Sierra Wilds Apartments
Design Review DR2025-0005
Environmental ENV2025-0008
Rocklin City Council
May 12, 2026
Nathan Anderson, Planning Division
2 3
4 5
Table 4-1 Summary of Land Use
Designations and Population
Density Standards
No individual parcel which has a
Mixed Use land use designation is
required to build a specific ratio of
residential to nonresidential.
Mixed Use designated parcels
may be all residential, all non-
residential, or a mix of residential
and nonresidential uses.
Mixed Use
6 7
8 9
Site 1-13 (St. Augustine - Wildcat)
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 36
36 30
18 19
20 21
22 PD-BP/C/LI (Stanford Ranch GDP)
City Parking Requirements
Project
Units
Ratio of Parking
Spaces Required
Total Parking
Spaces Required
1 bedroom 54 1.5 spaces / unit 81 spaces
2+ bedroom 66 2 spaces / unit 132 spaces
Guest -- .25 spaces / unit 30 spaces
Total 120 -- 243 spaces
23 MARKET
RATE
ONLY
City Parking Requirements
Density Bonus Parking Requirements
Project
Units
Ratio of Parking
Spaces Required
Total Parking
Spaces Required
1 bedroom 54 1 spaces / unit 54 spaces
2+ bedroom 66 1.5 spaces / unit 99 spaces
Guest -- 0 spaces / unit 0 spaces
Total 120 -- 153 spaces
Project
Units
Ratio of Parking
Spaces Required
Total Parking
Spaces Required
1 bedroom 54 1.5 spaces / unit 81 spaces
2+ bedroom 66 2 spaces / unit 132 spaces
Guest -- .25 spaces / unit 30 spaces
Total 120 -- 243 spaces
24 City Parking Requirements
Density Bonus Parking Requirements
Project
Units
Ratio of Parking
Spaces Required
Total Parking
Spaces Required
1 bedroom 54 1 spaces / unit 54 spaces
2+ bedroom 66 1.5 spaces / unit 99 spaces
Guest -- 0 spaces / unit 0 spaces
Total 120 -- 153 spaces
Project
Units
Ratio of Parking
Spaces Required
Total Parking
Spaces Required
1 bedroom 54 1.5 spaces / unit 81 spaces
2+ bedroom 66 2 spaces / unit 132 spaces
Guest -- .25 spaces / unit 30 spaces
Total 120 -- 243 spaces
Parking Proposed
180 spaces (1.5 spaces per unit)
25 26
Original
Submittal
Revised
Submittal
27 Original
Submittal
Revised
Submittal
28 X
X X
10 29
X
X X
10 Fence & Lattice
(8 ft. total)
Fence & Lattice
(8 ft. total)
30 31
32 33
34 CEQA – 15183 Consistency Checklist
With regards to mandatory findings of significant, the Consistency Checklist demonstrates that:
1. No peculiar impacts related to the proposed project or its site that were not analyzed as significant effects in the Prior FEIR have been identified.
2. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not analyzed in the Prior FEIR.
3. No substantial new information has been identified which results in an impact which is more severe than anticipated by the Prior FEIR.
4. No mitigation measures are necessary because the proposed project’s specific impacts would be less than significant. 35 New COA#22.b – Construction Management Plan
Prior to the issuance of improvement plans or building permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for review and approval by the Community Development Director. The CMP shall identify strategies to minimize construction-related disturbances to adjacent uses, including the Maria Montessori Charter Academy, and shall be consistent with the considerations outlined in the staff report and its attachments. At a minimum, the CMP shall address construction scheduling, site access and circulation, staging and parking, noise and vibration control, dust and air quality management, pedestrian and student safety, and coordination with nearby property owners. The CMP shall also include communication protocols for addressing concerns during construction. The developer shall work with the City in good faith to develop and implement reasonable measures to reduce potential impacts. The CMP may be modified, as necessary, to respond to site-specific conditions or operational considerations identified during review. 36 17.72.070 – Design Review Decision
Any decision by the design review board or the council on a design review application shall be based on consideration of the following:
1. Relationship between the site design and the surrounding development, natural features and constraints and traffic flow;
2. Height, bulk and area;
3. Orientation of buildings and structures (with emphasis on energy consumption for heating, cooling, lighting);
4. Color scheme and materials;
5. Style, type and orientation of lighting;
6. Dimensions and placement of signs and graphics;
7. Landscaping (with emphasis on aesthetics, use of water and maintenance needs);
8. Parking design, including ingress and egress patterns;
9. Other design review criteria, which may be adopted from time to time by resolution of the council.
37 Government Code Section 65589.5
This section of the Housing Accountability Act provides that a local agency shall not disapprove an affordable housing project, or condition it in a way that makes it infeasible, unless it can make one of the following written findings based on substantial evidence:
1) The jurisdiction has a compliant Housing Element and has met or exceeded its RHNA for the applicable income category.
2) The project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, with no feasible way to mitigate it without rendering the project unaffordable. 3) Denial or conditioning is required to comply with state or federal law, and no feasible alternative exists. 4) The project is located on agricultural or resource land, or lacks adequate water or wastewater infrastructure.
5) The project is inconsistent with both the zoning ordinance and General Plan, and the jurisdiction has a compliant Housing Element (with important exceptions for identified Housing Element sites and emergency shelters).
6) The jurisdiction does not have a compliant Housing Element, and the project is not a builder’s remedy project.
Absent one of these findings, the City must approve the project and cannot impose conditions that would make it infeasible.38
Existing
School
Existing
Church
39 Sierra Wilds Apartments
Design Review DR2025-0005
Environmental ENV2025-0008
Rocklin City Council
May 12, 2026
Nathan Anderson, Planning Division