Standards and Specifications require minimum 6- inch lower laterals for commercial and industrial buildings.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

52. Construction of sewer mainlines are prohibited within 100-year flood plains. The location of the 100-year flood plain must be shown on the improvement plans.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

53. All onsite sewer plans and offsite sewer plans must be submitted separately to SacSewer for review and approval.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

54. Alignment of all main lines and structures must provide a minimum of 1-foot vertical clearance and 5 feet horizontal clearance from all other utilities and improvements. Sewer is to be located a minimum of 10 feet (measured horizontally) from any structure or footing.

Show public sanitary sewer and water supply facilities in accordance with the Health and Safety Code.

Sewer Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento Area
Sewer District

55. Provide a note on the plans that reads, “Fire access roadways shall be built to bear a minimum of 80,000 pounds and meet the Sacramento County Public Works Standards for roadways. A report, prepared by a registered geotechnical engineer, verifying the ability of the road to bear the required minimum weight, shall be submitted with any plan indicating construction of roadway. Verification of constructed roadway shall be provided by a registered geotechnical engineer prior to final of the project.”
Fire Prior to approval
of improvement
plans
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

56. Show the location of the required fire hydrants for this project on the improvement plans. Approved fire hydrants capable of providing the Fire Prior to approval
of improvement
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
required fire flow for the protection of any and all structures shall be located along the fire apparatus access roadway. The required fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to any construction (including foundations). The minimum required fire flow for the protection of residential developments with an area per building not exceeding 3,600 square feet is 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm) at a pressure of 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for a two-hour duration. plans District

57. The project is within the Sacramento County Water Agency District and shall comply with the following;
•Provide separate public water service to each parcel. All water lines shall be located within a public right-of-way or within easements dedicated to SCWA. Easements shall be reviewed and approved by Sacramento County Water
Agency prior to Improvement Plan approval or Final Map
approval.
•Destroy all abandoned wells on the proposed project site in accordance with the requirements of the Sacramento County Environmental Health Division. Clearly show all
abandoned/destroyed wells on the improvement plans for the project. Prior to abandoning any existing agricultural wells, applicant shall use water from agricultural wells for grading and construction.
•No water supply mains shall be located under structures such as box culverts and bridges. If the project will build box culverts and bridges to the ultimate width, water mains shall cross above ground attached to the side of the structure.

Structures shall be designed accordingly. If the ultimate width is not being built, water mains shall cross underground routed outside of and around the ultimate structure footprint. 15-foot wide water main easements shall be dedicated for the portion outside of ROW. The crossing shall be approved by the
Agency Engineer. Underground crossings and attachments
Water Prior to
Improvement
Plan and or Prior
to Final Map
Sacramento County
Water Agency

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
to structures shall be included in the environmental impact analysis. Additional environmental permitting and other associated costs will be at applicant’s expense.

Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

58. The previous requirement for a park development agreement is replaced by this condition of approval that requires the Developer to provide the in-lieu fees and acreage described in COA #12. Street frontage improvements to be funded and provided by the Developer.

Improvements to the 0.04 acres will be completed by CRPD. The Developer will also pay a park impact fee of $9,925.88 and supplemental park fee of $3,018 per single-family unit per the Development Agreement (DA) between the City and the Developer.

The park impact fee portion is adjusted annually for inflation per the DA. Both fees are collected by the City of Rancho Cordova and passed through to Cordova Recreation and Park District (CRPD).

Parks Prior to issuance
of Building
Permits
Cordova Recreation
& Park District

59. Secure City of Rancho Cordova Public Works Department approval of final grading plans, as required by City Ordinance
Public Works Prior to issuance
of building permit
Public Works

60. Prior to issuance of the first building permit within a TM phase: All streets and improvements shown on the TM phasing plan, all streets necessary for access to the proposed homes, associated
improvements included in the approved improvement plans, and other infrastructure as necessary for adequate public access and use shall be substantially complete to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Prior to first occupancy all streets and improvements shown on the TM phasing plan shall be fully constructed and completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Public Works Prior to issuance
of the first
building permit
within a TM
phase.

Public Works

61. Applicant shall complete improvement plans to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Improvement plans shall include, but shall not be limited to:
•All onsite civil improvements.
•Civil plan shall include an ADA access plan.

Public Works Prior to issuance
of building permit
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
•All facilities, including but not limited to, sidewalk, driveways, etc. shall be upgraded to meet current ADA requirements and City Standards.
•Utility laterals and cuts in existing right-of-way shall be restored per Sacramento County Standards. Type 1 slurry seal or an approved alternative shall be provided within the limits of the project along: Canyonlands Drive, Timberland Drive, and Hetch Hetchy Drive. Type 1 slurry seal shall be applied for the full width of the roads along the entire project frontage of these roads.
•Remove existing 8ft sidewalk and replace with 4ft sidewalk and 4ft separated planter, curbs, and gutters along the frontages of Canyonlands Drive, Timberland Drive, and Hetch Hetchy Drive. •Replacement of damaged sidewalk and curb and gutter along property frontage to the satisfaction of The Public Works Department. Sidewalk panels shall be replaced to the nearest joint.
•Replacement of damaged pavement along property frontage to the satisfaction of The Public Works Department.
•Provide a 6ft masonry wall along boundary of residential lots and park, including a landscaped paseo access to park through Lot A.
•Public improvement plans shall clearly delineate all transitions to existing improvements.
•All improvements to be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
•Provide street lighting as required by the City of Rancho Cordova Code. Street Lighting shall conform to all City improvement standards, and necessary easements shall be granted to
accommodate those standards.
•A note shall be placed on the parcel map summarizing the

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
required public improvements.
•Pavement transition to existing Timberland Drive shall be constructed in accordance with Sacramento County standards.

Compete installation of all improvements shown on the improvement plan to satisfaction of the City prior to occupancy.

62. Secure City of Rancho Cordova Public Works Department approval of final grading plans, as required by City Ordinance.

Public Works Prior to issuance
of building permit
Public Works

63. Residential fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted for review and approval to the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District for all new one- and two-family dwellings in accordance with the California Residential Code.

Fire Prior to issuance
of building permit
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

64. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, the project developer/owner shall pay Zone 40 development fees applicable at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with Title 4 of the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) Code.

Water Prior to issuance
of building permit
Sacramento County
Water Agency

65. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project, the project shall conform to the specific provisions of the City of Rancho Cordova Landscaping Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 23, Chapter

23.716).

Water Prior to issuance
of building permit
Sacramento County
Water Agency

66. The owner must contact Permit Services Unit at
[email protected] or by phone at (916) 876-6100 to determine if Regional San or SacSewer impact fees are due. Fees are to be paid prior to the issuance of building permits.

Sewer Prior to issuance
of building permit
Sacramento Area
Sewer District
Prior to Final Inspection

67. Install improvements per the approved Public Works Improvement Plans and to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.

Public Works Prior to final
inspection of the
first unit
Public Works

68. Upon completion of the installation of the landscaping, the designer shall certify that the landscape complies with all city water conserving landscape requirements. Certification shall be accomplished by completion of a certificate of compliance on a form Public Works Prior to final
building
inspection
Public Works

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
approved by the director of the city public works department. Failure to submit a complete and accurate certificate of compliance will delay final approval of the project and/or discontinue water service per RCMC 22.180.090. Upon receipt of the certificate of compliance and site inspection from City staff, the landscaping performance bond will be released.

69. During and upon completion of the installation of the landscaping for the project, the project landscape architect/designer shall certify that the installed landscape complies with the approved plans.

Certification shall be accomplished by completion of site visits at key installation milestones. Key milestones at a minimum shall include:
rough grade, soil amendment verification, Plant material inspection, irrigation coverage test underdrain installation (as applicable) and final installation. Certification shall include signed site observation reports, photographs and documentation verifying implementation of soil report recommendations. Failure to submit complete and accurate documentation to the Planning Department will delay final approval/occupancy of the project.

Public Works Prior to final
building
inspection of the
first unit
Public Works

70. Record drawings of grading and improvement plans (1 full size and 1 half size hard copy), as well as a compact disc containing said plans in AutoCAD and pdf format, and a GIS shape file, or equivalent to the satisfaction of the City Engineer shall be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department.

Public Works Prior to final
building
inspection
Public Works
Prior to Occupancy

71. Applicant/Owner/Developer shall repair and replace all right-of-way damages caused by the construction of the building to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Damages include, but are not limited to: pavement, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters.

Public Works Prior to
occupancy
Public Works

72. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new or existing buildings in such a position as to be easily read from the street or road fronting the property. The minimum size of the Fire Prior to Final
occupancy
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

ITEM 10.1. ATTACHMENT 3
Exhibit B to the Resolution

SUNRIDGE PARK III TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

PLND-0822-0050 February 20, 2024 Conditions of Approval
Category Timing
/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring
numbers shall not be less than six (6) inches and shall be mounted immediately adjacent to a light source and shall also contrast with their background.

73. Residential roof coverings shall consist of materials having a minimum Class C rating.

Fire Prior to Final
Occupancy
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District
Advisories

74. The installation of security gates across a fire apparatus access road shall be authorized by the Chief and meet the requirements of The County Emergency Access Gates and Barriers Standard. Plans shall be submitted prior to installation.

Fire Advisory Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

MEMORANDUM

City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 10.2.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Edgar Medina, Principal Engineer

SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 10.50.010 AND 10.50.020 OF CHAPTER 10.50 OF TITLE 10 OF THE RANCHO CORDOVA

MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH ENFORCEABLE SPEED LIMITS

ON THE ROADS LISTED IN THE ORDINANCE

RECOMMENDATION

Waive the first reading and introduce the Ordinance.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

The Ordinance would come back for a second reading and adoption, resulting in amending Sections 10.50.010 and 10.50.020 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code to establish enforceable speed limits on the roads listed in the Ordinance.

BACKGROUND

The California Vehicle Code (CVC) requires local authorities to review, reaffirm, or adjust speed limits within their jurisdictions every seven years based on an Engineering and Traffic Survey (ETS). The CVC also mandates new speed limits be established based on an ETS. The ETS provides the mechanism for legal enforcement of the posted speed limit by laser, radar, and/or other electronic speed measuring devices.

As defined in the CVC, an ETS is a survey of highway and traffic conditions in accordance with the guidelines and methods contained in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) for use by state and local authorities. The survey shall include, but not be limited to, consideration of prevailing speeds as determined by traffic engineering measurements, accident statistics, and highway traffic and roadside conditions not readily apparent to the driver. These characteristics are all considered when determining a reasonable and prudent posted speed limit. Establishing a speed limit inconsistent with the 85th percentile speed, constitutes a “speed trap” as defined in the CVC, and is not enforceable by use of laser, radar, and/or other electronic speed measuring devices. The 85th percentile speed is defined as the speed at which 85% of the traffic is traveling at or below.

The CVC also allows local authorities to extend an ETS for a period of an additional seven years (up to 14 years), if a registered engineer determines that no significant changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred, including changes in adjoining property or land

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

use, roadway width, or traffic volume.

In the interest of public safety and to comply with the requirements of the CVC, a Citywide ETS update was conducted on forty roadways to determine the appropriate speed for each roadway segment. A summary of the locations is shown in Attachment 3 along with the recommended speed limit for each location. This update will include posted road segments not originally included in the ordinance.

The update indicates most of the existing speed limits do not require a change and the recommended speed limits are consistent with the existing posted speed limits. There are nine locations where a decrease to the posted speed limit is recommended. The locations are as follows:

• Bleckley St. - Mather Blvd. to Peter A McCuen Blvd. 35 MPH to 30 MPH • Douglas Rd. - Sunrise Blvd. to Rancho Cordova Pkwy. 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Douglas Rd. – Americanos Blvd. to Grant Line Rd. 55 MPH to 50 MPH • Folsom Blvd. - Cordova Lane to Sunrise Blvd. 45 MPH to 40 MPH • Gold Camp Dr. - Sun Center Dr. to Prospect Park Dr 35 MPH to 30MPH • Spoto Drive - Zinfandel Drive to N. Mather Boulevard 35 MPH to 25 MPH • Trinity River Dr. - Coloma Rd. to Sunrise Blvd. 30 MPH to 25 MPH • White Rock Rd. - Zinfandel Dr. to Sunrise Blvd. 45 MPH to 40 MPH • Zinfandel Dr. - Folsom Blvd. to Sunrise Blvd. 30 MPH to 25 MPH

The Citywide ETS also included establishing a posted speed limit on six roadways that are currently not posted. The locations are as follows:

• Airpark Dr. – Femoyer St. to Bear Hollow Dr. 35 MPH • Gold Valley Dr. – White Rock Rd. to Sanders Dr. 25 MPH • Rockingham Dr. – Old Placerville Rd. to Countryside Way/Nut Plains Dr. 30 MPH • Sanders Dr. – Sunrise Blvd. to Gold Valley Dr. 30 MPH • Timberland Dr. – Douglas Rd. to Borderlands Dr. 25 MPH • White Rock Rd. – Sunrise Blvd. to Macal Dr. 40 MPH

The recommended posted speed limits conform to the requirements of the CVC and CAMUTCD for establishing prudent speed limits that are consistent with roadway conditions, prevailing speeds, and are enforceable.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE

There is no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Ordinance

2. Revised Sections 10.50.010 and 10.50.020

3. Engineering Traffic Survey Locations

4. Track Changes - Revised Sections 10.50.010 and 10.50.020

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 8

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
ORDINANCE NO. XX-2024

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 10.50.010 AND 10.50.020 OF CHAPTER

10.50 OF TITLE 10 OF THE RANCHO CORDOVA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING

REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Purpose and Declarations.

WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22358 authorizes the City of Rancho Cordova ("City") to determine and declare by ordinance a prima facie speed limit less than the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 if the City determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 is more than is reasonable or safe upon any portion of any street other than a state highway where the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 is applicable; and WHEREAS, an engineering and traffic survey ("Survey") was conducted by the City; and WHEREAS, the Survey established speed limits for certain City streets, as set forth in Section 3; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the speed limits set forth in the Survey are most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic within the City and are reasonable and safe; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance modifies Rancho Cordova Municipal Code section 10.50.010 and 10.50.020 by establishing speed limits for certain City streets, based upon the results of the Survey; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project under the act and it only involves the operation of existing streets involving negligible or no expansion of existing use.

Section 2. Amendment of Code.

Section 10.50.010 of Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

The City Council approves and adopts the engineering and traffic surveys dated May 2023 and October 2023, prepared by the City, for the streets and portions thereof set forth therein, copies of which are on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the City Clerk. The City council finds and determines that the surveys were conducted in accordance with the Vehicle Code and methods of conducting engineering and traffic surveys prescribed in the California Department of Transportation’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and that the survey justifies the speed limits recommended for the streets and portions of streets therein described.

The City Council declares these speed limits as prima facie speed limits for the streets or portions

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 8
thereof, which limits shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the streets or portions thereof.

Section 10.50.020 of Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

The following prima facie speed limits are established based on prevailing speeds and the results of the Engineering and Traffic Surveys.

A. Baroque Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 35 mph; B. Bear Hollow Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35 mph; C. Business Park Drive:

1. Between Horn Road and Bradshaw Road, 35 mph;
D. Capital Center Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 35 mph; E. Chase Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Hagan Park, 25 mph;
F. Chrysanthy Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Adda Way, 35 mph;
G. Coloma Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph; H. Data Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; I. Disk Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 35 mph;
J. Douglas Road:

1. Westerly City Limits and Sunrise Boulevard, 55 mph;

2. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 50 mph;

3. Between Rancho Cordova Parkway and Americanos Boulevard, 50 mph;

4. Between Americanos Boulevard and Grant Line Road, 50 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 3 of 8
K. Explorer Drive:

1. Between Lincoln Village Drive to Lincoln Village Drive, 25 mph; L. Femoyer Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and International Drive, 40 mph; M. Fitzgerald Road:

1. Between White Rock Road and Recycle Road, 35 mph;
N. Folsom Boulevard:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Routier Road, 45 mph;

2. Between Routier Road and Cordova Lane, 40 mph;

3. Between Cordova Lane and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

4. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue, 45 mph;
O. Georgetown Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and McGregor Drive, 25 mph;
P. Gold Camp Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph; Q. Gold Canal Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; R. Gold Center Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph;

2. Between Prospect Park Drive (west) and Prospect Park Drive (east), 35 mph; S. Horn Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Routier Road, 35 mph;
T. International Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph; U. Kiefer Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 45 mph; V. Kilgore Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 40 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 4 of 8
W. Lincoln Village:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Viking Drive, 35 mph;

2. Between Viking Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
X. Luyung Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mechanical Drive, 35 mph; Y. Mather Field Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph; Z. McGregor Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 25 mph;
AA. Mills Park Drive:

1. Between Routier Road and Mather Field Road, 35 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; BB. Mills Station Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; CC. Monier Circle:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 30 mph; DD. Old Placerville Road:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Granby Drive, 45 mph;

2. Between Grandy Drive and Routier Road, 45 mph;

3. Between Routier Road and Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue, 45 mph;

4. Between Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue and Rockingham Drive, 45 mph; EE. Olson Drive:

1. Between Mills Park Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Zinfandel Drive and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; FF. Paseo Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Las Casas Way, 25 mph;
GG. Peter A McCuen Boulevard:

1. Mather Boulevard and Femoyer Street, 30 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 5 of 8
HH. Prospect Park Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 35 mph;
II. Quality Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; JJ. Rancho Cordova Parkway:

1. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Douglas Road, 45 mph;
KK. Recycle Road:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Elks Circle, 30 mph;
LL. Reserve Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and International Drive, 35 mph;
MM. Rockingham Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and S. White Rock Road, 25 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

3. Between Old Placerville Road and Countryside Way-Nut Plains Drive, 30 mph; NN. Routier Road:

1. Between Old Placerville Road and Folsom Boulevard, 40 mph; OO. S. White Rock Road:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 25 mph; PP. Sun Center Drive:

1. Between Prospect Park Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 35 mph; QQ. Sunrise Boulevard:

1. Between Jackson Highway and Kiefer Boulevard, 55 mph

2. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Herodian Drive, 50 mph;

3. Between Herodian Drive and White Rock Road, 45 mph;

4. Between White Rock Road and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

5. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 45 mph;

6. Between Coloma Road and city limits, southbound, 45 mph; RR. Systems Parkway:

1. Between Routier Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 6 of 8
SS. Trade Center Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Road and Mercantile Road, 30 mph; TT. Trinity River Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 25 mph;
UU. Vanguard Drive:

1. Between Explorer Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
VV. White Rock Road:

1. Between Mills Station Road and Evadna Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Evadna Drive and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph

3. Between S. White Rock Road and Zinfandel Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between Zinfandel Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

5. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Macal Drive, 40 mph;
WW. Zinfandel Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 25 mph;

2. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

3. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between International Drive and City Limits, 45 mph.

XX. Airpark Drive:

1. Between Femoyer Street and Bear Hollow Drive, 35 mph; YY. Bleckley Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and Peter A. McCuen Boulevard, 35mph 30 mph; ZZ. Gold Valley Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Sanders Drive, 25 mph;
A1. Mercantile Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; B1. Mills Tower Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph; C1. Rod Beaudry Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and East Tiffany Lane, 25 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 7 of 8
D1. Sanders Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Gold Valley Drive, 30 mph; E1. Spoto Drive

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35mph 25 mph; F1. Sunrise Gold Circle (N):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold–Mercantile Drive, 35 mph; G1. Sunrise Gold Circle (E):

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle (N) and Sunrise Gold Circle (S), 35 mph; H1. Sunrise Gold Circle (S):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold Circle (E), 35 mph; I1. Sunrise Park Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph; J1. Timberland Drive:

1. Between Douglas Road and Borderlands Drive, 25 mph;
K1. Vehicle Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Coloma Road, 35 mph;
L1. W. La Loma Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive, 25 mph;
Section 3.Environmental
This action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and therefore is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Additionally, this action is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines section 15301(c) because it involves the operation of existing streets involving negligible or no expansion of existing use.

Section 4.Severability
If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phases be held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 8 of 8
Section 5.Effective Date
Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, a Summary of this Ordinance shall be published once in the Grapevine Independent, or the Sacramento Bee, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Sacramento County and circulated in the City of Rancho Cordova, in accordance with Government Code Section 36933. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the ____ day of ______ 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________
David Sander, Mayor
ATTEST:

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

Chapter 10.50

REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS
Sections:

10.50.010 Determination and declaration of prima facie speed limits.

10.50.020 Prima facie speed limits declared.

10.50.010 Determination and declaration of prima facie speed limits.

The city council approves and adopts the engineering and traffic surveys dated November 9, 2020, prepared by the city, for the streets and portions thereof set forth therein, copies of which are on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the city clerk. The city council finds and determines that the surveys were conducted in accordance with the Vehicle Code and methods of conducting engineering and traffic surveys prescribed in the California Department of Transportation and that the survey justifies the speed limits recommended for the streets and portions of streets therein described. The city council declares these speed limits as prima facie speed limits for the streets or portions thereof, which limits shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the streets or portions thereof. [Ord. 11-2023 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 20-2020 § 2; Ord. 1-2018 § 2; Ord. 13-2015 § 2; Ord. 3-2004 § 1].

10.50.020 Prima facie speed limits declared.

The following prima facie speed limits are established based on prevailing speeds and according to traffic and engineering studies:

A. Baroque Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 35 mph; B. Bear Hollow Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35 mph; C. Business Park Drive:

1. Between Horn Road and Bradshaw Road, 35 mph;
D. Capital Center Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 35 mph; E. Chase Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Hagan Park, 25 mph;
F. Chrysanthy Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Adda Way , 35 mph;
G. Coloma Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph; H. Data Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

I. Disk Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 35 mph;
J. Douglas Road:

1. Between Westerly City Limits to Sunrise Boulevard, 55 mph;

2. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 50 mph;

3. Between Rancho Cordova Parkway and Americanos Boulevard, 50 mph;

4. Between Americanos Boulevard and Grant Line Road, 50 mph; K. Explorer Drive:

1. Between Lincoln Village Drive to Lincoln Village Drive, 25 mph; L. Femoyer Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and International Drive, 40 mph; M. Fitzgerald Road:

1. Between White Rock Road and Recycle Road, 35 mph;
N. Folsom Boulevard:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Routier Road, 45 mph;

2. Between Routier Road and Cordova Lane, 40 mph;

3. Between Cordova Lane and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

4. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue, 45 mph;
O. Georgetown Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and McGregor Drive, 25 mph;
P. Gold Camp Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph; Q. Gold Canal Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; R. Gold Center Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph;

2. Between Prospect Park Drive (west) and Prospect Park Drive (east), 35 mph; S. Horn Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Routier Road, 35 mph;
ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

T. International Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph; U. Kiefer Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 45 mph; V. Kilgore Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 40 mph;
W. Lincoln Village:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Viking Drive, 35 mph;

2. Between Viking Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
X. Luyung Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mechanical Drive, 35 mph; Y. Mather Field Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph; Z. McGregor Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 25 mph;
AA. Mills Park Drive:

1. Between Routier Road and Mather Field Road, 35 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; BB. Mills Station Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; CC. Monier Circle:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 30 mph; DD. Old Placerville Road:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Granby Drive, 45 mph;

2. Between Grandy Drive and Routier Road, 45 mph;

3. Between Routier Road and Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue, 45 mph;

4. Between Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue and Rockingham Drive, 45 mph;

ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

EE. Olson Drive:

1. Between Mills Park Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Zinfandel Drive and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; FF. Paseo Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Las Casas Way, 25 mph;
GG. Peter A McCuen Boulevard:

1. Mather Boulevard and Femoyer Street, 30 mph;
HH. Prospect Park Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 35 mph;
II. Quality Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; JJ. Rancho Cordova Parkway:

1. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Douglas Road, 45 mph;
KK. Recycle Road:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Elks Circle, 30 mph;
LL. Reserve Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and International Drive, 35 mph;
MM. Rockingham Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and S. White Rock Road, 25 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

3. Between Old Placerville Road and Countryside Way-Nut Plains Drive, 30 mph; NN. Routier Road:

1. Between Old Placerville Road and Folsom Boulevard, 40 mph; OO. S. White Rock Road:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 25 mph; PP. Sun Center Drive:

1. Between Prospect Park Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 35 mph;

ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

QQ. Sunrise Boulevard:

1. Between Jackson Highway and Kiefer Boulevard, 55 mph

2. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Herodian Drive, 50 mph;

3. Between Herodian Drive and White Rock Road, 45 mph;

4. Between White Rock Road and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

5. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 45 mph;

6. Between Coloma Road and city limits, southbound, 45 mph; RR. Systems Parkway:

1. Between Routier Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph; SS. Trade Center Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Road and Mercantile Road, 30 mph; TT. Trinity River Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Sunrise Boulevard,25 mph;
UU. Vanguard Drive:

1. Between Explorer Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
VV. White Rock Road:

1. Between Mills Station Road and Evadna Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Evadna Drive and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph

3. Between S. White Rock Road and Zinfandel Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between Zinfandel Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

5. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Macal Drive, 40 mph;
WW. Zinfandel Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 25 mph;

2. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

3. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between International Drive and city limits, 45 mph.

XX. Airpark Drive:

1. Between Femoyer Street and Bear Hollow Drive, 35 mph; YY. Bleckley Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and Peter A. McCuen Boulevard, 35mph 30 mph; ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

ZZ. Gold Valley Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Sanders Drive, 25 mph;

A1. Mercantile Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph;

B1. Mills Tower Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph;

C1. Rod Beaudry Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and East Tiffany Lane, 25 mph;

D1. Sanders Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Gold Valley Drive, 30 mph;

E1. Spoto Drive

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35mph 25 mph;

F1. Sunrise Gold Circle (N):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold–Mercantile Drive, 35 mph;

G1. Sunrise Gold Circle (E):

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle (N) and Sunrise Gold Circle (S), 35 mph;

H1. Sunrise Gold Circle (S):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold Circle (E), 35 mph;

I1. Sunrise Park Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

J1, Timberland Drive:

1. Between Douglas Road and Borderlands Drive, 25 mph;

K1. Vehicle Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Coloma Road, 35 mph;

L1. W. La Loma Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive, 25 mph;

[Ord. 11-2023 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 20-2020 § 3; Ord. 1-2018 § 3; Ord. 13-2015 § 3; Ord. 3-2004 § 2].

ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 2

Engi
neering and Traffic Survey Locations

LOCATION SEGMENT

EXISTING

SPEED LIMIT

RECOMMENDED

SPEED LIMIT
Airpark Drive Femoyer Street to Bear Hollow Drive NP 35 Baroque Drive Zinfandel Drive to Zinfandel Drive 35 35
Bear Hollow Drive Zinfandel Drive to North Mather Boulevard 35 35 Bleckley Street Mather Boulevard to Peter A McCuen Boulevard 35 30 Capital Center Drive White Rock Road to International Drive 35 35 Chrysanthy Boulevard Sunrise Boulevard to Adda Way 35 35 Disk Drive Data Drive to Prospect Park Drive 35 35
Douglas Road West City Limits to Sunrise Boulevard
Sunrise Boulevard to Rancho Cordova Parkway
Rancho Cordova Parkway to Americanos Boulevard
Americanos Boulevard to Grant Line Road
55 55
50 55
55 50
50 50
Folsom Boulevard Bradshaw Road to Routier Road
Routier Road to Cordova Lane
Cordova Lane to Sunrise Boulevard
Sunrise Boulevard to Hazel Avenue
45 40
45 45
45 40
40 45
Gold Camp Drive Sun Center Drive to Prospect Park Drive 35 30 Gold Center Drive Zinfandel Drive to Prospect Park Drive Prospect Park Drive to Prospect Park Drive
30 35
30 35**
Gold Valley Drive White Rock Road to Sanders Drive NP 25 International Drive Mather Field Road to Zinfandel Drive Zinfandel Drive to Sunrise Boulevard
45 45
45 45
Lincoln Village Drive Bradshaw Drive to Viking Drive
Viking Drive to Routier Road
35 25
35 25**
McGregor Road Folsom Boulevard to Coloma Road
Coloma Road to Ambassador Drive
25 25
25 25
Mercantile Drive Sunrise Gold Circle to Folsom Boulevard 35 35 Mills Tower Drive White Rock Road to Mills Park Drive 25 25 Monier Circle Sunrise Boulevard to Sunrise Boulevard 30 30 Old Placerville Road Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue to Rockingham Drive Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue to Routier Road
Bradshaw Road to Granby Drive
Granby Drive to Routier Road
45 45
45 45
45 45
45 45
Olson Drive Mills Park Drive to Zinfandel Drive 25 25** ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 3

LOCATION

SEGMENT

EXISTING

SPEED LIMIT

RECOMMENDED

SPEED LIMIT
Prospect Park Drive White Rock Road to White Rock Road 35 35 Quality Drive International Drive to White Rock Road 35 35 Recycle Road Sunrise Boulevard to Elks Circle 30 30
Rockingham Drive Mather Field Road to South White Rock Road Old Placerville Road to Mather Field Road
Old Placerville Road to Countryside Way-Nut Plains Drive 25 35
NP
25 35
30 Rod Beaudry Drive Folsom Boulevard to East Tiffany Lane 25 25 S. White Rock Road International Drive to White Rock Road 25 25 Sanders Drive Sunrise Boulevard to Gold Valley Drive NP 30 Spoto Drive Zinfandel Dr. to North Mather Boulevard 35 25 Sunrise Boulevard Jackson Road to Keifer Boulevard 55 55 Sunrise Gold Circle (N) Sunrise Boulevard to Sunrise Gold Circle-Mercantile Drive 35 35 Sunrise Gold Circle (E) Sunrise Gold Circle (N) to Sunrise Gold Circle (S) 35 35 Sunrise Gold Circle (S) Sunrise Boulevard to Sunrise Gold Circle (E) 35 35 Sunrise Park Drive Sunrise Boulevard to White Rock Road 35 35 Timberland Drive Douglas Road to Borderlands Drive NP 25 Trinity River Drive Coloma Road to Sunrise Boulevard 30 25 Vanguard Drive Explorer Drive to Routier Road 25 25
Vehicle Drive Zinfandel Drive to Routier Road 35 35
W. La Loma Drive Folsom Boulevard to La Loma Drive 25 25 White Rock Road Mills Station Road to Evadna Drive
Evadna Drive to Mills Park Drive
S. White Rock Road to Zinfandel Drive
Zinfandel Drive to Sunrise Boulevard
Sunrise Boulevard to Macal Drive
25 25
40 45
NP
25 25
40 40
40 Zinfandel Drive

Folsom Boulevard to Sunrise Boulevard
White Rock Road to Folsom Boulevard
International Drive to White Rock Road
30 35
40 25
35 40
** 14 Year Extension
XX= New Speed Limit
XX=Decrease
XX=Increase
ITEM 10.2.

ATTACHMENT 3

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

Chapter 10.50

REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS
Sections:

10.50.010 Determination and declaration of prima facie speed limits.

10.50.020 Prima facie speed limits declared.

10.50.010 Determination and declaration of prima facie speed limits.

The city council approves and adopts the engineering and traffic surveys dated November 9, 2020, prepared by the city, for the streets and portions thereof set forth therein, copies of which are on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the city clerk. The city council finds and determines that the surveys were conducted in accordance with the Vehicle Code and methods of conducting engineering and traffic surveys prescribed in the California Department of Transportation and that the survey justifies the speed limits recommended for the streets and portions of streets therein described. The city council declares these speed limits as prima facie speed limits for the streets or portions thereof, which limits shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the streets or portions thereof. [Ord. 11-2023 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 20-2020 § 2; Ord. 1-2018 § 2; Ord. 13-2015 § 2; Ord. 3-2004 § 1].

10.50.020 Prima facie speed limits declared.

The following prima facie speed limits are established based on prevailing speeds and according to traffic and engineering studies:

A. Baroque Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 35 mph; B. Bear Hollow Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35 mph; C. Business Park Drive:

1. Between Horn Road and Bradshaw Road, 35 mph;
D. Capital Center Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 35 mph; E. Chase Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Hagan Park, 25 mph;
F. Chrysanthy Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Adda Way eastern terminus of street, 35 mph; G. Coloma Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph; H. Data Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

I. Disk Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 35 mph;
J. Douglas Road:

1. Between Westerly City Limits and Sunrise Boulevard, 55 mph;

2. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 55 mph50 mph;

23. Between Rancho Cordova Parkway and Americanos Boulevard, 50 mph;

4. Between Americanos Boulevard and Grant Line Road, 50 mph; K. Explorer Drive:

1. Between Lincoln Village Drive andto Lincoln Village Drive, 25 mph; L. Femoyer Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and International Drive, 40 mph; M. Fitzgerald Road:

1. Between White Rock Road and Recycle Road, 35 mph;
N. Folsom Boulevard:

1. Between Horn RoadBradshaw Road and Routier Road, 45 mph;

2. Between Routier Road and Cordova Lane, 40 mph;

3. Between Cordova Lane and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph40 mph;

4. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue, 45 mph;
O. Georgetown Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and McGregor Drive, 25 mph;
P. Gold Camp Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 35 mph30 mph; Q. Gold Canal Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; R. Gold Center Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph;

2. Between Prospect Park Drive (west) and Prospect Park Drive (east), 35 mph; S. Horn Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Routier Road, 35 mph;
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

T. International Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph; U. Kiefer Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 45 mph; V. Kilgore Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 40 mph;
W. Lincoln Village:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Draco DriveViking Drive, 35 mph;

2. Between DracoViking Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
X. Luyung Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mechanical Drive, 35 mph; Y. Mather Field Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph; Z. McGregor Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 25 mph;
AA. Mills Park Drive:

1. Between Routier Road and Mather Field Road, 35 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; BB. Mills Station Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; CC. Monier Circle:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 30 mph; DD. Old Placerville Road:

1. Between Systems Parkway and Rockingham Drive, 45 mph;

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Granby Drive, 45 mph;

2. Between Grandy Drive and Routier Road, 45 mph;

3. Between Routier Road and Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue, 45 mph;

4. Between Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue and Rockingham Drive, 45 mph; ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

EE. Olson Drive:

1. Between Mills Park Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Zinfandel Drive and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; FF. Paseo Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Las Casas Way, 25 mph;
GG. Peter A McCuen Boulevard:

1. Mather Boulevard and Femoyer Street, 30 mph;
HH. Prospect Park Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 35 mph;
II. Quality Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; JJ. Rancho Cordova Parkway:

1. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Douglas Road, 45 mph;
KK. Recycle Road:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Elks Circle, 30 mph;
LL. Reserve Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and International Drive, 35 mph;
MM. Rockingham Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and S. White Rock Road, 25 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

3. Between Old Placerville Road and Countryside Way-Nut Plains Drive, 30 mph; NN. Routier Road:

1. Between Old Placerville Road and Folsom Boulevard, 40 mph; OO. S. White Rock Road:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 25 mph; PP. Sun Center Drive:

1. Between Prospect Park Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 35 mph; QQ. Sunrise Boulevard:

1. Between Jackson Highway and Kiefer Boulevard, 55 mph ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

12. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Herodian Drive, 50 mph;

23. Between Herodian Drive and White Rock Road, 45 mph;

34. Between White Rock Road and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

45. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 45 mph;

56. Between Coloma Road and city limits, southbound, 45 mph; RR. Systems Parkway:

1. Between Routier Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph; SS. Trade Center Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Road and Mercantile Road, 30 mph; TT. Trinity River Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 30 mph25 mph; UU. Vanguard Drive:

1. Between Explorer Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
VV. White Rock Road:

1. 1. Between Mills Station Road and Mills Park DriveEvadna Drive, 25 mph;

1.2.Between Evadna Drive and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph

32. Between S. White Rock Road and Zinfandel Drive, 40 mph;

43. Between Zinfandel Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph40 mph;

5. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Macal Drive, 40 mph;
WW. Zinfandel Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 30 mph25 mph;

2. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

3. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between International Drive and city limits, 45 mph.

XX. Airpark Drive:

1. Between Femoyer Street and Bear Hollow Drive, 35 mph; YY. Bleckley Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and Peter A. McCuen Boulevard, 35mph 30 mph; ZZ. Gold Valley Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Sanders Drive, 25 mph;
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 10.50 REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS

A1 Mercantile Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; B1. Mills Tower Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph; C1. Rod Beaudry Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and East Tiffany Lane, 25 mph; D1. Sanders Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Gold Valley Drive, 30 mph; E1. Spoto Drive

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35mph 25 mph; F1. Sunrise Gold Circle (N):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold–Mercantile Drive, 35 mph; G1. Sunrise Gold Circle (E):

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle (N) and Sunrise Gold Circle (S), 35 mph; H1. Sunrise Gold Circle (S):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold Circle (E), 35 mph; I1. Sunrise Park Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph; J1, Timberland Drive:

1. Between Douglas Road and Borderlands Drive, 25 mph;
K1. Vehicle Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Coloma Road, 35 mph;
L1. W. La Loma Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive, 25 mph;
[Ord. 11-2023 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 20-2020 § 3; Ord. 1-2018 § 3; Ord. 13-2015 § 3; Ord. 3-2004 § 2].

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 4

MEMORANDUM

City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 10.3.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Darcy Goulart, Planning Manager

SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA AMENDING TITLE 2 ADMINISTRATION AND
PERSONNEL, CHAPTER 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION TO

INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS TO AT-LARGE
MEMBERS (CEQA EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(B)(3))

RECOMMENDATION

Waive the first reading and introduce the Ordinance.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION

The Ordinance would come back for a second reading and adoption at the next regular City Council meeting. Approval of the Ordinance would amend Title 2, Administration and Personnel, Chapter 2.30 Planning Commission.

BACKGROUND

At the December 18, 2023 City Council meeting, the Council had a discussion regarding the potential incorporation of professional experience in a development related field into the Municipal Code for the two at-large Planning Commission members. Upon conclusion of staff's presentation and discussion, the Council directed staff to bring back a code amendment addressing the desire to have professional experience for the two at-large members.

ANALYSIS

Chapter 2.30, Planning Commission, Section 2.30.040 Qualifications is proposed to be amended to include the following:

D. Professional experience in a field closely related to development such as land use or environmental planner, surveyor or engineer, designer, architect, building contractor or other closely related professions is desired for the two at-large members.

This language is proposed to be added based upon the Council's direction at the December 18, 2023, Regular City Council meeting. As of the date of this staff report, both at-large positions are vacant and recruitment to fill both positions will begin in late February of 2024. It's anticipated that Council will have applications to review and make selections to fill these two vacancies in March or April.

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

ENVIRONMENTAL

CEQA requires analysis of agency approvals of discretionary“projects.” A “project,” under CEQA, is defined as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15378.) As reflected in State CEQA Guideline 15061 (b) (3), an activity is not subject to CEQA, “[where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment…” The proposed amendments are not a “project” within the meaning of CEQA because the amendments seek to provide clarification of qualifications to become an at-large Planning Commissioner. Because no expansion of uses or activities is reasonably anticipated, no possibility exists that the ordinance will result in a significant effect on the environment. Thus, the proposed ordinance is not subject to the requirements of CEQA. However, in the event that adoption of the ordinance is considered a CEQA project, it would nonetheless qualify for categorical exemptions as set forth below.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) states that a project is exempt from CEQA “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The approval of the code amendments set forth in the proposed ordinance does not approve any physical development and it would not result in a direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. For these reasons, the proposed amendments would not have the potential to result in individually or cumulatively significant effects on the environment and these Municipal Code amendments are exempt from review under CEQA and no further environmental review is necessary.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE

There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Ordinance

2. Exhibit A to the Ordinance

3. Track Changes

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 8

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA
ORDINANCE NO. XX-2024

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS 10.50.010 AND 10.50.020 OF CHAPTER

10.50 OF TITLE 10 OF THE RANCHO CORDOVA MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING

REDUCED SPEED LIMITS ON SPECIFIC STREETS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Purpose and Declarations.

WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22358 authorizes the City of Rancho Cordova ("City") to determine and declare by ordinance a prima facie speed limit less than the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 if the City determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 is more than is reasonable or safe upon any portion of any street other than a state highway where the speed limit set forth in Vehicle Code Section 22349 is applicable; and WHEREAS, an engineering and traffic survey ("Survey") was conducted by the City; and WHEREAS, the Survey established speed limits for certain City streets, as set forth in Section 3; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the speed limits set forth in the Survey are most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic within the City and are reasonable and safe; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance modifies Rancho Cordova Municipal Code section 10.50.010 and 10.50.020 by establishing speed limits for certain City streets, based upon the results of the Survey; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project under the act and it only involves the operation of existing streets involving negligible or no expansion of existing use.

Section 2. Amendment of Code.

Section 10.50.010 of Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

The City Council approves and adopts the engineering and traffic surveys dated May 2023 and October 2023, prepared by the City, for the streets and portions thereof set forth therein, copies of which are on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the City Clerk. The City council finds and determines that the surveys were conducted in accordance with the Vehicle Code and methods of conducting engineering and traffic surveys prescribed in the California Department of Transportation’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and that the survey justifies the speed limits recommended for the streets and portions of streets therein described.

The City Council declares these speed limits as prima facie speed limits for the streets or portions

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 8
thereof, which limits shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon the streets or portions thereof.

Section 10.50.020 of Chapter 10.50 of Title 10 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

The following prima facie speed limits are established based on prevailing speeds and the results of the Engineering and Traffic Surveys.

A. Baroque Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 35 mph; B. Bear Hollow Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35 mph; C. Business Park Drive:

1. Between Horn Road and Bradshaw Road, 35 mph;
D. Capital Center Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 35 mph; E. Chase Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Hagan Park, 25 mph;
F. Chrysanthy Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Adda Way, 35 mph;
G. Coloma Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph; H. Data Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; I. Disk Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 35 mph;
J. Douglas Road:

1. Westerly City Limits and Sunrise Boulevard, 55 mph;

2. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 50 mph;

3. Between Rancho Cordova Parkway and Americanos Boulevard, 50 mph;

4. Between Americanos Boulevard and Grant Line Road, 50 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 3 of 8
K. Explorer Drive:

1. Between Lincoln Village Drive to Lincoln Village Drive, 25 mph; L. Femoyer Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and International Drive, 40 mph; M. Fitzgerald Road:

1. Between White Rock Road and Recycle Road, 35 mph;
N. Folsom Boulevard:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Routier Road, 45 mph;

2. Between Routier Road and Cordova Lane, 40 mph;

3. Between Cordova Lane and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

4. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue, 45 mph;
O. Georgetown Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and McGregor Drive, 25 mph;
P. Gold Camp Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph; Q. Gold Canal Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; R. Gold Center Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Prospect Park Drive, 30 mph;

2. Between Prospect Park Drive (west) and Prospect Park Drive (east), 35 mph; S. Horn Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Routier Road, 35 mph;
T. International Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 45 mph; U. Kiefer Boulevard:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Rancho Cordova Parkway, 45 mph; V. Kilgore Road:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 40 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 4 of 8
W. Lincoln Village:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Viking Drive, 35 mph;

2. Between Viking Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
X. Luyung Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mechanical Drive, 35 mph; Y. Mather Field Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph; Z. McGregor Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 25 mph;
AA. Mills Park Drive:

1. Between Routier Road and Mather Field Road, 35 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; BB. Mills Station Road:

1. Between Peter A McCuen Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and White Rock Road, 25 mph; CC. Monier Circle:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard, 30 mph; DD. Old Placerville Road:

1. Between Bradshaw Road and Granby Drive, 45 mph;

2. Between Grandy Drive and Routier Road, 45 mph;

3. Between Routier Road and Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue, 45 mph;

4. Between Systems Parkway-McCready Avenue and Rockingham Drive, 45 mph; EE. Olson Drive:

1. Between Mills Park Drive and Zinfandel Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Zinfandel Drive and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; FF. Paseo Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and Las Casas Way, 25 mph;
GG. Peter A McCuen Boulevard:

1. Mather Boulevard and Femoyer Street, 30 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 5 of 8
HH. Prospect Park Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

2. Between White Rock Road and Baroque Way, 35 mph;
II. Quality Drive:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 35 mph; JJ. Rancho Cordova Parkway:

1. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Douglas Road, 45 mph;
KK. Recycle Road:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Elks Circle, 30 mph;
LL. Reserve Drive:

1. Between Data Drive and International Drive, 35 mph;
MM. Rockingham Drive:

1. Between Mather Field Road and S. White Rock Road, 25 mph;

2. Between Mather Field Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

3. Between Old Placerville Road and Countryside Way-Nut Plains Drive, 30 mph; NN. Routier Road:

1. Between Old Placerville Road and Folsom Boulevard, 40 mph; OO. S. White Rock Road:

1. Between International Drive and White Rock Road, 25 mph; PP. Sun Center Drive:

1. Between Prospect Park Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 35 mph; QQ. Sunrise Boulevard:

1. Between Jackson Highway and Kiefer Boulevard, 55 mph

2. Between Kiefer Boulevard and Herodian Drive, 50 mph;

3. Between Herodian Drive and White Rock Road, 45 mph;

4. Between White Rock Road and Folsom Boulevard, 45 mph;

5. Between Folsom Boulevard and Coloma Road, 45 mph;

6. Between Coloma Road and city limits, southbound, 45 mph; RR. Systems Parkway:

1. Between Routier Road and Old Placerville Road, 35 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 6 of 8
SS. Trade Center Drive:

1. Between Sun Center Road and Mercantile Road, 30 mph; TT. Trinity River Drive:

1. Between Coloma Road and Sunrise Boulevard, 25 mph;
UU. Vanguard Drive:

1. Between Explorer Drive and Routier Road, 25 mph;
VV. White Rock Road:

1. Between Mills Station Road and Evadna Drive, 25 mph;

2. Between Evadna Drive and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph

3. Between S. White Rock Road and Zinfandel Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between Zinfandel Drive and Sunrise Boulevard, 40 mph;

5. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Macal Drive, 40 mph;
WW. Zinfandel Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Folsom Boulevard, 25 mph;

2. Between Folsom Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph;

3. Between White Rock Road and International Drive, 40 mph;

4. Between International Drive and City Limits, 45 mph.

XX. Airpark Drive:

1. Between Femoyer Street and Bear Hollow Drive, 35 mph; YY. Bleckley Street:

1. Between Mather Boulevard and Peter A. McCuen Boulevard, 35mph 30 mph; ZZ. Gold Valley Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Sanders Drive, 25 mph;
A1. Mercantile Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle and Folsom Boulevard, 35 mph; B1. Mills Tower Drive:

1. Between White Rock Road and Mills Park Drive, 25 mph; C1. Rod Beaudry Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and East Tiffany Lane, 25 mph;

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 7 of 8
D1. Sanders Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Gold Valley Drive, 30 mph; E1. Spoto Drive

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and North Mather Boulevard, 35mph 25 mph; F1. Sunrise Gold Circle (N):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold–Mercantile Drive, 35 mph; G1. Sunrise Gold Circle (E):

1. Between Sunrise Gold Circle (N) and Sunrise Gold Circle (S), 35 mph; H1. Sunrise Gold Circle (S):

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and Sunrise Gold Circle (E), 35 mph; I1. Sunrise Park Drive:

1. Between Sunrise Boulevard and White Rock Road, 35 mph; J1. Timberland Drive:

1. Between Douglas Road and Borderlands Drive, 25 mph;
K1. Vehicle Drive:

1. Between Zinfandel Drive and Coloma Road, 35 mph;
L1. W. La Loma Drive:

1. Between Folsom Boulevard and La Loma Drive, 25 mph;
Section 3.Environmental
This action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and therefore is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3). Additionally, this action is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines section 15301(c) because it involves the operation of existing streets involving negligible or no expansion of existing use.

Section 4.Severability
If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phases be held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance No. XX-2024 Page 8 of 8
Section 5.Effective Date
Within fifteen (15) days after adoption, a Summary of this Ordinance shall be published once in the Grapevine Independent, or the Sacramento Bee, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Sacramento County and circulated in the City of Rancho Cordova, in accordance with Government Code Section 36933. This Ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova on the ____ day of ______ 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
____________________________
David Sander, Mayor
ATTEST:

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Ordinance
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

Chapter 2.30

PLANNING COMMISSION
Sections:

2.30.010 Establishment.

2.30.020 Membership.

2.30.030 Application, appointments, and terms of office.

2.30.040 Qualifications.

2.30.050 Removal from office.

2.30.060 Vacancies.

2.30.070 Duties and functions of the planning commission.

2.30.080 Rules.

2.30.090 Organization.

2.30.100 Meetings.

2.30.110 Voting.

2.30.120 Compensation.

Prior legislation: Ord. 18-2003.

2.30.010 Establishment.

Pursuant to Section 65100 of the Government Code of the state of California, there is hereby established a planning commission which shall have the powers and duties and serve the purposes enumerated in said Section 65100 and this chapter, and which shall have jurisdiction within the incorporated boundaries of the city of Rancho Cordova; provided, however: from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section until March 1, 2023 (Phase 1), the planning commission shall only have the power to take action on the following applications, projects, approvals, permits and appeals related to:

A. Processing, considering, and approving tentative and final parcel maps under Chapter 22.20 RCMC.

B. Processing, considering, and approving major design review for new residential projects under RCMC

23.104.030 and Table 23.104-1.

C. All other planning commission responsibilities regarding applications, projects, approvals, permits, and appeals in the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code are suspended from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section until March 1, 2023. During this time, all appeals which would otherwise be heard by the planning commission shall be heard by the city council.

And further provided, from March 1, 2023, until June 1, 2023 (Phase 2), in addition to all powers granted during Phase 1, the planning commission shall also have the power to take action on the following applications, projects, approvals, permits and appeals related to:

D. Processing, considering, and approving tentative and subdivision maps under Chapter 22.20 RCMC.

E. Processing, considering, and approving major design review for commercial and industrial projects under RCMC

23.104.030 and Table 23.104-1. [Ord. 15-2022 § 3; Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 5-2011 § 1; Ord. 56-2004 § 3].

2.30.020 Membership.

The planning commission shall consist of seven commission officers. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.030 Application, appointments, and terms of office.

Appointments to the planning commission shall be made by the city council as follows:

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Ordinance
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

A. An application period of three weeks shall be opened for any vacant planning commissioner seat. All applications shall be provided to individual members of the city council needing to fill the vacant seat for review and consideration for possible nomination.

B. Five commissioners shall be nominated by the individual members of the city council and confirmed by a majority vote prior to the first meeting of the council in February 2022. A commissioner’s term for those council seats up for re-election in 2024 shall coincide with the term of the councilmember that nominated that commissioner. A commissioner’s term for those council seats up for re-election in 2022 shall serve an initial two years. After the conclusion of the initial two-year term, the councilmember elected in 2022 shall have the ability to nominate a new commissioner for the remainder of the term if desired. Thereafter, following each election of the city council, re-elected or newly elected members of the council shall each nominate one member to serve on the planning commission within 90 days of taking office. All commissioners nominated by an individual member of the city council shall be confirmed by a majority vote of the city council.

C. Two commissioners shall be designated at-large members and shall be selected by the city council as a body from a pool of nominees. At-large members may be nominated by any member of the city council and confirmed by a majority vote prior to the first meeting of the council in February 2022. The term of the at-large commissioners will be terms of four years. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.040 Qualifications.

Minimum qualifications for the position of planning commissioner are as follows:

A. Must be at least 18 years of age.

B. Shall not be an elected or appointed official of another public entity whose jurisdiction includes any part of the city.

C. Shall reside within the incorporated boundaries of the city of Rancho Cordova.

D. Professional experience in a field closely related to development such as land use or environmental planner, surveyor or engineer, designer, architect, building contractor or other closely related professions is desired for the two at-large members.
[Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.050 Removal from office.

A planning commissioner may be removed from office by the city council without cause, notice or hearing. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.060 Vacancies.

Vacancies which occur within the commission shall be filled for the unexpired portions of the terms pursuant to RCMC 2.30.030. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.070 Duties and functions of the planning commission.

The planning commission shall have the duties and functions as specified below.

A. Serve as the approval authority as specified in Chapter 23.104 RCMC; B. Promote public interest in, and understanding of, the general plan, specific plans, special planning areas, and regulations relating to such plans;
C. Consider and provide recommendations to the city council on amendments to the general plan, zoning code, specific plans and special planning areas;
D. Consider subdivision matters arising from the Subdivision Map Act and this code;

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 2
Exhibit A to the Ordinance
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

E. Consider appeals of the community development director; F. Perform other powers and duties as directed by the city council. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.080 Rules.

The planning commission shall adopt, subject to city council approval, rules of procedure which shall govern the conduct of hearings and other business of the commission. Copies of the rules shall be published and shall be available with the city clerk’s office. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.090 Organization.

At the initial meeting of the commission, and annually thereafter at the first meeting of the calendar year for the commission, the members of the commission shall select a chairperson and vice-chairperson and shall determine the time, place, and frequency of regular meetings. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.100 Meetings.

The planning commission shall meet at least twice a month at a regularly scheduled time and date, and at other such times as the chairperson deems necessary to perform the duties of the commission. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.110 Voting.

Four members of the seven-member planning commission shall constitute a quorum, and a quorum is required for the commission to take action on any item on its agenda. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.120 Compensation.

A. Each member of the planning commission shall receive compensation for services as follows: Each member of the commission shall receive $75.00 compensation for each planning commission meeting attended, including regularly scheduled or special meetings.

B. The city may, at the discretion of the city manager, approve payment to a member for necessary and actual expenses incurred by a member acting in an official capacity as a member of the planning commission. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 3
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

Chapter 2.30

PLANNING COMMISSION
Sections:

2.30.010 Establishment.

2.30.020 Membership.

2.30.030 Application, appointments, and terms of office.

2.30.040 Qualifications.

2.30.050 Removal from office.

2.30.060 Vacancies.

2.30.070 Duties and functions of the planning commission.

2.30.080 Rules.

2.30.090 Organization.

2.30.100 Meetings.

2.30.110 Voting.

2.30.120 Compensation.

Prior legislation: Ord. 18-2003.

2.30.010 Establishment.

Pursuant to Section 65100 of the Government Code of the state of California, there is hereby established a planning commission which shall have the powers and duties and serve the purposes enumerated in said Section 65100 and this chapter, and which shall have jurisdiction within the incorporated boundaries of the city of Rancho Cordova; provided, however: from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section until March 1, 2023 (Phase 1), the planning commission shall only have the power to take action on the following applications, projects, approvals, permits and appeals related to:

A. Processing, considering, and approving tentative and final parcel maps under Chapter 22.20 RCMC.

B. Processing, considering, and approving major design review for new residential projects under RCMC

23.104.030 and Table 23.104-1.

C. All other planning commission responsibilities regarding applications, projects, approvals, permits, and appeals in the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code are suspended from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section until March 1, 2023. During this time, all appeals which would otherwise be heard by the planning commission shall be heard by the city council.

And further provided, from March 1, 2023, until June 1, 2023 (Phase 2), in addition to all powers granted during Phase 1, the planning commission shall also have the power to take action on the following applications, projects, approvals, permits and appeals related to:

D. Processing, considering, and approving tentative and subdivision maps under Chapter 22.20 RCMC.

E. Processing, considering, and approving major design review for commercial and industrial projects under RCMC

23.104.030 and Table 23.104-1. [Ord. 15-2022 § 3; Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 5-2011 § 1; Ord. 56-2004 § 3].

2.30.020 Membership.

The planning commission shall consist of seven commission officers. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.030 Application, appointments, and terms of office.

Appointments to the planning commission shall be made by the city council as follows:

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 3
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

A. An application period of three weeks shall be opened for any vacant planning commissioner seat. All applications shall be provided to individual members of the city council needing to fill the vacant seat for review and consideration for possible nomination.

B. Five commissioners shall be nominated by the individual members of the city council and confirmed by a majority vote prior to the first meeting of the council in February 2022. A commissioner’s term for those council seats up for re-election in 2024 shall coincide with the term of the councilmember that nominated that commissioner. A commissioner’s term for those council seats up for re-election in 2022 shall serve an initial two years. After the conclusion of the initial two-year term, the councilmember elected in 2022 shall have the ability to nominate a new commissioner for the remainder of the term if desired. Thereafter, following each election of the city council, re-elected or newly elected members of the council shall each nominate one member to serve on the planning commission within 90 days of taking office. All commissioners nominated by an individual member of the city council shall be confirmed by a majority vote of the city council.

C. Two commissioners shall be designated at-large members and shall be selected by the city council as a body from a pool of nominees. At-large members may be nominated by any member of the city council and confirmed by a majority vote prior to the first meeting of the council in February 2022. The term of the at-large commissioners will be terms of four years. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.040 Qualifications.

Minimum qualifications for the position of planning commissioner are as follows:

A. Must be at least 18 years of age.

B. Shall not be an elected or appointed official of another public entity whose jurisdiction includes any part of the city.

C. Shall reside within the incorporated boundaries of the city of Rancho Cordova.

D. Professional experience in a field closely related to development such as land use or environmental planner, surveyor or engineer, designer, architect, building contractor or other closely related professions is desired for the two at-large members.
[Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.050 Removal from office.

A planning commissioner may be removed from office by the city council without cause, notice or hearing. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.060 Vacancies.

Vacancies which occur within the commission shall be filled for the unexpired portions of the terms pursuant to RCMC 2.30.030. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.070 Duties and functions of the planning commission.

The planning commission shall have the duties and functions as specified below.

A. Serve as the approval authority as specified in Chapter 23.104 RCMC; B. Promote public interest in, and understanding of, the general plan, specific plans, special planning areas, and regulations relating to such plans;
C. Consider and provide recommendations to the city council on amendments to the general plan, zoning code, specific plans and special planning areas;
D. Consider subdivision matters arising from the Subdivision Map Act and this code; E. Consider appeals of the community development director;

ITEM 10.3. ATTACHMENT 3
Rancho Cordova Municipal Code
Chapter 2.30 PLANNING COMMISSION

F. Perform other powers and duties as directed by the city council. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.080 Rules.

The planning commission shall adopt, subject to city council approval, rules of procedure which shall govern the conduct of hearings and other business of the commission. Copies of the rules shall be published and shall be available with the city clerk’s office. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.090 Organization.

At the initial meeting of the commission, and annually thereafter at the first meeting of the calendar year for the commission, the members of the commission shall select a chairperson and vice-chairperson and shall determine the time, place, and frequency of regular meetings. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.100 Meetings.

The planning commission shall meet at least twice a month at a regularly scheduled time and date, and at other such times as the chairperson deems necessary to perform the duties of the commission. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.110 Voting.

Four members of the seven-member planning commission shall constitute a quorum, and a quorum is required for the commission to take action on any item on its agenda. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

2.30.120 Compensation.

A. Each member of the planning commission shall receive compensation for services as follows: Each member of the commission shall receive $75.00 compensation for each planning commission meeting attended, including regularly scheduled or special meetings.

B. The city may, at the discretion of the city manager, approve payment to a member for necessary and actual expenses incurred by a member acting in an official capacity as a member of the planning commission. [Ord. 2-2022 § 3 (Exh. A); Ord. 22-2021 § 3 (Exh. A)].

City Council Staff Report – Page 1 of 11

MEMORANDUM
ITEM 11.1.

DATE:February 20, 2024
TO:Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM:Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: MINE SHAFT DIGITAL BILLBOARD SIGNS – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,

MINOR DESIGN REVIEW, AND OPERATING AGREEMENT (MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT) – PROJECT PLND-0822- 0047 – 2300 MINE SHAFT LANE; APN: 072-0231-014-0000
PROPERTY OWNER:

Cordova Community Council Foundation
2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 117
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
APPLICANT:

RSC Engineering, Inc.
1420 Rocky Ridge Drive, Suite 150
Roseville, CA 95661
PROJECT: The Applicant, Cordova Community Council, is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Minor Design Review, and Operating Agreement for two digital billboard signs along US Highway 50. Each sign has two sign area displays, each measuring 1,200 square feet. The digital signs are approximately 2,708 feet from each other. The east sign height is 60 feet, and the west sign height is 70 feet. The Applicant will enter into an Operating Agreement with the City to govern the operation of the digital signs.

FILE: PLND-0822-0047
LOCATION: 2300 Mine Shaft Lane
APN: 072-0231-014-0000
PLANNER: Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION
Find the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with mitigation measures that was prepared and circulated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project is adequate; adopt the Resolution for the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review; and approve the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs Operating Agreement.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adoption of the Resolution would find that the project was adequately analyzed in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Applicant’s request to construct two

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 11
digital billboard signs along on the subject property US Highway 50. This would further allow the Applicant to move forward with building permit applications with the Building & Safety Department.

BACKGROUND
The Project site is located at 2300 Mine Shaft Lane along Folsom Boulevard, adjacent to US Highway 50, as shown in Figure 1: Project Location. The site encompasses approximately twelve acres of land designated as Folsom Boulevard Planning Area (FBPA) in the City’s General Plan and zoned General Commercial (GC).

Figure 1: Project Location
Besides the highway and Folsom Boulevard to the north, the project site is surrounded by open space land for the Folsom South Canal and close to industrial uses to the south and west. The parcel is developed with a parking lot and building used for various community events, including the

City Council Staff Report - Page 3 of 11
Heartstoppers Haunted House. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show current site conditions from two viewpoints.

Figure 2: Existing Conditions (Looking East)

City Council Staff Report - Page 4 of 11
Figure 3: Existing Conditions (Looking West)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Cordova Community Council (CCC) is seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, and Operating Agreement for two digital freeway signs. The development and long- term lease of two digital freeway billboards is a critical component of a strategy that would provide the CCC with long-term financial stability to carry out its mission. The project applicant understands that the marketplace for one or more digital freeway billboards along the US 50 corridor is limited. At some point in the near future, the City of Folsom, or Sacramento County may approve one or more digital billboards in this same corridor. If this happens before digital freeway billboards are approved for the Mine Shaft property, the moment of opportunity will be lost, market value for the proposed billboards will be diminished, and the Rancho Cordova community may lose the chance to have input into this advertising delivery system. As a non- profit organization serving the Rancho Cordova community, the Cordova Community Council has identified the following project objectives:
•Develop a revenue source for the Cordova Community Council from the ownership of two digital billboards.
•Provide productive use for a currently unused property located near US 50. •Provide the City of Rancho Cordova and community groups with a medium for communicating to area residents.

The Digital Freeway Signs Overlay section of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code regulates the installation and use of digital freeway signs within designated overlay zones. The overlay zones are established to protect residential areas from the negative impacts of digital freeway signs, such as excessive glare or light pollution. The project site is a former mini-golf

City Council Staff Report - Page 5 of 11
course with a building and associated parking lot. The site is level and mostly covered with hardscape surfaces, although it does contain ruderal grassland and trees, with the greatest extent west of the existing building. It is bordered by light rail tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and US 50 to the north. The site is bordered by Folsom South Canal on the south side. The unincorporated community of Gold River is located north of US 50, and to the south is open space and industrial uses.

The proposed project was presented to the Signs Ad Hoc Committee on January 18, 2023.

Committee members discussed the proposal and provided comments on the proposed number of signs, size, and height. Following the feedback received from the Signs Ad Hoc Committee, the applicant reduced the height of the digital billboard signs from 100 feet for both signs to 60 feet for the eastern sign and 70 feet for the western sign. The project was also presented to the City Council on March 20, 2023, to provide an overview of the proposed project and receive any council feedback.

Conditional Use Permit
Each proposed digital freeway sign has two sign area displays measuring 20’x60’ (1,200 square feet). The digital freeway signs are approximately 2,708 feet from each other at either end of the subject property as shown in Figure 4–6. The sign at the east end of the property has a maximum height of 60 feet and the sign at the west end has a maximum height of 70 feet as shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. The westernmost digital sign will be directly adjacent to the future Rancho Cordova Parkway/US 50 Interchange project. For comparison, Figure 9 shows existing freeway signs in nearby areas. The full set of project plans is provided in Attachment 4.

Figure 4: Site Plan

City Council Staff Report - Page 6 of 11
Figure 5: West Location
‘

City Council Staff Report - Page 7 of 11
Figure 6: East Location
Figure 7: Elevation – West Location

City Council Staff Report - Page 8 of 11
Figure 8: Elevation – East Location
Figure 9: Existing Freeway Signs
The proposed digital freeway signs would not operate at brightness levels of more than 0.3 foot- candles above ambient light, automatically adjusting as ambient light conditions change.

Construction at the west sign location would involve the removal of 3 trees for installation of the monopole. In addition, to improve visibility of this sign from US 50, 7 trees would be removed from a small area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound lane of US 50. As a condition of approval, the project will conform with the requirements of the City of Rancho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance.

City Council Staff Report - Page 9 of 11
Environmental impacts of the proposed digital freeway signs are identified and analyzed in the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). The IS/MND analyzed a number of environmental factors and identified less than significant impact in the following areas: air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and hazards and hazardous materials.

Subsequently, the IS/MND outlines mitigation measures to address these impacts in the Mitigation and Monitoring Program as shown in Attachment 7.

Per the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Section 23.743.150, a digital freeway sign proposed within the digital freeway signs overlay area requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.

Chapter 23.134 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code requires specific findings to approve a Conditional Use Permit. As shown in Attachment 3, all applicable findings have been met supporting the Conditional Use Permit.

Minor Design Review
The proposed project is also subject to design review per Section 23.140 of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code and must adhere to specific design standards. Each sign would have a monopole that would support two electronic displays angled to provide line-of-sight for highway travelers. The proposed sign structures supporting and surrounding the digital display areas are as small as possible and avoid any unnecessary height or width to the sign. The structures also do not add stylistic or architectural detailing that would call additional attention to the sign. As shown in Attachment 3, all applicable findings have been met supporting the Minor Design Review.

Operating Agreement
Per Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Section 23.743.150, the City and applicant may enter into an operating agreement that outlines the requirements of installation, ownership, maintenance, standards, use rights, utilities, etc. for a digital freeway sign. The applicant may also use the operating agreement to deviate from the development standards for these types of signs.

As proposed, the project requests deviation from the maximum sign area and maximum height standards as outlined in Table 1. Through the operating agreement, the applicant also requests deviation from the billboard removal requirement. The proposed project will remove one existing Clear Channel billboard sign currently located on the Mine Shaft property. There are no other billboards located on the property. The proposed operating agreement is included as Attachment 6.

Table 1: Development Standards for Digital Freeway Signs Standard Requirement Deviation Request
Number of Faces Two display areas, each
positioned to be visible only
by opposing directions of
traffic
None
Maximum Height 60 feet 70 feet (western sign only)
Maximum Area 672 square feet 1,200 square feet
Distance between Signs Minimum 2,500 feet None
Message Display Static messages only None
Billboard Removal For every 1 digital freeway
sign installed, the applicant
Removal of 1 sign on the
subject property

City Council Staff Report - Page 10 of 11
must remove at least 4 legally
existing billboard structures
The applicant, Cordova Community Council, requests the deviations from the requirements for sign height and size for the following reasons:
•Existing digital signs within and adjacent to Rancho Cordova are within 5 feet of Caltrans right-of-way with fully clear view corridors.
•The proposed Mine Shaft digital freeway signs will be over 180 feet from Caltrans right- of way.
•Between the proposed Mine Shaft digital freeway signs and the Caltrans right-of-way, there are the following impediments:
oFuture Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange (approximately 47 feet in height), oFour-lane Folsom Boulevard with both center parkway landscaping that includes trees,
oFully mature oak trees between Folsom Boulevard and Caltrans right-of-way (approximately 45 feet in height),
oSacramento Regional Transit train tracks,
oHeavy rail train tracks, and
oRegional Sanitation 20-foot easement
•The requested deviation for height of the west sign (70 feet) is required in order to avoid visual impediments.
•The requested deviation for size of all sign displays (1200 square feet) is required because the signs are at a further distance from the viewers on the freeway. •If a sign cannot be seen or read, then it will have no economic value.

The billboards would be operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. The electronic messages would be static, with no movement and the minimum display time for each message would be 8 seconds. As previously mentioned, brightness would be 0.3 foot-candles above ambient light and the brightness would automatically adjust up or down based on ambient light conditions.

The City of Rancho Cordova will be provided access to a portion of the total available display time to allow the City to present messages of community interest. This access will also include other appropriate agencies for the purpose of displaying public safety messages such as “Amber Alert” messages and emergency-disaster communications.

GENERAL PLAN/ZONING CODE
The proposed project is within the Folsom Boulevard Planning Area of the General Plan and zoned General Commercial (GC). The project is also within the Digital Freeway Signs Overlay area as outlined in Section 23.743.150 of the Zoning Code.

FISCAL IMPACT
Staff anticipates that the project will have no impact to the City’s General Fund.

City Council Staff Report - Page 11 of 11

ENVIRONMENTAL
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(Public Resource Code Section 2100 et. seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et. Seq.), a Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and circulated for the required 30-day review period, from September 29, 2023, to November 13, 2023. Areas identified in the Draft IS/MND that required mitigation measures to avoid less than significant effects on the environment were Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Mitigation measures to address these impacts include emission controls and reduction during construction, bird surveys prior to ground disturbance, tree inventory and protection during construction, appropriate measures in the event any archaeological resources are exposed during construction, and monitoring of any evidence of hazardous materials during site preparation and construction.

The City sent out a Notice of Intent when the Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for the 30-day public comment period. A Public Hearing Notice was mailed out regarding the February 5, 2024, City Council meeting. The radius list notification for the meeting meets the minimum requirement of 500 feet from the project boundary, as required by Section 23.11.120 B.4. of the Rancho Cordova Municipal Code.

During the public review period, 122 email comments from residents of Gold River and four comment letters from outside agencies were received. As a result of comments received, there were no substantial revisions made to the Draft IS/MND that required recirculation of the document. The revisions proposed in the Final IS/MND do not meet the criteria for recirculation provided in Section 15073.5(c) of the CEQA Guidelines, nor were project revisions required based upon the comments received.

RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Find the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration with mitigation measures that was prepared and circulated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the project is adequate;

2. Adopt the Resolution for the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review; and

3. Approve the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs Operating Agreement

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Final Mitigated Negative Declaration

2. MND Response to Comments

3. Resolution

4. Exhibit A to the Resolution - Project Plans

5. Exhibit B to the Resolution - Conditions of Approval

6. Exhibit C to the Resolution - Operating Agreement

7. Exhibit D to the Resolution - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan

Draft
Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for:

Prepared by:

September 2023
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Draft
Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
P
repared for:

City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Contact:

Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP
Senior Planner
916/851-8750
Prepared by:

AECOM
2020 L Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95811
Contact:

David Rader
Project Manager
916/414-5800
September 2023
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Project Requiring Environmental Analysis ............................................................................................... 1-1 Document Organization............................................................................................................................. 1-1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 2-1

2.2 Project Location and Setting ........................................................................................................ 2-1

2.3 Project Objectives......................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.4 Project Description ....................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.4.1 Construction .................................................................................................................... 2-5

2.4.2 Operation ......................................................................................................................... 2-5

2.4.3 City Discretionary and Ministerial Actions ..................................................................... 2-8 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Aesthetics .................................................................................................................................. 3.1-1

3.1.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.1-1

3.1.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.1-5

3.2 Agriculture & Forestry Resources ............................................................................................. 3.2-1

3.2.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.2-2

3.2.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.2-2

3.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................. 3.3-1

3.3.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.3-1

3.3.2 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................................... 3.3-2

3.3.3 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.3-3

3.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................. 3.4-1

3.4.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.4-1

3.4.2 Discu
ssion .................................................................................................................... 3.4-6

3.5 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 3.5-1

3.5.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.5-1

3.5.2 Research Methodology ................................................................................................. 3.5-1

3.5.3 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.5-6

3.6 Energy ....................................................................................................................................... 3.6-1

3.6.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.6-1

3.6.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.6-1

3.7 Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 3.7-1

3.7.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.7-1

3.7.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.7-2

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................................................... 3.8-1

3.8.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.8-1

3.8.2 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................................... 3.8-1

3.8.3 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.8-2

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................. 3.9-1 ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.9.1 Setting........................................................................................................................... 3.9-1

3.9.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................... 3.9-2

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................. 3.10-1

3.10.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.10-1

3.10.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.10-2

3.11 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................ 3.11-1

3.11.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.11-1

3.11.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.11-1

3.12 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................... 3.12-1

3.12.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.12-1

3.12.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.12-2

3.13 Noise ........................................................................................................................................ 3.13-1

3.13.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.13-1

3.13.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.13-4

3.14 Population and Housing .......................................................................................................... 3.14-1

3.14.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.14-1

3.14.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.14-1

3.15 Public Services ........................................................................................................................ 3.15-1

3.15.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.15-1

3.15.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.15-1

3.16 Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 3.16-1

3.16.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.16-1

3.16.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.16-1

3.17 Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 3.17-1

3.17.1 Setting.........................................................................................................................

3.17-1

3.17.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.17-1

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................ 3.18-1

3.18.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.18-1

3.18.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.18-2

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................................. 3.19-1

3.19.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.19-1

3.19.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.19-1

3.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................... 3.20-1

3.20.1 Setting......................................................................................................................... 3.20-1

3.20.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.20-1

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ....................................................................................... 3.21-1

3.21.1 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 3.21-1 4 R
EFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 4-1 5 LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................................................. 5-1

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Exhibits
Exhibit 2.4-1 Project Site Location .................................................................................................................... 2-2 Exhibit 2.4-2 Site Plan – West Location (Area 1) .............................................................................................. 2-3 Exhibit 2.4-3 Site Plan – East Location (Area 2) ............................................................................................... 2-4 Exhibit 2.4-4 Plan View – West Location .......................................................................................................... 2-6 Exhibit 2.4-5 Plan View – East Location (Area 2) ............................................................................................. 2-7 Exhibit 3.1-1 Viewpoint 1 ............................................................................................................................... 3.1-2 Exhibit 3.1-2 Viewpoint 2 ............................................................................................................................... 3.1-2 Exhibit 3.1-3 Digital Freeway Signs Overlay Location .................................................................................. 3.1-4 Exhibit 3.4-1 Land Cover Types and Aquatic Features Map .......................................................................... 3.4-3 Exhibit 3.5-1 Former Mini Golf Course (West side of property) .................................................................... 3.5-3 Exhibit 3.5-2 Exposed soils on the southeastern side of the project site ......................................................... 3.5-3 Exhibit 3.5-3 Exposed soils behind former retail building .............................................................................. 3.5-4 Exhibit 3.5-4 Paved area on northeastern portion of the project site............................................................... 3.5-4 Exhibit 3.5-5 Current signage on the northeastern portion of the project site ................................................. 3.5-5 Exhibit 3.5-6 Pavement marking location for proposed signage (looking southwest) .................................... 3.5-5

Tables
Table 3.3-1 SMAQMD CEQA Air Quality Thresholds of Significance ...................................................... 3.3-2 Table 3.3-2 Construction-Related Daily and Total Emissions ..................................................................... 3.3-5 Table 3.5-1 Previous Investigations within the Project Study Area ............................................................. 3.5-2 Table 3.5-2 Previous Investigations Conducted within 0.25 miles of the Project Study Area ..................... 3.5-2 Table 3.6-1 Construction and Operational Energy Consumption ................................................................. 3.6-2 Table 3.8-1 SMAQMD GHG Emissions CEQA Thresholds of Significance .............................................. 3.8-2 Table 3.8-2 G HG Emissions Summary ........................................................................................................ 3.8-3 Table 3.12-1 California Geological Survey Mineral Land Classification System ....................................... 3.12-1 Table 3.13-1 Summary of Existing Traffic Noise Level in the Vicinity of the Project Site ......................... 3.13-3 Table 3.13-2 Project Construction Noise Levels .......................................................................................... 3.13-5

Appendices
Appendix A Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas CalEEMod Appendix B Biological Resources CNDDB Database Search and Live Oak Associates Arborist Report Appendix C Noise Model Inputs and Outputs
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
amsl above mean sea level
ANSI American National Standards Institute
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
BMPs best management practices
BSA biological study area
CAA federal Clean Air Act
CAAQS California ambient air quality standards
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA Guide Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County CESA California Environmental Species Act
CH4 methane
City City of Rancho Cordova
CNDDB California Resources Agency Natural Diversity Database CNPS California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Inventory CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e CO2-equivalents
Council Cordova Community Council
CRPD Cordova Recreation and Park District
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibels
dBA A-weighted decibels
DDT dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
DOC California Department of Conservation
DPM diesel PM
Draft CAAP Draft Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA federal Environmental Species Act
EV electric vehicle
fc foot-candles
FCUSD Folsom Cordova Unified School District
FEMA Flood Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GC General Commercial
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

General Construction
Permit
General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ
GHG greenhouse gas
GWP Global warming potential
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons
Hz hertz
in/sec inches per second
IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation
IS initial study
ISA International Society of Arboriculture
Ldn Day-Night Noise Level
LED light emitting diode
Leq Equivalent sound level
Lmax Maximum sound level
Ln Statistical Descriptor
LRA Local Responsibility Areas
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MND mitigated negative declaration
mph miles per hour
MRZ mineral resource zone
MT metric tons
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS national ambient air quality standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NOX nitrogen oxides
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NWIC Northwest Information Center
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
PFCs perfluorocarbons
PM particulate patter
PM10 PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter PPV peak particle velocity
RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model
RCPD Rancho Cordova Police Department
RMS root-mean-square
ROG reactive organic gases
SACRT Sacramento Regional Transit District
SB Senate Bill
SCGA Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SFNA Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area
SMAQMD Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
SMFD Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District
SMUD Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SR State Route
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

SSHCP South Sacramento County Habitat Conservation Plan State CEQA
Guidelines
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
Superfund Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act SVAB Sacramento Valley Air Basin
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminant
UDA Urban Development Area
UL Underwriters Laboratories
UL-E Underwriters Laboratories Environmental
US 50 U.S. Highway 50
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VdB vibration decibel
VMT vehicle miles traveled
μin/sec microinch per second

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

1 INTRODUCTION
Section 21080(a) of the California Public Resources Code states that analysis of a project’s environmental impact is required for any “discretionary projects proposed to be carried out or approved by public agencies…” In this case, the City of Rancho Cordova (City) has determined that an initial study (IS) is required to determine whether there is substantial evidence that implementing the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards project would result in significant environmental impacts.

Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et seq.), an initial study is a preliminary environmental analysis that is used by the lead agency as a basis for determining whether an environmental impact report (EIR), a mitigated negative declaration (MND), or a negative declaration is required for a project. The CEQA Guidelines suggest that an initial study contain, in brief form, a project description; a description of the environmental setting; an identification of environmental effects by checklist or other similar form; an explanation of environmental effects; a discussion of mitigation for significant environmental effects; an evaluation of the project’s consistency with existing, applicable land use controls; the names of persons who prepared the study; and identification of data sources used in the review of environmental impacts and the conclusions reached in the document.

Section 15070 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that a lead agency may prepare a mitigated negative declaration when (1) the initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment; or (2) the initial study identifies potentially significant effects, however incorporation of mitigation measures into the project would reduce all impacts to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures are identified to avoid, eliminate, or reduce potentially significant adverse impacts of the proposed project.

Section 15064 specifies that, when an initial study identifies significant environmental impacts, the lead agency must prepare an EIR.

The analysis in this initial study concludes that the proposed project, with implementation of mitigation measures, would have no significant impacts. As such, further environmental review is not required by CEQA.

PROJECT REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The Cordova Community Council (Council) is proposing to construct two advertising billboards with electronic displays on the south side of U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and Folsom Boulevard between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue in the City of Rancho Cordova. The signs would be located in two separate areas on an 11.4-acre parcel. Each sign would have a monopole that would support two electronic displays angled to provide line-of- sight for highway travelers. Each billboard would be 60 feet wide by 20 feet tall. The top of the east location sign would be 60 feet above ground surface. The top of the west location sign would be 70 feet above ground surface.

DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION
This initial study is organized into five chapters:
► Chapter 1, “Introduction,” provides summary information about the proposed project and describes the purpose and content of the initial study.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

► Chapter 2, “Project Description,” provides the project location, project background, project objectives, detailed project description, and the needed permits and approvals. ► Chapter 3, “Environmental Checklist,” contains the completed initial study checklist. The checklist contains an assessment and discussion of impacts associated with each particular environmental issue. When the evaluation identifies potentially significant effects, as identified in the checklist, mitigation measures are provided to reduce such impacts to less-than-significant levels. ► Chapter 4, “References,” identifies the information sources used in preparing this initial study. ► Chapter 5, “List of Preparers,” identifies the individuals who contributed to this initial study.

Appendices contain technical information to supplement the mitigated negative declaration.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 INTRODUCTION
The Cordova Community Council (Council) is proposing to construct two advertising billboards with electronic displays on the south side of US 50 and Folsom Boulevard between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue in the city of Rancho Cordova. This section provides the project location, project objectives, project description, and the needed permits and approvals.

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING
As shown in Exhibit 2.4-1, the project site is located at 2300 Mine Shaft Lane in the city of Rancho Cordova. The total project site is approximately 11.40 acres in total land area and identified by the Sacramento County Assessor to include Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN): 072-0231-014 (Exhibit 2.4-1). The current general plan land use designation is Folsom Boulevard Planning Area, and the current zoning is General Commercial (GC). The project site is a former mini-golf course with a building and associated parking lot. The site is level and mostly covered with hardscape surfaces, although it does contain ruderal grassland and trees, with the greatest extent west of the existing building. It is bordered by light rail tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and US 50 to the north. The site is bordered by Folsom South Canal on the south side. The unincorporated community of Gold River is located north of US 50, and to the south is open space and industrial uses.

2.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The Council, the project proponent, was founded in 1959 as an “organization of organizations,” a forum for citizens to meet and plan community events. The development and long-term lease of two digital freeway billboards is a critical component of a strategy that would provide the Council with long-term financial stability to carry out its mission. The project proponent understands that the marketplace for one or more digital freeway billboards along the US 50 corridor is limited. At some point in the near future, the City of Folsom, or Sacramento County may approve one or more digital billboards in this same corridor. If this happens before digital freeway billboards are approved for the Mine Shaft property, the moment of opportunity will be lost, market value for the proposed billboards will be diminished, and the City of Rancho Cordova will lose the chance to have input into this advertising delivery system. The following project objectives have been identified:
► Develop a revenue source for the Cordova Community Council from the ownership of two digital billboards. ► Provide a productive use for a currently unused property located near US 50. ► Provide the City of Rancho Cordova and community groups with a medium for communicating to area residents.

2.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Council is proposing to construct two digital billboards on the 11.4-acre project site. The billboards would be located in two separate areas on the parcel, as shown on Exhibit 2.4-1. Exhibit 2.4-2 shows the site plan for the west location sign (Area 1). Exhibit 2.4-3
shows the site plan for the east location sign (Area 2). The west location sign would be located approximately 150 feet west of the planned right-of-way of the future Rancho Cordova ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: AECOM 2023
Exhibit 2.4-1 Project Site Location
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: RCS Engineering; adapted AECOM 2023
Exhibit 2.4-2 Site Plan – West Location (Area 1)
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: RCS Engineering; adapted AECOM 2023
Exhibit 2.4-3 Site Plan – East Location (Area 2)
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Parkway overcrossing. The east location sign would be located approximately 250 feet east of an existing billboard sign related to the previous land use. Both billboards would be located near the northern property line.

Each sign would have a monopole that would support two electronic displays angled to provide line-of-sight for highway travelers. Each billboard would be 60 feet wide by 20 feet tall. Exhibit 2.4-4 shows the plan view of the west location, as well as a photo-simulation of the sign as viewed from eastbound US 50. The top of the west location sign would be 70 feet above ground surface. Exhibit 2.4-4 also shows the sign in relation to the planned Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange Project (City of Rancho Cordova and Caltrans. 2014) that would span the highway just east of the west location sign. Exhibit 2.4-5 shows the plan view of the east location sign, as well as a photo-simulation of the sign as viewed from eastbound US 50. The top of the east location sign would be 60 feet above ground surface.

2.4.1 C ONSTRUCTION
Access to the project site would be through the existing driveway on the south side of Folsom Boulevard at approximately the mid-point of the site. A small amount of fill would be trucked in to cover on-site concrete drainage ditches to temporarily allow equipment to access the construction sites. The staging for construction of the west location sign would be east of the sign between the location of a planned highway overpass and the sign structure (see Exhibit 2.4-2). Minor grading by a backhoe and removal of 20 trees would be required to clear the construction site and staging area for construction of the west location sign, 3 to clear the footprint for the sign itself and the other 17 for the staging area. To prevent soil erosion and water quality impacts during construction, the proposed project would incorporate best management practices (BMPs) during construction, such as silt fencing, storm drain inlet protection, dewatering and proper material and waste storage. The construction staging area for the east location sign would be immediately to the west, and no grading or tree removal would be required. However, to improve visibility of the east location digital billboards from US 50, 7 trees would be removed from a small area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound lane of US 50. This area is shown on Exhibit 2.4-1. Combined with the tree removal on the project site, the project would involve the removal of 27 trees in total.

The prefabricated sign structures would be delivered by truck and assembled in the staging areas. An auger would be used to bore 4-foot-diameter by 50-foot-deep holes, which would involve removal of approximately 8 cubic yards of excess fill for each sign foundation. A crane would be used to install the monopoles in the holes and lift the sign parts in the air for attachment to the monopoles. Construction would not affect the existing on-site water, sewer, and drainage facilities. Electric service to the project site would be provided by Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Electrical lines could be extended either underground or aboveground from existing infrastructure to the sign locations. Construction of both digital billboards is anticipated to occur in fall 2023, and the duration of construction would be approximately one month.

2.4.2 O PERATION
The billboards would be operated 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. The electronic messages would be static, with no movement. The minimum display time for each message would be 8 seconds. Brightness would be 0.3 candles above ambient light. The brightness would automatically adjust up or down based on ambient light conditions.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: Primero Outdoor Media; adapted AECOM 2023
Exhibit 2.4-4 Plan View – West Location
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: Primero Outdoor Media ; adapted AECOM 2023
Exhibit 2.4-5 Plan View – East Location (Area 2)
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

2.4.3 C ITY DISCRETIONARY AND MINISTERIAL ACTIONS
Discretionary approvals and permits are required by the lead agency, the City of Rancho Cordova, for implementation of the proposed project and include:
► Site Design Review – Two (2) Digital Freeway Signs
► Conditional Use Permits
► CEQA Document Certification
► Operating Use Agreement
In addition, the proposed project would require the following ministerial entitlements from the City of Rancho Cordova for construction:
► Demolition permits
► Grading permits
► Building permit

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Title: Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project

2. Lead Agency: City of Rancho Cordova

3. Contact Person and Phone
Number:

Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Rancho Cordova Planning Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670

4. Project Location: 2300 Mine Shaft Lane in the City of Rancho Cordova Assessor’s Parcel Number: 072-0231-014

5. Project Sponsor Cordova Community Council

6. General Plan Designation: Folsom Boulevard Planning Area

7. Zoning: General Commercial

8. Description of Project:

The Cordova Community Council (Council) is proposing to construct two advertising billboards with electronic displays on the south side of Highway 50 and Folsom Boulevard between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue in the City of Rancho Cordova. The billboards would be located in two separate areas on an 11.4- acre parcel. Each sign would
have a monopole that would support two electronic displays angled to provide line -of-sight for highway travelers. Each billboard would be 60 feet wide by 20 feet tall. The top of the east location sign would be 60 feet above ground surface.

The top of the west location sign would be 70 feet above ground surface.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is bordered by light rail tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and Highway 50 to the north. The site is bordered by Folsom South Canal on the south side. The unincorporated community of Gold River is located north of Highway 50, and to the south is open space and industrial uses.
10: Other public agencies whose approval may be
required:

None

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture & F orestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology & So ils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology & Wa ter Quality Land Use & Pl anning Mineral Resources Noise
Population & Ho using Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities & S ervice Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all po
tentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date

Darcy Goulart Planning Manager
Printed Name Title

City of Rancho Cordova
Agency

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4. “ Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated ” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect t o a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project ’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.1 AESTHETICS

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway?

c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?

3.1.1 S ETTING

VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE PROJECT SITE
The project site is located in an urban area (U.S. Census Bureau 2020). The project site is a former mini-golf course with a building and associated parking lot and is surrounded by a chain-link fence. The site has nearly level topography and is mostly covered with hardscape surfaces, although it does contain ruderal grassland and trees, with the most existing vegetation focused in the area west of the existing on-site building. The project site is bordered by SACRT (Sacramento Regional Transit District) light rail tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and US 50 to the north. The site is bordered by Folsom South Canal on the south side. The unincorporated community of Gold River is located north of US 50, and to the south is open space and industrial uses.

Views across the project site to the north are the railroad, road, and highway uses to the north and west, with a structure at the end of the parking lot. Views from the project to the south include Folsom South Canal and Buffalo Creek to the south and east. The visual quality of the project site is low because of the surrounding urbanized environment (i.e., adjacent commercial uses and nearby industrial uses). And although the north side of the project site contains some native oak trees, overall, the site does not contain any unique visual features or landscape characteristics that influence visual quality. In addition, the project site has no cultural visual resources (e.g., buildings) or rock outcroppings and is not located such that it would be visible from a State scenic highway.

Exhibit 3.1-1 and Exhibit 3.1-2 show current site conditions from two viewpoints. Viewpoint 1 shows the site looking east toward the existing billboard at the eastern end of the parcel. Viewpoint 2 shows the northern periphery of the site along the light rail tracks looking west.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: AECOM 2023
Exhibit 3.1-1 Viewpoint 1

Source: AECOM 2023
Exhibit 3.1-2 Viewpoint 2
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA
The visual character surrounding the project site consists of residential, commercial, office, open space, and various transportation uses. The site is bordered to the north by SACRT light rail tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and US 50. The site is bordered by Folsom South Canal on the south side. The unincorporated community of Gold River is located north of US 50, and to the south is open space and industrial uses.

A residential neighborhood comprised mostly of detached, single-story single-family residences is located approximately 400 feet north of the project site on the north side of US 50. The rear yards of these residences include ornamental trees, landscaping, and a berm elevated sound wall that backs up along US 50. These features tend to screen views of the project site. The Folsom South Canal and Buffalo Creek border the project site to the south and east. It is separated from the project site by a chain link fence and adjacent open space that is mostly covered with grassland and scattered trees. South of the canal and creek is the Westborough Planning Area, an approximately 1,665-acre undeveloped area that is planned for a mix of uses, including open space bordering the project site, as well as residential and employment uses. There are commercial businesses and offices to the east of the project site, the two closest being Beck’s Furniture & Sleep and E Health, a health insurance agency.

Views of the project site would be best seen by motorists traveling on from Folsom Boulevard and US 50.

Viewers of the project site would also include passengers on the SACRT light rail transit, as well as employees and patrons of local businesses east of the project site. The overpass for the planned Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange Project (City of Rancho Cordova and Caltrans. 2014) would cross the site approximately 150 feet east of the proposed west location sign.

SCENIC HIGHWAYS AND CORRIDORS
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the State’s Scenic Highways Program. There are no California State Scenic Highways located at or nearby the project site. The nearest State scenic highway, State Route (SR) 160, is over 17 miles west of the proposed project area (California Department of Transportation 2019). Additionally, the project site and surrounding vicinity do not include any State or County-designated vistas (California Department of Transportation 2019).

LIGHT AND GLARE
The project site is in an urbanized environment and is surrounded by existing sources of light and glare. These sources include existing streetlights along Folsom Boulevard and within residential areas north of the project site, exterior lighting on commercial buildings to the east, parking lot lighting, illuminated signage, reflective building material, and vehicular headlights. The project site is currently vacant, and existing parking lot lighting is not in use.

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA DIGITAL FREEWAY SIGN STANDARDS
Section 23.743.150 (Digital Freeway Signs Overlay) of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, allows for consideration of digital freeway signs in certain, specific locations within the city with a use permit and a digital freeway signs operating agreement (City of Rancho Cordova 2022). The digital freeway signs overlay encompasses three specific geographies in the northeastern area of the city, including the mineshaft area. These locations are shown on Exhibit 3.1-3. Section 23.743.150 (C.) includes the following development standards:

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Source: City of Rancho Cordova 2022
Exhibit 3.1-3 Digital Freeway Signs Overlay Location

• Legally existing billboards may be refurbished to become a digital freeway sign, subject to the development standards below and issuance of a conditional use permit. • A digital freeway sign may consist of, at most, two digital display areas, each positioned to be visible only by opposing directions of traffic. Double-faced signs shall not have an interior angle between the face of the panels greater than 45 degrees.
• The maximum height shall be 60 feet.
• The maximum area of each digital display area is 672 square feet. • Distance between Signs. No digital freeway sign shall be located within 2,500 feet of any other digital freeway sign within the city limits.
• The sign structure supporting and surrounding the digital display area shall be as small as feasibly possible so as to avoid any unnecessary height or width to the sign. The sign structure shall not add stylistic or architectural detailing to further call attention to the sign.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

• Decorative pole covering is required for newly constructed digital freeway signs as well as any existing traditional billboard that is converted to a digital freeway sign. Such covering shall be simple and streamlined in material and design so as to not call further attention to the sign. • Digital freeway signs shall display static messages only, and shall not have animation, movement, or the appearance or optical illusion of movement in or on any part of the sign structure, design, or pictorial segment of the sign. Each static message shall not include flashing or scintillating lighting or varying light intensity. • Each message on the sign must be displayed for a minimum of eight seconds. • Digital freeway signs shall not operate at brightness levels of more than 0.3 foot-candles above ambient light, as measured using a foot-candle meter at a distance of 250 feet from the sign face. Each digital display area shall have a light sensing device that will adjust the brightness of the sign as ambient light conditions change throughout the day.
• The sign will not require substantial trimming or reduction of existing vegetation and landscaping. The sign will not obstruct or obscure on-site signs on the same or adjacent properties. • The sign shall not create a visibility hazard to traffic on adjacent streets, freeways, or parking areas. The sign will not reduce parking availability as required by this title. The sign will not interfere with on-site vehicular circulation.

CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS: TITLE 4, DIVISION 6, CHAPTER 1 OUTDOOR ADVERTISING Outdoor advertising displays require a permit from Caltrans if they are within 660 feet from the edge of the right- of-way and viewed primarily by persons traveling on the main-traveled way of the freeway (Caltrans 1998). The northern edge of the project site is approximately 150 feet from the edge of right-of-way of US 50.

3.1.2 D ISCUSSION
Because the project site is located in an urban area, the discussion under checklist question c) will address the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. A scenic vista is generally considered a view of an area that has remarkable scenery or a resource that is indigenous to the area. The City of Rancho Cordova has no officially designated scenic vistas in the vicinity of the project site. The project site consists of a vacant urban lot with nearly level topography surrounded by existing developed properties. As described in the Project Description (Section 2), Exhibit 2.4-2 shows the sign in relation to the planned Rancho Cordova Parkway Overcrossing
that would span the highway just east of the west location sign and Exhibit 2.4-3 shows the plan view of the east location sign, as well as a photo-simulation of the sign as viewed from eastbound US 50. Refer to Exhibit 2.4-4 and Exhibit 2.4-5 for photo simulations and a Plan View of the West Location (Exhibit 2.4-4) and a Plan View of the East Location (Exhibit 2.4-5). These figures demonstrate the poor visual quality of the site and the lack of scenic vistas in the surrounding areas. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? No Impact. The project site is not located along a State scenic highway, nor does it contain any other scenic resources, such as rock outcroppings or historic buildings (California Department of Transportation 2019). The ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

nearest State scenic highway, SR 160, is over 17 miles west of the proposed project area (California Department of Transportation 2019).
c) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant. The proposed project is construction and operation of two advertising billboards with electronic displays on the south side of US 50 and Folsom Boulevard between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue in the City of Rancho Cordova. This is an urban area consisting of commercial uses northeast of the project site and residential uses north of the project site. As stated under checklist item a), the visual quality of the project site is low because of the surrounding urbanized environment and because the project site does not contain any unique visual features or landscape characteristics that influence visual quality. In addition, the overpass for the Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange Project (City of Rancho Cordova and Caltrans 2014) will cross the project site approximately 150 feet east of the west sign location.

The proposed project would require site design review and conditional use permits from the City of Rancho Cordova. In addition, the project would be required to meet the city’s digital freeway sign standards (Section

23.743.150 of the municipal code) or obtain variances as allowed. For example, the east location sign (Exhibit

2.4-5) is proposed to meet the 60 feet height limit, while the west location sign (Exhibit 2.4-4) is proposed to be 70 feet in height and would require a variance. The two digital billboards would be located approximately 2,900 feet apart and, therefore, meet the requirement that no digital freeway sign shall be located within 2,500 feet of any other digital freeway sign within the city limits. In addition, the billboards would not operate at brightness levels of more than 0.3 foot-candles above ambient light, automatically adjusting as ambient light conditions change. The digital billboards would have display areas of 1,200 square feet, which is greater than the 672 feet specified in the ordinance. However, the project proponent has requested a deviation from this standard, as is allowed under the digital freeway signs operating agreement with the city. The operating agreement will also require removal of the existing billboard located at the east end of the project site. Finally, as the project site is within 660 feet of a Caltrans right-of-way (US 50), it would be subject to Caltrans permit requirements and applicable standards for outdoor advertising displays.

Construction at the west sign location would involve the removal of 20 trees for installation of the monopole and for preparation of a staging area associated with the planned highway overpass to the east. In addition, to improve visibility of this sign from US 50, 7 trees would be removed from a small area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound lane of US 50. This area is shown on Exhibit 2.4-1. The project would conform with the City of Ra
ncho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance. Ordinarily, the ordinance requires applicants who are granted permits to remove protected trees to prepare and implement a tree replacement plan. However, since there is no suitable location to replace trees on site, and there are no designated off-site locations, in-lieu fee payments would be made instead.

Because the proposed project would comply with city regulations governing location and design for digital freeway signs as well as a digital signs operating agreement with the city and comply with the City of Rancho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant. The operation of both proposed advertising billboards with electronic displays would introduce new sources of lighting. However, the billboards would incorporate light sensing technology that would automatically adjust the brightness of the sign as ambient light conditions change throughout the day so that the brightness level would remain at 0.3 foot-candles (fc) above ambient light, as measured using a foot-candle meter at a distance of 250 feet from the sign face, as required by Section 23.743.150 (Digital Freeway Signs Overlay) of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code.

A foot-candle is a measurement of light intensity. One foot-candle is defined as enough light to saturate a one-foot square with one lumen of light. One lumen of light is approximately equal to the amount of light put out by one birthday candle that is one foot away from you. To put this in perspective, the average incandescent light bulb that is one foot away from you is about 100 watts, which is 1.6 foot-candles. As an example of how the project would adjust to ambient light conditions, unobstructed full sunlight shining on the project area on a sunny day at noon is estimated to be about 10,000 fc, and in this case, the sign would illuminate to 10000.3 fc (Facility Solutions Group 2019). An average night has about 0.005 fc, so at that time, the digital billboards’ brightness would be

0.305 fc (Facility Solutions Group 2019). Thus, the billboards would never be much brighter compared to ambient conditions than a single birthday candle or incandescent lightbulb viewed from 1 foot away. In this case, the light would be measured by a foot-candle meter from 250 feet away, so 0.3 candles above ambient light would be the equivalent of looking at about 75 birthday candles from 250 feet away. It should be noted that ambient conditions include standard streetlights on Folsom Boulevard, standard streetlights on the nearby Tenderfoot Drive. As noted above, existing parking lot lighting is not in use.

Construction activities are expected to last one month and would occur during the day and would not require nighttime lighting or other sources of light or glare. Therefore, for the reasons discussed above, the project would not create a substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

This page intentionally left blank
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources.

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as updated) prepared by
the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
information compiled by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment
project; and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California
Air Resources Board.

Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.2.1 S ETTING
The project site is a former mini-golf course with a building and associated parking lot, and no records were found indicating that this land has been used for agriculture in the last century. The project site and surrounding area are not zoned for agricultural uses (see Section 3.10, “Land Use and Planning,” for further discussion).

The California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmland classifications—Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance—recognize the land’s suitability for agricultural production by considering the physical and chemical characteristics of the soil, such as soil temperature range, depth of the groundwater table, flooding potential, rock fragment content, and rooting depth.

The classifications also consider location, growing season, and moisture available to sustain high-yield crops.

Together, Important Farmland and Grazing Land are defined by the California Department of Conservation as “Agricultural Land” (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21060.1 and 21095).

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines focuses the analysis on conversion of agricultural land on Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland; therefore, any conversion of these lands would be considered a significant impact under CEQA. According to the Sacramento County Important Farmland map, published by the California Department of Conservation’s Division of Land Resource Protection, the project site and adjacent lands are designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. This is land that is used for residential, industrial, commercial, institutional, and public utility structures and for other developed purposes (California Department of Conservation [DOC] 2018a). The California Department of Conservation does not consider Urban and Built-Up Land to be Important Farmland.

Under the California Land Conservation Act of 1965, also known as the Williamson Act, local governments can enter into contracts with private property owners to protect land (within agricultural preserves) for agricultural and open space purposes. No parcels within or adjacent to the project site are under Williamson Act contracts (DOC 2018b).

Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) defines forest land as land than can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. An arborist survey (Appendix B) conducted in June 2022 recorded 81 native oak trees and 2 non- native palm trees within the project site. While the western portion of the project site has a tree canopy that exceeds 10 percent cover, these trees do not exist within natural conditions. There is no land that qualifies as forestland within the project site.

3.2.2 D ISCUSSION
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. As discussed previously, the project site and surrounding areas are designated by the Sacramento County Important Farmland map, published by the California Department of Conservation’s Division of Land Resource Protection, as Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2018a). Urban and Built-Up Land is not considered ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Important Farmland under CEQA (Public Resources Code Sections 21060.1 and 21095 and CEQA Guidelines Appendix G). Therefore, the conversion of this land would not be considered a significant impact. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project site and surrounding area are not zoned for agricultural uses. No parcels within or adjacent to the project site are under Williamson Act contracts (DOC 2018b). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The project site is not zoned as forestland, timberland, or a Timberland Production Zone. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestry resources. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Approximately 20 native oak trees would be removed from the project site, and an additional 7 native oak trees would be removed from a small area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound side of US 50.

While there are areas within the project site that have a tree canopy that exceeds 10 percent cover, these trees do not exist within natural conditions; thus, there is no land that qualifies as forestland within the project site.

Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in conversion of forest land to non-forest use. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. See responses to items a) and d) above. Because no agricultural land uses or forestland are present within or adjacent to the project site, implementing the project would not result in other changes in the physical environment that cause the conversion of agricultural land, including Important Farmland, to non-agricultural uses or cause conversion of forestland to non-forest uses.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.3 AIR QUALITY

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
III. Air Quality.

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied on to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?

b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?

d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?

3.3.1 S ETTING
The project site is located in the city of Rancho Cordova, which is within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB). The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) regulates air quality within the SVAB.

Air quality is defined as the concentration of pollutants in relation to their impact on human health. Ambient concentrations of air pollutants are determined by the amount of emissions released by pollutant sources and the ability of the atmosphere to transport and dilute such emissions. Natural factors that affect transport and dilution include terrain, wind, atmospheric stability, and the presence of sunlight. Therefore, existing air quality conditions in the project area are influenced by factors such as topography, meteorology, and climate, as well as the quantity emissions released by air pollutant sources.

The SVAB climate is characterized by hot, dry summers and cool, rainy winters. Typically, winds transport air pollutants northward out of the SVAB; however, during approximately half of the time from July to September, the wind pattern shifts southward, blowing air pollutants back into the SVAB and exacerbating the concentration of air pollutant emissions in the air basin. In addition, between winter storms, high pressure and light winds contribute to low-level temperature inversions and stable atmospheric conditions, resulting in the concentration of air pollutants.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Individual air pollutants at certain concentrations may adversely affect human or animal health, reduce visibility, damage property, and reduce the productivity or vigor of crops and natural vegetation. Six air pollutants have been identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as being of concern both on a nationwide and statewide level: ozone; carbon monoxide; nitrogen dioxide; sulfur dioxide; lead; and particulate patter (PM), which is subdivided into two classes based on particle size – PM equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM 10) and PM equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers
in diameter (PM2.5).

Health-based air quality standards have been established for these pollutants by EPA at the national level and by CARB at the state level. These standards are referred to as the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and the California ambient air quality standards (CAAQS), respectively. The NAAQS and CAAQS were established to protect the public with a margin of safety from adverse health impacts caused by exposure to air pollution. Both EPA and CARB designate areas of California as “attainment,” “nonattainment,” “maintenance,” or “unclassified” for the various pollutant standards according to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) and the California Clean Air Act, respectively. Because the air quality standards for these air pollutants are regulated using human and environment health-based criteria, they are commonly referred to as “criteria air pollutants.” With respect to regional air quality, the SMAQMD region is currently designated as nonattainment for the NAAQS and CAAQS for ozone, and nonattainment for the NAAQS for 24-hour PM

2.5, and the CAAQS for PM10
(SMAQMD 2017). The SMAQMD region is designated as an attainment area for all other criteria air pollutants (SMAQMD 2017).

3.3.2 T HRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The SMAQMD published the Guide to Air Quality Assessment in Sacramento County (CEQA Guide), which provides air quality guidance when preparing CEQA documents (SMAQMD 2020). This document presents the SMAQMD’s CEQA thresholds of significance for construction and operational emissions. Table 3.3-1 lists the SMAQMD recommended thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions.

Table 3.3-1 SMAQMD CEQA Air Quality Thresholds of Significance Phase NOX ROG PM10 1 PM2.5 1
Construction 85 pounds/day N/A 80 pounds/day and 14.6 tons/year 82 pounds/day and 15 tons/year Operational 65 pounds/day 65 pounds/day 80 pounds/day and 14.6 tons/year 82 pounds/day and 15 tons/year Source: SMAQMD 2020.

Notes:
1 The particulate matter thresholds apply to projects that impose the SMAQMD’s Best Available Control Technology or Best Management Practices, as feasible. Otherwise, the particulate matter thresholds would be zero (0) pounds per day.

CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act; N/A = not applicable; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = suspended particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter; ROG = reactive organic gases; SMAQMD = Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality District.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.3.3 D ISCUSSION
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant with Mitigation. Air quality plans describe air pollution control strategies to be implemented by a city, county, or region. The primary purpose of an air quality plan is to bring an area that does not attain federal or State air quality standards into compliance with the requirements of the CAA and California Clean Air Act requirements. SMAQMD prepares plans to attain state and national ambient air quality standards in the SVAB. The Sacramento Federal Nonattainment Area (SFNA) was designated as “severe” nonattainment for the 1979 1-Hour ozone NAAQS, and this standard has been revoked. In September 2017, the SMAQMD approved a Redesignation Substitution request, which demonstrated that the SFNA met EPA's requirements to be redesignated as attainment based on ambient air quality monitoring. The 2017 Sacramento Regional 2008 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Further Reasonable Progress Plan is the most updated plan issued by SMAQMD, approved by CARB on November 16, 2017.

The CEQA Guide is intended to provide a tool to identify proposed development projects that may have a significant adverse effect on air quality. According to the CEQA Guide, projects whose emissions are expected to meet or exceed the recommended significance criteria will have a potentially significant adverse impact on air quality, and therefore, potentially conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SMAQMD air quality plans.

Project emissions that do not exceed these thresholds would not impact SMAQMD’s ability to reach attainment.

As discussed in detail below in Section 3.3.3(b), modeled project construction emissions would not exceed the SMAQMD thresholds of significance. However, although construction emissions would not exceed SMAQMD thresholds, due to the nonattainment status of the SVAB with respect to ozone, PM 10, and PM2.5, SMAQMD
recommends that all construction projects implement the SMAQMD Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (SMAQMD 2020). SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Emission Control Practices include such measures as watering the construction site twice daily, limiting vehicle speeds on unpaved roadways to 15 miles per hour, minimizing vehicle idling, covering haul trucks transporting soil, and cleaning paved roads. Without incorporation of SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Control Practices, the project construction activities would be considered to potentially conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SMAQMD’s air quality plans for PM and the impact is considered to be potentially significant.

Following construction activities, operation of the digital billboards would be limited to the indirect electricity consumption, which would generate greenhouse gas emissions (discussed in Section 3.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions) and would not generate criteria air pollutants. Therefore, operation of the project would not conflict with any applicable air quality plans.

Mitigation Measure AIR-1: Implement the SMAQMD Basic Construction Emission Control Practices.

Comply with Basic Construction Emission Control Practices identified by the SMAQMD and listed below or as they may be updated in the future:
• Water all exposed surfaces two times daily. Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to soil piles, graded areas, unpaved parking areas, staging areas, and access roads.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

• Cover or maintain at least two feet of free board space on haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material on the site. Any haul trucks that would be traveling along freeways or major roadways should be covered.
• Use wet power vacuum street sweepers to remove any visible track out mud or dirt onto adjacent public roads at least once a day. Use of dry powered sweeping is prohibited. • Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph). • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, parking lots to be paved should be completed as soon as possible.

In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Minimize idling time either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the time of idling to 5 minutes [required by California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449(d) and 2485]. Provide clear signage that posts this requirement for workers at the entrances to the site. • Provide current certificate(s) of compliance for CARB’s In -Use Off -Road Diesel -Fueled Fleets Regulation [California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449 and 2449.1]. • Maintain all construction equipment in proper working condition according to manufacturer’s specifications. The equipment must be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition before it is operated.

SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
With implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, the project would not conflict with or obstruct an applicable air quality plan. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the SVAB, and this regional impact is cumulative rather than being attributable to any one source. A project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future projects.

Construction of the project would generate temporary emissions of criteria air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides (NO
X), reactive organic gases (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), PM10, and PM2.5. As shown in Table 3.3-1, SMAQMD has quantitative thresholds for NOX, PM10, and PM2.5; thus, construction emissions for these pollutants were quantitatively estimated for the project.

As described in Section 2, Project Description, construction of both billboards is anticipated to occur in fall 2023, and the duration of construction would be approximately one month. Emissions associated with construction activities were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1. CalEEMod allows the user to enter project-specific construction and operational information, such as types of construction equipment, number and length of off-site motor vehicle trips, daily vehicle trips, and anticipated energy ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

consumption details. Table 3.3-2 presents the project’s daily and total construction-related emissions. Additional details are provided in Appendix A.

Table 3.3-2 Construction- Related Daily and Total Emissions Description NOX PM10 1 PM2.5 1
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 9.37 0.69 0.38
SMAQMD Threshold: Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 85 80 82 Total Emissions (tons) 0.08 <0.005 <0.005
SMAQMD Threshold: Annual Emissions (tons/year) N/A 14.6 15 Exceeds Thresholds? No No No
Source: SMAQMD 2020.

Notes:
1 The particulate matter thresholds apply to projects that impose the SMAQMD’s Best Available Control Technology or Best Management Practices, as feasible. Otherwise, the particulate matter thresholds would be zero (0) pounds per day. lbs/day = pounds per day; N/A = not applicable; NOX = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = suspended particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter; SMAQMD = Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality District; tons/year = tons per year.

As shown in Table 3.3-2, emissions associated with construction of the two billboards would not exceed SMAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, these emissions are not considered cumulatively considerable.

However, although construction emissions would not exceed SMAQMD thresholds, due to the nonattainment status of the SVAB with respect to ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, SMAQMD recommends that all construction projects implement the SMAQMD Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (SMAQMD 2020). Without implementation of the SMAQMD Basic Construction Emission Control Practices as described in Mitigation Measure AIR-1, the contribution of construction-related emissions from the project would have the potential to be cumulatively considerable, resulting in a potentially significant impact.

Following construction activities, operation of the digital billboards would be limited to the indirect electricity consumption, which would generate greenhouse gas emissions (discussed in Section 3.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions) and would not generate criteria air pollutants. Thus, operation of the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 would ensure that construction would not exceed SMAQMD’s thresholds of significance. The impact is considered less than significant with mitigation. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant. Some members of the population are especially sensitive to air pollutant emissions and should be given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SMAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residential areas are examples of sensitive receptors (SMAQMD 2020). The ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

project site is located on the south side of US 50 and Folsom Boulevard between Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue in the city of Rancho Cordova. Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project site include single-family residential uses north of US 50 in the project area, approximately 430 feet away.

Criteria Air Pollutants
As shown in Table 3.3-2, construction-related activities would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants, but at levels that would not exceed the SMAQMD regional thresholds of significance. The regional thresholds of significance were designed to identify those projects that would result in significant levels of air pollution and to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and federal ambient air quality standards, which were established using health-based criteria to protect the public with a margin of safety from adverse health impacts due to exposure to air pollution. As such, the criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction of the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial criteria pollutant concentrations. The digital billboards are electric; therefore, operation of the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial criteria pollutant concentrations. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to criteria air pollutants, construction of the project would also generate toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions, specifically diesel PM (DPM), associated with heavy-duty construction equipment operations. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) developed a Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (OEHHA 2015). Due to uncertainty in assessing cancer risk from very short-term exposures, OEHHA does not recommend assessing cancer risk for construction of projects lasting less than two months for the nearest residential receptor. Since the duration of construction activities for the project are anticipated to last approximately one month and would cease following completion of the project, the overall exposure period would not approach the requirements for assessing cancer risk (OEHHA 2015).

In addition, construction emissions would occur intermittently throughout the day and would not occur as a constant plume of emissions from the project site and would vary on a day-to-day basis. Concentrations of mobile-source diesel PM emissions are typically reduced by approximately 60 percent at a distance of around 300 feet (100 meters) (Zhu and Hinds 2002). Furthermore, the project would implement Mitigation Measure AIR-1, which requires implementation of idling limits and maintaining equipment in proper working condition, which would reduce construction-related TAC emissions. Due to the intermittent and temporary nature of construction activities, and the dispersive properties of TACs, as well as the fact that PM emissions would be far less than the SMAQMD emission threshold, short-term construction would not expose sensitive receptors to DPM emission levels that would result in a health hazard. As described previously, operation of the project would be limited to electricity consumption associated with operation of the two billboards, which would not be a source of TAC emissions. As a result, this impact would be less than significant. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant. The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depend on numerous factors, including the nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; wind speed and direction; and the presence of sensitive receptors.

Typically, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from the psychological (i.e., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to the ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

physiological, including circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache. The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and overall is quite subjective.

Potential construction-related sources of other emissions, such as those leading to odors, include diesel construction equipment that emit exhaust. However, because of the amount and types of equipment, the temporary nature of these emissions, and the highly diffusive properties of diesel exhaust, nearby receptors would not be affected by diesel exhaust odors associated with construction of the project. Construction activities associated with the project would be minimal and the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature. Operation of the project would remain similar to existing conditions and would not add any new odor sources. As a result, the project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

This page intentionally left blank.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?

3.4.1 S ETTING
Field reconnaissance, database searches, and background literature review were conducted to characterize biological resources present or with the potential to occur within the project site. No protocol-level wildlife or botanical surveys have been conducted within the project site to date. A site reconnaissance survey was conducted on March 8, 2023. During this survey, land cover types and aquatic features were mapped within the 11.4 acre project site, plus a 200-foot buffer in order to capture conditions immediately surrounding the project site. The project site plus the 200-foot buffer comprises the biological study area (BSA), which totals approximately 58.4 acres. Background research for this survey included a records search of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) (USFWS 2023), the California Resources Agency Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2023), the California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Inventory (CNPS 2023), and the National Wetlands Inventory (USGS 2023). Appendix B contains a comprehensive table of species with potential to occur within a five-mile radius of the BSA.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES
All plants with a California Rare Plant Rank are considered “special plants” by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The term “special plants” is a broad term used by CDFW to refer to all of the plant taxa inventoried in CDFW’s CNDDB, regardless of their legal or protection status. Plants ranked as California Rare Plant Rank 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B may qualify as endangered, rare, or threatened species within the definition of CEQA Guidelines Section 15380. CDFW recommends that California Rare Plant Rank 1 and 2 species be addressed within the context of CEQA analyses and documentation. In general, California Rare Plant Rank 3 and 4 species do not meet the definition of endangered, rare, or threatened pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15380; however, these species may be evaluated by the lead agency on a case-by-case basis to determine significance criteria under CEQA.

The term “California species of special concern” is applied by CDFW to animals not listed under the federal Environmental Species Act (ESA) or California Environmental Species Act (CESA), but that are nonetheless declining at a rate that could result in listing, or that historically occurred in low numbers, or have limited ranges, and known threats to their persistence currently exist. “Fully protected” was the first state classification used to identify and protect animal species that are rare or facing possible extinction. Most of these species were subsequently listed as threatened or endangered under CESA or ESA. The remaining fully protected species that are not officially listed under CESA or ESA are still legally protected under California Fish and Game Code, and qualify as endangered, rare, or threatened species within the definition of CEQA Guidelines Section 15380.

Site Description
The project site is a former mini-golf course with a building and associated parking lot. The project site is mostly paved with ruderal vegetation and trees in the western portion of the project site. The project site is bordered by railroad tracks, Folsom Boulevard, and US 50 to the north and by Folsom South Canal on the south. The community of Gold River is located north of US 50 and open space and industrial uses to the south. The project site is level and situated at an approximate elevation of 125–135 feet above mean sea level (amsl). In addition to the project site, the project involves a small area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound side of US 50 that contains native oaks.

Vegetation Communities and Habitats
The two land cover types within the project site and BSA: urban and ruderal disturbed. Vegetation in urban areas consist primarily of introduced ornamental trees and shrubs, as well as invasive weeds in disturbed areas. Area 1 (Exhibit 3.4-1) contains approximately 20 native oak trees, and the area between Folsom Boulevard and the eastbound side of US 50 contains 7 native oak trees. Exotic plant species may provide valuable habitat elements such as cover for nesting and roosting, as well as food sources such as nuts or berries. Native and introduced animal species that are tolerant of human activities often thrive in urban habitats. Urban/developed lands are generally not of high value for wildlife. Birds and mammals that occur in these areas typically include introduced species adapted to human habitation, including rock pigeon (Columba livia), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house mouse (Mus musculus), and Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus). Some native species persist in developed lands, including Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), and American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos). Urban habitat within the BSA covers approximately 37.4 acres.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Exhibit 3.4-1 Land Cover Types and Aquatic Features Map

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Ruderal communities occur south of the project site, north of the Folsom South Canal. While this area is subject to frequent disturbance and dominated by non-native weedy species, this area is densely vegetated and could provide moderate foraging potential for nesting bird species. Vascular plant species associated with these areas typically include Canadian horseweed (Conyza canadensis), turkey mullein (Eremocarpus setigerus), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), yellow star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis), wild lettuce (Lactuca serriola), prickly sow thistle (Sonchus arvensis), common vetch (Vicia sativa), and shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana). Ruderal habitat within the BSA covers approximately 13.3 acres.

Aquatic Features
Buffalo Creek crosses the narrow sliver of the project site at the western extent of the parcel. The construction footprint and staging areas are restricted to the existing mini golf course and parking lot, which is separated from Buffalo Creek by a chain link fence and a patch of ruderal vegetation. Within the BSA, Buffalo Creek is densely vegetated with cattail (Typha spp.) and contains slow moving water. This portion of Buffalo Creek is moderately disturbed due to its proximity to nearby roadways, industrial uses, and public access.

Trees
The City of Rancho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance defines a protected tree as a native oak having a trunk diameter of at least six inches or greater, any tree species other than a native oak having a trunk diameter of at least 12 inches or greater on nonresidential property, any tree species other than a native oak having a trunk diameter of at least 24 inches or greater on residential property, any tree planted as a requirement tree for site development, tree permit conditions, landscape plan removal replacement, or other designated condition by the public works director or planning director (City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, Chapter 19.12). An arborist survey (Appendix B) was conducted in preparation for this project. This survey identified 90 protected trees on the project site and the off-site location between Folsom Boulevard and US 50.

Special-Status Species and Critical Habitat
The project site provides low value for wildlife. No burrows or nest sites for wildlife were observed within or adjacent to the project site at the time of the reconnaissance survey. The database searches identified previously documented occurrences of 19 special-status plant species and 21 special-status wildlife species in the vicinity of the project site (Appendix B). Of the 40 species known to occur in the vicinity of the project site, one special- status plant species (Sanford’s arrowhead [Sagittaria sanfordii]) could occur within Buffalo Creek. The remaining 39 special-status species are either unlikely to occur or have no potential to occur.

No critical habitat is located within or near the project site. The nearest critical habitat is 1.5 miles northwest of the project site along the American River, for the valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus). Critical habitat for Sacramento orcutt grass (Orcuttia viscida) is located 2.2 miles northeast of the project site.

Wetlands and Waters of the United States and State
Any areas that meet the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States” are regulated under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).

Waters of the U.S. include documented navigable waters of the United States; interstate waters; all other waters where the use, degradation, or destruction of the waters could affect interstate or foreign commerce; tributaries to ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

any of these waters, and wetlands adjacent to these waters. Potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are typically determined by conducting a wetland delineation according to USACE methods and guidelines.

However, because this site is heavily disturbed and no potential wetland features were observed on site during the reconnaissance-level survey, a wetland delineation survey was deemed unnecessary by the biologist. Additionally, a review of the National Wetlands Inventory showed that no wetlands are present within the project site.

Buffalo Creek bisects the westernmost portion of the parcel containing the project. This feature is approximately 600 feet west of the west location sign (Area 1).

Wildlife Movement/Corridors
The project site is located on an approximately 11.4-acre parcel that consists of a former mini-golf course with a building and associated parking lot; no wildlife movement corridors occur on the project site. The parcel is surrounded by US 50, Folsom Boulevard, light rail tracks on the north, and Folsom South Canal to the south. All of these features inhibit movement of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Trees on-site could support nesting migratory birds. A small section of Buffalo Creek crosses the westernmost sliver of the parcel and may provide a low-quality movement corridor for wildlife, including for waterfowl and other migratory birds. Project activities will be setback from Buffalo Creek by more than 500-feet. However, Buffalo Creek in the project site vicinity is highly modified, heavily disturbed, and likely of low value for most wildlife. Any wildlife using Buffalo Creek as a movement corridor are not likely to move onto the project site due to poor habitat quality in the project site, a lack of riparian cover along the creek and because of tall, steep banks that likely isolate Buffalo Creek from the project site.

South Sacramento County Habitat Conservation Plan
The project site is within the Urban Development Area (UDA) sub-area of the South Sacramento County Habitat Conservation Plan (SSHCP) plan area and the City of Rancho Cordova is a plan partner (Sacramento County 2018a). The UDA is the area within the SSCHP that is anticipated primarily for development. The proposed project consistency with the SSHCP is required under CEQA because the SSHCP has been adopted. While the installation of digital reader boards is not explicitly listed as a covered activity, covered activities described in the SSHCP are defined broadly to include planned urban growth and all ground-disturbing activities associated with urban development. Thus, this project could be considered a covered activity.

The SSHCP is intended to provide a streamlined process for special-status species and wetlands/waters related permitting in the plan area, providing a multi-species, multi-habitat conservation plan addressing the biological impacts of future urban development in the southern portion of the county. The SSHCP presents a conservation strategy that offsets habitat losses within the UDA through the establishment of large preserves outside of planned development areas that are funded through fee payments for development.

City of Rancho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance
The City of Rancho Cordova wishes to “guide the growth of [the] long-term community tree canopy that provides improved air quality, public and mental health, welfare, safety and environmental benefits to the residents, businesses, and visitors of Rancho Cordova.” As such, the Preservation and Protection of Private Trees, Title 19, Chapter 12 of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code protects certain trees and requires an approved permit be obtained before a protected tree has major pruning (pruning in a way which reduces the overall canopy of the ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

tree by 10 percent or more, or cutting of roots or branches greater than two inches diameter within a 12-month period) or to remove. Chapter 19.12.030 defines which trees are “protected trees” and are therefore subject to permits for removal as follows:

1. Native oak – Quercus lobata, valley oak; Quercus wislizenii, interior live oak; Quercus douglasii, blue oak; or Quercus morehus, oracle oak – having a trunk diameter of at least six inches or greater; or

2. Any tree species other than a native oak having a trunk diameter of at least 12 inches or greater on nonresidential property; or

3. Any tree species other than a native oak having a trunk diameter of at least 24 inches or greater on residential property; or

4. Any tree planted as a requirement tree for site development, tree permit condition, landscape plan removal replacement, or other designated condition by the public works director or planning director.

3.4.2 D ISCUSSION
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Trees in and around the project site could provide suitable nesting habitat for common, urban adapted migratory birds and raptors, such as Brewer’s blackbird, western scrubjay, American crow, and red-tailed hawk. These birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code. Project construction includes the removal of 27 trees that could provide suitable nesting habitat for birds and roosting habitat for bats. If construction activities occur during nesting bird season (typically February 1 to August 30) or roosting bat season (May 1 to August 31), removal of any trees could potentially result in the destruction of an active nest. Additionally, birds nesting or bats roosting within 250 feet of active construction, within trees, shrubs, or in the dense ruderal vegetation south of the project site, may be disturbed by project construction noise and vibration, causing nest abandonment. Any potential impact on nesting birds or roosting bats would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Conduct Preconstruction Nesting Bird and Roosting Bat Surveys and Implement Appropriate Avoidance Buffers.

If construction would occur during the bird nesting season (typically February 1 to August 31) or roosting bat season (May 1 to August 31), project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct preconstruction surveys for nesting birds and roosting bats no more than 2 weeks prior to the start of ground-disturbing construction activities. The survey shall include all suitable nesting and roosting habitat within the project site and a 250-foot buffer to the project site. Suitable nesting habitat includes all trees, shrubs, and densely vegetated ruderal grassland. Suitable roosting habitat includes trees, buildings, and any other tall structures with crevices suitable for housing bats.

If nesting birds or roosting bats are located during the preconstruction nesting bird and roosting bat survey, an appropriate “non-disturbance” buffer will be established by a qualified biologist to protect the ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

nest from project-related disturbances until the nest has fledged or is no longer active. An appropriate non-disturbance buffer shall be determined based on the species nesting, site conditions (e.g., existing level of disturbance), and biologist observations and professional judgement. Typical “non-disturbance” buffers are 100 feet for passerines and 250-feet for non-special status raptors and roosting bats. Smaller buffers may be implemented in some circumstances, if nest monitoring by a qualified biologist confirms project activities are not adversely affecting the nest or roost; this typically requires a period of monitoring prior to initiation of project activities to establish baseline nest activity.

SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Implementing Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce the potentially significant impact on nesting birds to less than significant because implementation of this measure would protect nesting birds that occur within the trees planned for removal and nesting birds in the vicinity of the project site from construction-related noise and vibrational disturbances, if project construction occurs during the bird nesting season. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. Sensitive natural communities include riparian habitat and other natural communities of special concern to resource agencies, areas protected under CEQA, or areas otherwise protected under local regulations and policies. Buffalo Creek and its associated riparian habitat is considered a sensitive natural community. While this feature is within the study area, it is not within the project footprint or within close enough proximity to the project footprint for it to be directly or indirectly impacted by construction activities. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. Construction of the two billboards would occur within the fence-line of the former mini-golf course.

Buffalo Creek bisects the westernmost section of the parcel; however, project activities would not extend past the existing fence-line of the former mini-golf course, building, and associated parking lot. There are no wetland features within this fenced urban area, and thus, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. No established migratory routes for native species occur on the project site. The project site is on a small, already developed parcel that is surrounded by US 50, Folsom Boulevard, and the Folsom South Canal, which inhibit movement of mammals, amphibians, and reptiles from nearby habitat to any potential low-quality habitat on site. The adjacent Buffalo Creek may serve as a movement corridor for common, urban-adapted, species, and waterfowl and wading birds. However, the proposed project does not propose activities within or along the banks of Buffalo Creek. Furthermore, noise and visual disturbances from temporary construction are not expected to rise above levels of existing urban disturbances along the Buffalo Creek corridor in the proposed ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

project vicinity. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with the movement of any native species, within established migratory corridors or within use of native wildlife nursery sites. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Of the 90 protected trees identified within the project site, project activities would result in the removal of 27 of these trees. Construction could also encroach into the root zone of up to 6 protected trees. Since there is no suitable location to replace trees on-site and there is no designated off-site location, the tree replacement plan will follow the guidelines in Chapter 19.12. 110.C.2 of the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code, which requires payment of an in-lieu fee when direct replacement is not feasible. For calculation of the replacement ratio, Chapter 19.12.110.D defines the ratio for which protected trees that are removed should be replaced using the following ratios: a tree in a 15-gallon container or smaller equals one-inch measured as diameter at standard height; a tree in a 24-inch box equals two-inch diameter at standard height; a tree in a 36-inch box or larger equals three-inch diameter at standard height. The contribution toward the in-lieu fund held by the Sacramento Tree Foundation or another acceptable in-lieu fund proposed by the City will be determined after permit approval.

Construction may encroach into the root zone of other protected trees, which could adversely affect the health of these trees, resulting in a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2 Protection of Trees During Construction The following measures shall be implemented prior to and during construction to ensure the health of trees that will be preserved:
• An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)-certified arborist, their designee, or the contractor with oversight from an arborist shall install tree protection fencing around all trees with canopies within 20 feet of construction areas. Tree protection fencing shall be installed prior to any clearing, grubbing, trenching, grading, or land disturbances. The fencing shall be installed around the dripline of the canopy. The fencing shall be temporary, readily visible, and a minimum of 4 feet high and constructed of chain link, orange plastic mesh fence, or a similar material with stationary posts at approximately 10-foot intervals. The fencing shall effectively keep the canopy and trunk of the tree clear from direct contact and damage by foot traffic, equipment, materials, and other disturbances, as well as preserve the roots and soil in an intact and non-compacted state. • During trenching or digging activities, any roots greater than 2 inches in diameter shall be trimmed using ISA root pruning standards as described in American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard A300 (Part 8) to prevent disease and decay from entering the tree. This protocol requires that the root be cut cleanly where the root stops shredding using a sharp tool (hand saw, sharp hand pruner, or sawzall). The root shall be cut perpendicular to growth, not at an angle like cut flowers.

Additionally, any roots encountered that are greater than 4 inches in diameter are potentially structural to the tree and shall not be impacted without consultation with an arborist for guidance on minimizing damage to the root.
• All large equipment such as cranes, excavators, backhoes, or trucks that are used to complete project activities shall remain on existing paved surfaces wherever possible and shall remain outside of the ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

fenced tree protection areas. All stockpiles of material shall be staged in a designated area located at least 5 feet outside of any tree canopy; this designated area shall be identified and communicated to all on site personnel prior to the start of construction. Equipment shall not be allowed to operate west of the line of the existing fence.
• Tarps or plastic shall be placed underneath the concrete truck or mixing location to prevent spilling of liquid onto a permeable surface, which could alter the pH of soil, harm vegetation or trees, or impact water quality of the water table. A spill kit shall be kept on site to properly manage the spilling or leaking of fluids on any type of surface within the project area. • Although tree pruning is not anticipated, if it is required for any reason, it shall be carried out in compliance with the ISA Tree-Pruning Guidelines and ANSI Standard A300 (Part 1). Any pruning that is greater than 10% of a tree’s canopy or limbs greater than 2 inches in diameter is considered major pruning, and an arborist shall be contacted prior to any work being completed for recommended practices to minimize pruning impacts. Construction personnel shall report unanticipated damage to trees from construction activities to the arborist or permit contact immediately.
• Before equipment staging or construction, an arborist or their designee shall inform all construction personnel on site of the tree protection measures in this document and shall provide a pamphlet to the construction manager summarizing the tree protection plan and general provisions specific to this project. The construction manager shall retain the pamphlet on site. Crew personnel shall be reminded to not stage equipment, drive equipment, or stockpile materials under any tree’s canopy on the project site because not all protected trees on site are subject to the tree protection fencing. At the time of the training, an arborist or their designee will also check that all the tree protection fencing is in place prior to any clearing, grubbing, trenching, grading, or land disturbances.

SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce the potentially significant impact on protected trees to a less-than-significant level because prior to construction, extensive steps would be taken to avoid unnecessary encroachment to the root zone and minimize any necessary encroachment. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less-than-Significant. The SSHCP final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (Sacramento County 2018b) includes general and covered species-specific avoidance and minimization measures for covered activities. General Measure Stream-2 requires a 100-foot stream setback from Buffalo Creek (measured from the top of bank) for all covered activities within the UDA where a creek or stream is within the project footprint. The project proposes to install two billboards, both to be installed placed greater than 600 feet east of Buffalo Creek. The project does not propose development within 100 feet of Buffalo Creek.

Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to further degrade conditions along Buffalo Creek with respect to the setback, as compared to existing conditions. All other avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures for covered species described in the draft SSHCP are consistent with the proposed project and Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would have a less-than- significant impact related to consistency with the provisions of the SSHCP.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 1