Rancho Cordova City Council
August 5, 2024

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 11 / 30
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Site Preparation and Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

7.74 6.51 61.3 58.5 0.11 2.60 — 2.60 2.39 — 2.39 — 11,894 11,894 0.48 0.10 — 11,935 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 28.9 28.9 — 13.8 13.8 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.70 0.59 5.52 5.26 0.01 0.23 — 0.23 0.22 — 0.22 — 1,071 1,071 0.04 0.01 — 1,074 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 2.60 2.60 — 1.24 1.24 — — — — — — —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 12 / 30
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.11 1.01 0.96 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 177 177 0.01 < 0.005 — 178 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.47 0.47 — 0.23 0.23 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 13 / 30

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 6.57 6.57 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.59 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 14 / 30
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.09 1.09 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.09 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 15 / 30
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving and Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.11 0.93 8.34 11.1 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 1,645 1,645 0.07 0.01 — 1,651 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.16 0.14 1.24 1.65 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 245 245 0.01 < 0.005 — 245 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.03 0.23 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 40.5 40.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 40.6 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 16 / 30
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN

3.11. Paving and Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.05 0.88 7.97 11.1 0.02 0.34 — 0.34 0.32 — 0.32 — 1,644 1,644 0.07 0.01 — 1,650 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 17 / 30
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.03 0.28 0.39 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 57.9 57.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 58.1 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.59 9.59 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.62 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN — NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 18 / 30

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 19 / 30
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 20 / 30
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Linear, Grubbing & Land
Clearing
10/1/2024 11/14/2024 5.00 5.00 —
Site Preparation and
Grading
Linear, Grubbing & Land
Clearing
11/15/2024 2/15/2025 5.00 5.00 —
Building Construction Linear, Drainage, Utilities, &
Sub-Grade
2/17/2025 10/16/2025 5.00 1.00 —
Paving and Architectural
Coating
Linear, Paving 10/17/2025 1/18/2026 5.00 0.00 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 21 / 30
Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation and
Grading
Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 6.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Site Preparation and
Grading
Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation and
Grading
Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Site Preparation and
Grading
Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation and
Grading
Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Site Preparation and
Grading
Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving and Architectural
Coating
Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
Paving and Architectural
Coating
Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving and Architectural
Coating
Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Paving and Architectural
Coating
Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36

5.3. Construction Vehicles
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 22 / 30

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 0.00 14.3 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 0.00 8.80 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation and Grading — — — —
Site Preparation and Grading Worker 0.00 14.3 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Site Preparation and Grading Vendor 0.00 8.80 HHDT,MHDT Site Preparation and Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation and Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 0.00 14.3 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 0.00 8.80 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving and Architectural Coating — — — —
Paving and Architectural Coating Worker 0.00 14.3 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Paving and Architectural Coating Vendor 0.00 8.80 HHDT,MHDT Paving and Architectural Coating Hauling NaN 20.0 HHDT
Paving and Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 23 / 30

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Demolition — — 26.0 0.00 —
Site Preparation and Grading — — 26.0 0.00 —
Building Construction — — 26.0 0.00 —

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
User Defined Linear 26.0 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 375 0.01 < 0.005
2025 0.00 375 0.01 < 0.005
2026 0.00 375 0.01 < 0.005
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 24 / 30

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 23.1 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.35 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 25 / 30
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.

Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation 2 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding 0 0 0 N/A
Drought 0 0 0 N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation 2 1 1 3
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 26 / 30
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding 1 1 1 2
Drought 1 1 1 2
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 59.7
AQ-PM 32.6
AQ-DPM 87.3
Drinking Water 97.0
Lead Risk Housing 83.2
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 17.9
Traffic 89.7
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 83.0
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 27 / 30
Groundwater 71.9
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 47.4
Impaired Water Bodies 51.2
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 73.8
Cardio-vascular 76.2
Low Birth Weights 84.2
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 67.4
Housing 66.1
Linguistic 71.4
Poverty 84.1
Unemployment 87.4

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 26.44681124
Employed 27.51186963
Median HI 21.72462466
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 20.18478121
High school enrollment 17.54138329
Preschool enrollment 63.77518286
Transportation —
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 28 / 30
Auto Access 56.16578981
Active commuting 78.73732837
Social —
2-parent households 67.11151033
Voting 33.10663416
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 18.49095342
Park access 58.1675863
Retail density 67.45797511
Supermarket access 50.82766585
Tree canopy 86.66752214
Housing —
Homeownership 35.77569614
Housing habitability 46.24663159
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 54.20248941 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 52.59848582
Uncrowded housing 29.30835365
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 21.00603105
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 34.5
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 29 / 30
Life Expectancy at Birth 3.9
Cognitively Disabled 11.9
Physically Disabled 6.2
Heart Attack ER Admissions 26.5
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors—
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures—
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 47.4
Elderly 55.7
English Speaking 34.1
Foreign-born 55.7
Outdoor Workers 34.3
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity—
Impervious Surface Cover 45.8
Traffic Density 79.7
Traffic Access 62.7
Other Indices—
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Detailed Report, 7/2/2024 30 / 30
Hardship 70.0
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 18.0

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 92.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 34.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Yes Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Yes Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases Schedule adjustment.

Construction: Off-Road Equipment Updated construction equipment list.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

APPENDIX B: MITIGATION MONITORING
& REPORTING PROGRAM SUMMARY

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
1 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
Biological Resources
Project implementation
would have the potential to
have a substantial adverse
effect, either directly or
through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special-status
species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California
Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.

MM BIO-1: The following avoidance and minimization efforts shall be implemented in order to reduce potential project effects to nesting migratory birds and raptors:
• To avoid and minimize impacts to tree and shrub nesting species, the following measures shall be implemented:
o Conduct all tree and shrub removal and grading activities during the nonbreeding season (generally September 1 through January 31). o If grading and tree removal activities are scheduled to occur during the breeding and nesting season (February 1 through August 31), preconstruction surveys shall be performed prior to the start of proposed project activities.
• If construction, grading, or other proposed project-related activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31), pre-construction surveys for other migratory bird species shall take place no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of construction within 250 feet of suitable nesting habitat.
o If the pre-construction surveys do not identify any nesting migratory bird species within areas potentially affectedly construction activities, no further mitigation is required.
o If the pre-construction surveys do identify nesting bird species within areas that are within 250 feet of construction activities, the following measures shall be implemented:
▪ Project-related construction impacts shall be avoided by establishment of appropriate no-work buffers to limit projectrelated construction activities near the nest site. The size of the nowork buffer zone shall be determined by species. The no-work buffer zone shall be delineated by highly visible temporary construction fencing. Monitoring of nest activity by a qualified biologist shall be required if the project-related construction activity has potential to adversely affect the nest or nesting Prior to
construction
activities
City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
2 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
behavior of the bird. No project-related construction activity shall commence within the no-work buffer area until a qualified biologist confirms that the nest is no longer active.

Project implementation
would conflict with any local
policies or ordinances
protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or
ordinance?
MM BIO-2: If protected trees will be removed as described in City Code Chapter 19.12 as part of the proposed project, the following mitigation measures will be implemented:
• Prior to the removal of any protected trees as defined in City Code Chapter 19.12, the proposed project proponent shall acquire a Tree Removal Permit from the City. • Prior to the removal of any protected trees, an ISA Certified Arborist shall conduct a tree survey in areas that may be impacted by construction activities. • This survey shall document tree resources that may be adversely impacted by implementation of the proposed project. The survey will follow standard professional practices.
• Existing trees shall be retained to extent feasible. A Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) shall be established on the bare ground around any tree or group of trees to be retained. The TPZ will be delineated by an ISA Certified Arborist. The TPZ shall be defined by the radius of the dripline of the tree(s) plus one foot. The TPZ of any protected trees shall be demarcated using fencing that will remain in place for the duration of construction activities.
• Construction-related activities shall be limited within the TPZ to those activities that can be done by hand. No heavy equipment or machinery shall be operated within the TPZ; if this is not possible, a six-inch layer of bark mulch shall be placed where the equipment shall be under the dripline in order to protect the root system from too much compaction. Grading shall be prohibited within the TPZ. No construction materials, equipment, or heavy machinery shall be stored within the TPZ. • If the proposed project encroaches upon the existing dripline of a protected tree, a tree protection plan shall be submitted with the project application. The tree protection plan shall be included on all demolition, grading, construction, and landscaping plans and project specifications. All protected trees and protective fencing or other protection features shall be shown on all project demolition, grading, construction, and landscape plans (Dewberry | Drake Haglan, 2021) Prior to and
during
construction
activities
City of West
Sacramento
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
3 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
• The City shall submit a tree replacement plan pursuant to the standards set forth in Rancho Cordova Municipal Code 19.12.120. A tree replacement plan that includes onsite or off-site replacement shall specify where the trees shall be planted and how the trees shall be monitored and maintained for a time period as determined by the public works director. The City will mitigate tree removal by replacing the removed trees at a 1:1 ratio.

Cultural Resources
Project implementation
would cause adverse change
in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant
to §15064.5
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to construction, the City shall clearly ensure the ESA boundary (the project boundary) is described and illustrated in the PS&E package prepared to guide construction of the undertaking.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Prior to construction, the City shall ensure that the ESA AP is part of the City Project Engineer’s Pending File.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3: In the event of any discovery of archaeological materials, the construction foreman will immediately halt work in the vicinity of the discovery then contact the City’s Project Engineer. City will immediately notify Caltrans of ESA violations or inadvertent discoveries, and Caltrans shall report all ESA violations or inadvertent discoveries to the Caltrans CSO and the SHPO within 48 hours and will consult on the appropriate course of action.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4: If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. Depending on the nature of the find, a qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric or historic archaeology, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, as necessary:
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required.
• If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, he or she shall immediately notify the lead agency. If the find is determined to be eligible for During
construction
activities.

City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
4 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
inclusion in the National Register or California Register, the lead agency shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures.

Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agency, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the National Register or California Register; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.
• If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, he or she shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the Sacramento County Coroner (in accordance with § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. • If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the proposed project (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate information center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction.

Project Implementation
would cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
See MM CUL-3 above During
construction
activities.

City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
5 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
Project Implementation
would disturb any human
remains, including those
interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
See MM CUL-4 above During
construction
activities.

City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
Geology and Soils
Project implementation
would directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic
feature?
MM GEO-1: If paleontological resources are discovered during earth-moving activities, the construction crew shall immediately cease work in the vicinity of the find and shall notify the City planning department. The proposed project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a proposed mitigation plan in accordance with SVP guidelines (1995). The proposed mitigation plan may include a field survey, construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures, museum storage coordination for any specimen recovered, and a report of findings.

Recommendations determined by the lead agency to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented before construction activities can resume at the site where the paleontological resources were discovered.

During
construction
activities.

City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
Noise
Project implementation has
the potential to result in the
generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local
general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
MM NO-1: Implement the following control measures to minimize noise and vibration disturbances at sensitive receptors during construction:
• Use newer equipment with improved muffling and ensure that all equipment items have the manufacturers’ recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine enclosures, and engine vibration isolators intact and operational. Newer equipment will generally be quieter in operation than older equipment. All construction equipment shall be inspected at periodic intervals to ensure proper maintenance and presence of noise control devices (e.g., mufflers and shrouding, etc.).
• Utilize construction methods or equipment that provides the lowest level of noise and ground vibration impact.
• Turn off idling equipment.

Prior to and
during
construction
activities
City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Summary
6 POTENTIAL IMPACT

MITIGATION MEASURES
TIMING

RESPONSIBLE
PARTY

LEVEL OF

SIGNIFICANCE
AFTER

MITIGATION
Tribal Cultural Resources
Project implementation has
the potential to result in
impacts to tribal cultural
resources.

MM TCR-1: If any suspected TCRs are discovered during ground disturbing construction activities, all work shall cease within 100 feet of the find, or an agreed upon distance based on the proposed project area and nature of the find. A Tribal Representative from a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area shall be immediately notified and shall determine if the find is a TCR (PRC §21074). The Tribal Representative will make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary.

When avoidance is infeasible, preservation in place is the preferred option for mitigation of TCRs, and every effort shall be made to preserve the resources in place, including through project redesign, if feasible. Culturally appropriate treatment may be, but is not limited to, processing materials for reburial, minimizing handling of cultural objects, leaving objects in place within the landscape, or returning objects to a location within the proposed project area where they will not be subject to future impacts. Permanent curation of TCRs will not take place unless approved in writing by the California Native American Tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the proposed project area.

The contractor shall implement any measures deemed by the CEQA lead agency to be necessary and feasible to preserve in place, avoid, or minimize impacts to the resource, including, but not limited to, facilitating the appropriate tribal treatment of the find, as necessary. Treatment that preserves or restores the cultural character and integrity of a TCR may include Tribal Monitoring, culturally appropriate recovery of cultural objects, and reburial of cultural objects or cultural soil.

Prior to
construction
activities
City of
Rancho
Cordova
Less than
significant
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

APPENDIX C:

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT
This appendix provides a summary of comments received during the public review for the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (project) located in the City of Rancho Cordova (City) in Sacramento County. The City, acting as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Lead Agency, prepared an IS to analyze the impacts created by the project. The IS/MND, Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) were submitted to the California State Clearinghouse (SCH) (SCH Number 202405130) on May 30, 2024, and the IS/MND was circulated for State and local public review for thirty days, through June 30, 2024. The City mailed an NOA to their standard mailing radius (properties within 500 feet of the project site) and circulated the NOA in the Grapevine newspaper. The NOA was also posted to the City’s website on May 30, 2024.

Comments Received
The City received four agency comment letters on the Draft IS/MND and no public comment letters. The agency comment letters received are as follows:
 Letter A: Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), Roberto Ramirez, Air Quality Planner/Analyst, June 16, 2024.  Letter B: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 3, Gary Arnold, Branch Chief, June 27, 2024.
 Letter C: Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), Jerry Park, Environmental Services Specialist, June 28, 2024.
 Letter D: Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB), Peter Minkel, Engineering Geologist, July 1, 2024.

Response to Comments
Table C‐1, below, provides the letter number, a summary of the comments, and brief reply to each comment. Any revisions to the IS/MND resulting from the commenter letters are identified below in the Conclusion section, and provided in the appropriate IS/MND section.

Deleted text is shown in strikeout (e.g., text) and new text is shown in double underline (e.g., new text). Formatting revisions in the IS/MND have not been identified through strikeout or double underline.

Table C‐1. Public Review Comment Summary
Comment
Number
Comment Summary Response
Letter A: Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) A‐1 The commenter commends the project
for including Basic Construction
Emissions Control Practices. For Air
The City acknowledges SMAQMD’s
appreciation that the project includes
Basic Control Emissions Control
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Quality emissions modeling, the
commenter recommends utilizing
CalEEMod as this model has superseded
the Road Construction Emissions model
(RCEM) that was used in the analysis of
the Air Quality IS/MND section.

Practices. Based on the
recommendation from SMAQMD,
CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.25 was
used, and the air quality (AQ)
emissions and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions results were included in
Section 4.3, Air Quality, Discussions b,
Table 4.3‐3 and Section 4.8,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
Discussions a and b of the IS/MND.

RCEM references and results of RCEM
modeling were struck from the
IS/MND and replaced with the results
from the CalEEMod. It should be
noted that although AQ emissions
results under the CalEEMod were
higher than the RCEM results, AQ
emissions and GHG emissions
generated by the project will still
remain under thresholds. Thus, results
of the analysis and significance
conclusions have not changed with
use of the CalEEMod Version
2022.1.1.25. Revisions to the IS/MND
based on this comment are
summarized below under the
Conclusion Section.

A‐2 The commenter states that all projects
are subject to SMAQMD Rules, and they
should be implemented as applicable
for the project. The commenter also
states that implementing the SMAQMD
Basic Construction Emissions Control
Practices facilitates compliance with
Rule 403, Fugitive Dust.

The City acknowledges that project
construction activities would require
implementation of SMAQMD rules as
applicable, and the City will
coordinate with SMAQMD to ensure
that the correct Rules are applied. A
bullet has been added on page 33 of
the IS/MND referencing that all
applicable SMAQMD Rules shall be
applied during project construction
activities. Revisions to the Final
IS/MND based on this comment are
summarized below under the
Conclusion Section.

Letter B: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 3 B‐1 The commenter states a sight line
conflict with the eastbound onramp
The City will coordinate with Caltrans
in providing the most current ADA
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

meter signal heads that will need to be
addressed in the design phase. Caltrans
requests detailed ADA plans to review
this conflict.
plans for the proposed project prior to
Final Plan Set approval. This comment
does not pertain to the analyses or
conclusions presented in the IS/MND
and therefore revisions to the IS/MND
are not warranted. This comment is
noted for the record and will be
forwarded to the decision makers for
their consideration.

B‐2 The commenter notes that no safety
concerns regarding the proposed
project have been identified. The
commenter requests construction
details and full plan set of the proposed
project.

The City acknowledges that the
commenter has no safety concerns for
the project. As requested, the City will
coordinate with Caltrans in providing
the most current construction details
and full plan set prior to Final Plan Set
approval. This comment does not
pertain to the analyses or conclusions
presented in the IS/MND and
therefore revisions to the IS/MND are
not warranted. This comment is noted
for the record and will be forwarded
to the decision makers for their
consideration.

B‐3 The commenter has provided right‐of‐
way (ROW) maps and indicates that all
future plan‐sets associated with the
project will need to clearly delineate
state (Caltrans) ROW lines. The
commenter also notes that the City may
need to identify any vulnerable survey
monuments during final planning
phases.

The City will coordinate with Caltrans
to ensure that all state (Caltrans) ROW
lines are shown on the Final Plan Set.

This comment does not pertain to the
analyses or conclusions presented in
the IS/MND and therefore revisions to
the IS/MND are not warranted. This
comment is noted for the record and
will be forwarded to the decision
makers for their consideration.

B‐4 The commenter notes that any project
along or within the State’s (Caltrans’)
ROW requires an encroachment permit
be issued by Caltrans.

The City will coordinate with Caltrans
to obtain any applicable
encroachment permits. This comment
does not pertain to the analyses or
conclusions presented in the IS/MND
and therefore revisions to the IS/MND
are not warranted. This comment is
noted for the record and will be
forwarded to the decision makers for
their consideration.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Letter C: Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)
C‐1 The commenter requests that the
project acknowledges impacts related
to overhead/underground
transmission/distribution line
easements, utility routing, electrical
load needs, energy efficiency, climate
change, cumulative impacts to electrical
delivery.

Section 2.3.1, Utility Relocation, of the
IS/MND acknowledges that utilities
are in the area (including SMUD
facilities) and that the need for
relocation of underground and
overhead utilities will be determined
prior to Final Plan Set approval.

Section 4.6, Energy, of this IS/MND
analyzes the effects of the project on
existing energy demand and future
energy consumption and concludes
that project construction and
operation (including cumulatively)
would not result in wasteful or
inefficient use of energy (including
electricity). For clarification purposes,
several sections of the IS/MND (as
shown below in the Conclusion
section) have been updated to include
acknowledgement that the City will
coordinate with the utility providers if
relocation of facilities is needed. This
comment does not affect the analyses
or conclusions presented in the
IS/MND. This comment is noted for
the record and will be forwarded to
the decision makers for their
consideration.

C‐2 The commenter requests that the
project acknowledges the potential
need to relocate and/or remove SMUD
infrastructure.

Section 2.3.1, Utility Relocation, the
IS/MND acknowledges that utilities
are in the area (including SMUD
facilities) and that the need for
relocation of underground and
overhead utilities will be determined
prior to Final Plan Set approval. For
clarification purposes, several sections
of the IS/MND (as shown below in the
Conclusion section) have been
updated to include acknowledgement
that the City will coordinate with the
utility providers if relocation of
facilities is needed. This comment
does not affect the analyses or
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

conclusions presented in the IS/MND.

This comment is noted for the record
and will be forwarded to the decision
makers for their consideration.

C‐3   The commenter requests coordination
with the City regarding potential
relocation of SMUD facilities due to
project implementation.

For clarification purposes, several
sections of the IS/MND (as shown
below in the Conclusion section) have
been updated to include
acknowledgement that the City will
coordinate with the utility providers if
relocation of facilities is needed. This
comment does not affect the analyses
or conclusions presented in the
IS/MND. This comment is noted for
the record and will be forwarded to
the decision makers for their
consideration.

Letter D: Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) D‐1 The commenter provides a summary of
the regulatory setting pertaining to the
applicable basin plan where the project
is located and antidegradation
considerations.

The City acknowledges the regulatory
setting CVRWQCB has referenced
applicable to the proposed project.

This comment does not pertain to the
analyses or conclusions presented in
the IS/MND and therefore revisions to
the IS/MND are not warranted. This
comment is noted for the record and
will be forwarded to the decision
makers for their consideration.

D‐2 CVRWQCB summarizes potential
permits required for the project,
including but not limited to:

Construction Storm Water General
Permit, Clean Water Act Section 404
Permit, Clean Water Act Section 401
Permit – Water Quality Certification,
Waste Discharge Requirements –
Discharges to Waters of the State,
Dewatering Permit, Limited Threat
General NPDES Permit, and an NPDES
Permit.

The City will coordinate with
CVRWQCB to obtain the applicable
permits required for the proposed
project. Furthermore, the IS/MND
Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water
Quality, references that the City
would ensure the Project contractor
complies with requirements of the
NPDES permit from CVRWQCB. As
part of the contract with the City as
per the NPDES permit, the project
contractor will prepare and
implement a SWPPP. This comment
does not pertain to the analyses or
conclusions presented in the IS/MND
and therefore revisions to the IS/MND
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

are not warranted. This comment is
noted for the record and will be
forwarded to the decision makersfor
their consideration.

Public Hearing
The City Council will consider adoption of the IS/MND on August 5, 2024, at Rancho Cordova City Hall, 2729 Prospect Park Drive at 5:30 p.m.

Conclusion
Minor editorial revisions were made in the IS/MND in the following sections:
 Cover
 Title Page
 Acronyms
 Appendix A
 Appendix C
Revisions to the IS/MND based on the four agency comment letters received:
 Revisions associated with Comment A‐1: The CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.25 was used and replaced the RCEM, resulting in revisions to Section 4.3, Air Quality, Section 4.3.2 Discussion b) and Table 4.3‐3, and Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 4.8.2 Discussion a) and Discussion b) as follows:

Section 4.3, Air Quality, Section 4.3.2 Discussion b), Construction emissions were modelled using the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2022.1.1.25 (CalEEMod) Road Construction Emissions Model (RCEM), Version 9, which was developed by the SMAQMD. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that construction would last 18 months, the total proposed project area would be 26 acres, and the maximum area disturbed/day would be 2 acres. It was also assumed that all on road equipment used for the proposed project would be year 2010 or newer models and all construction equipment would meet California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 requirements for some or all off‐road equipment. See Appendix A for the full CalEEMod RCEM. Estimated criteria air pollutant emissions generated by the proposed project’s construction and applicable SMAQMD emissions thresholds are summarized in Table 4.3‐3, below.

Table 0‐1. Air Quality Emission Prediction and Thresholds Pollutant SMAQMD Thresholds
(Pounds/day)
Maximum Project Emissions
(Pounds/day)
ROG ‐‐ 4.80 7.16
NOx 85 10.61 70.2
CO ‐‐ 90.90 63.1
Sox ‐‐ 0.16 0.11
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Pollutant SMAQMD Thresholds
(Pounds/day)
Maximum Project Emissions
(Pounds/day)
PM10

0. If all feasible BMPs are applied, then 80
pounds/day and 14.6 tons/year. 20.64 31.9
PM2.5

0. If all feasible BMPs are applied, then 82
pounds/day and 15 tons/year. 4.68 16.6
Source: SMAQMD, 2020b; SMAQMD, 2018. CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.25, July 2024.

Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 4.8.2 Discussion a). Construction emissions were modelled using the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2022.1.1.25 (CalEEMod) Road Construction Emissions Model (RCEM), Version 9, which was developed by the SMAQMD. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that proposed project construction would last 18 months, the total proposed project area would be 26 acres, and the maximum area disturbed/day would be 2 acres. It was also assumed that all on road equipment used for the proposed project would be year 2010 or newer models and all construction equipment would meet California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 requirements for some or all off‐road equipment. The threshold adopted by SMAQMD for GHG emissions during construction is 1,100 MTCO2e/year. The model predicted that a maximum of approximately 15,661 11,935 pounds of CO2e would be emitted per day, totaling approximately 1,894 1,145 MTCO2e over an 18‐ month construction period. As the 18‐month construction period would be over two years, the MTCO2e/ year for the proposed project would be approximately 947 573 MTCO2e. Therefore, GHG emissions would not exceed the construction threshold of 1,100 MTCO2e/year (SMAQMD, 2020a).

Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 4.8.2 Discussion b). As discussed in subsection a), above, the proposed project would result in a maximum of approximately 15,661 11,935 pounds of CO2e emitted per day, for a total of approximately 1,894 1,145 MTCO2e over the 18‐month construction period. Given the levels of emissions during construction, and the implementation of BMPs, along with compliance with federal, State, and local regulation policies, the proposed project would be consistent with the Sacramento County CAP. The proposed project would not conflict with any identified plans adopted for the reduction of GHG emissions. Impacts are less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
 Revisions associated with Comment A‐2: Under Section 4.3 Air Quality Section 4.3.2 Discussion b) the following bullet was added referencing that the project shall follow all SMAQMD Rules:
• As applicable, SMAQMD Rules shall be applied during project construction activities to reduce air quality emissions generated by the proposed project.  Revisions associated with Comments C‐1 through C‐3: For clarification purposes, Section

2.3.1 Utility Relocation and Section 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems Section 4.19.2 ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Discussion a) were updated to emphasize potential utility relocation and coordination with all utility owners (as applicable) if relocation is required for project implementation:

Section 2.3, Proposed Project, Section 2.3.1, Utility Relocation. Multiple existing surface and underground utilities are present in the proposed project area. Surface and underground utilities include communication, water, sewer, and electrical lines. Much of the anticipated utility relocation associated with the proposed project would include adjusting existing surface utility poles, boxes, meters, and drainage along Zinfandel Drive to correspond with the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, existing fire hydrants north of Olson Drive would be shifted as a result of the proposed project improvements. The need for the relocation of underground and overhead utilities at the project site is to be determined and the City would coordinate all relocation needs with the specific service provider (i.e., Sacramento Municipal Utility District).

Section 2.3, Proposed Project, Section 2.3.5, Construction Activities.

Relocating Utilities
Existing utilities which conflict with proposed improvements and equipment would be relocated and the City would coordinate all relocation needs with the specific service provider (i.e., Sacramento Municipal Utility District).

Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, Section 4.19.2 Discussion a). Multiple existing surface and underground utilities are present in the proposed project area. Surface and underground utilities include communication, water, sewer, and electrical lines. Much of the anticipated utility relocation associated with the proposed project would include adjusting existing surface utility poles, boxes, meters, and drainage along Zinfandel Drive to correspond with the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, existing fire hydrants would be shifted as a result of the proposed project improvements. The need for the relocation of underground and overhead utilities at the proposed project site is to be determined and the City would coordinate all relocation needs with the specific service provider (i.e., Sacramento Municipal Utility District).

The lead agency, the City of Rancho Cordova, has carefully considered the IS/MND and the received public comments and has determined that no new information has been added to the IS/MND in response to the public comments. As defined by Section 15073.5(a) of CEQA, the environmental document, while having minor edits, will not require any “substantial revisions.” Pursuant to Section 15073.5(c) of CEQA, the environmental document does not require recirculation.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

From: Roberto Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 4:46 PM
To: Edgar Medina <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Philley <[email protected]>
Subject: Project Comments - Draft ISMND for Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project
Hi Edgar,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project. Please find our comments below:

The Sac Metro Air District commends the Project for including our Basic Construction Emission Control Practices (BMPs). Currently, the Draft ISMND uses the Road Construction Emissions Model (RCEM) for it’s air quality analysis. The RCEM has been superseded by the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Sac Metro Air District recommends utilizing CalEEMod instead of the RCEM for project emissions analysis, as CalEEMod contains a linear construction module that is suitable for linear projects. You can find this and more of our guidance here: https://www.airquality.org/Businesses/CEQA-Land-Use-Planning/CEQAGuidance-Tools All projects are subject to Sac Metro Air District rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction. Please visit our website to find a list of the most common rules that apply at the construction phase of projects. Implementing Sac Metro Air District Basic Construction Emission Control Practices, also available on our website, will facilitate compliance with Sac Metro Air District’s Rule 403, Fugitive Dust.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Roberto Ramirez
Air Quality Planner/Analyst
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-14276A
Transportation & Climate Change
Desk: (916) 704-4552
www.AirQuality.org
@AQMD
Letter A
A-1
A-2
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 3
703 B STREET | MARYSVILLE, CA 95901-5556
(530) 821-8401
www.dot.ca.gov
June 27, 2024
GTS# 03-SAC-2024-01799
SCH#2024051303
Mr. Edgar Medina, PE
City of Rancho Cordova
Planning Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Dear Mr. Medina:

Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the review process for the project referenced above. We reviewed this local development for impacts to the State Highway System (SHS) in keeping with our mission, vision, and goals, some of which includes addressing equity, climate change, and safety, as outlined in our statewide plans such as the California Transportation Plan, Caltrans Strategic Plan, and Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure.

The Project is located along Zinfandel Drive in a fully developed urban environment that spans multiple major local and regional roadways, including White Rock Road, Gold Center Drive, U.S. Route 50 (US 50) on- and off-ramps, US 50 mainline, Olson Drive, and Folsom Boulevard, in City of Rancho Cordova, California. The proposes entail to construct a new bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing over US 50, along with approximately 3,200 feet of Class 1 bicycle and pedestrian improvements connecting Folsom Boulevard with White Rock Road. he proposed project intends to improve connectivity between the primarily business areas south of US 50 and the mass transit centers, residences, and commercial areas north of US 50. The pedestrian overcrossing structure and all aspects of the trail would be designed to meet current applicable City, Caltrans, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. Based on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration packet provided, Caltrans has the following requests and recommendations:

Letter B
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mr. Edgar Medina, PE
June 27, 2024

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Freeway Operations / Highway Operations
The sight line conflict with the EB Onramp ramp meter signal heads that will need to address in the design phase. Please provide more in detailed ADA plans to review.

Traffic Safety
At this time, Caltrans Traffic Safety has not identified any safety concerns regarding a new bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing over US 50, along with 3,200 feet of Class 1 bicycle and pedestrian improvements. We need detailed design information for further evaluation. Please provide Traffic Safety with the construction details and full plan set of the Class 1 bicycle and pedestrian trail.

Right of Way
Right of Way (ROW) maps have been provided for the area of future development, if further mapping is needed contact District 3 ROW Map counter at:
[email protected]
• Future planning will require plan-sets to clearly delineate state ROW lines and access control. Caltrans ROW, Centerline and width should be labeled on the plans, along with bearings and distances.
• Applicant or their representatives may also need to identify any possible vulnerable survey monuments in the development area that will need to be preserved and/or perpetuated, as required by PE Act 6731.2 and PLS Act 8771.

Encroachment Permit
Any project along or within the State’s ROW requires an encroachment permit issued by Caltrans. To apply, a completed encroachment permit application, environmental documentation, and five sets of plans clearly indicating State ROW must be submitted to:

Hikmat Bsaibess
California Department of Transportation
District 3, Office of Permits
703 B Street
Marysville, CA 95901
Please provide our office with copies of any further actions regarding this proposal.

We would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on any changes related to this development.

B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Mr. Edgar Medina, PE
June 27, 2024

“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” If you have any questions regarding these comments or require additional information, please contact Satwinder Dhatt, Local Development Review Coordinator, by phone (530) 821-8261 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
GARY ARNOLD, Branch Chief
Local Development Review and Complete Streets
Division of Planning, Local Assistance, and Sustainability California Department of Transportation, District 3
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

a a 407 3 /RANCHO RIO DE LOS AMERICANOS

NATOMAS CONSOLIDATED /
OF CALIFORNIA SUBDNE / i
Book 1dof Maps, Map No. 46, Recorded Sept. /3 @ RivCURVE , \
A LOT 4 . 5
A=4T°41'55" L:451.87" 4 Th
NG JOHN KASSIS, et.al. Ch=N Garof
BLOCK | (2050) RIW CURVE 7
~. (2059) R=2952.00'4"/
A= 03°!’ 29" 3)
NN L* 164.43" £

RIW CURVE : y RIN CURVY obiGENERAL CORP.
4=49°22'04" | &
Lr 303.29’
: 18
G22neSY | &
—)
| ee
—
; {25

AT COORDINATE
N 338,000
E 2,205,000

Chs N 49°083! 0 » wx z
NN 164.41" as 0,0 iil ;
: * : . / ad a '§ “ yg SUED les i, os / "ner
X > 28:34 .56°45'29+¢
°o u 3 ' .
[ Lt )
: aa NECAAONE E2508 NATO3246E ButoS : PROPOSED | ld bbe ff 1 824.12 Lil bl51°53'00'€ — 508.93 = g2.14' lef: \ o . ~ : ede a] | #4
> &/ & 8 ZINA'NDEL DrR/ O.C. dg {f
N°
: E>
~<— 70 SACRAMENTO —— 4Q & x Ct lY 3B P.M. II.2 1
“4 : 1 - f. + + b 4 / : LZ S + / ih + - N 51° 53 ooCJm034. 1 ©L | 2 dl A x : 5 . pe WA os
3 ASF od l ¥ 70PLACERVILLE —=
} AT / NS PA
Biz+62.55
NS 0 / 7 > & Biz+ 2 EY | | 0
goes | EEoo & > > : 130 £ Tlhg 7 1 rrr em rrr rrr rrr EtT_T vad fry] Nay hu Ps Bote a - =G0.77 . 14s.45.98" Re © wy 7 Ww x H ! uti ra—t_1 TE 548 Biz63.23 ' 'N 50°44 IS"E t PRO POS ED RIW 899. 50 { ¢ : / 318.8% WO AEN |
7 - & 0 ¥ @ z 246"E \ /
2 NG
n HD 0 /A 0 z 0 |
1 RIW CURVE & /A : © oA RIW CURVE ; ; &
A 4 =2948.00' -
R=350.00' A A
iB Re?‘a9
A=47°49' 50" Biz+ 237! ie A ™ L= 164.20"
‘ okBoar‘24 Ad Ch=N 49°08'30'E |
sot
LOT "8 |
JOHN KASSIS,etal2 / Po ¢
A Bi2+63.78 a) AN AEROJET - GENERAL CORP. ™ : Ce
4 ' N/A
“.
466.55 / \)
~~ ’
RIW CURVE \
R=150.00' 11998 ~~
A=59°32'25" \¥ >
Cesissore 13 | RES ea]
Ch=3S 0 ~~ - 9
148.96"
J 7 —) Mi J I fo Led 21.4 7S AC RE | ™ J
>
qr
2B43148329 8D. OF RANCHO RIO DE |05 AMER CANS i
Book / of’ Maps Recorded Apri] 4, 866
Map No. 2
NATOMAS C“ONSOLIDA ATEen|
OF CALIF. SUBD. NO. 2
Book /4 oFMopsyMa, No. 20 STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
Recorded Apr1 2 f /9/3 : DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
DISTRICT 3 Xx-3
RIGHT OF WAY ENGINEERING 1 o
ip £ RIGHT OF WAYNAP Fd 3
Naar7
Q : rt
= ~~ 5° i NOTE
: DISTRICT #I ee:
: N- BEARINGS AND: COORDINATES SHOWN ARE ON ein atoaives; FEBRUARY.27,/0% THE COORDINATE GRID OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE mi ] 003228 R= Fa COORDINATE SYSTEM, ZONE 2. DISTANCES SHOWN : Mis or — HI fone, wo. R-3745.21 “ScAL oi ARE GROUND DISTANCES. MULTIPLY DISTANCES 4 ow ae amills [co[| rTe.| Pm. | SHEET SHOWN BY .9992385T0 OBTAIN GRID DISTANCES. ig ACCES > | > 0], 1BI° | _ SN 3 SAC 50 Wee: a: a5

= eee.

wsbd wTfaiTNHEUETs
iyAECe Sn1s

AE
Dor
=
Wend
n
TH iSh.

IERS
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

A nTEETTITETod TL ETT RITE TTeTTri5 2 FTRITITRN . ¥
Fan NL - { i i il . v &
ACQUISITION DATA FOR RECORD MAP 27 OF 30 DATED res 25 1975

TYPE ACCESS
PARCEL NO. GRANTOR INSTR. aca. ciause REC.DATE VOL. PAGE moms REMARKS - V92 AEROJET-GEMNERAL (ORP| GRANT | FEE DEA- FER 2.176C 66-0203 Jonn PKASS IS etl DFO-| Iae

STATE of Chur, i —
; a: £ E€ DF 1 3-17- 991
Stare or Caz. T, : —- — I ee
Ce. ov SAcvo UL T2,1973 1730723
ci REE
Sac. Co Jaw 73,1994 94 0! )3
on : —— i"
Sac Co- - Jan 13 1994 3401/3
Sac Co Jan /3 rt 994 ‘
0306824- | Sac. Co aw 13 1994 |94 01 13
0%0825-1 AE. Co

GeAuT Fes Jan /3 1994 94 o/ 13

ak |

|
FEE
|
|

003228 A

!
| |
1 TN
|
i
|

z
|
|
|
i pdb i LebpaiLLTE LEE HH ETTETdractieetree|TSI VICE |
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Sent Via E-Mail
June 28, 2024
Edgar Medina, Principal Engineer
City of Rancho Cordova
Public Works Department
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, California 95670
[email protected]
Subject: Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project / 2024051303 / MND
Dear Mr. Medina:

The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project (Project, SCH 2024051303).

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-andConstruction-Services o https://www.smud.org/en/Corporate/Do-Business-with-SMUD/LandUse/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 Letter C
C-1
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

• The potential need to relocate and or remove any SMUD infrastructure that may be affected in or around the project area
o SMUD has overhead 69kV and 12kV facilities along Folsom Blvd on the northern border of the project that will need to remain or be relocated at developer expense. o SMUD has underground 12kV facilities along numerous parcels throughout the project scope that will need to remain or be relocated at developer expense.

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
6201 S Street
Sacramento, CA 95817
cc: Entitlements
C-2
C-3
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
1 July 2024
Edgar Medina
City of Rancho Cordova
2729 Prospect Park Drive
Rancho Cordova, CA 95670
[email protected]

COMMENTS TO REQUEST FOR REVIEW FOR THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION, ZINFANDEL DRIVE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
OVERCROSSING PROJECT, SCH#2024051303, SACRAMENTO COUNTY Pursuant to the State Clearinghouse’s 30 May 2024 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 Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing 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 Letter D
D-1
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian - 2 - 1 July 2024 Overcrossing Project
Sacramento County
the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board), Office of Administrative 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:

D-1
con.

D-2
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian - 3 - 1 July 2024 Overcrossing Project
Sacramento County
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/constpermits.sht ml
Clean 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., “nonfederal” 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:

D-2
con.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian - 4 - 1 July 2024 Overcrossing Project
Sacramento County
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/water_quality/200 4/wqo/wqo2004-0004.pdf
Dewatering 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/ D-2
con.

ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian - 5 - 1 July 2024 Overcrossing Project
Sacramento County
If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact me at (916) 464-4684 or [email protected].

Peter G. Minkel
Engineering Geologist
cc: State Clearinghouse unit, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Sacramento
ITEM 10.2. ATTACHMENT 5

MEMORANDUM
City Council Staff Report - Page 1 of 2

ITEM 12.1.

DATE: August 5, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM:

Albert Stricker, Public Works Director
Edgar Medina, Principal Engineer
Kristine Courdy, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: ZINFANDEL DRIVE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING

ART WALK PRESENTATION

RECOMMENDATION
Receive staff presentation on the proposed Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Art Walk, provide direction and approve the proposed Art Plan.

RESULT OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approving the Art Plan and incorporating City Council feedback would allow a Request for Qualification (RFQ) to be issued for the art along the Art Walk which would begin the solicitation process outlined in the Art Plan and begin applying for grants for the proposed artwork. The final art selection would be brought back for City Council review and approval in Spring 2025.

The funding required for the Art Walk and Signage proposed is approximately an additional $1,400,000 which would be programmed in detail as part of a future budgeting exercise.

BACKGROUND
U.S. Highway 50 is an impediment to alternative modes of travel within the City of Rancho Cordova, creating a barrier between the north and south sides of the City. While vehicle crossings exist, safe and comfortable bicycle and pedestrian facilities are limited. This results in bicycles sharing the road with high speed vehicles entering and exiting the freeway and major commercial/employment centers. This Project will construct a bicycle and pedestrian facility along Zinfandel Drive from White Rock Road to Folsom Boulevard. This Project will improve multi-modal access and user comfort by removing the barrier to active transportation created by U.S. Highway 50, connecting communities on both sides of the freeway, including improved access to the Zinfandel light rail station, housing, jobs and education. The completed work will reduce vehicle miles traveled and improve air quality.

In September 2021, staff presented Council the proposed alternatives for the project, with the tied arch structure for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing being the preferred alternative.

With the alternative being selected, the project team advanced the environmental and preliminary engineering phases with Caltrans and have actively pursued grant funding for the construction phase. As a result, the City was awarded a $19,956,000 grant through the State

City Council Staff Report - Page 2 of 2

Active Transportation Program for the construction phase.

On January 3, 2023, the team presented an aesthetic concept that establishes connections to the City's rich history. The City Council agreed that the Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Project is an opportunity to create a landmark and placemaking for the City.

Subsequently, the City retained Shelly Willis Consultant to develop an Art Plan (Attachment 1) for the Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing Art Walk (Art Walk) starting at White Rock Road and ending at Folsom Boulevard with the overcrossing being the focal point of the improvements and Art Walk. The Art Plan provides the vision, art locations, budget, section process, and timeline for the Art Walk. In addition, the Project Landscape Architect has proposed signage to complement the site, guide people through the Art Walk and provide wayfinding to neighboring destinations. The limits of the Art Walk could be extended in future years under a separate project.

Approving the Art Plan will allow an RFQ to be issued for the art along the Art Walk which will begin the solicitation process outlined in the Art Plan and begin applying for grants for the proposed artwork. The final art selection will be brought back for City Council review and approval in Spring 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT AND FUNDING SOURCE
The Zinfandel Drive Bicycle and Pedestrian Overcrossing total project cost is $27,320,000.

Project funding currently consists of $3,987,000 in Traffic Mitigation Impact Fees, $3,377,000 in Federal Highway Improvement Program Grants and $19,956,000 in State Active Transportation Program Grant Funds.

The funding required for the Art Walk and Signage proposed is approximately an additional $1,400,000. The City will be aggressively pursuing grants as an external funding source for the artwork. The proposed internal funding source to cover grant matches or any funding gap is the General Fund and/or Community Enhancement Investment Fund which would be programmed in detail as part of a future budgeting exercise.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Art Plan

2. Presentation

1 ART PLAN
May 23, 2024
City of Rancho Cordova
Zinfandel Bicycle and
Pedestrian Overcrossing
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

CONTENT
03 Introduction
04 Vision
05 Overview of Artwork + Sign Locations
06 Artwork Sites
10 Artwork Selection
10 Artist Selection + Design Approval Outline
11 Art Budget
11 Timeline
12 Signage
14 Additional Recommendations
14 Definitions
14 Appendix
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

3 INTRODUCTION
The nearly mile-long Zinfandel Bicycle and
Pedestrian Overcrossing (ZBPO) is located at the
center of the Rancho Cordova community, adjacent
to City Hall, and in the middle of the region’s 2nd
largest employment area. Once completed the trail
will connect the communities and businesses on
the north and south sides of Highway 50.

The overcrossing is designed to do more than
allow pedestrians and bicyclists to safely pass over
a major freeway to get home, to school, or to work.

It presents an exceptional opportunity to create a
unique environment through architecture, design,
and public art.

From the freeway, travelers will see the landmark,
50-foot-tall tied arch bridge, spanning ten lanes of
Highway 50 designed by the State of California,
Department of Transportation. A large “City of
Rancho Cordova” sign will be seen by westbound
travelers. The combination of the bridge and the
sign create an iconic gateway to the City.

Cyclists and pedestrians who are inspired to
explore the area will experience a beautifully
landscaped trail populated by distinctive artworks.

Whether passing through or pausing along
the trail, the public will experience a place that
uniquely identifies the City of Rancho Cordova.

All the elements of the ZBPO project, from the
landscaping to the bridge design, to signage, are
integral and therefore considered in this plan.

The Plan is informed by research that included
interviews with community stakeholders. City staff
provided vital input and feedback throughout the
process. Atlas Lab, the Landscape Architects, and
signage designers for the ZBPO were consulted
throughout the process to ensure the art and
signage is integrated with the art.

The Art Plan was informed by City documents and
plans including the Rancho Cordova Arts Strategic
Plan which provides a road map to continue
building art programs and outlines guiding
principles to inform decisions on art programming.

The Corridor Enhancement Plan (in an early stage
of development) which identifies opportunities to
beautify and enhance key corridors and entrances
into the City was also utilized. The Art Plan
considered City public art strategic planning goals
and priorities for public art including the Art Block.

It also considered the City’s past artist selection
processes.

The Art Plan outlines a vision and sites for artworks,
with an artist selection process and recommended
budgets for the artworks. It also shows sites and
conceptual designs for signage and wayfinding.

It is recommended the Art Plan be used as
the base for future art and design decisions
on the ZBPO, be integrated with the Corridor
Enhancement Plan, and help inform future public
art program planning decisions.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

4 VISION
The vision is meant to guide artist selection
panelists and the City Council as they select artists
and approve artwork designs and to help artists
as they develop their ideas for the project. The
overarching goal is to ensure the artworks are
distinctive and fully integrated into the ZBPO in
scale and concept.

The Artwork should:
• Reflect Rancho Cordova’s identity at the crossroads of California geographically, historically, culturally, and commercially
• Consider the site’s connection between the northern
and southern neighborhoods
• Consider the site is a thoroughfare and will be
experienced by pedestrians and bicyclists as they
traverse the site.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

5 OVERVIEW OF ARTWORK +

SIGN LOCATIONS
The ZBPO trail runs parallel to Zinfandel Drive,
a major six-lane throughfare. The trail begins at
the northeast corner of White Rock Road and
Zinfandel Drive, then continues north and crosses
under Gold Center Drive at the entrance to the
City Hall complex. It then goes over the eastbound
freeway entrance and Highway 50 along the iconic
helix tied-arch bridge structure. On the north side
of the freeway, the trail winds down in a circular
pattern and makes its way under the westbound
freeway on and off ramps. It continues along
Zinfandel Drive and then terminates at the Light
Rail Station at Folsom Boulevard.

There are four sites identified for art and four for
signage locations (see plan A below). The sites
were selected to achieve specific goals which are
described below.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

6 #1. SOUTH GATEWAY ENTRANCE
A sculpture or sculptural installation is
suggested for the south gateway entrance
to the ZBPO on the northeast corner of
White Rock Road and Zinfandel Drive. The
commissioned artwork(s) should be visible
and interesting by car, foot, bicyclist and mark
the entrance to the trail.

ARTWORK SITES
It is recommended the artist be selected once
plans have been finalized within the project
acquisition necessary for the trail, so that the
artwork can be designed for and have an
interrelationship with the location.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

7 #2. SOUTH WALL
Starting at ground level, a 168-foot-long
concrete retaining wall gradually increases
vertically to 12-feet high and frames in the
trail as it descends beneath Gold Center
Drive. It is a dramatic and large-scale surface
specifically selected to give two-dimensional
artists who may not have experience making
work in the public realm, an opportunity to
design a two-dimensional artwork that can
be fabricated in glass, ceramic, or other
durable materials onto the surface. It is
assumed the artwork would only partially
cover the wall but activate the surface for
the entire length. It is further recommended
this site be reserved for artists living in the
Sacramento County region.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

8 #3. POETRY ROUNDABOUT
A circular ramp approximately 500 feet long
is the pathway for bicyclists and pedestrians
to travel to and from the bridge on the north
side of Highway 50. The pathway is visible
from the bridge.

To make poetry accessible to a broad
community, it is recommended one or
multiple poets be selected to write site
specific work, to be stamped or embedded
intermittently in the concrete surface of the
pathway descending from the bridge.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

9 #4. NORTH GATEWAY ENTRANCE
At the entrance at the north side of ZBPO,
the trail opens as one descends under
the freeway entrance. A sculpture or
sculptures over the pathway or distributed
along one or both sides of the pathway, are
recommended.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

10 ARTWORK SELECTION
Artists will be selected in a national competition
through a Call for Artists in which artist
qualifications will be requested.

One or more Artist Selection Panels will be
convened to review applications, select one or
more finalists to create a project proposal, and
recommend proposed artwork designs for the
projects outlined in this Art Plan.

Proposed artwork designs will be recommended
by the Artist Selection Panel(s) to the Rancho
Cordova City Council for approval.

The Artist Selection Panels will be comprised of
the following representatives:
• Landscape Designer
• Art Stakeholders Group
• Community representative
• Arts professionals
• City Representative
Applications and artwork proposals will be
reviewed based on the following criteria:
• The artistic merit of past work including innovative
and effective approaches to creating work that is
timeless in terms of concept and design.
• Ability to design (or a proposal for) an artwork that aligns with the project vision as outlined in the project Art Plan.
• Effective community engagement skills and
demonstrated ability to collaborate with City staff,
contractors, design professionals, engineers, and others. • Probability of successful execution and completion of the project.
• Qualifications that reflect the ability to create an
artwork with materials that are appropriate for the
conditions of the site, taking into consideration
maintenance, safety, and longevity.
• Completeness of application and/or proposal.

Intensive outreach will be made to the Rancho
Cordova and Sacramento regional community,
with preference given in scoring to Sacramento
County area artists.

Art Plan:

City Council Final Review and Approval
Artist Selection Panel:

Reviews Submissions / Selects Finalists
Finalists:

Paid to Develop Design Proposals
ARTIST SELECTION +

DESIGN APPROVAL OUTLINE
1 2
3 Artist Selection Panel:

Reviews and Selects Final Designs
City Council:

Approves Final Designs
4 5
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

11 ART BUDGET

TIMELINE
Approximate artwork budgets include all costs to
fabricate and install each artwork. A contingency
for unexpected circumstances is included and if not
used, would be allocated to temporary artworks,
art education programs, or future artwork maintenance and conservation located on the Crossing.

The budget does not include lighting or signage.

It is the intention that apart from the South Gateway Entrance artwork, artworks will be selected, fabricated and installed in alignment with the
ZBPO construction project as described below.

The timeline for the South Gateway Entrance artwork will be developed when the use of the corner lot at Zinfandel Drive and White Rock Road has
been determined.

Description Estimate
Site #1: South Entrance $200,000
Site #2: South Wall $250,000
Site #3: Roundabout $200,000
Site #4: North Entrance $200,000
Administration $80,000
Contingency $80,000
Total $1,010,000
Art Plan Approval Summer 2024
RFQ Release Summer 2024
RFQ Deadline Summer 2024
Finalist Selection Summer 2024
Artist Proposal
Development Fall 2024
Artist Proposal Approval Fall 2024
Artwork Fabrication Winter 2025 –
Winter 2026
Artwork Installation Spring 2026
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

12 SIGNAGE
The signage in principle is intended to be timeless.

To be a feature in the urban landscape that blends
naturally into the surrounding and not be overly
stylized. The signage needs to work with both
historical and contemporary signs, spanning
multiple decades. The signage shall frame a
simple message of orientation and identification
of the city. It shall incorporate bold and legible
text and be visually secondary to the art, the tied
arch bridge and to the adjacent urban landscape.

The text font may take its cues from the clarity
and geometry of the “All-America City, Rancho
Cordova City Hall” sign. A monochromatic or
black and white color palette for the signage is
suggested to evoke a simple, timeless, elegant,
and civic character.

The following four sites along the ZPBO have been
designated for signs. Two “Entrance Signage”
areas mark the entrances of the walkway or art
walk and serve to orient visitors to the path
and adjacent artwork. The other two signage
elements are “City Signage” areas aim to identify
the City of Rancho Cordova, from arriving into the
city from Highway 50 or passing along Highway

50. Although these signs have different purposes
and vary greatly in scale, they will share unifying
design elements.

ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

13 ZINFANDEL DRIVE AND

GOLD CENTER DRIVE

CITY SIGNAGE
This is the entrance to the City
Hall complex. The signs would
be located on one or both
sides of the streets and should
be clearly visible to motorists.

ROUNDABOUT

CITY SIGNAGE
A 125’ foot retaining wall on
the north side of the freeway is
the site for a “City of Rancho
Cordova” sign. Monumental
in scale, the site is visible
to thousands of motorists
traveling west on Highway 50
and pedestrians and bicyclists
using the trail.

TRAIL ENTRANCES

NORTH AND SOUTH TRAIL

ENTRANCES AT WHITE ROCK ROAD &

ZINFANDEL DRIVE

NORTH TRAIL ENTRANCE AT GOLD

CENTER DRIVE AND ZINFANDEL
DRIVE
These signs mark the
entrances to the trail and
should consider and not
compete visually with the
artworks that are sited nearby.

CITY HALL

HYATT PLACE

HYATT PLACE
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

14 ADDITIONAL

RECOMMENDATIONS

DEFINITIONS
It is recommended that a City-wide public art plan
be developed to guide City Council in realizing
and implementing public art priorities.

At minimum the plan should prioritize public art
priority sites, a process for selecting artists and
approving art, and policies for accepting gifts and
donations, and decommissioning artworks.

Public art site priorities should be integrated into
City planning documents including plans for the
development of public buildings, parks, and bike
paths, the Mills Crossing Development project,
Corridor Engagement Plan, and future City
development.

Artist: Artist or team of artists whose body of work
and professional activities demonstrate serious
ongoing commitment to the fine arts.

Art professional: An individual who has received
specialized training in the arts or arts-related field
and is recognized as a professional by their peers.

Arts professionals may include artists, curators,
art historians, art educators, arts administrators,
design professionals, and others.

Artwork: A work in any media that is the result of
the creative expression of an artist.

City of Rancho Cordova Art Stakeholders
Group: An ad hoc committee convened by the
City to make art and public art programming
decisions.

Regional Artist: Artist that resides within
Sacramento, Yolo, Yuba, Placer, Butte, El Dorado,
and Solano Counties
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

15 APPENDIX
Rancho Cordova Bicycle Master Plan
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/13315/636349380279700000 Rancho Cordova Bike Map
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/14511/637582416593870000 Rancho Cordova Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.cityofranchocordova.org/home/showpublisheddocument/11101/635900977342400000 City of Rancho Cordova Arts Strategic Plan, Rancho Cordova, California, Ver.12/2019 City of Rancho Cordova Community Enhancement & Investment Fund Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Citizen Report
https://indd.adobe.com/view/4f60e6b8-7e11-48e2-95a3-3284349863af ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 1

1 Zinfandel Pedestrian
Overcrossing & Art Walk Overcrossing & Art Walk
August 5, 2024
CityOfRanchoCordova.org
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

2 • Update Council on:
• Project Goals & Vision
• Project Status
• Project Aesthetics
• Art Plan
• Proposed Artwork & Signage
• Next Steps
• Receive Council Input and Direction on the Project Aesthetics ITEM 12.1.

Meeting Goals
ATTACHMENT 2

3 Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing & Art Walk
Project Goals & Vision:
• The Art Walk will enhance multimodal trail, establish placemaking, and meets City public art strategic
planning goals.
• Improves multimodal access along Zinfandel Drive
• Improves connectivity to existing SacRT Light Rail
Stations along Folsom Blvd.
• Increase safety by reducing conflict zones at Highway 50 ramps.
• Increase safety at Olson Drive
• Support the goals of the City’s Bike and Pedestrian
Master Plans
– Grade Separated Crossings, particularly at
Highway 50
• Supports Economic Development in the City’s
Employment Centers
– Connects employment centers south of
Highway 50 with commercial centers north of
Highway 50
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

4 Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Project Status
• $23.3M in grant funding received for the Project.
• Total Project cost $27.3M.
• Summer 2024: Project Approval and Environmental
Document Phase
– August 5, 2024: City Council consideration for
approval of the Initial Study Mitigated Negative
Declaration
– September 2024: Caltrans Approval of Project
Report
• Summer 2024 – Fall 2024: Right of Way Phase
• Summer 2024 – Winter 2025: 65% to 100% Design
Phase
• Spring 2025: Complete Design and State Grant Fund
Authorization
• Summer 2025: Construction Start
• Early 2027: Project Completion
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

5 Proposed Artwork Locations
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

6 Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing & Art Walk
The Artwork Should:
• Be a gateway to and from the Zinfandel Bridge
Overcrossing
• Reflect Rancho Cordova’s identity at the crossroads
of California geographically, historically, culturally, and commercially
• Consider the site’s connection between the
northern and southern neighborhoods
• Consider the site both a destination and connection
that will be experienced by pedestrian’s and
bicyclists as they traverse the site
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

7 Proposed Art Walk Experience
Olson Drive
Viewpoint
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

8 Artwork Site #1: Corner of White Rock & Zinfandel
• Budget: $200,000
• One or more sculpture(s)
• Visible by car
• Marks south entrance to trail
Northeast Corner of Zinfandel Dr & White Rock Rd
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

9 Artwork Site #2: South Wall Entrance
• Budget: $250,000
• Mosaic
• Partial cover
• Recessed
• Opportunity site for proposals from local 2-D artists Zinfandel Drive ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

10 Artwork Site #3: Loop
• Budget: $200,000
• Integrated into pathway
• Contract with a curator to select poets and commission a poem • Intermittent
• Visible from bridge and seen as you walk down the ramp • Over walkway, embedded in walkway or railing
US50 Off-ramp
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

11 Artwork Site #4: North Entrance
• Budget: $200,000
• Sculpture(s)
• Over walkway or next to path
Roostarz
Proposed Art
Location
Proposed Art Location South of US WB Off-ramp
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

12 Artist Selection Recommendations
• National competition with intensive outreach to the
Rancho Cordova community and Sacramento
Region
• Represent local artists with preferential scoring
• Selection panel representatives:
– Landscape Designer (one)
– Art Stakeholders Group (one)
– Community representative (one)
– Arts professionals (four)
– City staff representative (one)
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

13 Art Work Selection Process
City Council: Approves Final Designs (Spring 2025)
Art Stakeholder Group Approves/Makes Recommendations to City Council Artist Selection Panel: Reviews and Selects Final Designs Artists Selected as Finalists: Paid to Develop Design Proposals Artist Selection Panel: Reviews Submissions Selects Finalists Art Plan: City Council Review and Consideration for Approval (August 2024) ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

14 Proposed Signage Locations
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

15 Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing & Art Walk
The Signage should be:
• Timeless
• Secondary to Art, Bridge and Landscape
• Simple Frame, Legible Text
Existing City of Rancho Cordova Signage
Proposed Signage – Precedent Images
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

16 Proposed Art Walk Experience
Olson Drive
WAYFINDING SIGNS *
*
*
*
*
Potential
Wayfinding
Sign
Viewpoint
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

17 Zinfandel Art Walk Entrance Signage
#1: Northeast Corner of Zinfandel Drive & White Rock Rd #4: Southeast Corner of Zinfandel Dr & Olsen Dr ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

18 ITEM 12.1.

Signage Site #2: Sign Visible to WB 50
ATTACHMENT 2

19 ITEM 12.1.

Signage Site #2: Sign Visible to WB 50
ATTACHMENT 2

20 ITEM 12.1.

Signage Site #2: Sign Visible to WB 50
ATTACHMENT 2

21 ITEM 12.1.

Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Fencing
ATTACHMENT 2

22 Signage Site #3: Zinfandel Dr & Gold Center Dr
Proposed Sign
Location
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

23 Art & Signage Plan Proposed Budget
Proposed Budget
Opportunities for Funding:

External Grant Programs, Internal
(General Fund/CEIF).

Description Estimate
Site #1: South Entrance $200,000
Site #2: South Wall $250,000
Site #3: Roundabout $200,000
Site #4: North Entrance $200,000
Signage $300,000
Administration & Contingency $250,000
TOTAL $1,400,000
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

24 Zinfandel Drive Pedestrian Overcrossing & Art Walk
Summer
2021:

Community
Outreach
Aug 2024:

Art Plan City
Council
Presentation
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
2026:

Art
Installation
Spring 2025:

City Council
Approves
Artists Art Fabrication &
Caltrans
Encroachment
Permit
Artist
Selection
Process
Summer
2025:

Construction
Award
Early 2027:

Project
Completion
Project
Construction
Environmental Clearance, Finalize Project Design
& Bid Project
2027
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2

25 Zinfandel Drive Pedestrian Overcrossing & Art Walk
Council Feedback
Next Steps
• Receive Council Input and Direction on the Proposed Art Walk & Signage • Apply for Grants
• Direct Staff to identify funding source and incorporate $1.4M Budget for the Artwork & Signage in Budget Update
• Approve the Art Plan and Issuance of the Artwork Request for Qualifications Future City Council Updates
• Approve the Zinfandel Art Walk Budget
• Zinfandel Art Walk artwork design selection
• Zinfandel Pedestrian Overcrossing Construction Award
Olson Drive
ITEM 12.1. ATTACHMENT 2