Agenda packet — Rancho Cordova City Council, February 20, 2024 (part 4 of 4)

Page 9 of 47 ends

Comment 21 - Chaponot

Hi Arlene,

I want to discuss the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project on Highway 50, and its potential negative impact on Gold River residents. I believe that none of us in the neighborhood would welcome this addition. Frankly, it seems like an eyesore, and I strongly believe we can find a more meaningful and appealing use for the 11 acres that would benefit our community.

I kindly urge you to consider the importance of maintaining the sense of community in our neighborhood and avoid turning it into something resembling the Las Vegas Strip. Your support in vetoing this project would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards,

Brett Chaponot
Gold River Homeowner

Response 21

See Response 1.

Comment 22 - Child

Respectfully submitted,
Julie Child
Gold River resident

Response 22

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 23 - Clark

Arlene,

I’m writing to provide my concern on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you for your consideration.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 392 of 526 ends

Page 10 of 47 ends

Kim Clark

Response 23

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 24 - Coleman

I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thanks,
Jerry Coleman
Gold Spike Village, Gold River, CA

Response 24

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 25 - Cooper

Hello,

Lawrence Cooper

Response 25

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 26 - Coyne

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones:

As a Gold River resident of 32 years, I’m writing in opposition to the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50. While it may bring revenue to the City of Rancho Cordova, I believe it will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. The bright, illuminating lights will bring unwanted "visual noise" to the Gold River residents who live near the Highway 50 freeway. Those residents already will be adversely affected by the approved Freeway Interchange that will create a steady stream of car lights into those same homes. The aforementioned Freeway Interchange was strongly opposed by Gold River residents, but nonetheless, approved by the City of Rancho Cordova.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 393 of 526 ends

Page 11 of 47 ends

Please consider your neighboring community of Gold River. We bring value to the City of Rancho Cordova by the beauty and consistency of our development and the close proximity we share. Please be a good neighbor!

I respectfully request your reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. We must have a greater vision for this fast-growing region and Highway 50 corridor. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you for your consideration of this email.

Michael & Terry Coyne

Response 26

See Responses 1 and 20. Section 3.21 of the IS/MND evaluated the potential longer-term visual/aesthetic impacts resulting from the proposed project in combination with the Rancho Cordova Parkway Interchange Project.

Comment 27 - Craig

Hello,
I'm writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Respectful,
Peter and Rosa Craig

Response 27

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 28 - Cutler

Dear Director McCaslin

I'm a Gold River resident and this is my feedback about the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, Due to its placement and size the glow of the proposed signage will be visible from my home and will be an annoying eyesore. It will be objectionable year-round - longer on winter evenings and irritating in summer when bedroom windows are open. Please consider the impact on all of Gold River and do not approve its construction.

Robert Cutler
11601 Union Mill Way
Gold River

Response 28

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 394 of 526 ends

Page 12 of 47 ends

See Response 1.

Comment 29 - Czapla

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones,

We live in Gold River.

I have reviewed the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (draft) document, dated September 2023.

It appeared to suggest the environmental factors potentially affected, “population and housing” is not seen as having any potential significant impact by this project.

I contend that the two proposed billboards (operating 24 hours a day, 7 days week, 365 days a year - with digital messages with a minimum display transition time of 8 seconds for each message) do offer a significant impact on our neighborhood living environment. These billboards will have a level of impact on our communities residents, and our vast nocturnal wildlife population - specifically at night.

I served on the county zoning board in Michigan, before we moved to California, and recognize all the factors that need to be considered on the impact of such decisions (removed from revenue considerations). The planning of one similar digital billboard when in Michigan, was approved in an area that had minimal impact on area residents, environment, and its potential as a traffic distraction. I mention traffic distraction, due to the visual intensity of this type of sign (both day or night).

At the very least, I would hope that some type of lumen limits would be imposed on the signs — especially during nighttime hours, for the reasons stated above.

Thank you for this opportunity to convey our concerns, and for your genuine consideration.

Sincerely,

Linda Czapla
Lawrence Czapla
11400 Gold Hill Court, Gold River, Ca 95670

Response 29

See Responses 2 and 20. Regarding population and housing, the IS/MND concluded the project would not induce population growth in the area because it is not anticipated that workers would relocate to the project area from other areas in the county or region; therefore, there would be no impact. The IS/MND evaluates the effects of the project on wildlife in Section 3.4.

Comment 30 - Denny

Good morning Ms. Granadosin-Jones,

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 395 of 526 ends

Page 13 of 47 ends

I am a resident of Gold River and have received the letter from the city of Rancho Cordova regarding the Hwy 50 billboard project.

Page 3 ends

or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?" The response is that it would be less than significant.

How anyone could come to the conclusion that 1,344 square feet of illuminated signage along Hwy 50 shining directly into three Gold River villages would be "less than significant" is shocking.

At 70 feet tall, there would be obvious impacts to hundreds of residents of Gold River, so their conclusion should be that the project would have a "significant impact" to residents.

In their analysis, they also do not address or consider night-time light impacts on Gold River residents. A total of 1,344 square feet of illuminated sign at night will be significant.

Please let this serve as my formal opposition to this project.

Thank you,

Julie Denny

Response 30

See Response 1. See Response 20 regarding the light and glare impact conclusion of less than significant.

Section 3.1 of the IS/MND concluded that the impact of the project on scenic quality in an urbanized area would be less than significant because it 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 the City of Rancho Cordova Tree Preservation Ordinance.

Comment 31 – De Rosa

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River.

I’m alarmed that this is the first opportunity I’ve had to hear about it, and you are about to go ahead with this project. It has the feel of avoiding the opportunity for such input so you can build without dealing with the people whom it impacts. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Gale De Rosa

Response 31

See Response 1.

Comment 32 - DeSimone
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 396 of 526 ends

Page 14 of 47 ends

Response 32

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 32 - Dodds

Hello. We live in Pioneer Village. Please consider this proposal carefully. It appears to us to be a colossally poor idea. Light pollution is more and more recognized as a problem to people and animals.

If even one neighbor is inconvenienced By this commercial process, it should not be approved.

Thank you

Dave and Sharon Dodds

Response 32

See Responses 1 and 20. The IS/MND evaluates the effects of the project on wildlife in Section 3.4.

Comment 33 - Dodge

Response 33

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 34 - Donohue

Dear Ms. Arlene Granadosin-Jones

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents of Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you

Jim Donohue

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 397 of 526 ends

Page 15 of 47 ends

Response 34

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 35 - Ehlers

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the above project plan for Highway 50, which will adversely impact residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the lights will have on residences in our community. While the interchange and freeway work may be necessary and approved, having an adverse impact to a residential community in close proximity is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and possibly moved.

Sincerely,
Josh Ehlers
Gold River Resident

Response 35

See Response 1.

Comment 36 - Erickson

Regarding your proposed installation of Digital Billboards along Highway 50 between Sunrise Blvd and Hazel, I'm very much against the project and disappointed in Rancho Cordova for even considering it.

I live in Gold River, which is approximately 40 years old. It is a very nice community and well maintained. My family moved to Gold River from Carmichael due to our neighborhood's lack of concern for maintaining and improving their community. We now pay HOA fees in Gold River to invest in keeping the neighborhood well maintained to protect property values.

Installing very large and illuminated billboards highly cheapens the entire area. A large number of Gold River houses parallel the proposed site along highway 50. As it is, some houses can hear the traffic noise and don't need to add bright lights and billboards nearby. I can only guess what type of advertisement would be shown on the billboards-- attorney's seeking clients for auto/motorcycle wrecks. Or better yet Gold Club Centerfold featuring Bambi. In addition, we recently took a trip through LA and the billboards looked cheesy and are very distracting to drivers who do not need further distractions.

I would like to believe the planning commission would consider older communities and the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods and not desert them while concentrating on new developments. New developments are welcome but not at the expense of existing areas in the community.

Please add my name and email to the mailing list of interested parties so that I can attend any public meetings on this matter. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Pete Erickson

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 398 of 526 ends

Page 16 of 47 ends

Response 36

See Responses 1 and 2. The IS/MND evaluates the project’s noise effects in Section 3.13.

Comment 37 - Espinosa

Respectfully,
Maria Espinosa
Gold River resident

Response 37

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 38 - Fennel

As a resident of Gold River, I respectfully request that you reconsider this project. It will have a negative effect on the residents of Gold River with the bright illumination all throughout the night. Perhaps you can consider another location or reduce the size and length of time that the sign would be illuminated.

Thank you for your consideration,
Llona Fennel
2230 Fort Point Drive
Gold River, CA 95670

Response 38

See Response 1.

Comment 39 - Fine

Good morning- I am commenting on the proposed digital illuminated mine shaft signage. Most certainly progress is progress, however, it is very unclear to many of us why there would be a necessity to propose digital illuminated signage at this location instead of the normal non-illuminated freeway signage found at the freeway exits. I am not aware of any other freeway exit signage that is digital and illuminated except for a few emergency sign notifications randomly placed along highway 50 and not impacting the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Moreover, Gold River is a charming and well maintained community priding itself on the importance of its many parks and trails and the surrounding natural wonders of the unspoiled environment. The proposed lights, alone, would be a seriously negative environmental impact destroying the nature and quality of Gold River. The impact to at least five (5) large villages, at a minimum, caused by lights blazing into all of these private residential yards is unacceptable and not necessary and a massive interference with the quiet enjoyment of their property.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 399 of 526 ends

Page 17 of 47 ends

With regard to the height and size of the proposed signage, I would like to request data on a size comparison of this proposed project to the other existing signage to determine whether the proposed structure is appropriate in size whether it is illuminated or not. Based on the environmental impact, I would request a review and reconsideration of this project as proposed.

Sincerely,
Robin Fine
Gold River

Response 39

See Response 20.

Comment 40 - Freeman

Hello, I recently learned about the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50. I am opposed to this project which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have on the nearby neighborhood and residents. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved to another location. Thank you.

Response 40

See Response 1.

Comment 41 - Freitas

Hello, I’m writing regarding the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Crystal Freitas
Gold River Resident

Response 41

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 42 - Fuchslin

Arlene:

I am in opposition to the proposed Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50. This project will adversely impact the residents in Gold River and if completed will add 2 additional 70 foot tall electronic signs in the Mine Shaft property area. With 2 similar signs already in place in that area, this would result in (4) 70 foot tall bright electronic signs within app. a 1.5 mile stretch. This is not an acceptable placement of additional lighting as is being proposed and I am against this project being ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 400 of 526 ends

Page 18 of 47 ends

moved forward. Finally, these signs will potentially be a source of driver distraction resulting in a driver safety issue as well being a source of unnecessary light pollution.

For these reasons, I am against this entire project.

Ralph Fuchslin
Gold River Resident

Response 42

See Responses 1 and 2.

Comment 43 - Fusco

With respect I would like to beg you NOT to move forward with this Billboard Project.

I live on Tenderfoot Drive and I am already fearful of the "overpass" project planned that will FOR SURE affect me and my property value. This feels unfair to plan 2 horrible projects in the exact same area - feels like there is no consideration for the neighborhood and the live humans that live in this neighborhood.

I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate in my opinion, and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Please consider how you would feel if this was happening to your neighborhood.

Is there NOT a better place for these 2 obnoxious billboards, somewhere that would NOT affect people in their homes....
-Pam Fusco

Response 43

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 44 - George

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones,
I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have.

It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved. Thank you for your consideration into this matter.

Sincerely,
Constance George
Resident of Gold River

Response 44
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 401 of 526 ends

Page 19 of 47 ends

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 45 - Gerety

Hello,

As residents of Gold River since 2001, we are concerned, and in opposition to the proposed Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50.

We believe that the illuminated signage will adversely impact the residents of Gold River, and the quality of life we enjoy. We’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate so close to a highly populated residential area, and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

We sincerely hope the City of Rancho Cordova reconsiders the signage, and either cancels the project, or provides a non-illuminated alternative.

Thank you,
Chris and Merrin Gerety
Sutter Village

Response 45

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 46 - Ging

Arlene, I would like you to consider not placing these billboards on Highway 50. There’s enough distraction already with signs and people going too fast and LED headlights making it difficult to see. I would appreciate you considering my concerns for additional signage, that distracts drivers from concentrating on the road. Thank you.

Constance Ging

Response 46

See Response 2.

Comment 47 - Giordano

Dear Arlene Granadosin-Jones,
Senior Planner with the City of Rancho Cordova Planning Division

My husband and I just learned of the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard project proposed along Highway 50.

Our view is that this will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. We respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 402 of 526 ends

Page 20 of 47 ends

Thank you in advance for your consideration
Traci Giordano

Response 47

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 48 - Goggins

Dear Arlene,

I am writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Sincerely,
Karon Goggins

Response 48

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 49 - Goldstene

Dear Arlene and the City of Rancho Cordova Planning Division —

We are writing to comment against the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50. This project will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have on the neighborhood and the environment. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you,
James and Jami Goldstene

Response 49

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 50 - Greeson

I strongly oppose the installation of any more digital billboards along Highway 50. I believe they pose a serious safety hazard by causing egregious and totally unnecessary distractions to freeway drivers. Cell phones are bad enough distractions causing many collisions, but to now add more digital billboards along Hwy 50 is VERY unwise.

Gary Greeson, Lt Col, USAF (Retired)
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 403 of 526 ends

Page 21 of 47 ends

Response 50

See Responses 1 and 2.

Comment 51 - Haakenson

Dave & Linda Haakenson

Response 50

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 51 - Hafner

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River with nighttime illumination. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is very impactful and needs to be rethought and/or moved to and are that does affect negatively nearby residential neighborhoods.

Hubert Hafner
Gold River resident

Response 51

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 52 - Hedges

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved. Our skylines are already too bright and can cause many problems for birds as well as our home's views and peaceful atmosphere. We do NOT need a large illuminated sign at night that is so obtrusive.

Please reconsider....this is a horrible idea.

Mr & Mrs Hedges
Gold River

Response 52
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 404 of 526 ends

Page 22 of 47 ends

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 53 - Helms

To whom it may concern,

Thank you,
Trevor Helms

Response 53

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 54 - Hennings

Hi,

As a resident of Gold River and HOA Vice-President, I'm writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50.

I am deeply concerned that the two proposed billboards will adversely impact residents in Gold River, particularly to those living in Villages closest to Highway 50 and the proposed billboard sites. 1344 square feet of illuminated signs is significant. I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the negative impact of illuminated billboards upon residents as a result of this proposed project.

Thank you for your consideration.

Susan Scott Hennings
Stanford Court Village

Response 54

See Response 1.

Comment 55 - Hernandez

To whom it may concern:

The proposed signs will be very impactful on the homes in Gold River as they produce significant light.

The impact will be significant in the Gold River Area. Please know that I am opposed to these signs for these reasons.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 405 of 526 ends

Page 23 of 47 ends

Anthony

Response 55

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 56 - Houston

I've recently heard about the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River where I live. In particular, I'm in Carson Creek which is directly across Highway 50 from Mine Shaft. I've heard the concerts they had over their and I'm not looking forward to the additional light these large screens will project. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. At least shut them off at night time so residents can sleep (like we have for noise after 10 PM).

Regards,
Steve Houston

Response 56

See Response 1.

Comment 57 - Jackson

I’m writing to provide commentary on along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Response 57

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 58 - Jacobs

Dear Ms. Agranadosin-Jones:

I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River.

While the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration addressed the impact of the billboards on the Gold River residents, I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will actually have.

The billboards are not appropriate and need to be rethought and/or moved.

Sincerely,
Anne Jacobs
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 406 of 526 ends

Page 24 of 47 ends

Response 58

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 59 - Janwar

Hello there, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I'm a resident in Gold River and I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Mike

Response 59

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 60 - Johnson

Response 60

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 61 - Wellman

Dear Arlene Granadosin-Jones,

I am writing to you as a resident of the Gold River Community. Simply stated: I am very against these signs. We are all inundated with signage, lights, and noise. Gold River makes every effort to keep our community 'as is'. And I wish this for all people: that we can live in a space where we have to think for ourselves and not have signs directing or encouraging us to buy something or attend an event or whatever it may be , where we get to have peace and quiet, and less impacts into our everyday life.

I see truly no benefit to this. Except the concept of more information.

Please NO SIGNS.

Robin Joy Wellman

Response 61

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 407 of 526 ends

Page 25 of 47 ends

See Response 1. See Response 1. The IS/MND evaluates the project’s noise effects in Section 3.13.

Comment 62 - Kam

Best regards,
Sin Kam
Property owner of Gold River

Response 62

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 63 - Keane

It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved. These billboards are intrusive to neighboring communities.

Thank you,
Lynn Keane

Response 63

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 63 - Keirns

David and Alicia Keirns

Response 63

See Responses 1 and 20.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 408 of 526 ends

Page 26 of 47 ends

Comment 64 - Kensky

Thank you ,
Katherine Kensky

Response 64

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 65 - Kier

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones:

Hello, I’m writing to request a further review on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway

50. The size and scope of the signs will definitely negatively impact residents within Gold River. Is there any way you could reconsider where the signs are being placed – possibly further south – so there would be less impact to residential citizens?

Thank you,
Teri Kier
Gold River Resident

Response 65

See Response 1.

Comment 66 - Kopitske

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50.

This willl adversely impact the residents in Gold River due to the illumination (plus impact of distracted drivers). I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placements, height, and the impact that these illuminated Billboards will have. This is not appropriate adjacent to a residential community. Place them along businesses such as by the U-Haul area along 50 just East of Sunrise BLVD as an example, but not as far back as the residential Gold River area from after Blue Cross to the business area described above. Placing them is a residential area is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Gold River Resident,
Andy Kopitske

Response 66

See Responses 1 and 2.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 409 of 526 ends

Page 27 of 47 ends

Comment 67 - Larson

Sincerely,
Linda Larson
Gold River resident

Response 67

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 68 - Lembi

George Lembi

Response 68

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 69 - Leopold

To Whom It May Concern,

I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. I don’t believe it is necessary to further clutter highways with more billboards and feel as if is this needs to be rethought and/or moved to another location.

Sincerely,
Jason Leopold

Response 69

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 70 - Lewis

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 410 of 526 ends

Page 28 of 47 ends

Bonnie Lewis, Resident
Pioneer Village, Gold River

Response 70

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 71 - Line

Hello,

Thank you,
Austin & Suzanne Lin

Response 71

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 72 - Litle

Hello,

I am writing to express concern about the impacts of the proposed illuminated billboards on Highway 50 adjacent to our Gold River residential community. This project will have adverse effects on our quality of life, enjoyment of our homes & neighborhood & will be seen as undesirable by future buyers affecting home values. Please consider designating these signs to a different area.

Sincerely,
Ellen Litle
Gold River resident

Response72

See Response 1. Regarding changes in property values, CEQA requires an analysis of physical impacts to the environment; it does not require analysis of social and economic impacts. Under CEQA, “an economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment.” (14 CCR §§ 15131 & 15382.) Effects analyzed under CEQA must be related to a physical change. (14 CCR § ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 411 of 526 ends

Page 29 of 47 ends

15358(b).) Social and economic impacts alone do not constitute a significant effect on the environment. (14 CCR §§ 15064(e), 15131 & 15382.)

Comment 73 - Loewy

To whom it may concern:

Please reconsider any billboard placement on highway 50...we worked so hard years ago to do away with them...and here they are, creeping back again...shame on you.

Dr. Roberta Springer Loewy
Rancho Cordova

Response 73

See Response 1.

Comment 74 - Lozano-Friedrich

Hello,
I live in Gold River and I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50. I believe this will adversely impact the residents in Gold River given the light reflected especially at night.

But I also ask why is it necessary to place more billboards along our highways….I remember a time when we were trying to “beautify America” by not putting so much advertising along these roads. We are already bombarded with advertising from so many mediums, do we really need more along the highway? I know income stream may be important but we so much distraction already on roads with drivers who may be on phones or under the influence.

I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought.

Sincerely,
Zori Lozano-Friedrich

Response 74

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 75 - Magni

Thank you.

Jeffrey Magni
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 412 of 526 ends

Page 30 of 47 ends

Carson Creek Village
Gold River CA

Response 75

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 76 - Malm

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones,

I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Sincerely,
Enid E. Malm

Response 76

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 77 - Masoud

Regards,
Masoud

Response 77

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 78 - McAlwee

Thank you for your consideration.

Response 78

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 413 of 526 ends

Page 31 of 47 ends

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 79 - McCaslin

Hello Arlene,
In response to the communication below. I would like to express my concerns that your analysis doesn’t address or consider night-time light impacts on Gold River residents. A total of 1,344 square feet of illuminated sign at night will be significant. Please consider moving these signs somewhere else.

Regards,
Socorro

Response 79

See Responses 1, 20, and 30.

Comment 80 – McCale, Robert

Greetings,
I am writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River and the Rancho Cordova community. Projects like this do not add anything positive to the residents of Rancho Cordova. It is a form of urban blight.

The city of Rancho Cordova has taken similar action before to make our community ugly. I remember when Rancho Cordova changed zoning so strip clubs can move into the area by Sunrise and Highway 50.

Who’s interest was served by that decision? Why do the people who represent citizens of Rancho Cordova hate the people they serve? I hope you see my point. We have enough ugliness in this area and we do not need to add huge billboards advertising casinos and auto malls.

Time for you to look after the citizens interests and not continue down this path of making our area look more like Los Angeles. Dump this project and let the sign company move their obnoxious signs further up the road.

Robert McHale

Response 80

See Response 1.

Comment 81 – McHale, Carolyn

Carolyn McHale

Response 81
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 414 of 526 ends

Page 32 of 47 ends

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 82 - Melnicoe

Dear Arlene Granadosin-Jones,

I am writing after learning of a proposal to build two 60- to 70-feet high digital billboards directly across the highway from Gold River. As Gold River is a residential area with hundreds of homes, this would seem to constitute bad planning. I have also heard that no consideration was given to Gold River -at least so far - in the plan for these billboards.

Having illuminated billboards in our sky at all hours of the night clearly would be a detriment to the residents who live here. We already have more than enough light pollution in the city, and a contract that benefits almost no one (other than those who would own and profit from it) seems like a very poor idea.

I respectfully ask that the placement and height of these billboards be reconsidered in light of (no pun intended) the impact they would have on Gold River residents. I have lived in my house for 39 years, so it is certainly fair to say that many of us were here first.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mark Melnicoe

Response 82

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 83 - Mercer

Thank you
y. mercer

Response 83

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 84 - Miller

Dear Ms. Granadosin,

As an owner of a Gold River home, I’m writing tegatding the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 415 of 526 ends

Page 33 of 47 ends

I and many other Gold River residents believe the billboards will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. We are a quiet and sleepy community and live here because of the low impact from light and sound pollution. The proposed billboards would greatly impact our community, especially with respect to light pollution.

I respectfully request the City and affiliates reconsider the sign placement, and at least address the height and the impact that the illuminating lights will have.

It is my belief the signs are not appropriate and need to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you for your consideration.

Catherine Ann Miller (Gold River resident)

Response 84

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 85 - Milne

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones,

Thank you.

Jen Milne

Response 85

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 86 – Montgomery, Celia

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones

I am writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Your time and attention to this matter are greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Celia Montgomery
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 416 of 526 ends

Page 34 of 47 ends

Response 86

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 87 – Montgomery, Tom

Arlene Granadosin-Jones,

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River and surrounding communities. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. We must do all we can to reduce both light and noise pollution whenever possible. As you know, this starts with making these decisions during the planning phase. I implore you to prioritize the care and health of the people of Rancho Cordova and Gold River over these type of commercial activities.

I’m sure that those who would profit from this, would think twice if they had to live next to them.

Please make the right decision in favor of those who live in our communities.

Thanks,
Tom Montgomery

Response 87

See Responses 1 and 20. The IS/MND evaluates the project’s noise effects in Section 3.13.

Comment 88 - Morris

Hello,

Please reconsider the above project that will impact Gold River neighborhoods with unwanted illumination from the current proposal. It needs to be reconsidered and placed elsewhere to prevent the unwanted light in our villages. Was any consideration given to the impact on other areas? Doesn’t seem so.

Thank You
Ken Morris
Gold River Resident

Response 88

See Response 1.

Comment 89 - O'Brien

Hi there!

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 417 of 526 ends

Page 35 of 47 ends

I am writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. While the lighting will not effect my address directly, it will do so to my Gold River community neighbors. This illuminated signage will be seen as a nuisance and lower their property values and, thus indirectly, mine and all homeowners in Gold River.

Secondarily, I object to more nighttime lighting in general, especially when it does not enhance security.

These signs could actually be a distraction to drivers and become a safety hazard.

I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placements, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. This project is not needed and not appropriate.

Please rethink this proposal and come up with a different approach.

Pamela O'Brien
Gold River resident

Response 89

See Responses 1, 2, 20, and 72.

Comment 90 - Orsburn

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have on our community. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved to an area that will not exude light pollution into a residential neighborhood. Thank you.

Kathy Orsburn

Response 90

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 91 - Panchal

Hello,

I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents of Gold River. We already have too much light pollution at night, and by adding these huge billboards, we are adding more lights at night, which are directly facing the community. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thanks
Dhruv
Gold River, CA

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 418 of 526 ends

Page 36 of 47 ends

Response 91

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 92 – Peters

Hello.

Respectfully submitted, Jim

Response 92

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 93 - Rasmusson

Hello, I am sending you an email to ask for reconsideration with the request to add digital Billboards along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. We respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have both on the residential neighborhood and the animals that reside in their natural habitat in the area. It is not appropriate and needs to be reconsidered for a different section of Highway 50 which will not impact the American River Parkway.

Thank you !
Katherine and Kaul Rasmusson

Response 93

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 94 - Rickey-Pidd

Michele Rickey-Pidd
Discovery Village Gold River

Response 94

See Responses 1 and 20.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 419 of 526 ends

Page 37 of 47 ends

Comment 95 – Rico, Louis
I strongly encourage the city of Rancho Cordova to reconsider its current plans for the placement and size of the electronic billboards to be placed along Interstate 50 near the Mine Shaft.

As a Gold River home owner I am concerned with the potential degradation of the quality of life for Gold River residents. This project also has the very real ability to impact home values in our community, something we all are concerned about, especially as we enter our golden years. As we age we bravely depend on our home values to increase which becomes, for many of us, to fund home care for ourselves or placement into residential care facilities.

The impact on our future can be negatively impacted by placement of the two planned electronic billboards. Additionally, once these electronic billboards are constructed you can be guaranteed that others will follow resulting in further devaluation of home values and will become an eyesore for our community.

I therefore ask that you reconsider installing electronic signs/billboards along the I50 corridor that parallels the Gold River community.

Respectfully
Louis Rico
Response 95

See Responses 1 and 72.

Comment 96 - Rico, Leticia
Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

More considerate planning went into the single digital billboard at Capitol Christian Center. They were asked to reduce the size and height of the billboard and it is located just as close to the residents of Rosemont. In the case of the Mine Shaft, there is the large established community of Gold River directly across Highway 50 that will certainly be impacted by TWO digital billboards. The excess lighting will negatively impact our outdoor life that many of us have invested in.

Response 96

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 97 - Robblee
Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 420 of 526 ends

Page 38 of 47 ends

sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be reconsidered.

Thank you.

Arthur and Mary Robblee
Discovery Village, Gold River

Response 97

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 98 - Sabbagh
Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Rich Sabbagh
Gold River Resident

Response 98

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 99 - Saverien

The proposed sign is too large and too tall. It also is a light pollutant.

Response 99

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 100 - Scheeler

Hello,

I’m writing to express my concerns on the mine shaft billboards project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Thank you,
Julia Scheeler
Gold River Resident

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 421 of 526 ends

Page 39 of 47 ends

Response 100

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 101 - Shulmister

Regards,
Jeff Shulmister
Gold River

Response 101

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 102 - Snopkowski
We are Gold River residents, and have concerns about the digital billboards that are under consideration at the Mine Shaft site. Have there been any tests to determine the impact of the brightness of the billboards at night on the residents of Gold River? Additionally, we don’t think the addition of more billboards adds anything of value to our community and consider them to be disruptive and distracting.

If we had a vote, I think we would vote against these billboards.

Thank you for your consideration.

With Best Regards,
Mark&Sharon Snopkowski
Gold River

Response 102

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 103 - Somorjai

Arlene,
Please do not install these billboards on highway 50 across from our neighborhood. My children's' bedrooms are in direct line of sight to where these billboards will be built. It will be like building floodlights right outside their windows. How will I expect them to sleep with these lights shining at them?

Please have mercy on my children!

Thank you
Roger
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 422 of 526 ends

Page 40 of 47 ends

Response 103

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 104 - Spencer

Good morning. On the behalf of all the residents in the Marshall Village of Gold River, I would like to state our opposition to the proposed illuminated billboards on Highway 50 between Sunrise and Hazel.

We feel that the addition of these billboards is inconsistent with the lifestyle of the community at large, particularly the Eureka, Gold Spike, and Carson Creek Villages. Whatever affects them also impacts us.

On behalf of the approximately 5,000 residents of Gold River, please say no.

— David Spencer, President, Marshall Village

Response 104

See Response 1.

Comment 105 - Tirrito
Hello,
I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’m very concerned with the lasting negative effect these billboards will have on our community. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Vittorio

Response 105

See Response 1.

Comment 106 - Traud

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. Please reconsider this as it will have a major impact to all of our houses along highway 50.

Response 106

See Response 1.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 423 of 526 ends

Page 41 of 47 ends

Comment 107 - Trimm

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50.

I am saddened to hear of this plan as a resident of Gold River. This is a residential community. We can already see flashing lights and hear music for events in the evening at Mine Shaft. While that is certainly not a problem on occasion, I'd hate to have this disturbance of unnatural lighting all night long. It affects our enjoyment of the nighttime stars/sky and can be disturbing to the wildlife here.

Thank you for your consideration.

Elizabeth Trimm

Response 107

See Responses 1 and 20. The IS/MND evaluates the effects of the project on wildlife in Section 3.4.

Comment 108 - Upton

Hello,

Thank you
Alan Upton

Response 108

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 109 - Vander Broek

Dear Arlene Granadosin-Jones,

I’m writing to provide commentary/feedback on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River and specifically my village, Carson Creek. As a long time resident of Rancho Cordova, I respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have as I do not believe it has been studied or nearby residents consulted. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Allyson Vander Broek

Response 109

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 424 of 526 ends

Page 42 of 47 ends

The IS/MND evaluates the effects of the project on wildlife in Section 3.4.

Comment 110 - Veach

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the above mine shaft billboards project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Shelby Veach
Gold river resident

Response 110

The IS/MND evaluates the effects of the project on wildlife in Section 3.4.

Comment 111 - Voelker

City of Rancho Cordova Planning Department,
I am writing you concerning the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. The mine shaft currently has excessive bright lighting that negatively impacts the living esthetics and quality of life for Gold River residents. In Eureka village the negative impact is the greatest. We have already had to complain to the city several times in the past about the excessive noise from the Mine Shaft at late hours of the day sometimes lasting two to three days until after 1:00 AM. The complaints about this nuisance have not been addressed by the city on how they plan to resolve the issue. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have especially since there is already excessive lighting in the area and the Mine Shaft already excessively has negative impacts on the quality of life for the residents of Gold River, especially those living in Eureka village. This project is not appropriate at this location and needs to be moved to a location that doesn't impact a housing community

Robert & Renee Voelker

Response 111

See Responses 1 and 20. The IS/MND evaluates the project’s noise effects in Section 3.13.

Comment 112 - Watts

Hello Arlene,
I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 425 of 526 ends

Page 43 of 47 ends

Kind regards,
Denise Watts

Response 112

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 113 - Wilkerson

Hello. I would like to make a comment regarding the Mine Shaft Visual Billboard Project. I certainly hope the advertising won’t be for topless bars or any other seedy business, as we have seen in the past.

Response 113

See Response 1.

Comment 114 - Wilkson, Brian

Arlene, just heard about the proposed two billboards on Highway 50 … IMHO a project like that will negatively impact Gold River’s residents particularly with reference to the effect of the light pollution which will come with two illuminated billboards of the proposed size. There are many locations along 50 East of Hazel where billboards won’t have such a negative and adverse impact on a residential area, and I hope (and request) that the City will reconsider the location of the billboards and either discontinue the project or choose another location(s)

I don’t think the Mine Shaft location on 50 is appropriate.

Thank you ….

Brian Wilkinson

Response 114

See Response 1.

Comment 115 - Williams

Hello,
I am writing to provide utter disappointment on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50 without considering the impact to those who live nearby. I ask one simple question:

Would you want this in YOUR neighborhood, permanently illuminating YOUR backyard every day from now until eternity??

If your honest answer is NO, then I respectfully ask that you reconsider the placement, the size and the impact that the illuminating lights will have on those of us that it will impact. This sign is not appropriate ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 426 of 526 ends

Page 44 of 47 ends

and needs to be rethought and/or moved to the backyard of the people who will benefit from it financially.

Regards,
Lili Williams

Response 115

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 116 - Williams-Keller

Hello, as a Gold River resident I’m writing to provide commentary on the above mine shaft billboards project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate and needs to be rethought and/or moved.

Response 116

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 117 - Wilson

Hello,

Thank you,
Chris and Susan Wilson

Response 117

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 118 - Witteborg

Response 118
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 427 of 526 ends

Page 45 of 47 ends

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 119 - Walcott

Hello, I’m writing to provide commentary on the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project along Highway 50, which will adversely impact the residents in Gold River. I’d respectfully request reconsideration of the sign placement, height, and the impact that the illuminating lights will have. It is not appropriate to this community and needs to be rethought and/or moved. Please inflict it on someone else’s living area.

Response 119

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 120 - Woolsey

Please reconsider the placement of these sign so close to our community. I understand you need the revenue from these monstrous signs, but does it have to come at the expense of our comfort and well being?

Katherine Woolsey

Response 120

See Response 1.

Comment 121 - Yan

Response 121

See Responses 1 and 20.

Comment 122 - Zirjacks

Ms Granadosin-Jones
I recently learned that the City of Rancho Cordova is considering issuing a Negative Declaration to serve as the environmental review action for the installation of two, 70-foot billboards on Hwy 50 near the Mine Shaft property. As this installation will be directly adjacent to the Gold River residential community, I strongly recommend that a thorough Lighting Impact Evaluation on this project be performed before considering the approval of a Negative Declaration.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 428 of 526 ends

Page 46 of 47 ends

Respectfully,
Winston Zirjacks

Response 122

See Responses 1 and 20.

Public Agencies

Comment Letter from Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (see attachment) [Note to reviewers: Due to length and formatting of the regional board and SMUD letters, we felt it would be best to attach the PDFs to this portion of the staff report.] Peter Minkel
Engineering Geologist

Response - CVRWQCB

The description of the Regional Board’s permitting requirements described is acknowledged. The project will comply with all such applicable requirements. With regard to water quality standards, Section 3.10 of the IS/MND notes that the project will comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Area Wide Stormwater Program and the City’s standard storm water runoff provisions for construction activities, such as runoff control and other measures set forth in the City of Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Chapter 15.12 (Storm Water Management and Discharge Control).

Comment from Sacramento Regional Transit District

Hi Arlene,

Thanks for the opportunity to review the IS-MND. FYI – a track warrant will need to be obtained from SacRT prior to construction, and for all future maintenance of the infrastructure, due to the distance from light rail tracks. Those requests can be directed to [email protected].

Thanks,
Sarah Poe
Planner

Response - SacRT

The requirement is acknowledged. The project applicant will obtain a track warrant from SacRT prior to construction.

Comment from Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District

There are no fire department comments for this project.

Matt Rieger
Fire Inspector II
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 429 of 526 ends

Page 47 of 47 ends

Response - Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District

The comment is acknowledged.

Comment Letter from Sacramento Municipal Utility District (see attachment) Jerry Park
Environmental Services Specialist

Response - SMUD

The requirements regarding underground transmission and distribution line easements, utility line routing, and electrical load needs are acknowledged. The project will comply with all applicable SMUD requirements. Section 3.6 of the IS/MND evaluates the project’s energy impacts. The analysis concluded that in terms of the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation, the project’s impact would be less than significant. In addition, the IS/MND concluded that the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. It should be noted that digital signs are designed to be energy efficient, with brightness limited to 0.3 candles above ambient light automatically adjusted up or down based on ambient light conditions. In terms of climate change, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were evaluated in Section 3.8 of the IS/MND. The analysis concluded that the project’s GHG emissions would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact on the environment. It also concluded that the project would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact with respect to conflicts with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. As part of pre-construction planning, the project applicant would address any potential need to relocate and or remove any SMUD infrastructure that may be affected in or around the project area.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 430 of 526 ends

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
30 October 2023

Arlene Granadosin-Jones
City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive

Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
[email protected]

COMMENTS TO REQUEST FOR REVIEW FOR THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION, MINE SHAFT DIGITAL BILLBOARDS PROJECT,
SCH#2023090677, SACRAMENTO COUNTY
Pursuant to the State Clearinghouse’s 28 September 2023 request, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board) has reviewed the Request for Review for the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project, located in Sacramento County.

Our agency is delegated with the responsibility of protecting the quality of surface and groundwaters of the state; therefore our comments will address concerns surrounding those issues.

I. Regulatory Setting
Basin Plan
The Central Valley Water Board is required to formulate and adopt Basin Plans for all areas within the Central Valley region under Section 13240 of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Each Basin Plan must contain water quality objectives to ensure the reasonable protection of beneficial uses, as well as a program of implementation for achieving water quality objectives with the Basin Plans. Federal regulations require each state to adopt water quality standards to protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the Clean Water Act. In California, the beneficial uses, water quality objectives, and the Antidegradation Policy are the State’s water quality standards. Water quality standards are also contained in the National Toxics Rule, 40 CFR Section 131.36, and the California Toxics Rule, 40 CFR Section 131.38.

The Basin Plan is subject to modification as necessary, considering applicable laws, policies, technologies, water quality conditions and priorities. The original Basin Plans were adopted in 1975, and have been updated and revised periodically as required, using Basin Plan amendments. Once the Central Valley Water Board has adopted a Basin Plan amendment in noticed public hearings, it must be approved by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), Office of ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 431 of 526 ends

A
dministrative Law (OAL) and in some cases, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Basin Plan amendments only become effective after they have been approved by the OAL and in some cases, the USEPA. Every three (3) years, a review of the Basin Plan is completed that assesses the appropriateness of existing standards and evaluates and prioritizes Basin Planning issues. For more information on the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, please visit our website:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/ Antidegradation Considerations
All wastewater discharges must comply with the Antidegradation Policy (State Water Board Resolution 68-16) and the Antidegradation Implementation Policy contained in the Basin Plan. The Antidegradation Implementation Policy is available on page 74 at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_2018

05.pdf
In part it states:

Any discharge of waste to high quality waters must apply best practicable treatment or control not only to prevent a condition of pollution or nuisance from occurring, but also to maintain the highest water quality possible consistent with the maximum benefit to the people of the State.

This information must be presented as an analysis of the impacts and potential impacts of the discharge on water quality, as measured by background concentrations and applicable water quality objectives.

The antidegradation analysis is a mandatory element in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and land discharge Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) permitting processes. The environmental review document should evaluate potential impacts to both surface and groundwater quality.

II. Permitting Requirements
Construction Storm Water General Permit
Dischargers whose project disturb one or more acres of soil or where projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit), Construction General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, grubbing, disturbances to the ground, such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). For more information on the Construction General Permit, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/constpermits.sht ml
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 432 of 526 ends

C
lean Water Act Section 404 Permit
If the project will involve the discharge of dredged or fill material in navigable waters or wetlands, a permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act may be needed from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). If a Section 404 permit is required by the USACE, the Central Valley Water Board will review the permit application to ensure that discharge will not violate water quality standards. If the project requires surface water drainage realignment, the applicant is advised to contact the Department of Fish and Game for information on Streambed Alteration Permit requirements. If you have any questions regarding the Clean Water Act Section 404 permits, please contact the Regulatory Division of the Sacramento District of USACE at (916) 557-5250.

Clean Water Act Section 401 Permit – Water Quality Certification If an USACE permit (e.g., Non-Reporting Nationwide Permit, Nationwide Permit, Letter of Permission, Individual Permit, Regional General Permit, Programmatic General Permit), or any other federal permit (e.g., Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act or Section 9 from the United States Coast Guard), is required for this project due to the disturbance of waters of the United States (such as streams and wetlands), then a Water Quality Certification must be obtained from the Central Valley Water Board prior to initiation of project activities. There are no waivers for 401 Water Quality Certifications. For more information on the Water Quality Certification, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/water_quality_certificatio n/
Waste Discharge Requirements – Discharges to Waters of the State If USACE determines that only non-jurisdictional waters of the State (i.e., “non- federal” waters of the State) are present in the proposed project area, the proposed project may require a Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) permit to be issued by Central Valley Water Board. Under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, discharges to all waters of the State, including all wetlands and other waters of the State including, but not limited to, isolated wetlands, are subject to State regulation. For more information on the Waste Discharges to Surface Water NPDES Program and WDR processes, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/waste_to_surface_wat er/
Projects involving excavation or fill activities impacting less than 0.2 acre or 400 linear feet of non-jurisdictional waters of the state and projects involving dredging activities impacting less than 50 cubic yards of non-jurisdictional waters of the state may be eligible for coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ (General Order 2004-0004). For more information on the General Order 2004-0004, visit the State Water Resources Control Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/200 4/wqo/wqo2004-0004.pdf

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 433 of 526 ends

D
ewatering Permit
If the proposed project includes construction or groundwater dewatering to be discharged to land, the proponent may apply for coverage under State Water Board General Water Quality Order (Low Threat General Order) 2003-0003 or the Central Valley Water Board’s Waiver of Report of Waste Discharge and Waste Discharge Requirements (Low Threat Waiver) R5-2018-0085. Small temporary construction dewatering projects are projects that discharge groundwater to land from excavation activities or dewatering of underground utility vaults. Dischargers seeking coverage under the General Order or Waiver must file a Notice of Intent with the Central Valley Water Board prior to beginning discharge.

For more information regarding the Low Threat General Order and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/2003/ wqo/wqo2003-0003.pdf
For more information regarding the Low Threat Waiver and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/adopted_orders/waiv ers/r5-2018-0085.pdf
Limited Threat General NPDES Permit
If the proposed project includes construction dewatering and it is necessary to discharge the groundwater to waters of the United States, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Dewatering discharges are typically considered a low or limited threat to water quality and may be covered under the General Order for Limited Threat Discharges to Surface Water (Limited Threat General Order). A complete Notice of Intent must be submitted to the Central Valley Water Board to obtain coverage under the Limited Threat General Order. For more information regarding the Limited Threat General Order and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/board_decisions/adopted_orders/gene ral_orders/r5-2016-0076-01.pdf
NPDES Permit
If the proposed project discharges waste that could affect the quality of surface waters of the State, other than into a community sewer system, the proposed project will require coverage under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. A complete Report of Waste Discharge must be submitted with the Central Valley Water Board to obtain a NPDES Permit. For more information regarding the NPDES Permit and the application process, visit the Central Valley Water Board website at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/help/permit/

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 434 of 526 ends

I
f you have questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (916) 464-4684 or [email protected].

Peter Minkel
Engineering Geologist
cc: State Clearinghouse unit, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Sacramento
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 435 of 526 ends

Sent Via E-Mail

October 27, 2023

Arlene Granadosin-Jones, AICP, Senior Planner City
Rancho Cordova Planning Division
2729 Prospect Park Dr.

Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
[email protected]

Subject: Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project / 2023090677 / MND

Dear Ms. Granadosin-Jones:

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project (Project, SCH 2023090677).

As a Responsible Agency, SMUD’s review of projects include supporting the goals of our 2030 Zero Carbon Plan. This plan is a flexible road map to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from our electricity production by 2030, which is the most ambitious goal of any large utility in the United States, while maintaining reliable and affordable service. This ambitious goal puts the Sacramento region on the map as an example to follow and a region where innovative, climate- friendly businesses want to be. As a community -owned, not-for-profit utility, our customers and community are at the heart of all we do. By pursuing zero carbon, we’re helping create a cleaner and healthier region for all.

It is our desire that the Project will acknowledge any impacts related to the following:

• Overhead and or underground transmission and distribution line easements. Please view the following links on smud.org for more information regarding transmission encroachment:
o https://www.smud.org/en/Business-Solutions-and-Rebates/Design-and- Construction-Services
o https://www.smud.org/en/Corporate/Do-Business-with-SMUD/Land- Use/Transmission-Right-of-Way
• Utility line routing
• Electrical load needs/requirements
• Energy Efficiency
• Climate Change
• Cumulative impacts related to the need for increased electrical delivery • The potential need to relocate and or remove any SMUD infrastructure that may be affected in or around the project area
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 436 of 526 ends

More specifically, please be aware of SMUD’s existing facilities and future plan as described below with development requirements.

• South of Folsom Blvd, there are existing 12kV OH/UG facilities • Proposed future plan is to rebuild the existing 12kV OH line with a 69kV OH line with a 12kV underbuild along Folsom Blvd
• Structural setbacks of less than 14- feet shall require the applicant to conduct a pre- engineering meeting with all utilities to ensure proper clearances are maintained • To maintain adequate trench integrity, building foundations must have a minimum horizontal clearance of 5 feet from any SMUD trench. Developer to verify with other utilities (Gas, Telephone, etc.) for their specific clearance requirements • Proposed SMUD facilities located on the customer’s property outside of the existing or proposed PUE(s) may require a dedicated SMUD easement
• The Applicant shall dedicate and provide a vehicular access road; SMUD will supply the minimum specifications during the acquisition process. (or: The Applicant shall dedicate and provide all -weather vehicular access for service vehicles that are up to 26,000 pounds. At a minimum: (a) the drivable surface shall be 20-feet wide; and (b) all SMUD underground equipment and appurtenances shall be within 15- feet from the drivable surface)
• SMUD requires a minimum 12.5-foot PUE adjacent to all public roads for 12kV facilities • The developer shall dedicate any private drive, ingress and egress easement, or Irrevocable Offer of Dedication (and 10 feet adjacent thereto) as a public utility easement for overhead and underground facilities and appurtenances

• If alternative locations are not provided, existing overhead/underground 12kV facilities will need to remain in order to maintain existing services not part of development • If applicable existing overhead lines will be removed and existing underground cables will be relocated at developer’s expense to maintain existing services within development

SMUD would like to be involved with discussing the above areas of interest as well as discussing any other potential issues. We aim to be partners in the efficient and sustainable delivery of the proposed Project . Please ensure that the information included in this response is conveyed to the Project planners and the appropriate Project proponents.

Environmental leadership is a core value of SMUD, and we look forward to collaborating with you on this Project . Again, we appreciate the opportunity to provide input on this Project. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 916.732.7406, or by email at [email protected]
.

Sincerely,

Jerry Park
Environmental Services Specialist
Sacramento Municipal Utility District

cc: Entitlements
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 437 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 1 of 5

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

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

OF CALIFORNIA, FINDING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WITH MITIGATION

MEASURES TO BE ADEQUATE AND ADOPTING A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MINE

SHAFT DIGITAL FREEWAY SIGNS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND MINOR DESIGN REVIEW – PROJECT NO. PLND-0822-0047
WHEREAS, in August 2022, Cordova Community Council (hereinafter referred to as “Applicant”), plans to construct two digital freeway signs, each with two sign area displays measuring 20 feet by 60 feet on a parcel located at 2300 Mine Shaft Lane; and WHEREAS, the proposed project is located on real property in the incorporated portions of the City more particularly described as APN: 072-0231-014-0000; and WHEREAS, the project is designated Folsom Boulevard Planning Area in the General Plan and zoned General Commercial (GC); and
WHEREAS, the project site is located within the Digital Freeway Signs Overlay; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for the project 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.); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cordova 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 BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA that the City Council approves the Mine Shaft Digital Freeway Signs Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review per the Project Plans (Exhibit A), subject to the following findings, Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B), and Operating Agreement (Exhibit C):

1. 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, detailed in Exhibit D, 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.

Page 438 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 2 of 5
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.

2. Approve the Conditional Use Permit subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit B, and subject to the findings as defined by Zoning Code Section

23.134.070 and evidence as follows:

A. Finding: The site size, dimensions, location, topography, and access are adequate for the needs of the proposed use, considering the proposed building mass, parking, traffic, noise, vibration, exhaust/ emissions, light, glare, erosion, odor, dust, visibility, safety, and aesthetic considerations.

Evidence: The project site is within the Digital Freeway Signs Overlay and the proposed signs are approximately 2,700 feet from each other at either end of the parcel. 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. 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 Exhibit D. The project has also been reviewed and conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies to minimize any potential impacts.

B. Finding: The negative impacts of the proposed use on adjacent properties and on the public can be mitigated through application of other code standards or other reasonable conditions of approval.

Evidence: The project has been reviewed and conditioned by all applicable departments and agencies to minimize any potential impacts. 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 Exhibit D.

C. Finding: All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal.

Evidence: The project has been reviewed by all applicable departments and agencies to supply adequate facilities to the proposed project. As part of the Conditions of Approval, the project will be required to provide separate plan

Page 439 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 3 of 5
submittals to all applicable utility providers and the Public Works Department to ensure the construction of adequate public infrastructure.

D. Finding: The project meets the requirements of the zoning code including development standards, design guidelines, and special use provisions.

Evidence: Aside from the deviations requested by the applicant through the Operating Agreement (Exhibit C), the proposed project is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations and design standards for digital freeway signs. The proposed signs are approximately 2,700 feet from each other at either end of the parcel, each with two sign area displays. Though the west sign (at 70 feet) requests deviation from the development standards, the east sign is consistent with the 60- foot maximum height requirement. Both sign structures supporting and surrounding the digital display area are as small as feasibly possible to avoid any unnecessary height or width to the sign. Both sign structures do not add stylistic or architectural detailing to further call attention to the sign. 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.

As outlined in the Operating Agreement (Exhibit C), the signs will display static messages only for a minimum of 8 seconds. 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.

E. Finding: If structures and site plans are considered nonconforming, the elements of a project that are nonconforming have been brought into compliance with the zoning code, where feasible
Evidence: The proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with all current design standards. There are no existing nonconforming uses or structures on the site.

3. Approve the Minor Design Review subject to the Conditions of Approval (Exhibit B) herein, and subject to the findings as defined by Zoning Code Section 23.141.070 and evidence as follows:

A. Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, Specific Plan provisions, and special planning area provisions, and is consistent with the applicable Rancho Cordova design guidelines.

Evidence: 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. The overlay zone was established to protect residential areas from the negative impacts of digital freeway signs, such as excessive glare or light pollution. Aside from the deviations requested by the applicant through the Operating Agreement (Exhibit C), the proposed project is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations and design standards for digital freeway signs.

B. Finding: The proposed architecture, site design, and landscape are suitable for the purposes of the building and the site and will enhance the character of the neighborhood and community.

Page 440 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 4 of 5
Evidence: 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. The proposed signs are approximately 2,700 feet from each other at either end of the parcel and is within the Digital Freeway Signs Overlay, which was established to protect residential areas from the negative impacts of digital freeway signs. The proposed project provides productive use for a currently unused property located near US

50. C. Finding: The architecture, including the character, scale, and quality of the design, relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing, and similar elements, establishes a clear design concept and is compatible with the character of existing or anticipated buildings on adjoining and nearby properties.

Evidence: Each proposed digital freeway 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. The proposed digital billboard signs would not operate at brightness levels of more than 0.3 foot-candles above ambient light, automatically adjusting as ambient light conditions change.

D. Finding: The proposed project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation.

Evidence: The proposed project will be on private property and will not create conflicts with the existing circulation of any transportation modes.

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:
____________________________
David Sander, Mayor

Page 441 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 3 Resolution No. XX-2024 Page 5 of 5
ATTEST:

Stacy Leitner, CMC
City Clerk

Page 442 of 526 ends

BILLBOARD
?
?
?
?

BILLBOARD
S
W

FOLSOM BLVD FOLSOM BLVD
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION

PER PROVIDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
24' ACCESS EASEMENT

PER PROVIDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
21" TREE CLUSTER
42" TREE CLUSTER
20" TREE
18" TREE
21" TREE
16" TREE
17" TREE
29" TREE
15" PALM TREES x3

3RELIMINAR< 3LANS FOR
MINESHAFT DI*ITAL
FREE:A< SI*NS
MINE SHAFT LANE
RANCHO CORDOVA CA

CORDOVA COMMUNIT<

COUNCIL FOUNDATION

RSC ENGINEERING
COVER
SHEET
CV
AREA

AREA
O:NER
A33LICANT
A3N
E;ISTIN* *ENERAL 3LAN
E;ISTIN* =ONIN*
E;ISTIN* SITE ACREA*E
SHEET INDE;
3RELIMINAR< 3LANS FOR
MINESHAFT DI*ITAL FREE:A< SI*NS
MINE SHAFT LANE
RANCHO CORDOVA CA

A3N
--
VICINIT< MA3
SITE
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 443 of 526 ends

?
W
21" TREE CLUSTER
42" TREE CLUSTER
20" TREE
18" TREE
21" TREE
16" TREE
17" TREE
29" TREE
15" PALM TREES x3
∆
∆
∆

FOLSOM BLVD
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION

PER PROVIDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
24' ACCESS EASEMENT

COUNCIL FOUNDATION

RSC ENGINEERING
ENLAR*ED
E;ISTIN*

CONDITIONS

AREA

E;

LE*END
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 444 of 526 ends

BILLBOARD

ONSITE SIGN
S
∆

FOLSOM BLVD
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
5 PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR

MINESHAFT DIGITAL

FREEWAY SIGNS
2300 MINE SHAFT LANE
RANCHO CORDOVA, CA 95670

CORDOVA COMMUNITY

COUNCIL FOUNDATION

RSC ENGINEERING
EX2
3 ENLARGED

EXISTING

CONDITIONS
(AREA 2)
LEGEND
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 445 of 526 ends

?
W
21" TREE CLUSTER
42" TREE CLUSTER
20" TREE
18" TREE
21" TREE
16" TREE
17" TREE
29" TREE
15" PALM TREES x3
∆
∆
∆

FOLSOM BLVD
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION

PER PROVIDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
24' ACCESS EASEMENT

PER PROVIDED LEGAL DESCRIPTION
21" TREE CLUSTER
42" TREE CLUSTER
20" TREE
18" TREE
21" TREE
16" TREE
17" TREE
29" TREE
15" PALM TREES x3
3RO3OSED LOCATION
OF DI*ITAL
FREE:A< SI*N
21" TREE CLUSTER
7 11.5" TREE
28' CANOPY WIDTH

TO BE REMOVED
6 19" TREE
40' CANOPY WIDTH

TO BE REMOVED
8 26.5" TREE CLUSTER
57' CANOPY WIDTH

TO BE REMOVED

3RELIMINAR< 3LANS FOR
MINESHAFT DI*ITAL
FREE:A< SI*NS
MINE SHAFT LANE
RANCHO CORDOVA CA

CORDOVA COMMUNIT<

COUNCIL FOUNDATION

RSC ENGINEERING
ENLAR*ED
SITE 3LAN

AREA

S3
TREE REMOVAL ENLAR*EMENT
NOTES
LE*END
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 446 of 526 ends

BILLBOARD

BILLBOARD
S
∆

FOLSOM BLVD
FOLSOM SOUTH CANAL - U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
3RO3OSED LOCATION
OF DI*ITAL
FREE:A< SI*N

3RELIMINAR< 3LANS FOR
MINESHAFT DI*ITAL
FREE:A< SI*NS
MINE SHAFT LANE
RANCHO CORDOVA CA

CORDOVA COMMUNIT<

COUNCIL FOUNDATION

RSC ENGINEERING
ENLAR*ED
SITE 3LAN

AREA

S3

NOTES
LE*END
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 447 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 448 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 4
Exhibit A to the Resolution

Page 449 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 1 of 6 ends

City Council Mine Shaft Digital Billboard Signs CUP, February 20, 2024 Minor Design Review, & Operating Agreement PLND-0822-0047
Conditions of Approval Category Timing/
Implementation
Enforcement/
Monitoring

1. The approved entitlement is for a Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review for the Mine Shaft Digital Signs Project. The project shall be constructed consistent with the Project Plans (Exhibit A) for Project PLND-0822-0047.

Project
Description On-Going Planning

2. Applicant(s) agree to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless with Counsel selected by the City of Rancho
Cordova (“City”) and its agents, officers, consultants, and employees (“City’s Agents”) from any and all claims,
actions, suits, or proceedings against the City or the
City’s Agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul an
approval by the City, or the City’s Agents concerning the project (collectively “Claim”). The City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Claim and the City shall
cooperate fully in the defense. Nothing in this paragraph obligates the City to defend any Claim and the City is not required to pay or perform any settlement arising from
any such Claim not defended by the City, unless the
settlement is approved in writing by the City.

General On-Going Planning

3. Any future alteration to the structure, change in use, intensification of the site, or modification to the parking and landscaped area must be reviewed by the City to
ensure compliance with all local, state, and federal
regulations. Minor modifications that are found to be in substantial conformance with the approved plans such as colors, plant materials, or minor lot line adjustments, may be approved administratively. Major modifications shall be approved by the applicable decision-making body.

General On-Going Planning/Building/Public
Works

Page 450 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 2 of 6 ends

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, to avoid delays in the processing of future permits or recordation of maps. Please email the Finance Department at
[email protected] for the status of your account with the City.

General On-Going Finance

5. The Conditional Use Permit and Minor Design Review is valid for a period of three (3) years from the date of City Council approval unless substantial construction of the permitted use has commenced or an extension is granted
by the Community Development Director.

Expiration On-Going Planning

6. 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
/Building

7. 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

8. The digital billboard signs proposed in Project PLND- 0822-0047 are subject to the approved Operating
Agreement. Any modifications to the development and
operation of the digital signs as outlined in the Operating Agreement will require a new written agreement signed
by both the Cordova Community Council Foundation and
the City of Rancho Cordova.

Operating
Agreement On-Going Planning/City Attorney

Page 451 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 3 of 6 ends

9. The project is subject to all Mitigation Measures in the Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#
2023090677)
Mitigation
Measures On-Going Planning
Prior to Approval of Improvement Plans/Grading Permit Issuance

10. Identify existing fire lanes on the plans and ensure the locations of the proposed billboards do not impede on fire apparatus access.

Fire Prior to Approval of
Improvement Plans
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

11. Identify existing fire hydrants on site and ensure the locations of the proposed billboards do not impede on fire hydrant access.

Fire Prior to Approval of
Improvement Plans
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District
Prior to Issuance of Building Permit

12. There are 3 protected onsite trees and 7 protected trees on an adjacent offsite easement are proposed for removal totaling 10 trees at 184.5 inches diameter at standard
height. Trees shall be replaced or mitigated per Rancho Cordova Municipal Code 19.12.120. Tree replacement is
one inch per one inch ratio. In-lieu payment is $165 per inch. If tree impacts were to change, the in-lieu amount may change. Mitigation for tree removal shall be provided prior to construction of billboard signage affecting trees.

Mitigation of offsite trees proposed for removal shall be determined at time of offsite improvements.

Public Works Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Public Works

13. Obtain protected tree permit per Rancho Cordova
Municipal Code 19.12.040 prior to removal any protected tree.

Public Works Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Public Works

Page 452 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 4 of 6 ends

14. All tree protection fencing shall be required at or beyond the tree’s dripline.

Public Works Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Public Works

15. All tree stumps within the project area shall be removed. Public Works Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
Public Works

16. For all approved work done within the fenced Tree
Protection Zone, fencing will need to be opened and
careful excavation shall be done with small equipment,
hand tools or hydraulic or pneumatic tools to expose
roots. The project arborist will be required to evaluate roots greater than 3-inches in diameter that may need to be cut.

Public Works Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Public Works

17. Project owner is responsible for identification and evaluation of potential impacts to structures and utilities, both above and below ground, including but not limited to onsite storm drainage lines.

Exploratory excavation via potholes will be required to avoid impacts to utilities.

Refer to City’s Facility Map Book Pages: 346-215, 348-
215, and 348-218 for storm drainage lines (Note: This is not a complete representation of all storm drainage
utilities at the site).

Public Works Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Public Works

18. The applicant shall meet the following: Civil Site Plans and Architectural Plans shall be submitted and
approved prior to Final Building Permit being issued.

Fire Prior to Issuance of a
Building/Fire Permit
Sacramento
Metropolitan Fire
District

Page 453 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 5 of 6 ends

19. In the event of the encounter of subsurface materials suspected to be of an archaeological or paleontological nature or if any human remains are found, all grading
and/or excavation shall cease, the find shall be left
untouched, and the City Planning Division shall be
immediately notified. This requirement shall be noted on the Grading and Building Plans, prior to issuance of
permits. A qualified professional archaeologist certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists or
paleontologist with a degree(s) in paleontology or
geology, to evaluate and make recommendations as to
disposition, mitigation and/or salvage. The
recommendation shall be implemented before work may
proceed.

Construction Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Planning/ Building

20. Utility areas, electrical and gas meters shall be
architecturally screened from view.

Architectural Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Planning/Building/Public
Works

21. Ensure that no debris or construction scrap material is placed on any adjoining lot, open space area, or street, and that any such material stored on an adjoining site
shall be completely removed and the site cleaned, prior to occupancy approval.

Construction Prior to Issuance of
Building Permits
Planning/
Building
Advisory

Page 454 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Exhibit B to the Resolution

Page 6 of 6 ends

22. The Outdoor Advertising Act section 5403(b) establishes that illuminations are considered vision impairing when their brilliance exceeds the values set forth in Section 21466.5 of the California Vehicle Code. Please note,
pursuant to 5408(b) Advertising displays may not be
placed that are so illuminated that they interfere with the effectiveness of, or obscure any official traffic sign, device, or signal; nor shall any advertising display include or be illuminated by flashing, intermittent, or moving lights (except that part necessary to give public service
information such as time, date, temperature, weather, or similar information); nor shall any advertising display cause beams or rays of light to be directed at the traveled ways if the light is of an intensity or brilliance as to cause glare or to impair the vision of any driver, or to interfere with any driver’s operation of a motor vehicle.

Advisory Advisory
CA Department of
Transportation
(CalTrans)

23. Gates shall be installed in accordance with the County Emergency Access Gates and Barriers Standard. Plan
submittal is required prior to installation.

Fire Advisory Advisory Fire

Page 455 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 1 of 27 ends

DIGITAL FREEWAY SIGN OPERATING AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN

CITY OF RANCHO CORDOVA AND CORDOVA COMMUNITY COUNCIL FOUNDATION

PARTIES
This Operating Agreement for Digital Freeway Signs (hereinafter “Agreement”), dated __________, 2024 by and between the City of Rancho Cordova, a California Municipal Corporation (the “City”), and the Cordova Community Council Foundation, a California 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Corporation. Hereinafter the City and Cordova Community Council Foundation may be referred to as “Party” or both as “Parties”.

RECITALS

1. Background. Rancho Cordova Municipal Code Section 23.743.150 , after all required notices and public hearing, allows for the City to enter into an Operating Agreement to allow for the operation of a Digital Freeway Sign under certain circumstances; including the permanent removal of pre-existing billboards from within the City. Cordova Community Council Foundation has applied for approval to install two (2) Digital Freeway Signs on the real property owned by the Cordova Community Council Foundation and located at 2300 Mine Shaft Lane in the City of Rancho Cordova, State of California (the “Property”).

2. Applicant. The Cordova Community Council Foundation, founded in 1959 as an organization of organizations and a forum for citizens to meet, dream about the future and plan community celebrations. The legacy of mutual support and collaboration nurtured by Cordova Community Council Foundation has become a hallmark of Rancho Cordova community life for more than six decades and has earned our reputation as a place of collaboration and innovation. In 2018, the Cordova Community Council Foundation acquired the Mine Shaft property. The acquisition of the property will give the Cordova Community Council Foundation long term financial strength to continue to provide quality programs and community engagement opportunities. The Cordova Community Council Foundation has experience managing large complex events, public grants, personnel, and real property.

3. Legal Framework. For the reasons recited herein, the City has determined that the construction and operation of the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s proposed outdoor advertising display on the Property is a development for which this Agreement is appropriate and is specifically permitted and encouraged by §§ 5412 and 5443.5 of the California Outdoor Advertising Act (Bus. and Prof. Code § 5200 et seq.) and Rancho Cordova Municipal Code section 23.743.150.

4. Public Benefit. City finds that a substantial public benefit will accrue to City by reason of the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s advertising display, which adds value to the community by enabling City to market projects, programs and other activities for the benefit of City and its businesses and residents. In addition the City finds that an additional substantial

Page 456 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 2 of 27 ends

public benefit will accrue to the City by reason of the Cordova Community Council Foundation removing, or having caused the removal of, an existing billboard as a material condition of this Agreement for Digital Freeway Signs. In exchange for providing these public benefits, the Cordova Community Council Foundation, receives assurance that it may proceed with the construction and operation of outdoor advertising display and the project in accordance with ordinances, resolutions and regulations existing as of the date of this Agreement, subject only to the terms and conditions contained herein and contained in any permits issued pursuant to this project.

Together with the City of Rancho Cordova and many community partners, the Cordova Community Council Foundation has contributed to the City of Rancho by providing stability for safe and high-quality signature community events, and convening significant community affinity organizations, including the Rancho Cordova Athletic Association, the Rancho Cordova Arts Council and Rancho Cordova Interfaith Council. Together with the vibrant schedule of dozens of community events, these organizations provide pathways for residents to engage with and enjoy the community in which they live, boosting community satisfaction and connections which strengthen the City. The Cordova Community Council Foundation is a 501(c)(3) public benefit non-profit organization headquartered in Rancho Cordova.

The development and long-term lease of two digital freeway signs is a critical component of Cordova Community Council Foundation’s strategy which would provide the Cordova Community Council with long term financial stability to carry out this vital community mission.

Cordova Community Council understands that the marketplace for one or more digital freeway signs along the Highway 50 corridor is limited.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises, conditions, and covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Preamble, the Recitals, and all defined terms set forth in both, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full.

2. Definitions. This section defines the terms: “Agreement Year,” “Business Day,” “Caltrans,” “Caltrans Permits,” “City Permits,” “Commencement Date,” “Digital Freeway Sign,” “Digital Display Area,” “Effective Date,” “Include,” “Operational,” “Obstruction,” “Site,” “Sign Structure,” and “Term.” Other terms are defined elsewhere in this Agreement. (a) “Agreement Year” means one of the consecutive 12-month periods during the Term. The first Agreement Year begins on the Effective Date. (b) “Business Day” means any day the City’s main offices located at 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova, California, are open to the public.

Page 457 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 3 of 27 ends

(c) “Caltrans” means the California Department of Transportation. (d) “Caltrans Permits” means all permits and approvals that Cordova Community Council Foundation must obtain from Caltrans to install, operate, and maintain the Digital Freeway Sign in accordance with this Agreement.
(e) “City Permits” means all building permits, conditional use permits, zoning amendments, operating agreements, and other permits, entitlements, and agreements that the City, acting in its governmental capacity, must issue or approve for The Cordova Community Council Foundation, to install, operate, and maintain the Digital Freeway Sign in accordance with this Agreement.
(f) “Commencement Date” means the date as of which both of the following have occurred: (1) the City has finally approved the Plans (defined in Section 6(a)); and (2) The Cordova Community Council Foundation has received all necessary governmental permits and approvals for the Digital Freeway Sign, including the Caltrans Permits and the City Permits.
(g) “Digital Freeway Sign” means an off-site outdoor advertising sign, including all above-ground supporting structures, with one or more digital display areas. A Digital Freeway Sign may be internally or externally illuminated. Digital Freeway Signs are always considered off-site signs and are regulated as such. The Cordova Community Council Foundation will install and operate the Digital Freeway Signs on the Site in accordance with the criteria set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement. (h) “Digital Display Area” means the portion of the Digital Freeway Sign that consists of the digital display areas used for general commercial advertising. The Digital Display Area is more particularly described in Exhibit B.
(i) “Effective Date” means the date as of which both the City and the Cordova Community Council Foundation have signed this Agreement, as indicated by the dates in the signature blocks below.
(j) “Include” and its variants are not restrictive. For example, “includes” means “includes but not limited to,” and “including” means “including but not limited to.” (k) “Operational” means the Digital Freeway Signs are capable, legally and functionally, of displaying digital advertising on the Digital Display Area. (l) “Obstruction” means any structure, sound wall, communications antennae, tree, or vegetation on City owned or controlled property within 1,000 feet of the Digital Freeway Sign and obstructs the view of the Digital Display Areas from the viewing public on Highway 50.

Page 458 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 4 of 27 ends

(m) “Site” means the portion of the Property located in the City that may be suitable for installation of Digital Freeway Signs. The Site is more particularly described in Exhibit B. (n) “Sign Structure” means the portion of the Digital Freeway Sign other than the Digital Display Area, including but not limited to supporting pole(s), display frame and all ancillary equipment and utilities installed on the sign Site. The Sign Structure as improved with Digital Display Area is more particularly described in Exhibit B. If the site currently does not have a Sign Structure, the term “Sign Structure” shall mean all supporting pole(s), display frame and ancillary equipment and above-ground utilities installed on the Site.
(o) “Term” means the entire time this Agreement is in effect, as specified in Section 3.

3. Term of Agreement.
(a)Term. The “Term” of this Agreement consists of two phases:
(1) The “Development Phase,” which begins on the Effective Date and ends when the Digital Freeway Signs becomes Operational.
(2) The “Operations Phase,” with regard to the Digital Freeway Sign begins at the end of the Development Phase and ends when such Digital Freeway Sign is removed or after a twenty-five (25) year period following the conclusion of the Development Phase, whichever occurs first. The Agreement is automatically renewed for an additional 25-year Term unless written notice is given by either Party to the other Party 60 days prior to expiration of the initial Term expressing the Party’s intent to terminate this Agreement.

4. Consideration. As consideration for the rights and benefits it enjoys under this Agreement, including the contemplated use during the Term, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall do all of the following:
(a)Removal of Existing Clear Channel Sign. At no cost to the City, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall remove the “Existing Sign” identified in Schedule 1, attached to this Agreement and incorporated by reference herein according to the schedule set forth in Schedule 1, subject to the following:
(1) The Cordova Community Council Foundation hereby waives any rights it may have to compensation for the Existing Signs under federal, state, or local law, including the Highway Beautification Act of 1965 (23 United States Code section 131) and the Outdoor Advertising Act (California Business and Professions Code section 5200 and following) for removal of the Existing Signs in accordance with this Agreement. (2) The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s commitment to remove the Existing Sign according to the schedule set forth in Schedule 1 is a material provision of this

Page 459 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 5 of 27 ends

Agreement. The Cordova Community Council Foundation is not entitled to replace the Existing Signs once they are removed.
(b)Dedicated “Click”. During the Term of this Agreement, to the extent permissible under applicable laws, rules and regulations, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall display advertisements promoting the City and local community events sponsored by and/or partnered with the City (the “City Copy”) on one digital display spot on the Digital Freeway Sign after each 8-spot digital loop (the “Display Time”) provided that: (i) all proposed City Copy is submitted to the Cordova Community Council Foundation not less than five (5) business days prior to the date on which the City Copy is proposed to be displayed on the Digital Freeway Sign (the “Copy Submission Deadline”); (ii) all digital artwork is consistent with the quality of material to be posted on the Digital Freeway Sign; and (iii) City pays for all digital production costs associated with the City Copy. In no event shall the City be permitted to give, sell, trade, barter or exchange the Display Time to any third party. Such act shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement and City shall automatically forfeit its right to any further Display Time on the Digital Freeway Sign.

City represents and warrants that all copy, content and materials supplied by City to the Cordova Community Council Foundation for display under this Agreement: (i) are owned or duly licensed by City and do not infringe or misappropriate the rights of any other person or entity; (ii) comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules and regulations and any industry codes or rules by which City and/or the Cordova Community Council Foundation may be bound and do not contain any obscene, libelous, slanderous or otherwise defamatory materials or refer in an offensive manner to the gender, race or ethnicity of any individual or group; (iii) are accurate and that all claims contained therein have been substantiated; and (iv) do not infringe upon any copyright, trademark or other intellectual property or privacy right of any third party. The advertisement to be shown during this “click” is separate from the amber alert and emergency public service notifications required by 6(i) of this agreement.

5. Use of Site.
(a)Exclusive Uses. Except as otherwise provided in Section 6(i), the Cordova Community Council Foundation has the exclusive right to display outdoor advertising on the Site, in digital formats. The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s exclusive right to conduct outdoor advertising on the Site includes the following:
(1) Installing, erecting, maintaining, operating, improving, supplementing, posting, painting, illuminating, repairing, repositioning, adding, changing, and maintaining equipment required to maintain communications with the Digital Freeway Sign repositioning (with the City’s consent) during the term of this Agreement. (2) Removing the Digital Display Area and all associated equipment on or from the site when this Agreement terminates, as provided in Section 6(l).

Page 460 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 6 of 27 ends

(3) Licensing the use of the Digital Freeway Sign, or any portion of it, for any lawful purpose related to outdoor advertising.
(4) All rights to operate the sign faces as Digital Display Areas. (b)Unobstructed Use.
(1) The City shall not allow the following (an “Obstruction”):
(A) On any City-owned or City-controlled real property within 1,000 feet of the Digital Freeway Sign any structure, sound wall, communications antennae, tree, or vegetation that obstructs the view of the Digital Display Areas from the viewing public on Highway 50.
(2) If The Cordova Community Council Foundation notifies the City in writing that an Obstruction exists, and if the City authorized or actively caused the Obstruction, then the City shall remove or remedy the Obstruction at its own cost within 30 days after receiving the notice. If the City fails to remove the Obstruction within 30 days after receiving the notice, then The Cordova Community Council Foundation may remove the Obstruction at the City’s expense after coordinating with the City’s Public Works Department, which coordination shall include, at a minimum, review with The Cordova Community Council Foundation before commencing work. (3) If The Cordova Community Council Foundation notifies the City in writing that an Obstruction exists, and if the City did not authorize or actively cause the Obstruction, then the City may remove or remedy the Obstruction at its own cost within 30 days after receiving the notice. If the City does not remove or remedy the Obstruction within the 30 days, then, at no cost to the City, and after coordinating with the City’s Public Works Department, which coordination shall include, at a minimum, review and approval of The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s plans to remove the Obstruction prior to The Cordova Community Council Foundation commencing work.
(4) The City is not obligated to remove or seek removal of visual obstructions on private property. Furthermore, this Agreement does not, and cannot authorize the Cordova Community Council Foundation to remove visual obstructions from private property.
(5) The Cordova Community Council Foundation exercise of its rights under this Section 5(b) are in addition to any other remedies it may have under this Agreement.

Page 461 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 7 of 27 ends

6. Installation and Operation of a Digital Freeway Sign.

The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall install and operate the Digital Display Area on the Sign Structure in accordance with this Section 6 and consistent with Section 5, all at no cost to the City.
(a)Plans and Specifications. At no cost to the City, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall prepare complete plans and specifications for the Digital Freeway Sign, working closely with the City to develop plans and specifications that are mutually acceptable (the “Plans”). The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall submit the Plans to the City for final approval, which the City shall not unreasonably withhold. (b)Caltrans Permits. As soon as practicable after the Effective Date, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall apply to Caltrans for all Caltrans Permits, and the City shall cooperate with The Cordova Community Council Foundation in that effort, including the completion of any Caltrans forms. All Caltrans Permits are to be obtained and secured for The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s sole benefit and are to be issued in The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s name. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall perform all obligations under the Caltrans Permits at no cost to the City. (c)City Permits. The City shall diligently process the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s applications for all City Permits. This Agreement does not commit the City in advance to approve the City Permits; and this Agreement does not constrain the City’s discretion, acting as a government, with respect to the City Permits generally or to the Digital Freeway Sign specifically.
(d)Installation. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall begin installing the Digital Display Area as soon as practicable after the Commencement Date and shall diligently pursue installation to completion without unnecessary interruption. The Cordova Community Council Foundation will be excused, however, for any delays in beginning or completing installation that are caused by a Force Majeure Event, as defined in Section 9(d)(1). The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall use reasonable diligence to avoid such delays and to resume work as promptly as possible after such a delay. (e)Ownership. The Cordova Community Council Foundation will be the owner of the Digital Freeway Sign and all permits and authorizations that relate to it, including the City Permits and the Caltrans Permits.
(f)Maintenance. At no cost to the City, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall maintain the Sign Structure and shall maintain and repair the Digital Freeway Sign in accordance with the standards of the outdoor-advertising industry. The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s maintenance obligation under this Section 6(f) includes the obligation to remove any graffiti from the Sign Structure and the Digital Freeway Sign

Page 462 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 8 of 27 ends

within three (3) business days of being notified of the graffiti by the City. The City is not obligated to maintain the Sign Structure or to maintain or repair the Digital Freeway Sign. (g)Damage or Destruction. This Agreement will continue in full effect if any of the Digital Freeway Sign is damaged and such damage amounts to less than material damage, as defined in Section 7(b)(6) below. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall promptly repair the Digital Freeway Sign, and The Cordova Community Council shall promptly apply for, and diligently pursue the issuance of, any permits or approvals it needs to repair or replace the Digital Freeway Sign. Within 30 days after obtaining the City Permits, all other necessary permits and approvals, and all parts and components, The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall begin work to repair or replace the Digital Freeway Sign. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall complete the work within 180 days after the work begins. If the Cordova Community Council Foundation elects, under this Section 6(g), not to repair or replace the Digital Freeway Sign then the Cordova Community Council shall notify the City in writing of its election and shall remove the Digital Freeway Sign and restore the Site in accordance with Section 6(l).
(h)Utilities. At no cost to the City, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall provide and pay for all utility connections, utility equipment, and utility service required to install, operate, maintain, repair, improve, or reposition the Digital Freeway Sign. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall participate in the Sacramento Municipal Utility District’s Greenergy Program for electricity service to the Digital Freeway Sign. In the event electrical power becomes unavailable, for whatever reason, the Cordova Community Council Foundation may remove the Digital Display Area and operate its Sign Structure with traditional faces.
(i)Amber Alerts and Public-Service Messages. During all periods when Digital Display Areas are Operational on the Digital Freeway Sign, The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall make the Digital Display Area available to the appropriate governmental agencies for the purpose of displaying “Amber Alert” messages in accordance with the Amber Alert Guidelines set forth in Exhibit C to this Agreement. In addition, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall allow the Digital Display Area to be available to the City, and to other government agencies without cost, on a space-available basis determined by The Cordova Community Council Foundation for the purpose of displaying public-service messages (e.g., evacuation routes, drunk-driving-awareness messages, emergency- disaster communications). The City’s messages must meet the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s graphics-arts standards so that the messages are “camera ready,” at no cost to the Cordova Community Council Foundation. All copy will be subject to The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s standard advertising copy rejection and removal policies which allow The Cordova Community Council Foundation has sole discretion to approve or disapprove a copy and remove a copy once posted or displayed.

Page 463 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 9 of 27 ends

(j)Future technologies. The technology currently being deployed for the Digital Freeway Sign is LED (light emitting diode), but there may be alternate, preferred or superior technology available in the future. The Cordova Community Council Foundation is authorized to change the Digital Freeway Sign to any other technology that operates under the maximum brightness standards set forth in Section 6(k) of this Agreement. City required approvals for more energy efficient technology shall not be unreasonably withheld. (k)Illumination Standards. Digital Freeway Sign illumination is expressly permitted when in compliance with all applicable rules and regulations (see Section 6(m) below) and when operated within these standards for Digital Freeway Signs:
(1) 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 pre-set distance. (2) Distance to measure the foot candles impact shall be measured from a distance of 250 ft. for a sign with a nominal face size no more than 20’ x 60’. (3) Each Digital Display Area must have a light sensing device that will adjust the brightness as ambient light conditions change.
(l)Removal of Digital Freeway Sign. When the Term ends, whether it expires as scheduled or is terminated early, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall promptly apply for, and diligently pursue the issuance of, at no cost to the City, any permits or approvals it needs to remove the Digital Freeway Sign, including the Digital Display Area and all above-ground sign structures and supports. Within 120 days after obtaining the necessary permits and approvals, the Cordova Community Council shall remove the Digital Freeway Sign and all above-ground sign structures and supports and restore the site to the pre- Agreement condition, all at no cost to the City. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall not be required to remove the below-grade portions of the Sign Structure. Following termination of this Agreement but prior to removal of the Digital Freeway Sign, the Cordova Community Council Foundation shall not display digital advertising on the Digital Display Area.
(m)Compliance with Laws; Waiver of Compensation. During the Term and while removing the Digital Freeway Sign after the Term in accordance with Section 6(k), Cordova Community Council Foundation shall do the following at no cost to the City: comply with all valid and applicable statutes, ordinances, regulations, rules, and orders that concern the Digital Freeway Sign and are enacted or issued by any federal, state, or local governmental entity with jurisdiction over the Digital Freeway Sign (including the City) whether enacted or issued before, on, or after the Effective Date including but not limited to sections 5403, 5402, 5405, 5408 and 5408.1 of the California Outdoor Advertising Act. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be deemed to negate, void, or diminish (i) any claim Cordova Community Council Foundation may have for just compensation as a result of any governmental action that results in the taking of its property or (ii) the right of the

Page 464 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 10 of 27 ends

Cordova Community Council Foundation to avail itself of all available remedies under state or federal law to maintain its Digital Freeway Sign. (n) Justification for sign height and face size.

•The sign has no value to either the City of Rancho Cordova or the Cordova Community Council Foundation if it is not economically viable.
•If the signs cannot be easily seen by freeway traffic the sign will not be economically viable.
•Every other digital sign in the Rancho Cordova is within 5 feet of Caltrans ROW with fully clear view corridors.
•The Mine Shaft signs are over 180 feet from that same Caltrans ROW. •Between the Mine Shaft signs and Caltrans ROW there are the following impediments:
oFuture freeway overpass (Approximately 47 feet tall),
oFour Lane Folsom Blvd with both center parkway landscaping that includes trees, oFully mature oak trees between Folsom Blvd. and Caltrans ROW (approximately 45 feet high),
oSacRT Light Rail train tracks,
oHeavy Rail train tracks, and
oRegional Sanitation 20-foot easement.
•The sign is required to be taller to get over the before mentioned visual blockages. •Regarding the Future freeway overpass the bottom of the west sign will be approximately 27 feet above the future overpass roadway deck. •The Larger Display area is required to equalize the difference between a display that is 262 feet (a football field) from an average viewer versus one that is approximately 109 feet from a viewer.
•Even though the display is larger it will appear the same size from an additional half a football field’s distance.
•If the sign does not rise above those visual blocks, it will not be seen. If the sign can be seen but not read it will have no economic value. Therefore, the sign needs to be tall enough to get over the visual blocks and be large enough to be read.

7. Early Termination.
(a)City’s Termination Rights. Without prejudice to its other remedies at law or in equity, the City may terminate this Agreement, at any time and in its sole discretion, effective 30 days after the City gives Cordova Community Council Foundation written notice of termination, if any of the following circumstances occurs:
(1) Cordova Community Council Foundation breaches its obligation to perform in accordance with any material provision of this Agreement and: (A) does not cure the breach within 30 days after the City serves it with a written notice of breach or, if the breach cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days; (B), does not begin work on a cure within 30 days after the City serves it with a written notice of breach and

Page 465 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 11 of 27 ends

diligently pursue the cure to completion within ninety (90) days after work begins.

The parties can agree to extend the time period to cure the breach by mutual written agreement. The express designation in this Agreement of a provision as “material” does not imply that other provisions are not material. (2) The Cordova Community Council Foundation initiates legal challenge to the validity of this Agreement or its authorizing ordinance.
(b) The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s Termination Rights. Without prejudice to its other remedies at law or in equity, including the right to seek just compensation under the laws of eminent domain as described in Section 9, the Cordova Community Council Foundation may terminate this Agreement, at any time and in its sole discretion, effective 30 days after Cordova Community Council Foundation the City written notice of termination, if any of the following circumstances occurs:
(1) The view of the Digital Display Area from the adjacent portion of Highway 50 is obstructed by an Obstruction on City-owned or City-controlled real property, and Cordova Community Council Foundation did not cause the Obstruction and the City has failed to adhere to its obligations under Section 5(b) following proper notice and: (A) does not cure the breach within 30 days after the City serves it with a written notice of breach or, if the breach cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days; (B), does not begin work on a cure within 30 days after the City serves it with a written notice of breach and diligently pursue the cure to completion within ninety (90) days after work begins. The parties can agree to extend the time period to cure the breach by mutual written agreement. The express designation in this Agreement of a provision as “material” does not imply that other provisions are not material. Materially obstructed shall mean at least one-half of the displayed area is obstructed.
(2) The Cordova Community Council Foundation cannot safely use the Site to install, operate, maintain, repair, or improve the Digital Freeway Sign because of a non- remediable or costly condition, and Cordova Community Council Foundation did not cause the condition.
(3) There is a material diversion of traffic from, or a material reduction or change in the directional flow of traffic on, the portion of Highway 50 adjacent to the Site, and the diversion or disruption continues uninterrupted for at least 30 consecutive days. (4) The Cordova Community Council Foundation cannot obtain or maintain any governmental permits, licenses or approvals required to install, operate, maintain, repair, or improve the Digital Freeway Signs, including but not limited to the Caltrans Permits and the City Permits.

Page 466 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 12 of 27 ends

(5) Use of the Digital Freeway Signs for its intended purpose is prevented or limited by law, or Cordova Community Council Foundation is required by any court or other governmental entity, for reasons other than eminent domain, to remove the Digital Freeway Sign from the Site.
(6) The Digital Freeway Signs are materially damaged or destroyed and Cordova Community Council Foundation elects not to repair or replace the Digital Display Area. Materially damaged or destroyed shall mean at least one-half of the Digital Display Area is damaged or destroyed such that at least one-half of it is fully inoperable.
(c)City and the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s Additional Termination Rights.

Without prejudice to their other remedies at law or in equity, either party may terminate this Agreement if the other party:
(1) Has an order for relief entered with respect to it, commences a voluntary case, or has an involuntary case filed against it under any applicable bankruptcy, insolvency, or other similar law then in effect, and the order or case is not stayed, withdrawn, or settled within 60 days after it is entered, commenced, or filed (11 U.S.C. § 365(e)(2)(A), as amended, or any successor statute); or (2) Files for reorganization, becomes insolvent, or has a receiver or other officer with similar powers appointed for its affairs in any court with jurisdiction, whether or not with its consent (unless dismissed, bonded, or discharged within 60 days after appointment).

8. Indemnification.
(a)Definitions. The following definitions apply to this Section 8:
(1) “Person” is to be interpreted broadly. It includes not just third persons but also the Cordova Community Council Foundation and its directors, officers, employees, contractors, and agents; and the City and the City’s elected officials, officers, employees, contractors, and agents.
(2) “Liabilities” means all liabilities, claims, demands, damages, and costs (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs through final resolution on appeal) that arise directly or indirectly from The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s possession or use of the Site.
(3) “Occurrence” means: (A) the death of, or injury to, any Person; and (B) damage to, or destruction of, any real property, personal property.

Page 467 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 13 of 27 ends

(b)General Indemnity. The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall indemnify, defend (with attorneys reasonably acceptable to the City), protect, and hold the City harmless from and against all Liabilities that arise directly or indirectly from The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s possession or use of the Site. The Cordova Community Council Foundation is obligated under this Section 8(b) even if the City or the City’s elected officials, officers, employees, contractors, or agents reviewed, accepted, or approved the work, materials, or activities from which the Liabilities arise. The Cordova Community Council Foundation is not obligated under this Section 8(b) to the extent the Liabilities are caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City or the City’s elected officials, officers, employees, contractors, or agents. The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s obligation under this Section 8 (b) includes Liabilities arising from any of the following:
(1) Any Occurrence on the Site, caused by The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s acts or omissions.
(2) Any Occurrence that is in any way connected with any of the Cordova Community Council Foundation’s personal property on the Site.
(3) Any Occurrence caused or allegedly caused by (A) any condition of the Site created by The Cordova Community Council Foundation or by any Person on the Site with The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s permission; or (B) some act or omission on the Site by The Cordova Community Council Foundation or by any Person on the Site with Cordova Community Council Foundation’s permission. (4) Any Occurrence caused by, or related in any way to, work or activities performed on the Site or materials furnished to the Site at the request of the Cordova Community Council Foundation or any Person or entity acting for the Cordova Community Council Foundation or its permission.
(5) Any Occurrence that is caused by, or related in any way to, a verbal or non-verbal display on the Digital Display Area.
(6) The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s failure to perform any provision of this Agreement, to comply with any requirement of law applicable to the Cordova Community Council Foundation, or to fulfill any requirement imposed by any governmental entity (including the City when acting as a government) on Cordova Community Council Foundation’s or use of the Site.
(c)Legal Challenges. Cordova Community Council Foundation shall indemnify, defend with attorneys selected by the City, protect, and hold harmless the City and the City’s elected officials, officers, and employees (“Agents”) in any litigation to attack, set aside, void or annul an approval by the City or its Agents concerning the Digital Freeway Sign (collectively, a “Claim”” including litigation based on the California Environmental Quality

Page 468 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 14 of 27 ends

Act) brought to challenge the validity of this Agreement, the validity of the City Permits or the Caltrans Permits, or the validity of the City ordinances that authorize the installation and Operation of the Digital Freeway Sign on the site. The Cordova Community Council Foundation’s obligation to indemnify under this Section 8(c) includes liability for attorneys’ fees awarded to a party who successfully challenges the validity of this Agreement, the City Permits, or the Caltrans Permits, or any authorizing ordinance. If such a Claim is brought, the Party that first receives notice or becomes aware of the Claim shall promptly notify the other Party of such Claim and each Party shall cooperate with the efforts of the other Party to defend such Claim. The City will not voluntarily assist the opposing party in any such Claim unless required by law. Nothing in this paragraph shall obligate the City to defend any Claim and the City shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement arising from any such Claim unless the settlement is approved in writing by the City.
(d)Survival. Cordova Community Council Foundation’s obligations under this Section 8 will survive this Agreement.

9. Miscellaneous.
(a)Assignments and SubAgreements. A party may not assign or otherwise transfer this Agreement or any interest in it, and this Agreement is not assignable by operation of law, without the other Party’s prior written consent, which the other party shall not withhold, delay, or condition unreasonably. This Agreement remains in effect, and an assignment or transfer of this Agreement does not occur, for purposes of this Section 9(a), if The Cordova Community Council Foundation merges with another Rancho Cordova Community Benefit nonprofit entity. An assignment or transfer made contrary to this Section 9(a) is void.
(b)Successors and Assigns. This Agreement binds and inures to the benefit of the successors and permitted assigns of the parties. This Section 9(b) does not constitute the City’s consent to any assignment of this Agreement or any interest in the Agreement. (c)Notices. Any notice or other communication under this Agreement must be in writing and will be considered properly given and effective only when mailed or delivered in the manner provided by this Section 9(c) to the persons identified below. A mailed notice or other communication will be effective or will be considered to have been given on the third day after it is deposited in the United States Mail (certified mail and return receipt requested), addressed as set forth below, with postage prepaid. A notice or other communication sent in any other manner will be effective or will be considered properly given when actually delivered. A Party may change its address for these purposes by giving written notice of the change to the other Party in the manner provided in this Section 9(c).

Page 469 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 15 of 27 ends

If to the City:

City of Rancho Cordova
Planning Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
Attention:

Elizabeth Sparkman, Community
Development Director
If to:

The Cordova Community Council
Foundation
The Cordova Community Council
Foundation
2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 117
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Attention, Executive Director
Shelly Blanchard
With a copy to:
(d)Force Majeure.
(1) “Force Majeure Event” means a cause of delay that is not the fault of the Party who is required to perform under this Agreement and is beyond that Party’s reasonable control, including the elements (such as floods, earthquakes, windstorms, and unusually severe weather), fire, energy shortages or rationing, riots, acts of terrorism, war or war-defense conditions, acts of any public enemy, epidemics, the actions or inactions of any governmental entity or that entity’s agents, litigation, labor shortages (including shortages caused by strikes or walkouts), and materials shortages.
(2) Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, if the performance of any act required by this Agreement to be performed by either the City or the Cordova Community Council Foundation is prevented or delayed because of a Force Majeure Event, then the time for performance will be extended for a period equivalent to the period of delay, and performance of the act during the period of delay will be excused.
(e)Waiver of Breach. A Party’s failure to insist on strict performance of this Agreement or to exercise any right or remedy upon the other Party’s breach of this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of the performance, right, or remedy. A Party’s waiver of the other Party’s breach of any provision in this Agreement will not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision. A waiver is binding only if set forth in writing and signed by the waiving Party. (f)Relationship of the Parties. This Agreement does not create any relationship or association between the City and the Cordova Community Council Foundation. For example, and without limiting the previous sentence, this Agreement does not create between the City and Cordova Community Council Foundation the relationship of principal and agent, nor does it create a partnership or joint venture.

Page 470 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 16 of 27 ends

(g)Attorneys’ Fees. The Party prevailing in any litigation concerning this Agreement, the Site, or any improvements to the Site (including the Digital Freeway Sign) will be entitled to an award by the court of reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs through final resolution on appeal in addition to any other relief that may be granted in the litigation.

If the City is the prevailing party, then this Section 9(g) will apply whether the City is represented in the litigation by the Office of the City Attorney or by outside counsel. (h)Severability. If a court with jurisdiction holds any nonmaterial provision of this Agreement to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, then the remaining provisions will remain in full force.
(i)Counterparts. The parties may execute this Agreement in counterparts, each of which will be considered an original, but all of which will constitute the same Agreement. (j)Further Assurances. Each Party shall execute all additional documents or instruments and take all necessary action that either Party reasonably considers necessary to carry out the proper purposes of this Agreement.
(k)Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. (l)Interpretation. This Agreement is to be interpreted and applied in accordance with California law without regard to conflict-of-laws principles, except that the rule of interpretation in California Civil Code section 1654 will not apply. Schedules 1 and 2 and Exhibits A, B, and C are part of this Agreement.
(m)Integration and Modification. This Agreement sets forth the Parties’ entire understanding regarding the matters addressed. It supersedes all prior or contemporaneous agreements, representations, and negotiations (written, oral, express, or implied) and may be modified only by another written agreement signed by both Parties. (Signature Page Follows)

Page 471 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Billboard
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 1 of 27 ends

City of Rancho Cordova
By: _________________________
Micah Runner
City Manager
Dated: ____________,
Dated_____________, 2024
Approved as to Form
City Attorney
By: ____________________________
Adam U. Lindgren
City Attorney
The Cordova Community Council Foundation
By: ____________________________
Shelly Blanchard
Executive Director
Dated: ____________,
Dated_____________, 2024

Page 472 of 526 ends

Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
Schedule 1
Existing Billboards to be Removed
New Billboard Existing Billboards
Address:
2300 Mineshaft Lane
APN
APN 072-0231-014
The Cordova Community Council Foundation shall
obtain the necessary permits to remove this
Existing Sign before the Commencement Date for
the new Digital Freeway Signs; and will actually
complete removal within 12 months from said
date:

Locations:
2300 Mineshaft Lane (APN 072-0231-014)
Single Sided traditional billboard with
approximately 672 square feet of sign area

Page 473 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
Exhibit A
Digital Freeway Sign Operational Requirements
a. Operational Limitations. Digital Freeway Sign 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, scintillating lighting or varying light intensity. b. Minimum display time. Each message on the sign must be displayed for a minimum of eight (8) seconds.
c. Each display must have a light sensing device that will adjust the brightness as ambient light conditions change.
d. The Digital Freeway Sign shall be operated with systems and monitoring in place to either turn the display off or show a “full black” image on the display in the event of a malfunction that affects at least fifty percent of the display area. e. The Digital Freeway Sign shall not be deemed prohibited under Section

23.743.050 and is not governed by any of the prohibitions set forth in Subsections B, Q, S or U thereof as the operation thereof is specifically authorized by Section 23.743.150 of the Code.
f. Section 23.743.090 of the Code shall not apply to Digital Freeway Sign.

Illumination for the Digital Freeway Sign shall comply with the terms of this Agreement and is otherwise specifically permitted by Section 23.743.150 of the Code. g. Digital Freeway Sign is not considered to be a pole sign under Section

23.743.120. E of the Code.
h. Digital Freeway Sign shall not be included within any definition of Flashing set forth in the Code.

Page 474 of 526 ends

Page 475 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 476 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 477 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 478 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 479 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 480 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign

Page 481 of 526 ends

ITEM 11.1. ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit C to the Resolution
Agreement for Digital Freeway Sign
City of Rancho Cordova and Cordova Community Council Foundation Exhibit C
Amber Alert Guidelines
AMBER alerts are issued by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in Washington, DC. For those alerts, the outdoor advertising industry adhere to these guidelines:

Digital Freeway Sign advertising will be completely interrupted upon receipt of an AMBER Alert within the affected geographical boundary.

The appropriate AMBER Alert will run uninterrupted for a minimum of one hour preempting all other advertising.

Thereafter, during the two hours immediately following the aforementioned one-hour display of the AMBER Alert, the same alert will be displayed in rotation along with other paid advertisers unless cancelled earlier. After the initial 3-hour display period, any additional posting of the alert shall be based on the situation and availability. 5562744.1

Page 482 of 526 ends

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project

1. STATUTORY REQUIREMENT
When a lead agency makes findings on significant environmental effects identified in a mitigated negative declaration (MND), the agency must also adopt a “reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment” (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a) and California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15091(d) and Section 15097). The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is implemented to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the MND are implemented. Therefore, the MMRP must include all changes in the proposed project either adopted by the project proponent or made conditions of approval by the lead agency or a responsible agency.

2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The City of Rancho Cordova (City) is the lead agency responsible for the adoption of the MMRP . The project applicant is responsible for implementing, verifying, and documenting compliance with the MMRP , in coordination with other identified agencies. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097(a), a public agency may delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private entity that accepts the delegation. However, until mitigation measures have been completed, the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the measures occurs in accordance with the program. Verification of mitigation compliance and responsibility for compliance is the responsibility of the applicant–designated project manager. The project manager will be responsible for coordinating plan reviews and field verification with the appropriate City department staff or outside agencies.

3. MITIGATION MEASURES AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Table 1 is structured to enable quick reference to mitigation measures and the associated monitoring program based on the environmental resource. The numbering of mitigation measures correlates with numbering of measures found in the Environmental Checklist of the Initial Study.

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 483 of 526 ends

Page 2 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
Air Quality
AIR-1 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.
• 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.

Construction
equipment
monitoring
During
construction
Construction
contractor
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 484 of 526 ends

Page 3 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
• 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.

Biological Resources
BIO-1 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 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 Survey and
monitoring
Prior to and
during
construction
Applicant
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 485 of 526 ends

Page 4 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
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.

BIO-2 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.

Survey and
monitoring
Prior to and
during
construction
Construction
contractor

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 486 of 526 ends

Page 5 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
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
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
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 487 of 526 ends

Page 6 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
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.

Cultural Resources
CUL-1 The project applicant or its contractor shall retain a qualified archaeologist to undertake the tasks specified within this mitigation measure. In the event that suspected precontact or historic-period archaeological resources are encountered during debris removal, demolition, excavation, and/or grading of the site, all activity within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be stopped, the project applicant or designee shall be notified, and the qualified archaeologist shall examine the find. Project personnel shall not collect or move any cultural material. The Monitoring During
construction
Applicant or
construction
contractor

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 488 of 526 ends

Page 7 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
archaeologist shall evaluate the find(s) to determine if it meets the definition of a historical, unique archaeological, and/or tribal cultural resource and follow the further procedures outlined below:
• If the finds do not meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, no further study or protection is necessary prior to resuming
project implementation.
• If the find(s) does meet the definition of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource, then it
should be avoided by project activities. If avoidance is not feasible, as determined by the City of Rancho
Cordova, the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the City, shall make appropriate recommendations
regarding the treatment and disposition of such finds,
and significant impacts to such resources shall be
mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of
the archaeologist prior to resuming construction
activities within a 50-foot radius.
• If human remains are encountered, project work shall
stop in the vicinity of the remains and, as required by law, the Sacramento County Coroner would be notified
immediately. An archaeologist also would be contacted
to evaluate the find. If the human remains were
determined of Native American origin, the coroner
would need to notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours of that
determination. Pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98, the NAHC, in turn, would immediately
contact a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD would
have 48 hours to inspect the site and recommend
ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 489 of 526 ends

Page 8 of 8 ends

Mine Shaft Digital Billboards Project MMRP City of Rancho Cordova

Mitigation
Measure
Requirements of Measure Compliance
Method
Timing Responsible
Party
Review and
Approval
(Data/Initials)
treatment of the remains. The project applicant and City shall coordinate with the MLD in good faith to find a
respectful resolution to the situation and entertain all reasonable options regarding the descendants'
preferences for treatment.
• Recommendations for treatment and disposition of finds could include, but are not limited to, the collection,
recordation, and analysis of any significant cultural
materials, or the turning over of tribal cultural resources to tribal representatives for appropriate treatment. A
report of findings documenting any data recovery shall
be submitted to the Northwest Information Center
(NWIC).

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1 If, during site preparation and construction activities, evidence of hazardous materials contamination is observed or suspected (e.g., stained or odorous soil or groundwater), construction activities shall cease immediately in the area of the find. If such contamination is observed or suspected, the contractor shall retain a qualified hazardous materials specialist to assess the site and collect and analyze soil and/or water samples, as necessary.

If contaminants are identified in the samples, the contractor shall notify and consult with the appropriate federal, State, and/or local agencies, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control. Measures to remediate contamination and protect worker health and the environment shall be implemented in accordance with federal, State, and local regulations before construction activities may resume at the site where
contamination is encountered.

Monitoring During
construction
Construction
contractor

ITEM 11.1.

ATTACHMENT 7
Exhibit D to the Resolution

Page 490 of 526 ends

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 1

ITEM 11.2.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Dalia Fadl, Principal Engineer

SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE PROTESTS TO THE PROPOSED STORMWATER UTILITY 1 FEE INCREASE AND A RESOLUTION TO

SUBMIT THE QUESTION TO A VOTE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER UTILITY 1 FEE

INCREASE

RECOMMENDATION

Continue item to the March 4, 2024, City Council meeting.

ATTACHMENT(S)

None

Page 491 of 526 ends

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 1

ITEM 12.1.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Maria Kniestedt, Communications and Public Affairs Director

SUBJECT: COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIC PLAN

RECOMMENDATION

Provide July 2022 – December 2023 communications update and answer Council questions.

BACKGROUND

Annually, the city’s communications team presents an update to the City Council.

The goal of the 2024 update is to provide the City Council with a review of:
•July 2022 – December 2023 communications activities
•Data and insights from July 2022 – December 2023
•2024 proactive strategic communications recommendations

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Presentation

Page 492 of 526 ends

COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE
2022/2023 Insights, 2024 Strategic Plan
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 493 of 526 ends

TONIGHT’S DISCUSSION
• Goals
• Philosophy
• Questions &
Discussion
• Insights
• What’s New
• 2024 Plans
• Data Tools
• 2022/2023
Metrics
• Year-over-Year
Growth + Goals
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 494 of 526 ends

JULY 2022 – DECEMBER 2023 HIGHLIGHTS
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 495 of 526 ends

CITY’S COMMUNICATIONS APPROACH
Strategic & Proactive
How We Work
• Strategic Plan
• Quarterly Work Plans
• Reactive
Goals
• Strategic
• Outcome-driven
• Measurable
• Insight-focused
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 496 of 526 ends

DATA-GATHERING TOOLS
Metrics provide an objective snapshot that delivers strategic insights.

Research
• Random Sample Surveys
• Scientific Panels
• Self-selecting Surveys
Channel
• Audience Growth
• Engagement
• Anecdotal
Digital Content
• Visits
• Opens
• Clicks
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 497 of 526 ends

METRICS: MEDIA RELATIONS
0 200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2018 2019 2020 FY 2021/22 July 2022 - December
2023
Total Media Placements
Total Media Placements
*COVID-19 Pandemic
*AMGEN Tour
3% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 498 of 526 ends

METRICS: CITY SOCIAL MEDIA
0 5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 FY 2021/22 2023
Growth by Channel
Facebook X Instagram Nextdoor LinkedIn TikTok
16% Growth
17% Growth
17% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 499 of 526 ends

TOP 3 SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS: CITY
Facebook X
Instagram
#1 #2
#3
#1
#2
#3 #1
#3
#2
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 500 of 526 ends

METRICS: RCPD SOCIAL MEDIA
0 5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 FY 2021/22 2023
Growth by Channel
Facebook Twitter Instagram Nextdoor
25% Growth
32% Growth
10% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 501 of 526 ends

TOP 3 SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS: RCPD
Facebook X Instagram
#1
#2
#1
#3
#2
#3
#1 #2
#3
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 502 of 526 ends

METRICS: DIGITAL NEWSLETTER
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
2018 2019 2020 FY 2021/22 July 2022 - December
2023
Rancho Cordova News Year-over-Year Growth
Subscribers Average Opens
44% Growth
59% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 503 of 526 ends

METRICS: DIGITAL NEWSLETTER
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
2018 2019 2020 FY 2021/22 July 2022 - December
2023
Rancho Cordova Events Year-over-Year Growth
Subscribers Average Opens Average Clicks
40% Growth
44% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 504 of 526 ends

METRICS: RCPD WEBSITE
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
RCPD Website Visits
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 July 2022 - December 2023 43% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 505 of 526 ends

METRICS: CITY WEBSITE
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
City Website Visits
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY 2021/22 July 2022 - December 2023 112% Growth
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 506 of 526 ends

METRICS: TOP 10 WEBPAGES
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000
Events
Residents
Animal Services
Human Resources
Departments
New Businesses and Projects
Building and Safety
Rancho Recycles
Rancho Cordova Online
Residential Solid Waste Services
Home Page
Page Visits
Page Visits
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 507 of 526 ends

ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 508 of 526 ends

AWARD-WINNING
20TH YEAR
7 online stories
55 broadcast stories
3 print stories
65 stories, 34M+ Reach
PRSA Awards for 20th
Anniversary Book and
Campaign
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 509 of 526 ends

GOALS & YEAR-OVER-YEAR GROWTH
Channel Goals Actuals
Media Relations 10% Positive Story Increase +3% City
Media Value:

Social Media 10% Channel Growth +17% City
+32% RCPD
Digital Content 20% Subscriber Growth +59% City
Websites Steady Visitor Growth +112% City
+43% RCPD
Publications New goal: Steady growth 101 Total
164,060 Reach
July 2022 – December 2023
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 510 of 526 ends

INSIGHTS FOR 2024
Growth across all channels means high audience engagement • Continue campaign, tactical models
• Build new channels, capabilities
• Create understanding with trusted
information
• Promote key projects, programs
• Focus on high-interest storytelling
• Measure and analyze efforts
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 511 of 526 ends

WHAT’S NEW IN 2024
Another Exciting Year for Rancho Cordova
• Storytelling: Key City Projects, Programs
• New Year, New Citywide Banners
• Campaigns: RCYC, Food Waste Recycling, Spring
Service Day
• National League of Cities Visits Rancho Cordova
• Publications: Year-end Report
• City Podcast Launches
• Community Outreach/Conversations
• Test & Learns: Artificial Intelligence
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 512 of 526 ends

2024 PLANS: Q1

PROACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
Strategic Plan
• Staff report
• PowerPoint
• Video
• Workplans
Internal Podcast
• Set up and training
• Content and launch
Campaigns
• RCYC
• Food Waste Recycling 2
• City Flower
• Public Works Projects
• Spring Service Day
• NLC Summer Board
• Citywide Banners
Community Outreach
• Mills Crossing
• Community Development
Projects
• Stormwater Fee Increase
• Public Works Infrastructure
Projects
• General Plan
• Community Development
Block Grant
Digital Content
• RC News, RC Events
Social Media
• Content
• City/RCPD Channel Management
News Articles
• City and RCPD
Media and Social Media Monitoring
• City and RCPD
Website Management
• Content
• SEO
Billboards/Lobby Digital Display
Branded Giveaways
Metrics/Analysis

CITY COUNCIL SUPPORT
Mayoral Support:
• Rancho Cordova Luncheon
• NLC Roadshow Application and Video
• NLC Congressional Conference
• NLC meetings, summer board
conference prep
Council Meetings/Special Work Sessions
Speaking Engagement Support
Publications
• CEIF Annual Report and
Postcard
• Food Waste Recycling
• Year-end report prep
Branding
• New citywide banners
• New signature blocks
• New notepads
• New ppt template
• New social media headers
• Refresh RC News/Events
headers
Media Relations
• CHS Weight Room
• Book Vending Machine at RCYC
• RCYC Programming/Open
House
• Prep April pitch
Spring Photo Planning

FOUNDATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 513 of 526 ends

QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 514 of 526 ends

THANK YOU!
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM 12.1.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 515 of 526 ends

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 11

ITEM 12.2.

DATE: February 20, 2024

TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Adam Lindgren, City Attorney

SUBJECT: UPDATE ON CALIFORNIA LAWS ENACTED IN 2023

RECOMMENDATION

Receive the report.

NEW LAWS

Each year from among the many laws adopted by the California State Legislature, the City Attorney identifies those new laws most likely to be of interest to the City Council, City Manager and staff.

Behavioral Health
SB 326, Eggman. The Behavioral Health Services Act.

Responding to the needs of Californians who have a mental illness, SB 326 may change how mental health services are carried out across the State. The bill makes some changes today, but many important components of this bill will not come into effect unless Proposition 1 is approved by the voters in the March 5, 2024, election.

Without need for voter approval, SB 326 alters county planning processes by requiring county integrated plans to be developed every three years with local stakeholder groups.

If approved by voters, this bill would also overhaul and rename the existing Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), which funds a system of county mental health plans that provide mental health services, to become the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA).

Should voters approve it, the bill would also create local behavioral health boards under community mental health services with the responsibility to advise the government body

Page 516 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 11
on community mental health and substance use disorder services delivered by the local mental health agency or local behavioral health agency, as well as reviewing the community’s needs in these areas of mental health care. Subject to voter approval, this new law would allow funds appropriated under its auspices to be used to treat, and intervene to prevent, substance use disorders.

Also subject to voter approval, this bill would expand services eligible for State funding dedicated to:
- Housing interventions;
- Full-Service Partnerships;
- Behavioral health services and support;
- Population-based mental health and substance use disorder prevention programs.

SB 43, Eggman. Behavioral Health.

Conservatorship is generally a last resort aimed at providing essential aid and assistance to individuals struggling with substantial behavioral health challenges. It commences with a request from a county mental health department to the court, seeking the appointment of an individual to oversee another person's care. This oversight, granted for a defined period, aims to interrupt the recurring pattern of crises such as arrests, incarceration, and stays in psychiatric hospitals.

This bill seeks to amend existing law, particularly the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, which addresses involuntary commitment and treatment of individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others due to mental health issues or are gravely disabled. The amendment broadens the definition of "gravely disabled" to include cases where a person, due to severe substance use disorder or a combination of mental health and severe substance use disorder, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs like food, clothing, shelter, personal safety, or necessary medical care. Chronic alcoholism is included in the expanded definition. The bill allows counties to delay implementing these changes until January 1, 2026.

Public Safety
AB 436, Alvarez. Vehicles.

This bill will make specific amendments to the Vehicle Code regarding the authority granted to local governments to create rules and regulations concerning "cruising." Going forward, local governments would not have the authority to outlaw cruising.

Additionally, the bill would remove the prohibition on operating modified passenger or light commercial vehicles that have been altered in a way that decreases the clearance between the vehicle and the road surface, specifically eliminating this restriction from the current law.

Page 517 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 3 of 11
Cannabis Regulation
AB 1448, Wallis. Cannabis: enforcement by local jurisdictions.

In November 2016, California voters passed Proposition 64, the Control Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA”), legalizing recreational or “adult use” cannabis for adults 21 years of age or older. That law created a comprehensive regulatory and licensing structure for commercial, non-medical cannabis businesses. It also required cities and counties to permit adults 21 years of age and older to cultivate up to six cannabis plants inside their residence.

Soon after, in June 2017, the legislature passed SB 94 in an attempt to better align regulations for medical and adult use cannabis. SB 94 repealed much of MCRSA (for medicinal cannabis) and merged certain of its requirements with the AUMA to create a single program. The new regulatory system, the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (“MAUCRSA”), is intended to regulate all commercial cannabis activity. In 2021, the three state cannabis programs were merged to form a single new state department called the Department of Cannabis Control (“DCC”). The DCC now licenses and regulates all commercial cannabis activity in California at the state level.

Cities have the authority to license commercial cannabis businesses on a local level.

Commercial cannabis businesses or individuals that sell cannabis without local approval are subject to civil penalties by the Attorney General, a county counsel, a city attorney. State law provides that the penalty first be used to reimburse the prosecuting agency for specified costs of bringing the action, with the remainder, if any, to be deposited in the State General Fund. AB 1448 would instead require the penalty first be used to reimburse the prosecuting agency for costs in bringing the action, with 50% of the remainder, if any, paid to the county or city, and the other 50% to be deposited into the State General Fund. This bill will provide a monetary incentive for local governments to enforce commercial cannabis license regulations.

Government Financing
ACA 1, Aguiar-Curry. Local Government Financing: Affordable Housing and Public Infrastructure: Voter Approval.

The Legislature has proposed an amendment to the Constitution of the State that, if approved by voters, would adjust local tax rules to make it easier to fund infrastructure and affordable housing. Current law requires local special taxes to be approved by 2/3 of the electorate in order to pass. This amendment would reduce the required approval to 55% of local voters to impose, extend, or increase special sales and use tax or transactions and use taxes proposed specifically for the construction, reconstruction,

Page 518 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 4 of 11
rehabilitation, or replacement of public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing.

This bill would also create an exception to the existing 1% property tax limit, allowing local jurisdictions to impose an additional ad valorem tax to fund projects such as building public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing.

Similarly, this tax can only be implemented if 55% of the voters in that area approve the tax. It would further require 55% voter approval for local governments to go beyond yearly income and revenue limits in issuing general obligation bonds for projects like public infrastructure, affordable housing, or permanent supportive housing.

Labor and Employment
HR 1065, Nadler. Federal Pregnancy Workers Fairness Act.

The Federal Pregnancy Workers Fairness Act applies to all private and public employers with 15 or more employees. It requires employers to provide “reasonable accommodations” to a worker’s known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation will cause the employer “undue hardship.” Examples of possible reasonable accommodations include:
- the ability to sit down;
- drink water;
- park closer to their workplace;
- have flexible hours;
- receive additional break time to use the bathroom, eat, and rest; - take leave or time off to recover from childbirth;
- be excused from strenuous activities or activities that involve exposure to compounds not safe for pregnancy.

SB 553, Cortese. Workplace Violence Prevention Program.

Senate Bill 553 adds Section 6401.9 to the Labor Code and requires employers to implement workplace violence prevention plans by July 1, 2024. This applies to nearly all employers with limited exceptions (e.g., healthcare facilities operating under Cal/OSHA’s Violence Prevention in Health Care regulation; law enforcement agencies; employers with fewer than 10 employees that are not accessible to the public; and employees teleworking from locations of their choosing). “Workplace Violence” is defined as the “threat or use of physical force against an employee that results in, or has a high likelihood of resulting in, injury, psychological trauma, or stress, regardless of whether the employee sustains an injury.” Employer violence prevention plans must include specific information, such as: instructions for reporting a violent incident or a threat of violence; investigation procedures regarding

Page 519 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 5 of 11
how the employer will receive and respond to such reports; and recommendations for responding to workplace violence. Employers are also required to maintain a log of violent incidents with specific information in order to provide “effective” training upon implementing the plan and for subsequent annual trainings.

SB 497, Smallwood-Cuevas. Presumption of Retaliation.

On January 1, 2024, Senate Bill 497 amended Labor Code Sections 98.6, 1102.5, and 1197.5 to create a “rebuttable presumption of retaliation” if an employee is discharged, threatened with discharge, demoted, suspended, retaliated against, subjected to adverse action, or discriminated against in the terms and conditions of their employment within ninety days of engaging in certain protected activity. As a result, it is easier for employees and applicants to establish a prima facie case of retaliation during litigation. In order to do so, an employee must demonstrate: (1) the employee engaged in protected activity; (2) the employer engaged in an adverse action against the employee; and (3) there was a causal connection between the protected activity and the alleged adverse action.
“Protected activity” here includes (but is not limited to) instances where an employee:
- files a bona fide complaint or claim, or institutes or causes to be instituted any proceeding relating to the employee’s rights under the jurisdiction of the Labor Commissioner;
- makes a written or oral complaint that they are owed unpaid wages; - initiates any action or notice pursuant to Labor Code Section 2699; - testifies or intends to testify in a proceeding pursuant to Section 2699; - exercises other rights afforded to the employee by the Labor Code; - files a claim for loss of wages as the result of demotion, suspension, or discharge from employment for lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours away from the employer's premises;
- engages or participates in politics or becomes a candidate for public office.

In some circumstances, employees who assist other employees in enforcing their rights and even applicants for employment may be able to utilize the legal presumption created by SB 497.

Because SB 497 makes it easier for employees to establish a prima facie case of retaliation, employers need to pay extra attention to the timing of any adverse employment actions in relation to protected activity. In addition to creating a rebuttable presumption of retaliation, Senate Bill 497 also modifies an employer’s penalties for a violation of Section 1102.5 to include a civil penalty not exceeding $10,000 per employee for each violation.

AB 2188 and SB 700. Off-Duty Cannabis Use and Drug Test Results.

Page 520 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 6 of 11
Effective January 1, 2024, AB 2188 establishes a new category of employee protection under the California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Once effective, employers will be prohibited from discriminating against employees based on their use of marijuana off-the-job and away from the workplace or based on employer required drug screenings that find non-psychoactive cannabis metabolites in the employee’s hair, blood, urine, or other bodily fluid. The focus of this legislation is on how employers assess marijuana impairment in the workplace. These new protections apply to persons through hiring, termination, or any condition of employment. Effective January 1, 2024, SB 700 also expands on these protections by prohibiting employers from inquiring about a candidate’s prior use of cannabis.

Public Contracting
AB 334, Blanca Rubio. Public Contracts: Conflicts of Interest.

This bill helps cities navigate conflict of interest laws for multi-stage public projects. In the past, it has been difficult for consultants and independent contractors who advise cities during the early stages of a project to be awarded a contract at the project’s later stages, due to the broad construction that courts have given to the meaning of “making” a contract under Government Code Section 1090. Section 1090 prohibits members of legislative bodies and city officers and employees from being financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity or by any body or city of which they are members.

AB 334, which adds Section 1097.6 to the Government Code, clarifies when an independent contractor’s involvement at an early stage of a public project as an advisor would preclude the same independent contractor from participating in the project’s later stages as a contractor. It establishes that an independent contractor who meets certain requirements (primarily, having no involvement in “engaging in or advising on public contracting on behalf of the public entity”) will not be deemed a “city officer” for purposes of considering whether they may be awarded a contract at later project stages. Additionally, even independent contractors who are considered “city officers” at early stages of a project can be awarded a later-stage contract in some circumstances.

Accessory Dwelling Units
AB 1332, Carrillo. Accessory Dwelling Units: Preapproved Plans.

Building on the many ADU laws enacted by the Legislature in prior sessions, this bill aims to further streamline the ADU approval process. It requires each local jurisdiction to develop by January 1, 2025, a program for the preapproval of ADU designs.

Preapproval decisions will be based on the standards and permitting fees established in Section 65852.2 of the Government Code.

Page 521 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 7 of 11
Preapproved ADU designs must then be published on the local jurisdiction’s website along with contact information for companies offering the preapproved plans. This bill allows any party to submit plans for preapproval by the local agency. Preapproved plans may include plans that have been developed by the agency itself or those that have been preapproved by other agencies within the state.

Once AB 1332 comes into effect, a permit for a proposed ADU using preapproved plans must be approved or denied ministerially within 30 days, pursuant to Section 65852.2.

The preapproval process and website must be in place by January 1, 2025. Some agencies have already voluntarily adopted similar preapproval programs.

AB 1033, Ting. Authorizing Cities to Adopt an Ordinance Permitting Separate Sale of Accessory Dwelling Units.

In an effort to promote affordable homeownership for Californians, this bill expands the authority of local jurisdictions (but does not require them) to adopt ordinances allowing the separate sale of an ADU and primary dwelling unit as condos. Existing law required local agencies to allow ADUs to be sold separately from the primary residence to a qualified buyer if certain conditions are met, including that the property was developed by a nonprofit. AB 1033 expands the authority of local jurisdictions to allow the separate sale of ADUs as condominiums.

Should a local jurisdiction choose to adopt such an ordinance, the process to establish the primary dwelling and ADU as condos must comply with both the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act and the Subdivision Map Act. Other requirements must be included in any ordinance pursuant to AB 1033 as well, including a safety inspection, consent of any lienholders, notification to utilities, and securing authorization of any applicable associations under Civ. Code Section 4080.

Housing
AB 531, Irwin. The Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act of 2023.

Previously, the California legislature set up the Multifamily Housing Program and the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program. The former program offers deferred payment loans for eligible development costs, particularly aimed at housing for individuals affected by or at risk due to medical conditions from the COVID-19 pandemic or other diseases. It directs specific funds to align with this housing program's guidelines for the homeless or those at risk. The latter program allows the State to award grants for the construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of behavioral health treatment resources.

Page 522 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 8 of 11
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) usually requires an environmental impact report for projects that could significantly affect the environment. However, an exemption exists until July 1, 2024 for projects aiding homeless populations impacted by medical crises, provided other conditions are met. This new bill extends this exemption for certain housing projects funded by the Multifamily Housing Program or the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program, streamlining their review process without requiring discretionary local government approvals under CEQA.

Moreover, the bill extends the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program indefinitely, supporting grants for constructing, acquiring, or rehabilitating behavioral health treatment resources. The Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act of 2024 includes $1.5 billion specifically earmarked to help cities and counties. Sections of this bill will be to presented to voters in the March 5, 2024 statewide primary election, along with SB 326.

SB 684, Caballero. Streamlined Housing Approval: Ministerial Approval of Up to 10-Unit Housing Projects on Small Parcels.

Building on the Legislature’s efforts to streamline housing approvals, part of a long-term effort to reduce housing costs in the state, effective July 1, 2024, this bill requires a local agency to ministerially consider, without discretionary review or a hearing, a parcel map or a tentative and final map for a housing development that meets specified requirements. The bill has been characterized as an effort to promote approvals of “starter” homes in infill developments in multifamily zones.

These requirements for ministerial approval include, but are not limited to, the following:
- The project contains 10 or fewer single-family residential units. - The project is located on a lot that is either zoned for multifamily residential development or vacant and zoned for single-family residential development, and the lot is no larger than five acres and is substantially surrounded by qualified urban uses. - The lot is a legal parcel located within either an incorporated city, the boundaries of which include some portion of an urbanized area, or an urbanized area or urban cluster in a county with a population greater than 600,000.
- The lot was established pursuant to this new law or section 66411.7. - Subject to exceptions within this law, the newly created parcels are no smaller than 600 square feet.
- The project has as its primary purposes the creation and maintenance of permanently affordable single-family and multifamily residences.

SB 684 imposes streamlining requirements, requiring a parcel map or tentative and final map for qualifying projects to be approved or denied within 60 days.

AB 1633, Ting. Housing Accountability Act: Disapprovals under CEQA.

Page 523 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 9 of 11
This bill amends Government Code Section 65589.5 with a view to increasing California’s housing stock. The amendment aims to bring clarity in situations where there is a potential conflict between the HAA and CEQA for projects that meet certain criteria.

The HAA prohibits a local jurisdiction from disapproving a housing development project without making written findings on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. The HAA currently defines “disapproval” as, “any instance in which a local agency either votes and disapproves a proposed housing development project application, including any required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the issuance of a building permit, or fails to comply with specified time periods” (among other scenarios).

AB 1633 takes aim at situations where local agencies drag out the process but don’t definitively “disapprove” a project. Accordingly, the statute’s list of actions that constitute a “disapproval” under the HAA now includes (among others): (1) instances when a local agency fails to make a determination of whether a project is exempt from CEQA, or commits an abuse of discretion in that determination; and (2) instances when a local agency fails to either require further study or adopt a negative declaration or addendum for the project, certify an EIR, or approve another environmental document for the project, or commits an abuse of discretion. AB 1633 sunsets on January 1, 2031.

SB 4,Wiener. Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023
To address California’s housing crisis, this bill overrides local land use and planning barriers that would inhibit the development of lower-income housing on parcels of land owned by independent education institutions of higher education or religious institutions.

The bill requires that a predominantly lower-income housing development project on such qualifying parcels be a use by-right upon the request an applicant who submits an application for streamlined approval. Only projects meeting certain specified criteria can take advantage of SB4. Projects on environmentally sensitive areas or that would be proximate to certain industrial uses, for example, are not eligible for SB 4’s streamlined process. SB 4 projects must meet objective local development standards that are not in conflict with it. In addition to streamlining the approval process and removing local regulatory barriers, SB 4 also specifies the densities, parking requirements, and labor standards for qualifying projects. SB 4 sunsets in 2036.

SB 423, Wiener. Extension and Adjustment of SB 35’s streamlined approval process.

Page 524 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 10 of 11
This bill extends SB 35’s ministerial housing and mixed-use approval process in local jurisdictions that fall behind in meeting their RHNA, from 2026 to 2036. The bill also expands SB 35’s streamlined process to very high fire risk zones where it previously did not apply. SB 423 also extends the streamlined approval process to jurisdictions that have failed to obtain HCD certification of their Housing Element (and not just those which fail to meet their RHNA), and it relaxes SB 35’s labor requirements for certain projects. It also authorizes the Department of General Services, at its discretion, to act in the place of a locality or local government, for development on property owned by or leased to the state.

Among its many other changes, SB 423 also clarifies that it is the planning director or other equivalent official who shall make the determination that a project under SB 35 is consistent with objective planning standards. Additionally, under SB 423, an alternative definition of “affordable rent” is established, which defines “affordable rent” as a development that dedicates 100% of units, exclusive of a manager’s unit or units, to lower income households. This bill makes many other amendments to this major affordable housing law and should be studied carefully.

Planning and Zoning
AB 821 General plan: zoning ordinance: conflicts.

Under state law, cities must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan that governs their land uses and physical development. Zoning regulations must be consistent with the general plan. Current law requires a zoning ordinance to be amended within a reasonable time to bring it into consistency with the general plan when a general plan amendment causes the zoning to become inconsistent. AB 821 maintains this requirement to amend zoning ordinance within “reasonable time” if the zoning code becomes inconsistent with a general plan by reason of amendment to the general plan, or to any element of the plan.

AB 821also creates a deadline of 180 days for local jurisdictions to amend their zoning code if the inconsistency has arisen due to an amendment of the general plan or any element of the general plan and the jurisdiction has received a development application for a project that is not subject to Section 65589.5 and that is consistent with the general plan, but inconsistent with the zoning ordinance. Residents or property owners also have a cause of action to enforce compliance with this requirement if local jurisdictions fail to act under AB 821.

Surplus Land Act
SB 747 and AB 480. Changes to Surplus Land Act.

Page 525 of 526 ends

City Council Staff Report - Page 11 of 11
Existing law, the Surplus Land Act, establishes requirements applicable when local agencies dispose of surplus land. These new bills change the Surplus Land Act to streamline affordable residential developments that meet SLA requirements. These changes also aim to reduce some of the SLA’s complexity. For example, the meaning of “dispose” is clarified to exclude leases less than 15 years or and also to exclude leases that will not involve demolition or development regardless of the term. The bill’s changes also create a significant number of new categories of land that are exempt from the SLA, including parcels less than one-half an acre. It also alters to the penalties that apply when a local jurisdiction disposes of surplus land after receiving a notice of violation from HCD: For a first violation, 30 percent of the greater of the final sale price or the fair market value of the land at the time of disposition; For a second or subsequent violation, 50 percent of the greater of the final sale price or the fair market value of the land at the time of disposition.

ATTACHMENT(S)
None

Page 526 of 526 ends

Rancho Cordova City CouncilFebruary 20, 2024

Rancho Cordova City Council
February 20, 2024