Agenda packet, regular meeting, first session — Rocklin City Council, October 13, 2026 (part 5 of 6)

Operational energy demand would increase with implementation of the General Plan due to population and development growth. However, compliance with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), as well as implementation of General Plan policies OCR-56 and OCR-57, would promote energy conservation, improve building efficiency, and support sustainable land use patterns.

As discussed in the GP EIR, implementation of the General Plan would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and would not conflict with applicable State or local plans for energy efficiency or renewable energy. Therefore, impacts related to energy would be less than significant.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section was prepared using the following report:
• Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Study, prepared by EPD Solutions Inc., April 2026.

Included as Appendix A.
1124
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 75
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.13.3.2 and was determined result in a less-than-significant impact. The GP EIR determined that development under the General Plan would be required to comply with California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24), which would minimize inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy and reduce impacts on peak energy demand and overall State energy use. In addition, implementation of General Plan policies OCR-56 and OCR-57 would promote energy conservation and efficient land use patterns. As such, the GP EIR concluded that impacts related to energy consumption would be less than significant . (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.13-30 to 4.13-31).

Construction
During construction of the proposed Project, energy would be consumed in three general forms:

1. Petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment, construction worker travel to and from the site, as well as delivery truck trips;

2. Electricity associated with providing temporary power for lighting and electric equipment; and

3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, paint, fencing, lighting, and gate materials.

Construction activities would require the use of diesel-fueled equipment and gasoline-powered worker, vendor, and haul vehicles. Total construction fuel consumption is estimated at approximately 107,542 gallons of diesel fuel and 114,505.7 gallons of gasoline over the duration of construction. This represents approximately a 1.70 percent increase in countywide diesel consumption and a 0.12 percent increase in countywide gasoline consumption, which are nominal increases relative to regional energy demand (Appendix A).

Electricity consumption during construction would be limited to temporary uses such as lighting and construction trailers and would represent a negligible portion of total Project energy demand. Natural gas consumption during construction would also be negligible. In addition, construction activities would be typical of residential development and would not require specialized equipment or processes that would result in excessive or inefficient energy use.

Operation
Once operational, the proposed Project would generate demand for electricity and gasoline for vehicle trips. Operational use of energy would include the heating, cooling, and lighting of residential units, water heating, operation of electrical systems and plug-in appliances, and the transport of electricity and water to the areas where they would be consumed. The proposed Project is designed as an all-electric development and would not utilize natural gas. This use of energy is typical for residential development, and no operational activities or land uses are proposed that would result in extraordinary energy consumption.

Transportation
The largest source of operational energy use would be vehicle trips generated by residents. The proposed Project would result in an estimated annual fuel consumption of approximately 203,047.6 gallons of 1125
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 76
gasoline (Appendix A). Trip generation associated with the proposed Project would be consistent with similar residential developments of comparable scale and configuration. The Project does not include uses or operational characteristics that would generate excessive or unnecessary vehicle trips or result in inefficient transportation energy consumption. As such, transportation-related energy use would not be considered wasteful or inefficient.

Electricity
The estimated electricity demand for the proposed Project would be approximately 1,393,829.1 kilowatthours (kWh) per year (Appendix A). This represents a less than 0.01 percent increase in countywide electricity consumption, which is nominal in comparison to regional energy demand. The Project’s electricity consumption would be consistent with that of similar residential developments and would not represent an inefficient or excessive use of energy resources.

Renewable Energy
The proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, including current requirements for the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems for new residential development. Compliance with these standards would improve energy efficiency and reduce reliance on non-renewable energy sources. The Project would not inhibit the use of renewable energy and would support the continued transition toward cleaner energy sources.

Based on the foregoing analysis, operational energy consumption associated with the proposed Project would be typical of residential development and would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy resources. In addition, the Project would not conflict with applicable plans for energy efficiency or renewable energy. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur beyond those previously evaluated in the GP EIR, and no additional environmental review is required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

The State of California has adopted various plans and programs to promote renewable energy and energy efficiency, including the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; Title 24, Part 11), and the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, which requires utilities to procure increasing amounts of electricity from renewable sources.

The proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24 and CALGreen, as adopted by the City of Rocklin and enforced through the building permit and plan check process. These standards are designed to reduce energy consumption and ensure consistency with statewide energy conservation goals. The RPS applies to electricity providers rather than individual development projects; therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the RPS.

Because the Project would comply with applicable energy efficiency standards and would not interfere with implementation of State or local renewable energy programs, it would not conflict with or obstruct an applicable plan. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed project would not result in a peculiar impact related to creating a conflict with, or obstruct a plan for renewable energy or 1126
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 77
energy efficiency pursuant to Section 15183. Therefore, no impacts would occur. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur, and no additional environmental review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 4.13-32, the proposed Rocklin General Plan Update’s mitigating policies and their associated action steps, and the requirement that subsequent development under the General Plan comply with energy efficiency standards in Title 24 of the California Code, ensure that the impact will be less than cumulatively considerable. As discussed above, the Project would be designed and constructed in compliance with the current California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24), the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), and all applicable City of Rocklin requirements related to energy efficiency. Compliance with these regulations would ensure the incorporation of energyefficient building materials, lighting, mechanical systems, appliances, and water conservation features that reduce overall energy consumption. Because the Project would comply with applicable General Plan policies, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of energy, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR utilities analysis used California Energy Commission and California Public Utilities Commission information, service provider consultation, and Title 24 requirements to evaluate electricity, natural gas, telecommunication, and energy efficiency impacts. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Study, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a new or substantially greater energy impact.

5. No mitigation measures related to energy are contained within the GP EIR. Additionally, no mitigation measures would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) Title 24, Energy Efficiency and Green Building Standards. The Project is required to be designed in accordance with the applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen standards (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 24, Part 6 and Part 11). These standards are updated, nominally every three years, to incorporate improved energy efficiency technologies and methods.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 15.04.010: Building Code. The City of Rocklin adopts by reference the California Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24), including Part 6 (Energy Code) and Part 11 1127
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 78
(CALGreen), which establishes mandatory energy efficiency and green building requirements for all new development within the City.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy OCR-56 Encourage energy conservation in new developments.

Policy OCR-57 Encourage urban design and form that conserves land and other resources.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to energy are included in the GP EIR. 1128
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 79

6.7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

These impacts included seismic hazards such as ground shaking and liquefaction, erosion, soil stability, and wastewater conflicts (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011 pages 4.6-1 through 4.6- 27). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the General Plan can result in geological impacts, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of development standards contained in the City's Improvement Standards and Standard Specifications and in the Rocklin Municipal Code, the application of General Plan goals and policies that would assist in minimizing or avoiding geologic hazards and compliance with local, state and federal standards related to geologic conditions.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section is based on the following reports:

Would the project:

Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the
Project or
the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table 18-
1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of
adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater
disposal systems where
sewers are not available for
the disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic
feature?
1130
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 81
• Geotechnical Engineering Study Update, prepared by Youngdahl Consulting Group, Inc., November 2025. Included as Appendix C.
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-18 to 4.6-20).

As described in the Geotechnical Evaluation (Appendix C), the Project site is within a region of relatively low seismic activity in northern California, which means occasional seismic ground shaking is possible over the lifetime of the proposed Project. The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no known active faults traverse the Project site or the City of Rocklin.

However, the proposed Project would be required to comply with the seismic safety requirements as well as State and local seismic and structural regulations (i.e. California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, California Building Standards Code, and the City of Rocklin Municipal Code).

Structures built in the City are required to be built in compliance with the CBC (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2) which provides provisions for earthquake safety. The CBC standards also require all new developments to be designed consistent with a site specific, design-level geotechnical report, which would be fully compliant with the seismic recommendations of a California-registered professional geotechnical engineer. Consistent with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Evaluation, proposed buildings would be setback from the fault zone, and no active faults are present within the delineated buildable area of the proposed Project.

Adherence to the applicable CBC requirements, Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act, Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, and General Plan policies, such as Policy S-1 and Policy S-20 related to seismic safety, would ensure that development of the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving ground rupture of a fault. Thus, impacts would be less than significant, and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-18 to 4.6-20).

The amount of motion expected at a building site can vary from no motion to forceful depending upon the distance to the fault, the magnitude of the earthquake, and the local geology. As described in the GP EIR, the City of Rocklin is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and no known active faults traverse the City of Rocklin, but the City may experience ground 1131
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 82
shaking from regional fault systems located outside the Planning Area. The Project site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone. The Project site, similar to all sites across California, is subject to minor ground shaking and potentially secondary hazards as a result of earthquakes. However, structures built in the City are required to be built in compliance with the CBC (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2) that provides provisions for earthquake safety based on factors including building occupancy type, the types of soils on-site, and the probable strength of ground motion. Compliance with the CBC would require the incorporation of: (1) seismic safety features to minimize the potential for significant effects as a result of earthquakes; (2) proper building footings and foundations; and (3) construction of the building structure so that it would withstand the effects of strong ground shaking.

The proposed Project would also be developed in compliance with the Rocklin Municipal Code, the recommendations of the Geotechnical Evaluation (included as Appendix C), and all other ordinances adopted by the City related to construction and safety. The Rocklin Building Services Division would review the building plans through building plan checks, issuance of a building permit, and inspection of the building during construction, which would ensure that all required CBC seismic safety measures are incorporated into the building. Compliance with these requirements would reduce impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking to a less-thansignificant level. Thus, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-18 to 4.6-20).

Liquefaction occurs when soils are transformed from a solid state into a liquefied state due to increased pressure. Liquefaction is most likely to occur when soils of higher porosity (i.e., clay) become saturated and subjected to seismic activity. Areas where the groundwater table is approximately 50 feet below ground surface are also more susceptible to liquefaction.

As described in the GP EIR, the potential for soil liquefaction within the Rocklin Planning Area is considered minimal due to the presence of stable granitic bedrock, relatively deep groundwater levels (approximately 13 to 161 feet below ground surface), and the general geologic conditions of the area. While localized areas of clay soils may exhibit instability when saturated and subjected to ground shaking, such conditions are not considered a significant hazard within the Planning Area.

The Project site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for earthquakeinduced liquefaction or landsliding. In addition, the Geotechnical Evaluation evaluated the liquefaction potential at the site and determined based on the relatively low seismicity of the area, the relatively shallow depth to rock, the dense and competent nature of the subsurface soils and relatively deep groundwater conditions, the liquefaction potential at the Project site is considered to be very low (Appendix C). Regional ground waters are not expected to be a major 1132
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 83
factor in the development of the site, further supporting the conclusion that the site is not susceptible to liquefaction hazards.

Additionally, as described previously, the proposed Project would be required to be constructed in compliance with the CBC, the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Evaluation, and the City’s Municipal Code, which would be verified through the City’s plan check and permitting process. Thus, potential impacts related to liquefaction would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts on people or structures due to ground failure or liquefaction.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. iv. Landslides?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.3 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-21 to 4.6-22).

Landslides are the downhill movement of masses of earth and rock and are often associated with earthquakes. However, other factors, such as the slope, moisture content of the soil, composition of the subsurface geology, heavy rains, and improper grading can influence the occurrence of landslides. The Project site is not located near any slopes or hillsides and is situated on relatively flat terrain within an urbanized portion of the City. As described in the GP EIR, while localized soil conditions may require special design considerations, the Planning Area is not characterized by widespread landslide hazards. The Project site does not contain topographic features that would be susceptible to slope instability or landslide conditions. In addition, the proposed Project would be required to comply with the California Building Standards Code (CBC; CCR Title 24), City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 15.04.010, and applicable grading requirements under Chapter

15.28, and implementation of applicable General Plan policies. A site-specific Geotechnical Evaluation (Appendix C) has been prepared for the Project and would provide recommendations for site preparation and foundation design to ensure stability of the proposed improvements.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to slope instability or seismically induced landslides. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.
b) Result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.2 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance with NPDES requirements, preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), City grading and erosion control standards, and applicable General Plan policies (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-20 to 4.6-21). 1133
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 84
Construction of the proposed Project has the potential to contribute to soil erosion and the loss of topsoil.

Grading activities that would be required for the proposed Project would expose and loosen topsoil, which could be eroded by wind or water. However, construction activities would be required to comply with the City of Rocklin Municipal Code, including applicable grading and erosion control requirements under Chapter 15.28, Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control, requiring preparation and approval of an erosion control plan and implementation of appropriate measures during soil-disturbing activities to reduce erosion.

Furthermore, the proposed Project would be subject to NPDES permitting regulations, including implementation of a SWPPP and associated Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs may include a combination of construction methods to reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from Project-related grading and construction activities, such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, stabilized construction entrances, hydroseeding, and sediment control measures. Additionally, the Construction General Permit, State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, regulates construction activities to minimize water pollution, including sediment.

As identified in the GP EIR, soils within the Planning Area generally have moderate erosion potential; however, compliance with City regulations, SWPPP requirements, and implementation of BMPs would reduce erosion impacts to less than significant levels. Additionally, the proposed Project includes installation of landscaping throughout the site. With this landscaping, areas of loose topsoil that could be eroded by wind or water would be stabilized upon operation of the proposed Project. Stormwater features associated with the Project, including landscaped areas and on-site drainage design, would further reduce runoff velocities and erosion potential.

Therefore, with implementation of existing regulatory requirements, impacts related to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.3 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-21 to 4.6-22).

As described above, the Project site does not contain nor is it adjacent to any significant slope or hillside area. The proposed Project would also not create slopes. Thus, on or off-site landslides would not occur from the implementation of the proposed Project.

Lateral spreading is a type of liquefaction-induced ground failure associated with the lateral displacement of surficial blocks of sediment resulting from liquefaction in a subsurface layer. Once liquefaction transforms the subsurface layer into a fluid mass, gravity plus the earthquake inertial forces may cause the mass to move downslope towards a free face (such as a river channel or an embankment). Lateral spreading may cause large horizontal displacements, and such movement typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures. As described previously, the Geotechnical Evaluation found that the site 1134
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 85
possesses a low liquefaction potential. Additionally, because the site is relatively flat and the relatively low liquefaction hazard potential, the potential for earthquake-induced lateral spreading is considered negligible at the site (Appendix C). Therefore, impacts related to liquefaction and lateral spreading are not anticipated at the Project site, and impacts would be less than significant.

Subsidence is a general lowering of the ground surface over a large area that is generally attributed to lowering of groundwater levels within a basin. The Project site is not located within a known subsidence hazard area, and groundwater conditions encountered during subsurface exploration indicate relatively deep groundwater levels that would not be expected to contribute to subsidence-related impacts at the site (Appendix C). Any potential settlement would be localized and addressed through standard engineering design and foundation recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Evaluation.

Compliance with the CBC would be required by the City of Rocklin through the building plan check and permitting process, which would ensure that impacts related to subsidence would be less than significant.

Overall, compliance with the requirements of the CBC, as ensured by the City through the permitting process, and implementation of site-specific geotechnical recommendations would ensure impacts related to lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, and collapse would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no subsequent review is required.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.3 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-21 to 4.6-22).

Expansive soils contain clay particles that swell when wet and shrink when dry. Foundations constructed on expansive soils are subjected to forces caused by the swelling and shrinkage of the soils and could result in heaving and cracking of buildings and foundations. As part of the Geotechnical Evaluation, laboratory testing was performed on selected soil samples obtained during the field exploration to confirm the field classification of the soils. The test results indicated that near-surface soils exhibit a low expansion index, indicating a low potential for shrink-swell behavior (Appendix C). Additionally, compliance with the CBC would be incorporated into grading plans and building specifications as a condition of construction permit approval to ensure that the proposed Project structures would withstand effects related to ground movement, including expansive soils. Thus, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.6.4 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-22 to 4.6-24). 1135
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 86
As described in the GP EIR, impacts related to septic systems are generally associated with development in areas where public sewer service is not available. However, such conditions are limited within the City of Rocklin, where most urban development is served by public wastewater infrastructure.

The proposed Project would not utilize septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Wastewater generated by the Project would be conveyed via on-site sewer infrastructure, including eightinch sewer lines, which would connect to an existing 8-inch public sewer line located within Pacific Street.

Because the Project would connect to an existing public sewer system, soils underlying the site would not be relied upon for wastewater disposal. Therefore, the suitability of soils for septic systems is not a relevant factor for the proposed Project.

Accordingly, impacts related to soils incapable of supporting septic systems would not occur. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no subsequent review is required.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.8.3 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.8-17 to 4.8-18).

The proposed Project includes site preparation, excavation, grading, and other ground disturbance activities that have the potential to damage or destroy paleontological resources that may be present on the Project site. No paleontological resources study has been conducted for the Project site; however, as identified in the GP EIR, fossil resources have been identified within the Planning Area, and there remains the potential for undiscovered resources to occur at depth.

The Project site is underlain by alluvial deposits of Pleistocene age, which are generally considered to have moderate to high paleontological sensitivity. As such, there is a potential for unknown paleontological resources to be encountered during ground-disturbing activities.

In the event that paleontological resources are inadvertently discovered during construction, work would be halted in the vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist would be retained to evaluate the significance of the resource and recommend appropriate treatment measures in accordance with standard professional practices.

Compliance with applicable General Plan policies, including Policy OCR-65, which requires preservation or mitigation of impacts to paleontological resources, and implementation of standard inadvertent discovery procedures would ensure that impacts remain less than significant. Therefore, the proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the GP EIR and would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts that would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no subsequent review is required. 1136
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 87
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on pages 4.6-24 through 4.6-25, compliance with adopted erosion control standards and NPDES and SWPPP requirements, as well as implementation of the General Plan Update policies, would ensure that substantial soil erosion and loss of topsoil impacts related to implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant and that, consequently, cumulative impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable. As discussed above, the Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation, the California Building Code, applicable City of Rocklin grading and construction standards, and all other applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Implementation of these requirements would ensure that the Project is appropriately designed to address site-specific geologic conditions, including seismic hazards, soil stability, erosion control, and expansive soils. The Project would implement all applicable General Plan policies and regulations governing grading, erosion control, and structural design, and would incorporate the recommendations of the project-specific geotechnical investigation into final engineering and construction plans. Accordingly, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative geology and soils impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of geology and soils, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR geology and soils analysis used published information, surveys, reports, agency resources, the proposed General Plan Update, the Placer County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and applicable City regulations. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR and the Project’s development area being the same as was analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific Geotechnical Engineering Study Update, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a geology and soils impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No new mitigation measures would be required. Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) California Building Standards Code Title 24-Structural and Seismic Standards. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 24), including Part 2 (California Building Code), which establishes structural design and seismic safety requirements for buildings. These standards require structures to be designed to withstand seismic forces, incorporate appropriate foundation systems, and address site-specific geotechnical conditions. 1137
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 88
City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.010: Building Code. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the City’s adopted Building Code, as outlined in Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter

15.04. This section adopts the most recent edition of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24), along with any local amendments, to ensure safe and structurally sound development. All building plans would be subject to plan check and permit review by the City’s Building and Safety Division to confirm compliance with applicable structural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, fire safety, and energy efficiency standards. Adherence to these requirements would ensure that all new construction meets current safety and performance codes.

Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.28: Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control. The proposed Project would be required to comply with Chapter 15.28, which requires preparation and approval of grading and erosion control plans and implementation of measures to minimize soil erosion and loss of topsoil during construction activities.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy S-1: Require engineering analysis of new development proposals in areas with possible soil instability, flooding, earthquake faults, or other hazards, and to prohibit development that cannot mitigate the applicable hazard.

Policy S-20: Provide for seismic safety and structural integrity in residential, commercial, industrial and public facilities through Building Code enforcement.

Policy S-21: Require site-specific geotechnical studies of development proposals in areas subject to landslide potential, erosion, and/or slope instability.

Policy OCR-49: Minimize the degradation of water quality through use of erosion control plans and Best Management Practices.

Policy OCR-65: Preserve significant archaeological resources (including Native American remains) and paleontological resources in place if feasible, or provide mitigation (avoidance, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures) prior to further disturbance.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to geology and soils are included in the GP EIR. 1138
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 89

6.8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated impacts that would occur related to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included consistency with greenhouse gas reduction measure, climate change environmental effects on the City and generation of greenhouse gas emissions (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages 4.15-1 through 4.15-25). Mitigation measures to address these impacts are incorporated into the General Plan in the Land Use and Circulation Elements, and include goals and policies that encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation and promote mixed use and infill development.

The General Plan EIR concluded that despite these goals and policies, significant greenhouse gas emission impacts will occur as a result of development under the General Plan and further, that these impacts cannot be reduced to a less than significant level. Specifically, the General Plan EIR found that buildout of the Rocklin General Plan will result in the generation of greenhouse gas emissions which are cumulatively considerable. Findings of fact and a statement of overriding considerations were adopted by the Rocklin City Council in regard to this impact, which was found to be significant and unavoidable.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section was prepared using the following report:
• Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis, prepared by EPD Solutions, April 2026.

Included as Appendix A.

Would the Project:

Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the Project
or the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an
applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse
gases?
1139
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 90
GHG Thresholds
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 provides discretion to the lead agency whether to: (1) use a model of methodology to quantify GHG emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use; or (2) rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In addition, CEQA does not provide guidance to determine whether the project’s estimated GHG emissions are significant, but recommends that lead agencies consider several factors that may be used in the determination of significance of project related GHG emissions, including:
• The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting.
• Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.
• The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(f) describes that the effects of GHG emissions are by their very nature cumulative and should be analyzed in the context of CEQA’s requirements for cumulative impact analysis.

Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)3 states that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative impact can be found not cumulatively considerable if the project would comply with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides requirements to avoid or lessen the cumulative problem.

CEQA allows the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district to be used to assess impacts of a project on climate change.

California State Executive Order S-3-05, issued by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in June 2005, established comprehensive GHG reduction targets for the state (Executive Department State of California, 2005). It mandated reducing GHG emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This Executive Order laid the foundation for subsequent climate change mitigation efforts in California, including the development of various policies and programs aimed at reducing emissions across sectors such as transportation, energy, and industry. The objective of the Executive Order is to contribute to capping worldwide CO2 concentrations at 450 parts per million (ppm), stabilizing global climate change.

The Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) has adopted thresholds for GHG emissions within their jurisdiction. The thresholds were determined based on the goals set by Executive Order S-3- 0517, which set a goal to reduce GHG emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, and Senate Bill (SB) 32, which established into law a GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

The PCAPCD has established project-level greenhouse gas (GHG) significance thresholds based on consideration of multiple factors, including: (1) thresholds adopted by other air districts, (2) CEQA projects reviewed by the District, (3) applicable statewide regulatory requirements for 2030, and (4) local geographic considerations specific to Placer County.

The PCAPCD applies a bright-line significance threshold of 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO₂e) per year to evaluate both construction-related and operational GHG emissions associated with 1140
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 91
land use projects. Projects with emissions exceeding this threshold are considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change.

In addition to the bright-line threshold, the PCAPCD has developed a tiered approach for evaluating operational GHG emissions, which includes the following:
• Bright-Line Threshold: 10,000 MTCO₂e per year.
• Efficiency Metrics:
o Residential Development
 Urban: 4.5 MTCO₂e per capita per year
 Rural: 5.5 MTCO₂e per capita per year
o Non-Residential Development
 Urban: 26.5 MTCO₂e per capita per year
 Rural: 27.3 MTCO₂e per capita per year
• De Minimis Threshold: 1,100 MTCO₂e per year for operational emissions.

For the purposes of Appendix A, the 10,000 MTCO₂e per year bright-line threshold is used to evaluate the Project’s construction and operational emissions. Projects with emissions below this threshold are not considered to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to climate change. a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.15.3 and was determined to have a significant and unavoidable impact. The GP EIR determined that while the General Plan includes policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from future development, implementation would still result in an overall increase in emissions compared to existing conditions and would not achieve the long-term reduction goals established by State regulations. As such, impacts related to GHG emissions were determined to be significant and unavoidable (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.15-24).

Construction
Construction of the proposed Project is anticipated to occur over approximately 24 months, beginning in the second quarter of 2027 and ending in the second quarter of 2029. GHG emissions associated with Project construction would occur over the short term and would consist primarily of emissions from construction equipment, as well as worker and vendor vehicle trips. The calculations presented below include construction emissions in terms of annual CO2e GHG emissions from increased energy consumption, water usage, and solid waste disposal, as well as estimated GHG emissions from vehicular traffic that would result from implementation of the proposed Project. During construction of the proposed Project, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment, as well as emissions from worker and vendor vehicles, each of which typically uses fossil-based fuels to operate. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change.
1141
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 92
As shown in Table GHG-1, Project Construction GHG Emissions, total construction emissions are estimated at approximately 751 MTCO₂e over the duration of construction. These emissions would be temporary and short-term in nature and would cease upon completion of construction. Therefore, constructionrelated GHG emissions would not represent a long-term contribution to global climate change.

Table GHG-1: Project Construction GHG Emissions
Construction Year
Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)
Year 1 (2027) 267
Year 2 (2028) 395
Year 3 (2029) 89
Total Emissions 751
Significance Threshold 10,000
Threshold Exceeded? No
Source: Appendix A.

Operation
During operation, the proposed Project would generate long-term GHG emissions from mobile sources (vehicle trips), area sources, electricity consumption, water usage, and solid waste generation. As shown in Table GHG-2, Total Project GHG Emissions, the proposed Project would generate approximately 2,213 MTCO₂e per year, which is well below the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) brightline significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO₂e per year.

While the GP EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts related to GHG emissions at the program level due to long-term growth and uncertainty in achieving reduction targets, the proposed Project would not generate emissions exceeding applicable thresholds or result in emissions beyond those previously evaluated in the GP EIR.

Based on the foregoing analysis, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more severe GHG impacts beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required.

Table GHG-2: Total Project GHG Emissions
Activity
Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)1
Mobile 1,998
Area 3
Energy 130
Water 15
Waste 65
1142
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 93
Activity
Annual GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)1
Refrigeration 0
Total Project Operation Emissions 2,213
Significance Threshold 10,000
Threshold Exceeded? No
Source: Appendix A 1 Values may vary slightly due to rounding; b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.15.1 and was determined to result in a less than significant impact. The GP EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan Update would be consistent with applicable State and regional plans adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan and Executive Order S-3-05, and would not conflict with applicable GHG reduction strategies (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.15-15 to 4.15-23).

The proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The Project would be required to comply with applicable State regulations that reduce GHG emissions, including the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), which requires reduction of statewide emissions to 1990 levels; Senate Bill 32 (SB 32), which establishes a target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030; and the Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB 1493), which regulate vehicle emissions.

In addition, the proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which require reductions in energy consumption, water use, and construction waste. The Project would also be subject to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and vehicle efficiency standards implemented by CARB, which reduce emissions associated with mobile sources.

As demonstrated in the Project-specific air quality and GHG analysis (Appendix A), the proposed Project would generate approximately 2,213 MTCO₂e per year, which is well below the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) bright-line threshold of 10,000 MTCO₂e per year.

Based on the foregoing, the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur beyond those previously evaluated in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 4.15-24, implementation of the General Plan would result in cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable impacts associated with GHG emissions due to increased residential, commercial, and industrial development. A project’s GHG emissions are at a microscale relative to global emissions, but could result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution 1143
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 94
to a significant cumulative macro-scale impact. As such, impacts related to emissions of GHG are inherently considered cumulative impacts. As shown in Table GHG-2, Total Project GHG Emissions, the proposed Project would generate approximately 2,213 MTCO₂e per year, which is well below the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) bright-line significance threshold of 10,000 MTCO₂e per year. Therefore, the proposed Projects GHG emissions are considered less than cumulatively considerable.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of GHG emissions, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR climate change and greenhouse gases analysis used transportation, electricity, natural gas, and waste emissions modeling to evaluate GHG emissions associated with General Plan implementation. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a greenhouse gas emissions impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No new mitigation measures related to GHG would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) Title 24, Energy Efficiency and Green Building Standards. As listed in Section 6.6, Energy.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.010: Building Code. As listed previously in Section 6.7, Geology and Soils.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy LU-11: Encourage infill residential development that is in keeping with the character and scale of the surrounding neighborhood, while providing a variety of densities and housing types as reflected by the zoning and land use designation of the infill property.

Policy LU-13: Review proposals for new residential development for compatibility with the character and scale of nearby neighborhoods, while providing a variety of densities and housing types as reflected by the zoning and land use designation of the infill property.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to GHG are required to reduce Project impacts. 1144
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 95

6.9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Project
Impact that
is Peculiar
to the
Project or
the Project
Site
Significant
Impact
not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No
New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions
involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions
or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which
is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located
within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for
1145
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 96
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated human health and hazards impacts that would occur as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included wildland fire hazards, transportation, use and disposal of hazardous materials, and emergency response and evacuation plans (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011 pages 4.7-1 through

4.7- 30). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the Rocklin General Plan can introduce a variety of human health and hazards impacts, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of development standards in the Rocklin Municipal Code, the application of General Plan goals and policies that would assist in minimizing or avoiding hazardous conditions, and compliance with local, state and federal standards related to hazards and hazardous materials.

These goals, policies and standards include, but are not limited to, Chapter 2.32 of the Rocklin Municipal Code which requires the preparation and maintenance of an emergency operations plan, preventative measures in the City's Improvement Standards and Standard Specifications, compliance with local, state and federal standards related to hazards and hazardous materials and goals and policies in the General Plan Community Safety and Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Elements requiring coordination with emergency management agencies, annexation into fee districts for fire prevention/suppression and medical response, incorporation of fuel modification/fire hazard reduction planning, and requirements for site-specific hazard investigations and risk analysis.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section is based on the following reports:
• Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., November 2025. Appendix D.
• Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., December 2025. Appendix E.
people residing or working in
the project area?
f) Impair implementation of
or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or
structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires?
1146
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 97
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.3 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-22 to 4.7-25).

A hazardous material is defined as any material that, due to its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or environment. Hazardous materials include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that a business or the local implementing agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. Hazardous waste requires special handling and disposal because of their potential to damage public health and the environment.

Development and long-term operation of the proposed Project would require standard transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. If the use of these materials does not adhere to established federal, State, and local laws and regulations, workers, residents, the public, and/or the environment could be exposed to hazardous materials.

Construction
Heavy construction equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated for construction of the proposed Project. The equipment would be fueled and maintained by petroleum‐based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored, handled, or transported. Other materials used, such as paints, adhesives, and solvents, could also result in accidental releases or spills that could pose risks to people and the environment. These risks are standard on all construction sites, and the proposed Project would not cause greater risks than would occur on other similar construction sites.

In addition, as identified in the Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments prepared for the Project site, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with historical uses, including former railroad operations and industrial activities, have been identified. These assessments concluded that residual petroleum hydrocarbons and metals may be present in shallow and localized soils; however, these materials do not pose a significant risk to human health and are below applicable regulatory screening levels. In an abundance of caution, it is recommended that soils be removed onsite where historic arsenic impacts are documented onsite, in compliance with General Plan Policies S-14 and S-15 and has been included as Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Potential vapor encroachment from nearby off-site sources were also evaluated and are not expected to pose a significant risk to the Project site. In addition, off-site hazardous materials sites in the surrounding area are regulated by appropriate agencies and are not expected to result in significant impacts to the Project site. During construction, any soil or groundwater encountered that exhibits signs of contamination would be managed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that potential exposure to hazardous materials during construction is minimized and would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As a standard precaution, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) would be implemented during construction to outline procedures for handling 1147
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 98
previously unidentified materials encountered during grading activities, and is included as Mitigation measure HAZ-2.

Construction contractors would be required to comply with federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, as implemented by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), requires proper classification, handling, and transport of hazardous materials. Additionally, construction activities would require preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in compliance with the NPDES General Construction Permit, which would include best management practices (BMPs) to minimize the potential for accidental releases, spills, and runoff of hazardous materials.

Mandatory compliance with applicable laws and regulations related to the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities at the Project site would limit potentially significant hazards to construction workers, the public, and the environment. Impacts would be less than significant, and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR.

Operation
The proposed Project would develop the site with 281 multifamily residential units. While hazardous materials are not typically associated with this type of residential use, limited quantities of common household products, such as cleaning agents, pesticides, and herbicides, may be used for routine maintenance and landscaping. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous and would only be used and stored in limited quantities. The normal routine use of these hazardous materials pursuant to existing regulations would not result in a significant hazard to people or the environment in the vicinity of the proposed Project. With compliance with existing laws and regulations, the proposed Project would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional review is required.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.3 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-22 to 4.7-25).

In November 2025, Stantec completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) then conducted a subsequent Phase II ESA in December, 2025 for the Project site (Appendices D and E). The purpose of the ESA’s were to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs), including historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), and controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs) that may exist at a property. The term “recognized environmental condition” means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. 1148
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 99
Information gathered from interviews, reviews of existing data, and a site inspection were evaluated to determine if RECs are present in connection to the Project site. The Phase I ESA identified recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with historical uses of the site, including former railroad operations and industrial activities. A subsequent Phase II ESA further evaluated these conditions and determined that residual petroleum hydrocarbons and metals may be present in shallow, localized soils; however, these materials do not pose a significant risk to human health and are below applicable regulatory screening levels. Potential vapor encroachment from nearby off-site sources was also evaluated and is not expected to pose a significant risk to the Project site. Based on these findings and prior regulatory review, no further remediation was determined to be necessary.

Construction
While the routine use, storage, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with applicable regulations during construction activities would not pose health risks or result in significant impacts, improper use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes could result in accidental spills or releases, posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. To avoid an impact related to an accidental release, the use of BMPs during construction are implemented as part of a SWPPP as required by the NPDES General Construction Permit. Implementation of a SWPPP would protect quality of the water supply. Construction contract specifications would include strict onsite handling rules and BMPs that include, but are not limited to:
• Establishing a dedicated area for fuel storage and refueling and construction dewatering activities that includes secondary containment protection measures and spill control supplies; • Following manufacturers’ recommendations on the use, storage, and disposal of chemical products used in construction;
• Avoiding overtopping construction equipment fuel tanks; • Properly containing and removing grease and oils during routine maintenance of equipment; and • Properly disposing of discarded containers of fuels and other chemicals.

In addition, given the presence of shallow and localized soil impacts identified in the Phase II ESA, any soil or groundwater encountered during construction that exhibits signs of contamination would be managed, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. The Phase II ESA identified limited, shallow concentrations of lead and arsenic in localized areas of the Project site, which are considered de minimis in extent and are recommended for removal during site development to eliminate potential exposure to future residents, and is included as Mitigation Measure HAZ-1.

The Phase II ESA also determined that no vapor intrusion risk is present at the Project site and that no vapor mitigation is warranted. In addition, no widespread soil or groundwater contamination was identified across the majority of the site. As a standard precaution, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) would be implemented during construction to outline procedures for handling previously unidentified materials encountered during grading activities, and is included as Mitigation Measure HAZ-2.

Compliance with these requirements would ensure that potential accidental releases or exposure to hazardous materials during construction are minimized.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to a reasonably foreseeable upset and accident condition involving the release of hazardous materials into the 1149
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 100
environment, and the proposed Project would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR.

Operation
As discussed previously, hazardous materials are not typically associated with multifamily residential uses.

Operations could require the use of various types and quantities of hazardous materials, including cleaning products and the use of pesticides and herbicides for landscape maintenance. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous and would only be used and stored in limited quantities. In addition, adherence to existing regulations related to hazards and hazardous materials safety would be required.

Therefore, development of the proposed Project would be required to minimize risk of accidental spills and protect human health and the environment should any accidental spills or releases of hazardous materials occur during operation of the proposed Project, including on-site collection and treatment of potentially polluted runoff, as well as nonstructural maintenance implemented to prevent potentially hazardous spills or leaks of stored materials. As such, the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to the accidental upset or release of hazardous materials and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional review is required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-22 to 4.7-25).

Holy Cross Lutheran Academy is located approximately 0.14 miles east of the Project site, within onequarter mile. As such, the proposed Project has the potential to occur within proximity to a sensitive receptor.

As described in the previous responses, residential land uses are not typically associated with the routine use, storage, or release of hazardous materials. Construction and operation of the proposed Project would involve the use and disposal of limited quantities of hazardous materials, which would be used in compliance with federal, State, and local regulations, thereby reducing the potential for accidental spills or releases.

Construction activities may involve the temporary use of hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants, and solvents; however, these materials would be handled in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and standard construction practices, and would not result in substantial hazardous emissions. These activities would be short-term and would not result in prolonged exposure to nearby receptors, including the nearby school.

As identified in the Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments, limited shallow soil impacts are present in localized areas of the Project site; however, these conditions do not pose a significant risk to human health and would be managed in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements during construction. No vapor intrusion risk was identified at the site. 1150
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 101
Furthermore, the emissions that would be generated from construction and operation of the proposed Project were evaluated in the air quality analysis discussed in Section 6.3, Air Quality, and were determined to be less than significant.

Consistent with General Plan Policies S-13 (hazardous materials disclosure), S-14 (construction contamination response), and S-15 (site investigation requirements), the proposed Project would be required to disclose hazardous materials use, cease construction in the event contamination is encountered, and implement appropriate evaluation and remediation measures, as necessary, under oversight of applicable regulatory agencies.

As described in the GP EIR, compliance with federal, State, and local regulations and implementation of General Plan policies would ensure that impacts associated with hazardous materials use and potential upset conditions, including those occurring within one-quarter mile of a school, would be less than significant.

Therefore, impacts related to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.3 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-22 to 4.7-25).

The GP EIR identified multiple hazardous materials sites within the Planning Area and evaluated the potential for development to occur on or near such sites. The GP EIR concluded that impacts associated with hazardous materials, including development on sites listed pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, would be less than significant with compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and implementation of General Plan policies.

In November 2025, Stantec completed a Phase I ESA, followed by a Phase II ESA in December 2025 for the Project site in compliance with General Plan Policy S-15 (Appendices D and E). The Phase I ESA included a review of federal, State, and local regulatory databases to identify whether the Project site or surrounding properties are included on lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The Phase I ESA determined that the Project site is not included on any such list; however, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with historical site uses were identified and warranted further evaluation.

The subsequent Phase II ESA evaluated these conditions and determined that limited, shallow concentrations of lead and arsenic are present in localized areas of near-surface soils. These impacts are considered de minimis in extent and do not represent a significant hazard to human health or the environment. The Phase II ESA recommended removal of these shallow soils in the affected areas prior to development to eliminate potential exposure to future receptors which has been included as Mitigation 1151
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 102
Measure HAZ-1. No soil vapor intrusion risk, groundwater impacts, or widespread contamination were identified, and no further remedial action was determined to be necessary.

In addition, a Soil Management Plan would be prepared as required by Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 in compliance with General plan Policy S-14 and applicable federal, State, and local regulations, including oversight by agencies such as the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as well as adherence to standard construction best management practices, would ensure that any contaminated materials are properly managed, handled, and disposed of. Consistent with General Plan Policy S-14 (cease work and remediate contamination), construction activities would be halted in the vicinity of any discovery until the extent of contamination is evaluated and appropriate measures are implemented.

Based on the foregoing, the Project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and with implementation of recommended soil removal measures and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous materials sites would be less than significant.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.2 and was determined to have no impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-22).

As described in the GP EIR, there are no airports located within the City of Rocklin; however, the nearest airports include Lincoln Regional Airport/Karl Harder Field, located approximately 7 miles from the Project site, and Auburn Municipal Airport, located approximately 14 miles from the Project site. The Rocklin Planning Area is not located within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) area or safety zones of any public or private airport.

Consistent with the GP EIR, the Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or publicuse airport and is not within any airport influence area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to safety hazards associated with airport operations, including aircraft overflight, accident risk, or airspace conflicts.

The Placer County Transportation Planning Agency (PCTPA), acting as the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), establishes Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (ALUCPs) to ensure land use compatibility and minimize safety risks in the vicinity of public-use airports; however, the Project site is located outside of any ALUCP influence area and is not subject to ALUC review requirements.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area, and impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the 1152
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 103
GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. f) Impair implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.4 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-25 to 4.7-27).

Emergency response within the City of Rocklin is guided by the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), as codified in Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 2.32. The EOP provides a framework for emergency preparedness, response, and recovery, including coordination of City resources and identification of evacuation procedures. As identified in the GP EIR, implementation of General Plan Policies S-2 (maintain EOP), S-3 (multi-agency coordination), S-4 (evacuation routes), S-5 (roadway design standards), and S-6 (interagency coordination) would ensure that development within the Planning Area does not impair emergency response or evacuation efforts.

Construction
The proposed construction activities, including equipment and supply staging and storage, would occur within the Project site, and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the Project site or adjacent areas. The installation of new driveways, connections to existing infrastructure systems, and related improvements that would be implemented during construction of the proposed Project may require the temporary closure of portions of Pacific Street and Midas Avenue. However, temporary closures would be subject to City permitting and traffic control requirements to ensure that adequate emergency vehicle access is maintained at all times. Thus, implementation of the proposed Project through the City’s permitting process would ensure existing regulations are adhered to and potential construction-related emergency access or evacuation impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Operation
The proposed Project would include internal circulation improvements and site access designed in accordance with City standards. Access to the Project site would be provided via Pacific Street and Midas Avenue, and internal roadways would be designed to meet applicable City requirements for emergency vehicle access, including minimum roadway widths and turning radii. Compliance with the City of Rocklin Municipal Code and applicable provisions of the California Fire Code would ensure adequate emergency access. The Project would also include required fire protection features, such as fire hydrants and building sprinkler systems, subject to review and approval by the appropriate fire authority during the permitting process.

Consistent with General Plan Policy S-5 (roadway standards for emergency access), the Project would maintain adequate roadway widths and access points to accommodate emergency vehicles. In addition, compliance with the City’s EOP and applicable regulatory requirements would ensure that the Project does not interfere with established evacuation routes or emergency response procedures. 1153
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 104
Therefore, the proposed Project would not impair implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-20 to 4.7-22).

As identified in the GP EIR, wildland fire risk within the Planning Area is generally associated with areas located within or adjacent to the wildland-urban interface, including locations with dense vegetation, open space, and undeveloped land. However, the Project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) or State Responsibility Area (SRA), and is situated within an urbanized portion of the City.

According to the CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps, the Project site is not located within or near an area identified as a VHFHSZ (CAL FIRE, 2026). Therefore, the Project site is not subject to elevated wildfire risk conditions typically associated with wildland interface areas.

Development of the proposed Project would be required to comply with the City of Rocklin Municipal Code, including Chapter 15.04 (Fire Code), which adopts the California Fire Code and establishes requirements related to fire-resistant construction, emergency access, water supply for fire protection, and fuel management.

Consistent with General Plan Policies S-2 (emergency preparedness), S-5 (roadway standards for emergency access), and S-18 (fuel modification and fire hazard reduction), the proposed Project would incorporate fire prevention and response measures, including adequate roadway access for emergency vehicles, installation of fire suppression systems, and compliance with fire-safe design standards.

In addition, as surrounding areas continue to urbanize consistent with the General Plan, the reduction of undeveloped open space and vegetation would further reduce the potential for wildland fire exposure at the Project site.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, and impacts would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 4.7-27, potential exposure to or generation of hazardous conditions in the city is site-specific rather than associated with the combination of other hazards in the region to result in a significant effect. Implementation of proposed General Plan Update policies, along with federal, state, 1154
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 105
and local regulations regarding hazardous materials as identified under Impacts 4.7.1, 4.7.3, and 4.7.4, would address site-specific hazards and emergency access and operation. As discussed above, the proposed Project would include Project specific mitigation measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2 , in compliance with General Plan Policies S-14 and S-15 and existing federal, state, and local regulations in order to minimize impacts related to hazardous materials onsite to a less than significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of hazards and hazardous materials, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR hazards analysis used existing documentation, hazardous materials database review, field review of the Planning Area, and consultation with applicable local, State, and federal agencies. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR and the Project’s development area being the same as was analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a hazards or human health impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures contained within the GP EIR would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant with compliance to existing regulations.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.010: Building Code. As listed previously in Section 6.7, Geology and Soils.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 15.04.050: Fire Code. Adopts the 2025 edition of the California Fire Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9), including Fire-Flow Requirements for Buildings, Fire Hydrant Locations and Distribution, and Fire Apparatus Access Roads, and establishes minimum fire safety requirements applicable to all development. These standards address fire apparatus access, water supply, construction materials, vegetation management, and other fire prevention measures. Compliance is required for all projects and enforced by the Rocklin Fire Department. 1155
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 106
GP Goals and Policies
Policy S-2: Emergency Operations Plan. Maintain a City Emergency Operations Plan, to include the National Incident Management System (N.I.M.S.).

Policy S-5: Roadway Standards. Maintain appropriate standards for minimum road widths and turnarounds.

Policy S-14: Require that construction activities cease if contamination is discovered on construction projects until the contamination is reported, and its extent is assessed, delineated, and isolated, as appropriate. Remediation shall occur to the satisfaction of the appropriate responsible agency (such as the Placer County Environmental Health Services, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, or the City of Rocklin, depending on the type of contamination).

Policy S-15: Require site-specific hazard investigations to be conducted, if determined to be necessary by the City, to confirm potentially contaminated soils prior to approval of new discretionary development projects.

Policy S-18: Fuel Modification. Incorporate fuel modification/fire hazard reduction planning (e.g., weed abatement, open space management plans, firebreaks, planting restrictions) on lands (both public and private) that contain terrain and vegetative features such as grass, woodlands and severe slopes.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to hazards and hazardous materials are included in the GP EIR.

Project Specific Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of grading permits and commencement of earthwork activities, the Project Applicant shall implement the recommendations identified in the Phase II Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project site. Specifically, shallow soils (approximately one foot below ground surface) containing arsenic and lead impacts identified near historical boring location G-1 and assessment borings SB-9 and SB-10 shall be removed from the project site. Additionally, shallow soils in the vicinity of historical boring locations G-10 and G-13 shall be removed as a precautionary measure due to historically documented arsenic impacts.

Soil removal activities shall be conducted under the oversight of a qualified environmental professional and in accordance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing the handling, transportation, and disposal of contaminated soils, including applicable requirements of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or other appropriate regulatory agencies. Excavated soils shall be properly characterized prior to disposal and transported to an appropriately permitted disposal facility or managed in accordance with regulatory agency requirements.

Following completion of soil removal activities, the project applicant shall submit documentation to the City demonstrating completion of the removal activities, including the areas and depths of soil removed, quantities of soil removed, disposal documentation, and any confirmation sampling or other verification documentation, as applicable.
1156
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 107
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Soil Management Plan. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be prepared by a qualified hazardous materials consultant in coordination with the Community Development Department, Building Division, for review and approval, and shall detail procedures and protocols for excavation and disposal of on-site hazardous materials, including:
• Any subsurface materials exposed during construction activities that appear potentially contaminated, based on either visual observation or suspect odors, shall be segregated, stockpiled, and tested for potential contamination. If contamination is found to be present per the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for the applicable use, and cannot be reused on the Project site, it shall be transported by a certified hazardous waste hauler to a landfill permitted by the state to accept hazardous materials and disposed of per California Hazardous Waste Regulations. The appropriate regulatory agency (e.g., DTSC, RWQCB, or County Department of Public Health) shall be notified as required by law, and all agency directives shall be implemented. • A Health and Safety Plan (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance with Cal/OSHA requirements for each contractor that addresses potential safety and health hazards and includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection. The HASP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to hazardous materials during construction.
• All SMP measures shall be printed on the construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of grading permits. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the SMP, including laboratory results and waste disposal manifests (if applicable), shall be provided to the Community Development Department, Building Division prior to final grading approval.
1157
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 108

6.10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the
Project or
the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
iii) create or contribute
runoff water which
would exceed the
capacity of existing or
planned stormwater
drainage systems or
provide substantial
additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect
flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami,
or seiche zones, risk release
of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water
quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated hydrology and water quality impacts that would occur as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included water quality, ground water quality and supply, drainage, flooding, risks of seiche, tsunami and mudflow (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages 4.9-1 through 4.9-37). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the General Plan can result in hydrology and water quality impacts, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of development standards contained in the City's Improvement Standards and Standard Specifications and in the Rocklin Municipal Code, the application of General Plan goals and policies related to hydrology, flooding and water quality, and compliance with local, state, and federal water quality standards and floodplain development requirements.

These goals, policies and standards include, but are not limited to, flood prevention and drainage requirements in the City's Improvement Standards and Standard Specifications, the City's Grading and Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance, the Stormwater Runoff Pollution Control Ordinance, the State 1159
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 110
Water Resources Control Board General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit requirements, and goals and policies in the General Plan Open Space, Conservation and Recreation and Safety Elements requiring the protection of new and existing development from flood and drainage hazards, the prevention of storm drainage run-off in excess of pre-development levels, the development and application of erosion control plans and best management practices, the annexation of new development into existing drainage maintenance districts where warranted, and consultation with the Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and other appropriate entities..

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.9.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.9-21 to 4.9-26). Development under the General Plan was identified as having the potential to affect water quality through construction-related disturbance and operational stormwater runoff.

The proposed Project would involve similar construction and operational activities as those evaluated in the GP EIR and would therefore result in similar types of potential impacts. However, consistent with the GP EIR analysis, the Project would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations that govern water quality. Construction activities disturbing one acre or more would be subject to the State Water Resources Control Board’s General Construction Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) identifying best management practices (BMPs) to minimize pollutant discharge. The Project would also be required to comply with the City of Rocklin Municipal Code, including Chapter 15.28 (Grading and Erosion and Sedimentation Control) and Chapter 8.30 (Stormwater Runoff Pollution Control), which regulate grading activities, erosion control, and discharge of pollutants to the storm drain system.

During operation, the Project would implement post-construction stormwater controls consistent with the City’s Storm Water Management Program and applicable Low Impact Development standards to reduce pollutant loading and manage runoff. In addition, implementation of General Plan policies, including Policy OCR-49 (erosion control and BMPs), Policy OCR-50 (grading ordinance), Policy OCR-51 (stream channel protection), Policy OCR-52 (public education), and Policy OCR-54 (operations and maintenance procedures), would further ensure that surface and groundwater quality is protected.

Accordingly, the proposed Project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional environmental review is required. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.9.3 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.9-26 to 4.9-28).

As described in the GP EIR, groundwater resources underlying the Planning Area are not a primary source of water supply for the City. The City of Rocklin receives water from the Placer County Water Agency 1160
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 111
(PCWA), which primarily provides surface water within Zone 1, where the Project site is located. As such, development within the Planning Area does not rely on groundwater extraction and would not result in depletion of groundwater supplies.

The GP EIR acknowledges that development associated with the General Plan would increase impervious surfaces, which could reduce opportunities for groundwater recharge. However, the GP EIR further explains that local geologic conditions, including underlying granite bedrock and volcanic formations, inherently limit the potential for groundwater recharge within the City. Infiltrated water typically does not percolate to deep aquifers but instead becomes perched or flows laterally toward surface water features.

Therefore, reductions in infiltration associated with development would not substantially affect groundwater recharge or basin conditions.

The GP EIR also notes that regional groundwater conditions are stable, and the California Department of Water Resources has not identified groundwater overdraft as a concern in this portion of the state.

Groundwater depths within the North American Subbasin vary but are generally deep, and development within the Planning Area is not expected to substantially influence groundwater levels.

The proposed Project would be consistent with the type and intensity of development evaluated in the GP EIR and would similarly not involve groundwater extraction. The Project would receive water service from PCWA and would not include the use of groundwater wells. Although the Project would introduce additional impervious surfaces, it would be required to comply with City standards requiring management of stormwater runoff, including maintaining post-development runoff rates consistent with predevelopment conditions and incorporating Low Impact Development (LID) features where applicable.

In addition, implementation of Policy OCR-11 (protection of groundwater recharge areas) would ensure that riparian and wetland areas that contribute to recharge are preserved to the extent feasible.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.9.4 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.9-28 to 4.9-29).

Construction
Construction of the proposed Project would require grading and excavation of soils, which would loosen sediment and could result in erosion or siltation. However, construction of the proposed Project would be required to comply with the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit, including preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared by a Qualified SWPPP Developer. The SWPPP is required for plan check and approval by the City’s Engineering Division, prior to issuance of permits, and would include construction BMPs to reduce erosion and siltation. Typical BMPs include silt fencing, fiber rolls, gravel bags, stabilized construction entrances, 1161
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 112
and stockpile management. These measures are consistent with regulatory requirements identified in the GP EIR to control erosion and sedimentation during construction activities. Adherence to these requirements would ensure that erosion and siltation associated with construction activities would be minimized, and impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Operation
During operation of the proposed Project, disturbed areas would be stabilized through landscaping, paving, and installation of drainage infrastructure, which would reduce the potential for exposed soils to erode. Additionally, the proposed drainage infrastructure would control and convey runoff in accordance with City standards and applicable drainage design criteria, which would limit the potential for erosion or siltation. The proposed Project is required to implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that provides operational BMPs to minimize runoff-related impacts. Consistent with the GP EIR, compliance with City standards requiring management of post-development runoff to maintain pre-development conditions would further reduce the potential for erosion and sediment transport.

As a result, stormwater runoff and the potential for erosion and siltation would not substantially increase with implementation of the proposed Project, and impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
No New Impact. These topics were evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.9.5 and were determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.9-29 to 4.9-32).

Implementation of the proposed Project would result in site grading and the introduction of impervious surfaces, which could alter existing drainage patterns and increase the rate and volume of surface runoff.

If not properly managed, these changes could result in on- or off-site flooding, exceedance of storm drain system capacity, or alteration of flood flows. However, as described in the GP EIR, compliance with City standards and regional drainage requirements would reduce these impacts to less than significant levels.

The proposed Project would be required to design and implement drainage improvements consistent with City of Rocklin standards and the PCFCWCD Flood Control Manual. Consistent with General Plan Policies S-10 and S-11, the Project would be required to manage post-development runoff such that peak flow rates do not exceed pre-development conditions and to ensure that development does not result in onsite or off-site flooding. 1162
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 113
In addition, Policy S-9 requires that development not adversely affect the 100-year floodplain, and Policy S-8 requires compliance with the City’s Flood Hazard Ordinance (Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.16), which regulates development within flood-prone areas.

The Project would also be required to comply with applicable stormwater regulations, including preparation and implementation of a SWPPP and incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control runoff and prevent adverse drainage conditions during construction. As discussed above, the proposed Project is required to implement a WQMP that provides operational BMPs to minimize runoffrelated impacts. These requirements would ensure that runoff is properly conveyed and treated and would prevent the Project from exceeding the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or creating substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), the Project site is located entirely within Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard. Therefore, the proposed Project would not impede or redirect flood flows or expose structures to flood risk.

Based on the foregoing, the proposed Project would not substantially increase runoff in a manner that would result in flooding, would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, and would not impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR and would be consistent with the findings of the GP EIR.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new or substantially greater impacts beyond those previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.9.6 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.9-32 to 4.9-33).

As discussed above, the proposed Project site is located entirely within FEMA Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard, and is not located within a 100-year floodplain or other mapped flood hazard area.

Therefore, the Project site would not be subject to flood inundation that could result in the release of pollutants. Additionally, the City of Rocklin is not located in a coastal area; therefore, the Project site is not subject to tsunami hazards.

A seiche is the oscillation of water within enclosed or partially enclosed waterbodies due to seismic activity or atmospheric conditions. As described in the GP EIR, the potential for seiche-related impacts within the Planning Area is very low and generally limited to small, contained waterbodies such as tanks or reservoirs, which would not result in widespread inundation.

Because the Project site is not located within a flood hazard area, tsunami hazard area, or seiche-prone location, the Project would not be subject to inundation that could result in the release of pollutants.

Furthermore, compliance with applicable stormwater regulations, including preparation and implementation of a SWPPP and incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs), would ensure that pollutants are properly managed and contained during construction and operation.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the risk of release of pollutants due to inundation from flood hazards, tsunami, or seiche, and impacts would be less than significant. 1163
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 114
Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. This topic was not specifically evaluated in the GP EIR.

The proposed Project is located within the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), which establishes water quality standards and regulatory requirements through the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan). The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses of surface and groundwater resources and establishes water quality objectives and implementation measures to protect those uses.

Construction and operation of the proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing water quality. Construction activities disturbing one acre or more would be subject to the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to minimize pollutant discharges through the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the City of Rocklin Municipal Code, including provisions regulating stormwater runoff and erosion control, as well as the applicable Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit requirements for post-construction stormwater management.

Post-construction, the Project would incorporate stormwater treatment and control measures consistent with the City’s Storm Water Management Program and Low Impact Development (LID) requirements to ensure that runoff is treated and managed prior to discharge. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that the Project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Basin Plan.

With respect to groundwater, the Project is located within the North American Subbasin, which is subject to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The basin is managed by designated Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs), which are responsible for implementation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). However, as described in the GP EIR, the City of Rocklin does not rely on groundwater as a primary water supply source and receives water from the Placer County Water Agency (PCWA). The proposed Project would not include groundwater extraction, would not require installation of groundwater wells, and would not interfere with groundwater recharge in a manner that would affect basin conditions.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impacts would occur. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed Project would not result in a peculiar impact related to obstructing the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.
1164
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 115
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 5.0-35, existing development standards in the Rocklin Municipal Code and the proposed Rocklin General Plan Update’s mitigating policies and their associated action steps ensure the impact will be less than cumulatively considerable. As discussed in this section, the Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with all applicable stormwater and water quality requirements, including preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction and compliance with the City of Rocklin's stormwater design standards and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Permanent stormwater treatment and low impact development (LID) features would be incorporated into the Project design to control runoff quantity and improve runoff quality prior to discharge. During construction, best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented to minimize erosion, sedimentation, and the discharge of pollutants to receiving waters. The Project would also comply with all applicable regulations related to drainage, flood protection, and water quality. The Project is consistent with the type and intensity of development anticipated under the General Plan and would implement all applicable General Plan policies and regulatory requirements to protect water quality and manage stormwater runoff.

Accordingly, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of hydrology and water quality, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR hydrology and water quality analysis used published information, reports, plans, and technical studies regarding regional hydrology, climate, geology, water quality, flood potential, and applicable regulations. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR and the Project’s development area being the same as was analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a hydrology or water quality impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No new mitigation measures would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant with compliance to existing regulations.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit (NPDES). The proposed Project would be required to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit and prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to minimize pollutants in stormwater runoff during 1165
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 116
construction through Best Management Practices (BMPs). In addition, the Project would prepare and implement a WQMP that provides operational BMPs to minimize runoff-related impacts.

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Requirements. The Project would be required to comply with applicable MS4 permit requirements for post-construction stormwater management, including incorporation of site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 8.30: Stormwater Runoff Pollution Control Ordinance. The Project would be required adhere to the City's Stormwater Runoff Pollution Control Ordinance to protect water quality by regulating discharges into the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) and local waterways. The ordinance is intended to ensure compliance with the federal Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater Permit, and applicable State water quality requirements.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.28: Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control. The Project would be required to prepare and implement grading and erosion control plans to minimize soil erosion, sedimentation, and runoff during construction.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.16: Flood Hazard Ordinance. The Project would be required to comply with the City’s flood hazard regulations, which govern development within flood-prone areas and ensure that development does not increase flood hazards or impede flood flows.

Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (PCFCWCD) Flood Control Manual. The proposed Project would be required to design drainage improvements in accordance with PCFCWCD standards to ensure that post-development runoff does not exceed pre-development conditions and that downstream drainage systems are not adversely impacted.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy S-8: Maintain and implement the City’s Ordinance regarding “Flood Hazard Areas” (Rocklin Municipal Code, Chapter 15.16).

Policy S-9: Ensure that the 100-year floodplain, based upon the most current information, both upstream and downstream, is not adversely affected by new development.

Policy S-10: Require that new development detain on-site drainage such that the rate of runoff flow is maintained at pre-development levels, except where detention is not recommended in plans and policies adopted by the Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (PCFCWCD), and to require coordination with other projects’ master plans to ensure no adverse cumulative effects. In lieu of detention, the City may require retention and/or off-site drainage improvements that are more beneficial to the community’s overall drainage system.

Policy S-11: Ensure that new development does not result in on-site flooding or increase flooding of offsite properties.

Policy S-12: Require new development to annex into an existing drainage maintenance district where warranted.
1166
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 117
Policy OCR-11: Protect the groundwater recharge value of riparian and wetland areas while recognizing that minor modifications to such areas may be a necessary outcome of the development process.

Policy OCR-49: Minimize the degradation of water quality through use of erosion control plans and Best Management Practices.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to hydrology and water quality are included in the GP EIR. 1167
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 118

6.11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

These goals and policies include, but are not limited to goals and policies in the General Plan Land Use Element requiring buffering of land uses, reviewing development proposals for compatibility issues, establishing and maintaining development standards and encouraging communication between adjacent jurisdictions.

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Physically divide an established community?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.1.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.1-24 to 4.1-25) The physical division of an established community could occur if a major road (expressway or freeway, for example) were built through an existing community or neighborhood, or if a major development were built which was inconsistent with the land uses in the community such that it divided the community. The environmental effects caused by such a facility or land use could include lack of, or disruption of, access 1168
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 119
to services, schools, or shopping areas. It might also include the creation of blighted buildings or areas due to the division of the community.

The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped and surrounding land uses include light industrial and retail commercial uses and Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the north; mixed use, retail and service commercial uses to the south; commercial uses to the east; and railroad tracks and existing residential uses to the west. The proposed Project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designations for the site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not physically divide an established community, and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.1.3 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.1-31 through 4.1-35).

The Project site is designated HDR by the City of Rocklin General Plan land use map and is currently zoned PD 33 RES 24+ by the zoning map. The proposed Project would develop the site with 281 multifamily detached residential units and related site improvements that would be consistent with the existing land use and zoning designations. The proposed Project does not involve conflict with any land use related policy, as detailed throughout this Consistency Analysis and Checklist. The proposed Project would also be subject to applicable development standards, including design review and implementation of General Plan policies related to compatibility, urban form, and environmental protection, which ensure consistency with adopted land use regulations intended to avoid or mitigate environmental effects.

Therefore, impacts related to conflict with a policy adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would not occur and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 5.0-4, following the application of the General Plan Update’s policies, the General Plan would not contribute to any significant impacts related to the specific potential land use impacts, and the proposed project would not significantly contribute to cumulative land use impacts in the region. As discussed above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the previous Mixed Use Land Use designation as analyzed in the General Plan EIR as well as this site’s existing High Density Residential land use designation. In addition, the proposed Project would be consistent with the General Plan Update policies that would reduce the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative land use impacts associated with conflicts between adjacent land uses and conflicts with applicable plans, policies, and regulations. The Project would represent the type and intensity of development anticipated under the General Plan and would be developed in accordance with the applicable goals, policies, and implementation measures adopted by the City. Because the Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations and does not involve a land use or intensity beyond that contemplated by the 1169
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 120
General Plan EIR, it would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative land use impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of land use and planning, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR land use analysis used planning document review, field review, surrounding jurisdiction plan review, agency consultation, and buildout conditions under the proposed Land Use Diagram.

Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR and the Project’s development area being the same as was analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a land use impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures related to land use and planning are contained within the GP EIR. Additionally, no mitigation would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) None.

GP Goals and Policies
None.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to land use and planning are included in the GP EIR. 1170
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 121

6.12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on the general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR and was determined to have no impacts with implementation of GP EIR mitigation measures (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.6-17).

As the GP EIR indicates that the City of Rocklin Planning Area does not contain known mineral resources of regional or statewide importance as classified by the State Geologist. The proposed Project site is not located on or near any identified mineral resource extraction or recovery sites, and no locally important mineral resource recovery sites are designated within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources or locally important mineral resource recovery sites.
1171
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 122
Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 4.6-17, the City of Rocklin Planning Area has no mineral resources as classified by the State Geologist. The Planning Area has no known or suspected mineral resources that would be of value to the region and to residents of the state. Therefore, no impact would occur to mineral resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of mineral resources, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR did not include a standalone mineral resources section; however, the geology and soils analysis used published information, surveys, reports, agency resources, the proposed General Plan Update, the Placer County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and applicable City regulations. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s site-specific conditions, no substantial information has been identified that would result in a significant mineral resources impact.

5. No mitigation measures contained within the GP EIR would be required because no Project specific impacts would occur.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) None.

GP Goals and Policies
None.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to mineral resources are included in the GP EIR. 1172
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 123

6.13. NOISE
Would the project result
in:

4.5-1 through 4.5-48).

Mitigation measures to address these impacts are incorporated into the General Plan in the Noise Element, which includes policies that require acoustical analyses to determine noise compatibility 1173
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 124
between land uses, application of stationary and mobile noise source sound limits/design standards, restriction of development of noise-sensitive land uses unless effective noise mitigations are incorporated into projects, and mitigation of noise levels to ensure that the noise level design standards of the Noise Element are not exceeded.

The General Plan EIR concluded that, despite these goals and policies, significant noise impacts will occur as a result of development under the General Plan and further, that these impacts cannot be reduced to a less than significant level. Specifically, the General Plan EIR found that buildout of the Rocklin General Plan will result in exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of applicable noise standards, will result in exposure to surface transportation noise sources and stationary noise sources in excess of applicable noise standards and will contribute to cumulative transportation noise impacts within the Planning Area. Findings of fact and a statement of overriding consideration were adopted by the Rocklin City Council in regard to these impacts, which were found to be significant and unavoidable.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section is based on the following report:
• Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis, prepared by EPD Solution, Inc., May 6, 2026. Included as Appendix F.
a) Generation of 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?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.5.1 and was determined to have a significant and unavoidable impact with implementation of applicable General Plan policies because future development under the General Plan could expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of applicable standards, particularly from traffic-related noise sources (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.5-29 through 4.5-40).

Construction
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would occur in one phase and would include site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities. These activities would require the use of heavy equipment and would temporarily increase ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity. However, construction noise would fluctuate depending on the type, quantity, and duration of equipment usage and would cease upon completion of construction activities.

The nearest sensitive receptors consist of existing residential uses located approximately 125 feet southeast of the Project site. As shown in Table NOI-1, Construction Equipment Noise Levels, the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis determined that maximum construction noise levels at the nearest residential receptors would range from approximately 54.0 dBA to 69.6 dBA Leq depending on the construction phase, which would not exceed the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction threshold of 80 dBA for residential uses.
1174
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 125
Table NOI-1: Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Activity
Composite Noise Level @ 125
Feet1,2
Composite Noise Level
@ 480 Feet1,2,3
dBA Leq dBA Leq
Demolition 79.5 67.8
Site Preparation 79.7 68.0
Grading 79.3 67.6
Paving 78.4 66.7
Paving and Building Construction 81.3 69.6
Building Construction 78.1 66.4
Building Construction and Architectural Coating 78.4 66.7 Architectural Coating 65.7 54.0
Source: Appendix F

1. Federal Highway Administration. (2006). Construction Noise Handbook.

2. The noise levels are based on Table 9.1 of the Construction Noise Handbook. If the exact equipment listed is not available, a default noise level of 85 dBA, representative of typical construction equipment, is used. Specifically, the Forklift is modeled using this default value. Additionally, for the category of Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes, the noise level of a Tractor (84.0 dBA) is used, as it represents the loudest among the three.

3. There would be a short period of overlap between the building construction and paving phases, as well as between the building construction and architectural coating phases.

Additionally, construction activities would be required to comply with the City of Rocklin Noise Standards Ordinance (RMC Chapter 9.52). Consistent with the Noise Standards Ordinance and GP EIR Action Step NA-3, construction activities occurring in proximity to residential or other noise-sensitive land uses would be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekdays and 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekends unless otherwise approved by the City.

Because construction noise would be temporary, intermittent, and conducted in accordance with the City’s construction noise requirements, construction noise impacts would be consistent with those analyzed in the GP EIR and would be less than significant.

Operation
Long-term, off-site stationary noise associated with operation of the proposed Project would primarily result from on-site mechanical equipment, including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems serving the residential units. HVAC equipment may operate intermittently throughout the day and night; however, such equipment is typically designed and installed to meet applicable building code and manufacturer noise standards for residential uses.

The Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed Project evaluated operational noise associated with HVAC systems, parking activity, and on-site vehicular circulation. The analysis determined that HVAC noise levels at the nearest residential receptors would be approximately 34.1 dBA during both daytime and nighttime hours, which would not exceed the City’s exterior stationary noise standards of 55 dBA daytime and 45 dBA nighttime. As shown in Table NOI-2, Increase in Ambient Noise from Project Operation, cumulative operational noise associated with HVAC equipment, parking activity, and on-site 1175
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 126
mobile sources would result in an incremental increase of approximately 0.1 dBA during both daytime and nighttime conditions, which would remain below the applicable 1.5 dBA significance threshold.

Table NOI-2: Increase in Ambient Noise from Project Operation Land Use Time of
the Day
Project
Noise
Level
(dBA)1
Ambient
Noise
Level
(dBA)2
Cumulative
Noise Level
(dBA)3
Increase over
Ambient(dBA)4
Incremental
increase
(dBA)5
Exceed
threshold?
Residential to
the East
Daytime 58.6 74.2 74.3 0.1 1.5 No
Nighttime 55.7 72.6 72.7 0.1 1.5 No
Source: Appendix F

1. Ambient Noise Level is based on the noise measurement in Table 4-1 of Appendix F. The ambient noise for industrial land use was based on data collected at NML-1, and Wellness Center’s was based on NML-2.

2. Calculation is based on Logarithmic Addition of Sound Level, SPLtotal=10*Log(10SP1/10+10SPL2/10).

3. Difference between Cumulative Noise Level and Ambient Noise Level.

4. Thresholds are based on the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) estimated from the noise measurement in Table 4-1 of Appendix F.

The proposed Project is located adjacent to an existing Union Pacific Railroad corridor. As discussed in the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis, outdoor common open space areas would comply with the City’s 60 dBA CNEL transportation noise standard due to shielding provided by the proposed building configuration (Appendix F). Interior residential noise levels would also comply with the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior standard through incorporation of building assemblies with a minimum STC 30 rating and compliance with the California Building Code.

Consistent with GP EIR Policy N-1, which requires acoustical analyses for noise-sensitive land uses located in areas exposed to elevated noise levels, the proposed Project incorporated a project-specific Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis to evaluate transportation and stationary noise sources. In accordance with Policy N-2, which promotes site planning and project design techniques to reduce noise exposure, the proposed Project incorporates building placement and shielding features to minimize transportationrelated noise exposure. The proposed Project is also consistent with Policy N-7, which restricts development of noise-sensitive land uses in high-noise environments unless effective noise reduction measures are implemented, through incorporation of building construction features designed to achieve applicable interior and exterior noise standards. Additionally, consistent with Policy N-9, which applies the City’s Noise Element transportation noise criteria to new development projects, the Project was evaluated against applicable City CNEL standards for residential interiors and outdoor common areas.

Therefore, operational noise impacts associated with the proposed Project would be consistent with those analyzed in the GP EIR and would be less than significant.

Off-Site Traffic Noise
Traffic generated by the operation of the proposed Project has the potential to influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding off-site areas and at the Project site. Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. The level of traffic noise depends on three primary factors:
(1) the volume of traffic; (2) the speed of traffic; and (3) the number of trucks in the flow of traffic. The proposed Project does not propose any uses that would require a substantial number of truck trips and the proposed Project would not alter the speed limit on any existing roadway; so, the proposed Project’s 1176
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 127
potential off-site noise impacts have been focused on the noise impacts associated with the change of volume of traffic that would occur with development of the proposed Project.

Traffic generated by operation of the proposed Project has the potential to contribute to traffic noise levels along surrounding roadways. However, traffic-related noise increases are dependent on substantial increases in traffic volumes. The proposed Project would generate approximately 1,253 daily vehicle trips (Appendix F). As shown in Table NOI-3, Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels, Project-generated traffic would increase roadway noise levels by approximately 0.3 dBA along Pacific Street and 0.6 dBA along East Midas Avenue under existing conditions. These increases would remain below the applicable 1.5 dBA significance threshold (Appendix F).

Table NOI-3: Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Roadwa
y
Segment
Existing Existing Plus Project
Increase
over
Existing
Scenari
o (dBA)
Threshold
s based on
Ambient
Noise
Level
Exceed
Threshold
? Existin
g ADT1
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerlin
e
Existin
g Plus
Project
ADT2
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerlin
e
Centerlin
e to 65
dBA CNEL
(feet)
Centerlin
e to 60
dBA CNEL
(feet)
Pacific
Street 15,000 67.6 16,253 67.9 78 168 0.3 1.5 No
East
Midas
Avenue
9,300 64.5 10,553 65.1 51 109 0.6 1.5 No
Source: Appendix F
Notes: ADT= average daily traffic; CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level; dBA=A-weighted decibels.

1. Existing ADT from Table 7, Existing Traffic Noise Levels in 2012.

2. ADT of the Existing (2012) with Project is the total of the existing ADT and Project’s daily trips, which is 1,253 trips per day, based on the VMT Screening Analysis provided by EPD Solutions, Inc. (EPD Solutions, Inc., 2026a).

In addition, as shown in Table NOI-4, General Plan Buildout Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels, Projectgenerated traffic would increase roadway noise levels by approximately 0.3 dBA along Pacific Street and

0.4 dBA along East Midas Avenue under General Plan buildout conditions. These increases would also remain below the applicable 1.5 dBA significance threshold. Therefore, the Project would not result in a perceptible or substantial increase in off-site traffic noise under either existing or General Plan buildout conditions.

Table NOI-4: General Plan Buildout Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels Roadway
Segment
General Plan Buildout General Plan Buildout Plus Project Increase
Threshold
s based
on
Ambient
Noise
Level
Exceed
Threshold
? Existing
ADT1
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Existing
Plus
Project
ADT2
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerlin
e
Centerlin
e to 65
dBA CNEL
(feet)
Centerli
ne to 60
dBA
CNEL
(feet)
Pacific
Street 16,700 68.0 17,953 68.3 83 180 0.3 1.5 No
1177
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 128
Roadway
Segment
General Plan Buildout General Plan Buildout Plus Project Increase
Threshold
s based
on
Ambient
Noise
Level
Exceed
Threshold
? Existing
ADT1
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Existing
Plus
Project
ADT2
dBA @ 50
feet from
Roadway
Centerlin
e
Centerlin
e to 65
dBA CNEL
(feet)
Centerli
ne to 60
dBA
CNEL
(feet)
East
Midas
Avenue
12,200 63.4 13,453 63.8 42 90 0.4 1.5 No
Source: Appendix F
Notes: ADT= average daily traffic; CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level; dBA=A-weighted decibels.

1. City of Rocklin, 2012, General Plan Environmental Impact Report Noise Section.

2. ADT of the General Plan Buildout with Project is the total of the General Plan Buildout ADT and Project’s daily trips, which are 1,253 trips per day, based on the VMT Screening Analysis provided by EPD Solutions, Inc. (EPD Solutions, Inc., 2026a).

The proposed Project would not generate traffic noise impacts beyond the scope of development previously evaluated in the GP EIR. The Project site is located within an urbanized area planned for residential development under the City’s General Plan and zoning designations, and the Project’s contribution to roadway noise levels would remain below applicable significance thresholds. As such, Project-generated traffic noise would remain within the scope of impacts previously analyzed in the GP EIR.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no subsequent review is required. b) Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 9.5.5 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact with implementation of applicable General Plan policies and Action Step NA3 (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.5-42 to 4.5-46).

Construction
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would involve grading, excavation, paving, and building construction activities that would temporarily generate groundborne vibration. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site consist of existing residential uses located approximately 125 feet east of the Project site, while the nearest non-sensitive structure consists of a commercial building (United Rentals) located approximately 100 feet northeast of the Project site. Construction vibration impacts would primarily result from heavy equipment such as vibratory rollers, bulldozers, graders, excavators, and haul trucks.

The GP EIR identifies vibration levels in excess of 0.2 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) as a level at which architectural damage to conventional structures or increased annoyance to persons could potentially occur. The GP EIR further states that vibration generated by typical construction equipment is generally well below applicable damage thresholds.
1178
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 129
The Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis prepared for the proposed Project evaluated vibration generated by construction equipment, including vibratory rollers, bulldozers, graders, excavators, and haul trucks.

As shown in Table NOI-5, Continuous Construction Equipment Vibration Levels, construction vibration levels would range from less than 0.001 to 0.026 in/sec PPV at the nearest commercial structure and from less than 0.001 to 0.019 in/sec PPV at the nearest residential sensitive receptors. These vibration levels would remain substantially below the 0.2 in/sec PPV reference level identified in the GP EIR, as well as below the applicable Caltrans thresholds of 0.5 in/sec PPV for structural damage at commercial buildings and 0.3 in/sec PPV for annoyance at residential receptors Table NOI-5: Continuous Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment
Reference Vibration Level at
25 Feet (PPV
[inches/second])1
Vibration Level at 100
feet (PPV
[inches/second])2
Vibration Level at 125 Feet
(PPV [inches/second])2
Vibratory Roller 0.21 0.026 0.019
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.011 0.008
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.010 0.007
Small Bulldozer 0.003 <0.001 <0.001
Thresholds 0.5 0.3
Exceed the threshold? No No
Source: Appendix F

1. FTA. (2018). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

2. 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 = 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑟𝑟 𝑟𝑟 × �
25 𝐷𝐷 �

1.5 , D=distance between the equipment to the sensitive receptors.

Blasting is not proposed or anticipated based on the current Project design and information provided by the applicant and civil engineering team. Because vibration levels associated with blasting are highly variable and depend on site-specific factors, including the amount of explosive used, soil and rock conditions, depth of blasting, and distance to nearby receptors, blasting-related vibration was not quantified in Table NOI-5. However, consistent with the qualitative approach used in the GP EIR, potential blasting-related vibration is addressed herein. The GP EIR recognized that blasting-related vibration is highly variable and site-specific and concluded that construction vibration impacts would be less than significant due to the temporary and short-term nature of construction activities and compliance with the City’s allowable construction hours. If localized rock removal requiring blasting were determined to be necessary during construction, such activities would be temporary, intermittent, limited to the construction phase, limited to approved construction hours, and subject to applicable City review and construction safety requirements. Therefore, potential vibration impacts associated with blasting would not result in a new or substantially greater impact than evaluated in the GP EIR.

Accordingly, construction-related vibration impacts, including potential equipment- and blasting-related vibration, would remain temporary, intermittent, and less than significant..

Consistent with the City’s Noise Standards Ordinance and GP EIR Action Step NA-3, construction activities occurring near residential land uses would be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekdays and 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM on weekends unless otherwise approved by the City. Similar to construction noise, construction vibration would be temporary, intermittent, and localized in nature and would cease upon completion of construction activities.
1179
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 130
Therefore, construction-related groundborne vibration impacts would be consistent with those analyzed in the GP EIR and would be less than significant.

Operation
Once operational, the proposed Project would not be a substantial source of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Operational activities associated with the proposed residential development would primarily consist of passenger vehicle trips, residential occupancy, and routine maintenance activities, none of which are typically associated with substantial vibration generation.

The Project site is located adjacent to an existing Union Pacific Railroad corridor. The GP EIR concluded that vibration levels associated with railroad operations would not exceed the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold beyond approximately 7.5 feet from the track centerline and that future development under the General Plan would not expose persons to excessive vibration levels. The proposed residential buildings and outdoor activity areas would be located substantially farther than 7.5 feet from the railroad corridor and were evaluated in the project-specific Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis. The analysis concluded that operational vibration associated with nearby rail activity would not exceed applicable significance thresholds (Appendix F).

Residential land uses are not typically associated with heavy truck traffic, industrial operations, or other vibration-intensive activities that could generate substantial groundborne vibration or noise. As such, operational vibration effects would be intermittent, low in magnitude, and consistent with existing background conditions in the Project vicinity.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no subsequent review is required. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

As described in the GP EIR, there are no airports located within the City of Rocklin. The Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis determined that the closest airport to the Project site is Lincoln Regional Airport/Karl Harder Field, located approximately 9.2 miles northwest of the Project site. The Rocklin Planning Area is not located within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) area or safety zones of any public or private airport.

The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public-use airport and is not located within any airport influence area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive aircraft-related noise levels, aircraft overflight noise, or other airport-related operational noise impacts.

The Placer County Transportation Planning Agency (PCTPA), acting as the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), establishes Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (ALUCPs) to ensure land use compatibility and 1180
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 131
minimize safety and noise risks in the vicinity of public-use airports. However, the Project site is located outside of any ALUCP influence area and is not subject to ALUC review requirements.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed Project would not result in a peculiar impact related to wildfire infrastructure pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 5.0-27 and 5.0-28, while General Plan Update noise policies and noise reduction measures would reduce noise levels whenever feasible, there may be some cases when transportation noise impacts cannot be fully mitigated. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in transportation noise impacts which are cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable. The Project would generate temporary construction noise and operational noise associated with residential activities and vehicular traffic. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and would comply with the City's construction hour restrictions and applicable noise control requirements. Operational noise generated by the Project would be consistent with the residential land use designation anticipated under the General Plan and would not expose sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of applicable City standards. In addition, the Project would not generate substantial stationary noise sources or vibration beyond those previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The Project is consistent with the land use assumptions and development intensity evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would comply with all applicable General Plan policies, City noise standards, and construction regulations. Accordingly, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative noise impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of noise, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR noise analysis used existing literature, accepted noise thresholds, qualitative assessment of transportation and non-transportation noise sources, and FHWA traffic noise modeling based on roadway and traffic data. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a noise impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.
1181
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 132

5. No new mitigation measures would be required. Project-specific impacts would be less than significant with adherence to applicable City standards, GP EIR policies, and Action Step NA-3, as listed below.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) Rocklin Municipal Code Section 9.52.030: Noise Standards. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the City of Rocklin noise standards regulating construction and operational noise levels.

Compliance with these standards would be ensured through the City’s permitting and plan check review process.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy N-1: Determine noise compatibility between land uses, and to provide a basis for developing noise mitigation, an acoustical analysis shall be required as part of the environmental review process for all noise-sensitive land uses which are proposed in areas exposed to existing or projected exterior noise levels exceeding the level standards contained within this Noise Element.

Policy N-2: Emphasize site planning and project design to achieve the standards of this Noise Element.

The use of noise barriers shall be considered a means of achieving the noise standards; however, the construction of aesthetically intrusive wall heights shall be discouraged.

Policy N-3: Ensure that stationary noise sources do not interfere with sleep by applying an interior hourly maximum noise level design standard of 45 dBA in the enclosed sleeping areas of residences affected by stationary noise sources. This standard assumes doors and windows are closed.

Policy N-7: Restrict development of noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to existing or projected levels of noise from transportation noise sources that exceed the noise level standards contained within the Noise Element, unless the project design includes effective mitigation that results in noise exposure which meets standards.

Policy N-9: Apply the noise level design criteria contained within Table 2-2 of the Noise Element in the General Plan EIR to Policies N-7 and N-8 of the Noise Element.

Action Step NA-3: Limit construction activity to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekends when construction is conducted in proximity to residential or other noise sensitive land uses, unless such restriction would result in increased risk to the health and/or safety of the general public or construction workers, or a determination is made by the City based on substantial evidence that it is in the best interests of the City to approve alternative hours of work.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to noise are included in the GP EIR. 1182
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 133

6.14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the
Project or
the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Induce substantial
unplanned population
growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension
of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial
numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating
the construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated population and housing impacts that would occur as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included population growth and availability of housing opportunities (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages 4.11-1 through 4.11-13). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the General Plan can result in population and housing impacts, implementation of the General Plan would not contribute to a significant generation of growth that would substantially exceed any established growth projections nor would it displace substantial numbers of housing units or people. Moreover, the project will not construct off-site infrastructure that would induce substantial development, unplanned or otherwise. As such, population and housing impacts were determined to be less than significant.

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.11.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.11-8 to 4.11-10).

The proposed Project would construct 281 multifamily residential units. The proposed Project is not anticipated to induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area, either directly or indirectly. 1183
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 134
The US Census Bureau estimates that the City of Rocklin had an average household size of 2.65 persons and a vacancy rate of 3.1 percent in January 2025 (California Department of Finance, 2025). Thus, the average number of persons per housing unit in the City of Rocklin in 2025 is estimated as the average household size (2.65 persons) times the occupancy rate (96.9 percent), or 2.57 persons. Using this person per household estimate, buildout of the proposed Project would result in approximately 722 residents.

Furthermore, as a residential housing development, the proposed Project would generate minimal new permanent jobs. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in indirect population growth from potential employees relocating to the city. Potential population growth associated with the proposed Project would represent less than one percent increase over the City’s January 1, 2025, estimated population of 73,172 persons(California Department of Finance, 2025). As such, although nominal, the proposed Project would induce population growth in a local context.

Potential population growth impacts are also assessed based on a project’s consistency with adopted plans that have addressed growth management from a local and regional standpoint. Table POP-1 below shows the population growth forecast estimates for Placer County between 2025 and 2050 (Placer County, 2024).

Table POP-1: Population Trends (Placer County)
20251 2035 2050 2025 – 2050 Increase
Placer County 414,895 465,335 487,874 83,953 (20 percent) Sources:
1 (Placer County, 2024)
As shown above, the Placer County General Plan Demographic Trends growth forecasts estimate the County’s population to reach 487,874 persons by 2050, representing a total increase of 83,953 persons between 2025 and 2050. The proposed Project’s anticipated resident population (722 persons) would represent less than one percent of the 2050 population anticipated for the County and would not exceed the amount of growth anticipated by the Placer County General Plan Demographic Trends from 2025 to 2050.

This analysis is further supported by the Rocklin-specific population trends analyzed in Section 4.11, Population and Housing, of the GP EIR. As shown in Table POP-2, the GP EIR evaluated historical and projected population growth in Rocklin between 1990 and 2030, including a projected 2030 population of 76,136 persons.

Table POP-2: Population Trends (City of Rocklin)
Year Population Change % Change Annual % Change
1990 19,033
2000 36,330 17,297 91% 9.0%
2008 53,843 17,513 48% 6.0%
2015 Projected 65,614 11,771 22% 3.1%
2020 Projected 73,414 7,800 12% 2.4%
2030 Projected 76,136 2,722 4% 0.5%
Sources: (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.11-1)
1184
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 135
As shown above, the GP EIR growth forecasts estimate the City’s population to reach 76,136 persons by 2030, representing a total increase of 57,103 persons between 1990 and 2030. The proposed Project’s anticipated resident population (722 persons) would represent less than one percent of the 2030 population anticipated for the City and would not exceed the amount of growth anticipated by the GP EIR Population Trends from 1990 to 2030.

Additionally, since the proposed Project is consistent with the existing land use designation, buildout of the Project site was already contemplated in the GP and regional growth forecasts. Furthermore, the proposed Project is compliant with the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation of 3,543 units for the 2021-2029 planning period, as identified in the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Update.

California’s RHNA is a methodology used to determine future housing needs by income category, based on growth in population, households, and employment. The proposed Project would result in 281 new multifamily units, that would contribute toward fulfilling this obligation by increasing the residential development capacity within the City, consistent with the City’s long-range housing and land use planning strategies. As a result, the proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth either directly or indirectly, and would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.11.2 and was determined to have a less than significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.11-10 and 4.11-11).

The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The Project site is designated HDR in the General Plan and is zoned PD-33 RES-24. The HDR land use designation is intended for higher-density residential development, including multifamily housing and related uses and the PD-33 RES-24 zoning designation allows for flexible, master-planned residential development at higher densities with customized development standards with a residential minimum density of 24 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Project would develop 281 multifamily residential units, consistent with the existing residential General Plan land use and zoning designations. Therefore, the proposed Project would not displace any housing and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on page 5.0-39 to 5.0-40, implementation of the General Plan would not result in an increase in population or housing growth that would substantially exceed any established growth projections. As discussed above, since the proposed Project is consistent with the existing land use designation, buildout of the Project site was already contemplated in the GP and regional growth 1185
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 136
forecasts. The proposed Project would result in 281 new multifamily units, that would increase the residential development capacity within the City, consistent with the City’s long-range housing and land use planning strategies. As a result, the proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth either directly or indirectly, and would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of population and housing, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR population and housing analysis used demographic and housing data, agency projections, City housing policy documents, and General Plan buildout growth assumptions. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a population or housing impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures related to population and housing are contained within the GP EIR.

Additionally, no mitigation measures would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) None.

GP Goals and Policies
None.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to population and housing are included in the GP EIR. 1186
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 137

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

These goals, policies and standards include, but are not limited to the California Fire Code, the California Health and Safety Code, Chapters 8.12 and 8.20 of the Rocklin Municipal Code, and goals and policies in the General Plan Community Safety and Public Services and Facilities Elements requiring studies of infrastructure and public facility needs, proportional share participation in the financial costs of public services and facilities, coordination of private development projects with public facilities and services needed to serve the project, maintaining inter-jurisdictional cooperation and coordination and requiring 1187
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 138
certain types of development that may generate higher demand or special needs to mitigate the demands/needs.

Project-Specific Impacts
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection and emergency services?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.12.1.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance with General Plan policies, payment of development impact fees, and applicable regulations (California Fire Code, residential codes, etc.) (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.12-8 to 4.12-11).

As described in the GP EIR, the City of Rocklin is served by the Rocklin Fire Department (RFD), which provides fire prevention, suppression, and emergency medical services and operates three fire stations within the City, supported by mutual aid agreements with surrounding jurisdictions. The primary responding station for the proposed Project is Fire Station No. 23, located approximately 0.5 roadway miles from the Project site, with an estimated 1-minute drive time under normal conditions. Additionally, Fire Station No. 24 is situated about 1.8 roadway miles from the Project site.

The Project site encompasses approximately 7.19 gross acres, and is currently vacant and undeveloped.

Development of the proposed Project would consist of the construction of approximately 281 multifamily residential units within three four-story buildings, with related site improvements.

Construction
Construction and operation of the proposed Project would increase the number of structures and workers in the Project area, which may increase demand for fire protection and emergency medical services.

However, construction of the proposed Project would be required to comply with all applicable State and local regulations. These requirements include measures such as installation of temporary construction fencing to prevent unauthorized access and maintenance of a clean and orderly construction site to reduce potential fire hazards. As a result, construction of the proposed Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, and would not adversely impact service ratios, response times, or other performance standards. Impacts would be less than significant, and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR.

Operation
As disclosed in the GP EIR, the proposed Project and other anticipated residential development would create an increased demand for fire protection services with the addition of new residents to the area. As described in Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not exceed the amount of growth anticipated by Placer County or the GP EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would not induce 1188
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 139
significant population growth and would not result in the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Furthermore, the City of Rocklin requires that new development projects provide adequate improvements and resources to support future infrastructure and public facility needs, as included in GP Policy PF-25. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with all applicable City standards related to emergency access, fire flow, fire lanes, turn radii, and other fire protection and site design requirements, as reviewed and enforced by Rocklin Fire Department. Additionally, the proposed Project would be subject to compliance with the most recent versions of the CBC and California Fire Code. The California Fire Code is adopted by reference in the Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050 and establishes minimum standards for fire safety including site access requirements and fire safety precautions.

Pursuant to the City of Rocklin’s Municipal Code Chapter 3.16 (Construction Taxes and Development Impact Fees), and GP Policy PF-3 and PF-11, the proposed Project would be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIFs). The City of Rocklin collects DIF from development projects and is mandated to use the DIF funds to construct new fire and emergency service facilities. DIFs collected offset any Project-related demand on existing fire services. The fees would ensure that adequate fire protection and emergency/medical services would be provided and maintained and can be applied to the purchase of equipment, maintenance of existing facilities, and the construction of facilities as needed. Compliance with applicable local and State regulations, such as payment and implementation of the DIF program and compliance with applicable design requirements, would ensure that implementation of the Project maintain sufficient levels of fire protection services and facilities. Therefore, impacts related to fire protection services would be less than significant and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. b) Police protection services?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.12.2.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance with General Plan policies and payment of Development Impact Fees (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp 4.12-15 through 4.12-17).

As described in the GP EIR, the Rocklin Police Department would provide police protection services to the Project site. The Rocklin Police Station is located at 4080 Rocklin Rd, Rocklin, CA 95677, which is approximately 0.7 roadway miles southeast of the Project site.

Crime and safety issues during Project construction may include theft of building materials and construction equipment, malicious mischief, graffiti, and vandalism that would create a temporary increased demand for Rocklin Police Department protection services. Operation of the 281 multifamily residential units may also generate a typical range of police service calls such as burglaries and thefts.

However, pursuant to the City’s existing permitting process, the Police Department would review and approve the final site plan to ensure the appropriate crime prevention and site design features are incorporated consistent with General Plan Policies PF-11 and PF-16 are incorporated appropriately to provide a safe environment. In addition, the proposed Project would comply with the most recent versions of the CBC and California Fire Code. Specifically, Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.010 adopts by reference the CBC, which includes emergency access requirements which would minimize site safety hazards and potential operational impacts to police services.
1189
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 140
As described above, growth resulting from the proposed Project has been accounted for within the GP EIR, as the proposed Project is consistent with the GP land use designation. While the proposed Project would introduce new residents through development of approximately 281 multifamily residential units, this increase in population is within the growth projections evaluated in the City of Rocklin General Plan EIR. Since the proposed Project would not contribute to population growth beyond that anticipated in the GP EIR, the proposed Project would not result in the need for new or expanded police services or facilities to support the proposed Project. Additionally, the proposed Project would be required to pay applicable development impact fees consistent with General Plan Policies PF-3 and PF-11. The collection of development impact fees (DIFs) would ensure the level of police protection services is maintained and can be applied to the purchase of equipment, maintenance of existing facilities, and the construction of facilities as needed. Therefore, Project impacts to police services would be less than significant and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the City of Rocklin General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, and therefore no subsequent review is required.
c) School services?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impacts 4.12.3.1 and 4.12.3.2 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through mandatory developer fees (CA Gov. Code §65995), and implementation of the General Plan policies (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.12-25 through 4.12- 30).

According to the GP EIR, Rocklin residents are served by Rocklin Unified School District. As described in Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would increase the area’s population by introducing 281 new multifamily detached residential units, thus increasing the demand for school services. However, pursuant to Government Code Section 65995 et seq., the need for additional school facilities is addressed through compliance with school impact fee assessment. SB 50 (Chapter 407 of Statutes of 1998) sets forth a State school facilities construction program that includes restrictions on a local jurisdiction’s ability to condition a project on mitigation of a project’s impacts on school facilities in excess of fees set forth in the Government Code. Therefore, the proposed Project would be required to contribute fees to the Rocklin Unified School District, in accordance with the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 (i.e., SB 50). Pursuant to SB 50, payment of school impact fees constitutes complete mitigation under CEQA for Project‐related impacts to school services. Therefore, the Project would result in no impacts related to school services and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. d) Parks?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.12.4.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance of developer fees (Quimby Act), payment of development impact fees and/or dedication of parkland or in-lieu fees, as well as implementation of the General Plan policies (Rocklin 2011, pp. 4.12-40 to 4.12-42). 1190
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 141
The proposed Project would develop 281 multifamily residential units on a site that is currently vacant and undeveloped. As described in Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project is consistent with the site’s GP land use designation and the level of residential growth anticipated in the GP EIR. As such, the proposed Project is within the scope of planned development and associated public service demands, including parks.

The City of Rocklin maintains an extensive system of approximately 37 developed parks and over 200 acres of open space that provide recreational opportunities throughout the community. Park planning and future expansion are guided by the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which ensures that park facilities are developed in coordination with anticipated population growth. The City of Rocklin implements parkland dedication requirements through Municipal Code Chapter 3.16.410, Park Improvement Impact Fee, which is consistent with the Quimby Act (California Government Code § 66477).

This ordinance requires new residential subdivisions to dedicate parkland, pay in-lieu fees, or provide a combination of both, based on a parkland standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. The proposed Project’s compliance with these requirements is ensured through the City’s development review and approval process and would be required as a condition of approval. Additionally, the proposed Project includes private open space and on-site recreational amenities such as landscaped courtyards, a playground, and community gathering areas that would serve future residents and reduce demand on existing public park facilities. These on-site amenities would help offset use of off-site recreational resources but would not replace the need for compliance with applicable parkland dedication or in-lieu fee requirements.

Accordingly, with the proposed Project’s consistency with the GP, required compliance with the City’s parkland dedication requirements, and provision of on-site recreational amenities, the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision or need for new or physically altered park facilities. Impacts would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.
e) Other public facilities?
No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

Other public facilities are provided throughout the City of Rocklin and are planned to accommodate growth consistent with the General Plan. As described above, the proposed Project would introduce new residents; however, this increase in population is within the growth projections evaluated in the City of Rocklin General Plan EIR. As such, the proposed Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered public facilities beyond those already anticipated. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the City of Rocklin General Plan EIR. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed Project would not result in a peculiar impact related to other public facilities pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. 1191
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 142
Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on pages 5.0-40 through 5.0-44, impacts related to substantial physical deterioration of public facilities would occur and/or require the construction or expansion of public facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable. AS described above, the proposed Project is consistent with the existing land use designation, buildout of the Project site was already contemplated in the GP and regional growth forecasts. As a result, , the proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth that would result in the deterioration or expansion of existing public facilities and would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of public services, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR public services analysis used Rocklin Police and Fire Department information, RUSD facilities and enrollment data, the existing General Plan, Municipal Code, and other relevant literature to evaluate law enforcement and public school service impacts. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a public services impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures related to public services are contained within the GP EIR. Additionally, no mitigation measures would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 3.16.410: Park Improvement Impact Fee. A development impact fee is established and collected at the time of building permit issuance for all residential development in the City to fund park facility improvements and expansions needed to serve new growth. The adopted fee study identifies the facilities to be funded and ensures that new development contributes its fair share toward park infrastructure.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.010: Building Code. As listed previously in Section 6.7, Geology and Soils.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050: Fire Code. As listed previously in Section 6.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
1192
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 143
GP Goals and Policies
Policy PF-1: Provide for adequate lead time in the planning of needed expansions of public services and facilities.

Policy PF-3: Require that any development that generates the need for public services and facilities, including equipment, pay its proportional fair share of providing those services and facilities. Participation may include, but is not limited to, the formation of assessment districts, special taxes, payment of fees, payment of the City’s Construction Tax, purchase of equipment, and/or construction and dedication of facilities.

Policy PF-11: Ensure that new development will not create a significant negative impact on the existing level of police and fire protection services.

Policy PF-25: Require new development to meet fire flow requirements based on standards codified in the International Fire Code.

Policy PF-26: Evaluate all residential development project applications for their impact on school services and facilities. Where an impact is found, the project may be conditioned to the extent and in the manner allowed by law to mitigate the impact, such as requiring payment of school district fees and/or participation in a community facilities district to fund school facilities.

Policy OCR-12: Provide for park and other outdoor recreational needs, both active and passive, through methods including but not limited to: collection of park user fees, dedication of parkland, or a combination of both; rehabilitation of existing park and recreation facilities; requiring the installation of park improvements; and requiring that financial mechanisms be created for long-term park and/or open space operation and maintenance.

Policy OCR-13: Require dedication of parkland, payment of in lieu fees for parkland, or a combination of both, as a condition of approval in the early stages of the development process, including approval of rezonings, where it is necessary to insure consistency with or implementation of the goals and policies contained in this General Plan.

Policy OCR-22: Require new development to mitigate its impact on park development and maintenance.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to public services are included in the GP EIR. 1193
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 144

6.16. RECREATION
Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the
Project or
the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Would the project
increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the facility
would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or
require the construction or
expansion of recreational
facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated impacts on the demand for recreation facilities as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included increased demand for parks and recreation (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages

4.12-30 through 4.12-45). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the General Plan can result in recreation facilities impacts, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of General Plan goals and policies that would assist in minimizing or avoiding impacts to recreation facilities. The General Plan has established a parkland standard of five acres per 1,000 population and has adopted goals and policies to insure that this standard is met. These goals and policies call for the provision of new park and recreational facilities as needed by new development through parkland dedication and the payment of park and recreation fees. These programs and practices are recognized in the General Plan Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element, which mitigates these impacts to a less than significant level.).
1194
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 145
Project-Specific Impacts
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that physical deterioration of the facility would be accelerated? b) Require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.12.4.1 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact through compliance of developer fees (Quimby Act), payment of development impact fees and/or dedication of parkland or in-lieu fees, as well as implementation of the General Plan policies (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.12-39 through 4.12-42).

As described in the GP EIR, the City of Rocklin determined that development of new park facilities would keep pace with anticipated population growth. The proposed Project would construct 281 multifamily residential units on a site that is currently vacant and undeveloped. As described in Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project is consistent with the land use designation for the site and is therefore consistent with the anticipated growth within the city. Thus, the city has adequate parkland available to serve the proposed Project.

In accordance with the City of Rocklin’s Park Improvement Impact Fee, Trails Impact Fee, and Community and Recreation Facilities Fee requirements, the proposed Project would be required to pay all applicable park and recreational impact fees prior to issuance of building permits. These fees are intended to fund the acquisition, development, and expansion of park and recreational facilities needed to serve population growth associated with new residential development within the City. Compliance with these requirements would be enforced through the City’s development review and permitting process as conditions of Project approval, thereby ensuring the proposed Project provides its fair share toward park and recreational amenities necessary to accommodate future residents.

The Project proposes on-site private and common open space and recreational amenities that would serve future residents, thereby reducing reliance on off-site public facilities. Given the proposed Project’s consistency with planned growth, required compliance with the City’s parkland dedication requirements, and inclusion of on-site recreational features, the proposed Project is not expected to result in the physical deterioration of existing recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of new recreational facilities that could cause significant environmental impacts. Based on the previous analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on pages 5.0-43 through 5.0-44, impacts related to substantial physical deterioration of parks and recreational facilities would occur and/or require the construction or expansion of parks and recreational facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable. As described above, the proposed Project is consistent with the existing land use designation, and buildout of the Project site was already contemplated in the GP and regional growth forecasts. In addition, the proposed Project would be consistent with Municipal Code Section 3.16.410: Park Improvement Impact Fee requiring all 1195
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 146
residential development in the City to fund park facility improvements and expansions needed to serve new growth, and would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of recreation, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR did not include a standalone recreation section; however, the public services analysis evaluated parks and recreation service impacts using City department information, recreation and facilities guides, the existing General Plan, Municipal Code, and other relevant literature. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a recreation impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures related to recreation are contained within the GP EIR. Additionally, no mitigation would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 3.16.410: Park Improvement Impact Fee. As listed previously in Section 6.15, Public Services.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 3.16.420: Trails Impact Fee. A development impact fee is established on issuance of all building permits for residential development in the city to pay for trail facility improvements. The fee study dated April 18, 2022, identifies the facilities to be funded by the fee.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Section 3.16.430: Community and Recreation Facilities Impact Fee. A development impact fee is established on issuance of all building permits for residential development in the city to pay for community and recreation facility improvements. The fee study dated April 18, 2022, identifies the facilities to be funded by the fee.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy OCR-12: Provide for park and other outdoor recreational needs, both active and passive, through methods including but not limited to: collection of park user fees, dedication of parkland, or a combination of both; rehabilitation of existing park and recreation facilities; requiring the installation of park improvements; and requiring that financial mechanisms be created for long-term park and/or open space operation and maintenance.

Policy OCR-13: Require dedication of parkland, payment of in lieu fees for parkland, or a combination of both, as a condition of approval in the early stages of the development process, including approval of 1196
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 147
rezonings, where it is necessary to insure consistency with or implementation of the goals and policies contained in this General Plan.

Policy OCR-22: Require new development to mitigate its impact on park development and maintenance.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to recreation are included in the GP EIR. 1197
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 148

6.17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Mitigation measures to address these impacts are incorporated into the General Plan in the Circulation Element, and include policies that require the monitoring of traffic on City streets to determine improvements needed to maintain an acceptable level of service, updating the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and traffic impact fees, providing for inflationary adjustments to the City's traffic impact fees, maintaining a minimum level of service (LOS) of "C" for all signalized intersections during the PM peak period on an average weekday, maintaining street design standards, and interconnecting traffic 1198
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 149
signals and consideration of the use of roundabouts where financially feasible and warranted to provide flexibility in controlling traffic movements at intersections.

The General Plan EIR concluded that, despite these goals and policies, significant transportation impacts will occur as a result of development under the General Plan and further, that these impacts cannot be reduced to a less than significant level. Specifically, the General Plan EIR found that buildout of the Rocklin General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes at state/interstate highway intersections and impacts to state/interstate highway segments. Findings of fact and a statement of overriding consideration were adopted by the Rocklin City Council in regard to these impacts, which were found to be significant and unavoidable.

Project-Specific Impacts
This section is based on the following report:
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening, prepared by EPD Solutions, Inc., April 17, 2026. Included as Appendix G.

Methodology
Trip Generation
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic that is attracted and produced by a development based on the specific land uses planned for a given project. Trip generation rates for the proposed Project are shown in Table TRA-1, Proposed Project Trip Generation, based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (12th Edition, 2025). The proposed Project is expected to generate 1,352 daily trips with 101 AM peak hour trips and 129 PM peak hour trips.

Table TRA-1: Proposed Project Trip Generation
Land Use Dwelling
Units Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rate
223 Affordable Housing - 4.81 0.10 0.26 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.46 Project Trip Generation
223 Affordable Housing
281 1,352 29 72 101 76 53 129
Total Project Trip Generation 281 1,352 29 72 101 76 53 129 Source: Appendix G
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impacts 4.4.8 and 4.4.9 and determined that impacts would be less-than-significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.4-94 to 4.4-96).

The construction and operation phases of the proposed Project would be contained within the Project site and subsequently would not interfere with the use of sidewalks, bike lanes, or public transit. The proposed Project would be consistent with the General Plan’s goals and policies, and the proposed Project 1199
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 150
is not found to result in conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs, nor is it expected to negatively affect the performance or safety of existing or planned pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities. Therefore, impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Transit Facilities
Public transportation services within the City are provided by the Placer County Transit Agency (PCTA).

The nearest PCTA bus stop is located at the intersection of Pacific Street and Midas Avenue, adjacent to the Project site. The existing transit service would continue to serve its ridership in the area and may also serve residents of the proposed Project. The proposed Project would not alter existing transit routes, stops, or service levels. Consistent with General Plan policies that promote coordination with transit providers and transit-supportive infrastructure, the Project would be designed to maintain access to transit services. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with adopted transit plans or programs, and impacts would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR .

Bicycle Facilities and Pedestrian Facilities
The General Plan Circulation Element includes policies requiring the development of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, including bike lanes, sidewalks, and connectivity between land uses. The proposed Project would construct frontage improvements, including a bike lane, a 6-foot-wide public sidewalk, and curb and gutter improvements, consistent with City standards. Implementation of the Project would not remove or conflict with existing or planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities and would enhance multimodal connectivity in the Project vicinity. Therefore, impacts related to bicycle and pedestrian facilities would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Roadway and Intersection Facilities
Implementation of the proposed Project would develop 281 multifamily residential units on a site that is currently vacant and undeveloped. Access to the Project site would be provided via a new 26-foot-wide driveway on Pacific Street and a new 26-foot-wide driveway on Midas Avenue, which would provide access to all 281 proposed residences. Vehicular traffic to and from the Project site would utilize the existing network of regional and local roadways that currently serve the Project area. Specifically, regional access to the site would be provided via Interstate 80 and State Route 65, while local access would be provided via Pacific Street and Midas Avenue. Additionally, the proposed Project would be consistent with applicable GP Circulation Element goals and policies addressing the circulation system and would not impede or conflict with achievement of city-wide goals.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, transportation impacts are evaluated based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rather than level of service (LOS). As demonstrated in the Project’s VMT Screening Memorandum, the proposed Project would not result in VMT impacts beyond applicable thresholds or those previously evaluated in the GP EIR.

Although LOS is not a CEQA significance metric, the City of Rocklin may use LOS to determine the need for roadway or intersection improvements as part of the development review process. Any required improvements would be implemented as conditions of approval and would occur within existing rightsof-way or previously disturbed areas. 1200
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 151
The City will require that roadway improvements be implemented as conditions of approval, and the proposed Project would either construct or pay its fair-share toward such improvements, as determined through the City’s review process.

The proposed Project would include frontage and roadway improvements along Pacific Street and Midas Avenue, including construction of a right-turn lane into the proposed western driveway along Midas Avenue, installation of bicycle lane striping, installation of curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements, demolition of approximately 303 feet of existing median along Pacific Street to accommodate center turn lane striping, and reconstruction of portions of existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the Project frontage. The proposed Project would also require utility connections and trenching within the existing public right-of-way and public utility easements along Pacific Street and Midas Avenue. These improvements would support implementation of the City of Rocklin’s 2026–2031 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which serves as the City’s long-range planning tool for roadway, circulation, stormwater, and infrastructure improvements throughout the City. As described in the CIP, roadway and stormwater improvements are intended to maintain and enhance safe and efficient transportation infrastructure, improve circulation, and support multimodal transportation improvements citywide. The CIP also includes ongoing roadway safety, pedestrian, bicycle, intersection, resurfacing, and railroad crossing improvement projects within the City, including improvements along Midas Avenue and at-grade railroad crossing enhancement programs.

Impacts under this threshold were adequately addressed in the GP EIR. The proposed Project is within the scope of the GP EIR and would remain consistent with the GP EIR. As described in Section 6.11, Land Use and Planning, and Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project would not induce substantial population growth beyond that anticipated in the General Plan and is consistent with the planned land use for the Project site. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, transportation impacts are evaluated based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and as demonstrated in the Project’s VMT Screening Memorandum, the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant VMT impacts.

Therefore, impacts related to the circulation system would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed by Governor Brown in 2013 and required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide an alternative to level of service (LOS) for evaluating transportation impacts. SB 743 established that the new criteria should promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. In response, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 was adopted and applies statewide, identifying vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), provides that projects that generate VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may result in a significant impact. The City of Rocklin evaluates 1201
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 152
transportation impacts using VMT consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 and applicable regional guidance.

As detailed in the VMT Screening Memorandum (Appendix G), the proposed Project was evaluated using screening criteria consistent with the Placer County Transportation Study Guidelines (May 2021) and the OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018).

The Project does not meet the small project screening threshold due to trip generation; however, the Project qualifies for multiple other screening criteria. Specifically, the Project proposes a 100 percent affordable multifamily residential development, which qualifies for the affordable housing screening criterion under both Placer County Guidelines and the OPR Technical Advisory.

In addition, the Project is located within a low VMT-generating area, as demonstrated using the SACOG VMT Evaluation Tool, and is located within one-half mile of an existing major transit stop (Rocklin Train Station). The Project also meets all additional criteria required for transit-based screening, including consistency with the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy and provision of parking consistent with applicable standards.

Because the Project satisfies multiple screening thresholds, including affordable housing, proximity to transit, and location within a low VMT-generating area, the Project may be presumed to result in a lessthan-significant VMT impact. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), and no further VMT analysis is required.

Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed Project would not result in a peculiar impact related to wildfire infrastructure pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.4.10 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.4-96 to 4.4-97).

Construction
The Project proposes development of the site in one phase lasting approximately 23.8-months. During construction, worker vehicles, haul trucks, and vendor trucks would be staged on the portion of the Project site under construction for the duration of the construction period. As part of the grading plan and building plan review processes, City permits would require appropriate measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures and measures to properly route heavy-duty construction vehicles entering and leaving the site (as applicable). As a result, impacts related to vehicular circulation design features and incompatible uses during construction of the proposed Project would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

Operation
As previously described, vehicular access to the Project site would be provided via driveways along Midas Avenue and Pacific Street, which would provide access to the proposed residential development. Internal circulation would be accommodated through a network of private drive aisles designed to meet local 1202
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 153
circulation and emergency access standards, with roadway widths designed in accordance with applicable City standards.

The proposed Project would not introduce any new roadways or land uses that would conflict with existing land uses in the surrounding area. Design of the proposed Project, including internal private drive aisles, ingress and egress points, and streetscape improvements, would be subject to the City’s development standards. The proposed Project has also been designed to ensure fire apparatus access and turnaround areas consistent with California Fire Code standards. On-site traffic signing and striping would be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans. Project frontage improvements and site access points would be constructed consistent with roadway classifications and applicable cross-sections identified in the City of Rocklin General Plan Circulation Element. Compliance with these requirements would be ensured through the City’s permitting process.

With respect to potential at-grade railway conflicts, the Project would not introduce design features that would increase hazards at existing crossings. As identified in the GP EIR, compliance with General Plan Policy C-33, which seeks safety and circulation improvements to railroad crossings and encourages grade separation where feasible, would ensure that proposed Project would not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those identified in the GP EIR.

As such, impacts related to hazards due to design features or incompatible uses would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

Construction
As described above, the proposed construction activities, including equipment and supply staging and storage, would occur within the Project site and would not restrict access of emergency vehicles to the Project site or adjacent areas. The installation of driveways and connections to existing infrastructure systems that would be implemented during construction of the proposed Project could require the temporary closure of one side or portions of Pacific Street and Midas Avenue for a short period of time.

However, Project construction activities would be required to ensure emergency access in accordance with Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9), which would be ensured through the City’s permitting process and City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050, Fire Code. The City as well as Rocklin Fire Department would review the development plans as part of the permitting procedures to ensure adequate emergency access pursuant to the requirements. Thus, implementation of the proposed Project through the City’s permitting process would ensure existing regulations are adhered to and would address any potential construction related emergency access impacts. Therefore, impacts related to inadequate emergency access during construction activities would not occur and no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. 1203
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 154
Operation
As described previously, the proposed Project would provide adequate emergency access to the site via a new 26-foot-wide driveway on Pacific Street and new 26-foot-wide driveway on Midas Avenue. Internal circulation would be accommodated through a network of private drive aisles, designed to support twoway vehicle travel and provide adequate access for emergency response vehicles in accordance with applicable City and fire department standards.

The City as well as Rocklin Fire Department would review the development plans as part of the permitting procedures to ensure adequate emergency access pursuant to the requirements in Section 503 of the California Fire Code. Since the proposed Project is required to comply with all applicable City codes, as verified by the City during the review process, potential impacts related to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on pages 5.0-9 through 5.0-26, implementation of the General Plan would contribute to cumulative transportation impacts associated with increased development and corresponding increases in vehicle trips. The General Plan EIR evaluated cumulative transportation conditions based on anticipated growth within the City and the region and identified improvements and policies intended to reduce transportation-related impacts, including multimodal transportation strategies, roadway improvements, and measures to encourage alternative transportation modes. The proposed project is consistent with the development assumptions analyzed in the General Plan EIR and would not result in new or substantially more severe transportation impacts than those identified in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative transportation impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no further analysis of cumulative transportation impacts is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of transportation and traffic, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR transportation and circulation analysis used existing transportation system and LOS data, buildout assumptions, and travel demand modeling to project future traffic volumes with and without General Plan implementation. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, and the findings of the project-specific VMT Screening, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a new or substantially greater transportation impact.
1204
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 155

5. No mitigation measures related to recreation are contained within the GP EIR. Additionally, no mitigation would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050: Fire Code. As listed previously in Section 6.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy C-33: Seek safety and circulation improvements to existing railroad crossings and construction of new grade separated crossings or undercrossings where appropriate and feasible.

Policy C-56: Improve bicyclist and pedestrian safety through such methods as signage, lighting, traffic controls, and crosswalks.

Policy C-59: Promote pedestrian convenience and recreational opportunities through development conditions requiring sidewalks, walking paths, or hiking trails connecting various land uses including residential areas, commercial areas, schools, parks, employment centers and open space.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to transportation are included in the GP EIR. 1205
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 156

6.18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural
landscape that is
geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place,
or object with cultural value
to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:

Project
Impact
that is
Peculiar to
the Project
or the
Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Listed or eligible for listing
in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical
resources as defined in Public
Resources Code Section
5020.1(k)?
b) A resource determined by
the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in
subdivision I of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in
subdivision I of Public
Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of
the resource to a California
Native American tribe?
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated impacts that would occur to historical, cultural and paleontological resources within the Planning area as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included potential destruction or damage to any historical, cultural, and paleontological resources (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages 4.8-1 through 4.8-21). Mitigation measures to address these impacts are incorporated into the General Plan in the Land Use and Open Space, Recreation and Conservation Elements, and include goals 1206
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 157
and policies that encourage the preservation and protection of historical, cultural and paleontological resources and the proper treatment and handling of such resources when they are discovered.

The General Plan EIR concluded that despite these goals and policies, significant cultural resources impacts will occur as a result of development under the General Plan and further, that these impacts cannot be reduced to a less than significant level. Specifically, the General Plan EIR found that buildout of the Rocklin General Plan will contribute to cumulative impacts to historic character. Findings of fact and a statement of overriding considerations were adopted by the Rocklin City Council in regard to these impacts, which were found to be significant and unavoidable.

Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) were not required to be evaluated separately from Cultural Resources by CEQA Guidelines at the time of the preparation of the GP EIR.

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision I of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision I of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No New Impact.

While impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources were not discussed within the GP EIR, as discussed on page

4.8-9., a sacred lands search was conducted and a list of Native American contacts from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was obtained. The results of the sacred lands search were received on October 16, 2008, and did not identify any Native American sacred lands within the General Plan Update Planning Area. Tribal cultural resources (TCRs) are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074.

The Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, and no known tribal cultural resources have been identified on-site.

Assembly Bill (AB) 52 establishes a formal consultation process for projects requiring the preparation of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report. As the proposed Project is being evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 which supports an exemption, and no additional CEQA document is required, formal AB 52 consultation is not applicable to the proposed 1207
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 158
Project. Similarly, Senate Bill (SB) 18 consultation requirements apply to the adoption or amendment of general plans or specific plans and are not applicable to the proposed Project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met; therefore, no additional review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
While impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources were not discussed within the GP EIR, as discussed on page

4.8-9., a sacred lands search was conducted and a list of Native American contacts was obtained from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The results of the sacred lands search were received on October 16, 2008, and did not identify any Native American sacred lands within the General Plan Update Planning Area. All tribal representation groups on the list provided by the NAHC were contacted, through written correspondence. While TCRs are not necessarily the same as what are considered to be more typical cultural resources, the proposed Project would implement Mitigation Measure CUL-1, which would reduce impacts to any inadvertently discovered cultural resources on the site. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative cultural resource impacts would not be cumulatively considerable, and no further analysis of cumulative transportation impacts is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of tribal cultural resources, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR did not include a standalone tribal cultural resources section; however, the cultural resources analysis included an NAHC Sacred Lands File search and Native American contact outreach, which identified no sacred lands within the Planning Area. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s sitespecific conditions, and implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, no substantial information has been identified that would result in a significant tribal cultural resources impact.

5. No new mitigation measures would be required. Project specific impacts would be less than significant with adherence to the City’s standard mitigation measure, as listed below.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) None.
1208
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 159
GP Goals and Policies
OCR-62: Preserve historically significant resources in place if feasible, or provide mitigation (avoidance, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures) prior to further disturbance.

OCR-65: Preserve significant archaeological resources (including Native American remains) and paleontological resources in place if feasible, or provide mitigation (avoidance, excavation, documentation, curation, data recovery, or other appropriate measures) prior to further disturbance.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to tribal cultural resources are included in the GP EIR.

Project Specific Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unanticipated Resources. As mentioned in Section 6.5 Cultural Resources. 1209
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 160

6.19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Project
Impact that
is Peculiar
to the
Project or
the Project
Site
Significant
Impact not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed
in the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Require or result in the
relocation or construction of
new or expanded water or
wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water
supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably
foreseeable future
development during normal,
dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination
by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected
demand in addition to the
provider’s existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in
excess of State or local
standards or in excess of the
capacity of local
infrastructure or otherwise
impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, State,
and local management and
reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid
waste?
1210
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 161
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The General Plan EIR analyzed the anticipated impacts on utilities and service systems that would occur as a result of the future urban development that was contemplated by the General Plan. These impacts included increased generation of wastewater flow, provision of adequate wastewater treatment, increased demand for solid waste disposal, and increased demand for energy and communication services (City of Rocklin General Plan Update Draft EIR, 2011, pages 4.13-1 through 4.13-34). The analysis found that while development and buildout of the General Plan can result in utilities and service system impacts, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level through the application of General Plan goals and policies that would assist in minimizing or avoiding impacts to utilities and service systems.

In addition, impacts related to the expansion or relocation of water facilities and the capacity of water supplies to serve the future development were discussed within Chapter 4.14 of the GP EIR. The GP EIR found that the proposed Rocklin General Plan Update’s mitigating policies and their associated action steps as well as PCWA’s efforts to provide adequate and reliable water supply for buildout of its planning area, ensure the impact would be less than significant.

These goals and policies include, but are not limited to, requiring studies of infrastructure needs, proportional share participation in the financial costs of public services and facilities, coordination of private development projects with public facilities and services needed to serve the project and encouraging energy conservation in new developments.

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Require or result in the construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impacts 4.13.1.1, 4.13.1.2, and 4.13.3.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.13-10 to 4.13-15 and 4.13-28 to

4.13-30).

Water
As described in the General Plan EIR, the Project site is located within the service area of the Placer County Water Agency (PCWA), which provides potable water service to the City of Rocklin. PCWA supplies treated water to the Planning Area through an existing system of transmission mains, distribution pipelines, and storage facilities that were evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

Potable water service for the proposed Project would be provided via the installation of an on-site sixinch water line, which would connect to existing 12-inch public water lines located in Pacific Street. The new on-site water system would convey water supplies to the proposed building and landscaping through plumbing/landscaping fixtures that are compliant with the CALGreen Code for efficient use of water and that are consistent with GP goals and policies. Installation of the new water distribution lines would only serve the proposed Project and would not provide new water supplies to any off-site areas. The construction activities related to the on-site water infrastructure that would be needed to serve the proposed Project are included as part of the proposed Project and would not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this document. 1211
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 162
Furthermore, as described in Section 6.11, Land Use and Planning, and Section 6.14, Population and Housing, the proposed Project is consistent with land uses anticipated for the area by the GP and would not induce substantial unplanned population. Thus, it is not anticipated that implementation of the proposed Project would require construction of new or expanded water facilities and no additional water supplies would be needed to accommodate the proposed Project beyond what is anticipated by PCWA.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects, and impacts would be less than significant.

Wastewater
As described in the General Plan EIR, the Project site is located within the service area of the South Placer Municipal Utility District (SPMUD), which provides wastewater collection and conveyance, with treatment provided at the Dry Creek and Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plants operated by the South Placer Wastewater Authority (SPWA).

The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of planned growth would increase wastewater flows; however, these increases would be accommodated within planned infrastructure improvements and expansions identified in the South Placer Regional Wastewater and Recycled Water Systems Evaluation. Planned buildout conditions would not exceed available or planned treatment capacity, and no unanticipated expansion of facilities would be required.

Additionally, the General Plan EIR determined that most wastewater conveyance infrastructure required to serve development is already in place or planned, and any necessary improvements would be implemented by future development and subject to project-level CEQA review. The proposed Project is consistent with the land use assumptions evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would not result in wastewater flows or infrastructure demands beyond those previously analyzed. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts related to wastewater treatment or conveyance would occur.

Development of the proposed Project would include installation of on-site sewer infrastructure connecting to existing SPMUD facilities. Specifically, the Project would connect to an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line within Pacific Street and would install approximately 8-inch private sewer lines within the Project site, with smaller lateral connections serving individual buildings. These improvements are typical of urban development and would occur within previously disturbed areas or within the Project footprint.

Construction activities associated with installation of on-site sewer infrastructure (e.g., trenching and pipe installation) are accounted for as part of the Project’s overall construction impacts and would not result in new or substantially more severe physical environmental effects beyond those identified elsewhere in this document. Because the proposed Project includes all necessary on-site wastewater infrastructure to serve the development and would connect to existing SPMUD facilities, it would not require the construction of new off-site wastewater treatment or conveyance facilities beyond those previously planned and analyzed in the General Plan EIR.

As described above, the proposed Project is consistent with the land use and growth assumptions of the General Plan and would not induce substantial unplanned population growth. Therefore, implementation 1212
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 163
of the proposed Project is not anticipated to require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities beyond those already planned by SPMUD.

Accordingly, the proposed Project would not require or result in the expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or conveyance infrastructure beyond what was previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR, and impacts would remain less than significant.

Stormwater
As evaluated in the General Plan EIR, future development within the Planning Area would incorporate stormwater infrastructure and comply with applicable regulatory requirements, and associated impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The proposed Project would be required to implement on-site drainage controls consistent with applicable standards. Because the Project is consistent with the development assumptions evaluated in the General Plan EIR, it would not require new or expanded off-site stormwater facilities beyond those previously analyzed. Therefore, no new or more severe impacts would occur.

Electric Power and Telecommunications
The General Plan EIR evaluated increased demand for electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications services associated with buildout of the Planning Area and concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

The General Plan EIR determined that utility providers, including Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and telecommunications providers, would accommodate increased demand through planned infrastructure extensions and upgrades implemented on an as-needed basis consistent with approved land use development. Such improvements are anticipated to occur primarily within existing rights-of-way or previously disturbed areas and were accounted for in the program-level analysis.

The General Plan EIR further concluded that compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency standards and implementation of General Plan policies (including requirements for undergrounding utilities, coordinating infrastructure installation, and minimizing roadway trenching) would reduce potential environmental impacts associated with utility infrastructure.

The proposed Project is consistent with the land use designations and growth assumptions evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would not result in utility demand beyond what was previously analyzed.

Therefore, the Project would not require new or expanded off-site electrical, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities beyond those already anticipated, and no new or substantially more severe impacts would occur.

Natural Gas
The proposed Project would not incorporate the use of natural gas. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in no new impacts related to construction of new or expanded utilities that could result in significant environmental effects.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed 1213
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 164
in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impacts 4.14.1, 4.14.2, and 4.13.3.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.14-16 to 4.13-24).

The Project site is located within the service area of the Placer County Water Agency (PCWA), which provides potable water service to the City of Rocklin. PCWA maintains a Water System Master Plan that is periodically updated to address existing and projected water demands within its service area and includes provisions for infrastructure expansion as necessary. PCWA also collects connection and capacity fees to fund maintenance and expansion of water supply and conveyance facilities.

PCWA’s service area is divided into five zones, and the Project site is located within Zone 1, which provides water service to Auburn, Bowman, Ophir, Newcastle, Penryn, Loomis, Rocklin, Lincoln, and portions of Granite Bay. PCWA has planned for growth in the City of Rocklin and has sized the water supply infrastructure to meet this growth and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry year conditions (PCWA 2022).

The Project site would be served by the Foothill Water Treatment Plant (WTP), which treats water diverted from the American River Pump Station near Auburn, and the proposed Project’s estimated maximum daily water treatment demand would not exceed the plant’s permitted capacity. Because the proposed Project would be served by a water treatment plant that has adequate capacity to meet the Project’s projected demand and would not require the construction of a new water treatment plant, the Project’s water supply and treatment facility impacts would be considered less than significant.

The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and would not result in water demand beyond what has been accounted for in PCWA planning documents. In addition, the Project would incorporate water-efficient fixtures and landscaping in compliance with Title 24 and the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), which would reduce overall potable water demand.

Therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the proposed Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and impacts would be less than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no additional environmental review is required. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impacts 4.13.1.1 and 4.13.1.2 and was determined to have a less-than-significant impact (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.13-10 to 4.13-15).

As described in the General Plan EIR, the Project site is located within the service area of the South Placer Municipal Utility District (SPMUD), which provides wastewater collection and conveyance, with treatment provided at the Dry Creek and Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plants operated by the South Placer Wastewater Authority (SPWA).
1214
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 165
The General Plan EIR concluded that sufficient wastewater treatment capacity exists and/or is planned to accommodate buildout within the Planning Area. Specifically, regional wastewater treatment facilities are operating below permitted capacities and have planned expansions to accommodate future growth, and wastewater flows associated with development consistent with the General Plan would not exceed the capacity of these facilities.

The proposed Project is consistent with the land use assumptions and development intensity evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would not generate wastewater flows beyond those previously analyzed. As such, the Project’s demand has been accounted for within the existing and planned treatment capacity of SPMUD/SPWA facilities.

Therefore, the wastewater treatment provider would have adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to existing commitments, and the Project would not require new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities beyond those previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the General Plan EIR.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further environmental review are not met.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.13.2.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.13-20 to 4.13-21).

As described in the General Plan EIR, solid waste generated within the City of Rocklin is collected by a franchised hauler (Recology Auburn Placer) and transported to facilities operated by the Western Placer Waste Management Authority (WPWMA), including the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill.

The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of planned growth would increase solid waste generation; however, sufficient landfill and processing capacity exists within the WPWMA system to accommodate buildout of the Planning Area. Specifically, waste generated at buildout would not exceed the landfill’s permitted capacity of 1,900 tons per day or the MRF’s processing capacity of approximately 2,200 tons per day.

The proposed Project would generate solid waste during construction activities as well as during operation. Construction-related waste would consist primarily of packaging and discarded materials, while operational waste would consist of typical residential refuse. All solid waste generated by the Project would be collected, recycled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations.

The proposed Project is consistent with the land use assumptions and development intensity evaluated in the General Plan EIR and would not generate solid waste in excess of what was previously analyzed.

Implementation of General Plan Policies PF-29, which include provisions of solid waste collection services to maintain public health standards, would ensure continued adequate solid waste collection and disposal capacity.
1215
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 166
Accordingly, the proposed Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, would not exceed the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

No new or substantially more severe impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further environmental review are not met. e) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.13.2.1 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.13-16 to 4.13-22).

As described previously, the proposed Project would generate solid waste during construction and operation. All solid waste-generating activities associated with the Project would be subject to applicable federal regulations administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, State requirements under the California Integrated Waste Management Act, and local regulations governing solid waste handling, storage, and disposal.

Construction activities would be required to comply with Section 5.408.1 of the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which requires recycling or reuse of a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste. Operational solid waste would be subject to State diversion requirements, including AB 341 and related regulations, which require recycling and diversion of solid waste from landfills.

In addition, the City of Rocklin Municipal Code 13.08, Solid Waste and Construction Refuse Collection, requires the provision of adequate on-site solid waste and recycling receptacles and regular collection services to ensure proper handling of refuse and maintenance of public health standards. Compliance with these requirements would be verified through the City’s development review and permitting process.

The proposed Project does not include any unusual land uses or operational characteristics that would impair compliance with applicable solid waste statutes and regulations. Implementation of the Project would occur in accordance with all applicable requirements related to solid waste diversion, recycling, and disposal during both construction and operation.

Therefore, the proposed Project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and no new or substantially more severe impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further environmental review are not met.

Cumulative Impacts
As discussed in the GP EIR on pages 4.13-14 through 4.13-15, 4.13-22, and 4.14-23 through 4.14-24, implementation of the General Plan would increase the demand for public utility infrastructure that could result in the need for new systems or a substantial expansion or alteration to the local or regional facilities that would result in a physical impact to the environment. However, the proposed Rocklin General Plan Update’s mitigating policies and their associated action steps would ensure that new development under the proposed project would not proceed without verification and determination that adequate water 1216
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 167
supply infrastructure exists to serve the development. The proposed Project would be consistent with the development assumptions analyzed in the General Plan EIR and would not result in utility demands beyond those anticipated under the General Plan. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with applicable General Plan policies, Municipal Code requirements, and utility provider standards related to infrastructure improvements, water conservation, wastewater management, stormwater control, solid waste reduction, and energy efficiency. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in new or substantially more severe cumulative impacts related to utilities and service systems beyond those identified in the General Plan EIR, and impacts would not be cumulatively considerable pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of utilities and service systems, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR utilities and service systems analysis used service provider information, agency planning documents, technical reports, and consultation with applicable wastewater, solid waste, and water service providers. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, and the Project’s development intensity being within the level analyzed in the GP EIR, no substantial new information has been identified that would result in a utilities and service systems impact more severe than anticipated in the GP EIR.

5. No mitigation measures related to utilities and service systems are contained within the GP EIR.

Additionally, no mitigation measures would be required because Project specific impacts would be less than significant.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 (CALGreen). Section 5.408.1.1 Construction waste management plan. Newly constructed projects and additions and alterations to existing buildings shall recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition debris in accordance with Section 5.408.1.1.

City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 13.08: Solid Waste and Construction Refuse Collection. Requires adequate on-site solid waste and recycling facilities and regular collection services to ensure proper handling and disposal of refuse.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy PF-3: Require that any development that generates the need for public services and facilities, including equipment, pay its proportional share of providing those services and facilities. Participation may include, but is not limited to, the formation of assessment districts, special taxes, payment of fees, payment of the City’s Construction Tax, purchase of equipment, and/or the construction and dedication of facilities.
1217
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 168
Policy PF-5: Require that construction of private development projects be coordinated with the construction of public facilities and services that are needed to serve the project.

Policy PF-29: Require solid waste collection services to ensure the maintenance of health standards.

Policy OCR-56: Encourage energy conservation in new developments.

Policy OCR-57: Encourage urban design and form that conserves land and other resources.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to utilities and service systems are included in the GP EIR. 1218
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 169

6.20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near State
responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would
the project:

Project
Impact that
is Peculiar
to the
Project or
the Project
Site
Significant
Impact
not
Analyzed
as
Significant
in the
Prior EIR
Potentially
Significant
Off-site or
Cumulative
Impact not
Discussed in
the prior
EIR
Adverse
Impact
More
Severe
based on
Substantial
New
Information
No
New
Impact
Not
Previously
Analyzed
in the
Prior EIR
a) Substantially impair an
adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing
winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other
utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or
structures to significant risks,
including downslope or
downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage
changes?
Summary of Impacts Identified in the GP EIR
The GP EIR evaluated hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan and determined that impacts related to emergency response and evacuation, hazardous materials use, airport hazards, and wildfire exposure would be less than significant with compliance with existing regulations and General Plan policies.
1219
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 170
With respect to emergency response and evacuation, the GP EIR concluded that development under the General Plan would not substantially impair emergency access or evacuation plans, as future projects would be required to comply with the City’s Emergency Operations Plan, roadway design standards, and applicable fire and building codes.

The GP EIR also determined that wildfire risk within the Planning Area is primarily associated with areas located within or adjacent to wildland-urban interface areas, including portions of the City identified as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ). However, implementation of applicable regulations, including the California Building Code (CBC), California Fire Code (CFC), and General Plan policies, would reduce wildfire-related risks to a less-than-significant level.

Project-Specific Impacts
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No New Impact. This topic was evaluated in the GP EIR as Impact 4.7.4 and was determined to be less than significant (City of Rocklin, 2011, pp. 4.7-25 through 4.7-27).

California Government Code Chapter 6.8 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to identify areas of very high fire hazard severity within Local Responsibility Areas (LRA).

Mapping of the areas, referred to as VHFHSZ, is based on data and models of potential fuels over a 30- to 50-year time horizon and their associated expected fire behavior and expected burn probabilities, which quantifies the likelihood and nature of vegetation fire exposure to buildings. LRA VHFHSZ maps were initially developed in the mid-1990s and are now being updated based on improved science, mapping techniques, and data. In 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted California Building Code Chapter 7A requiring new buildings in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones to use ignition-resistant construction methods and materials.

According to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps recommended by CAL FIRE on December 16, 2025, the Project site is not located within a SRA or within an area identified as a VHFHSZ (CAL FIRE, 2026). The Project site is, however, listed within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA), meaning the primary responsibility for preventing and suppressing wildfires is with the local agency. Additionally, as stated in Section 6.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the proposed Project would not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The proposed Project does not include any characteristics (e.g., permanent road closures or long-term blocking of road access) that would substantially impair or otherwise conflict with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Should the proposed Project require temporary impairment of an evacuation route due to road closures, the City of Rocklin would require issuance of an encroachment permit approved by the Public Works Director, pursuant to Section 12.04.30 of the Rocklin Municipal Code, to assure safety of the public.

The proposed Project would provide adequate emergency access to the site via a new 26-foot-wide driveway on Pacific Street and a new 26-foot-wide driveway on Midas Avenue. The proposed Project would include the construction of private parking lot designed to meet local circulation, safety, and access standards. The internal parking layout would include 26-foot wide roadway widths to accommodate emergency vehicle access. Project driveways and internal access would be consistent with the City’s permitting procedures, to ensure adequate emergency access and evacuation. 1220
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 171
The City of Rocklin and Rocklin Fire Department would review the development plans as part of the permitting procedures to ensure adequate emergency access pursuant to the requirements in Section 503 of the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9). As a result, the proposed Project would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project beyond what was previously evaluated, identified, and disclosed in the GP EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollution concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

As described in the previous response, the Project site is not located within or near an SRA or a VHFHSZ.

The site is currently vacant and undeveloped, with no existing structures. It is primarily characterized by non-native, ruderal grasses. As such. development of the site with the proposed uses would reduce the amount of exposed vegetation available as fuel. The Project site is also surrounded by retail commercial and light industrial uses and Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the north; retail and service commercial uses to the south; commercial uses to the east; and railroad tracks and existing residential uses to the west.

Overall, adjacent areas are predominantly developed and do not contain factors that could exacerbate wildfire risks. Therefore, the proposed Project and existing site conditions would not contribute to an increase in exposure to wildfire hazards.

The proposed Project would be required to comply with the 2022 California Fire Code, 2022 California Building Code, and City of Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050, Fire Code. The City of Rocklin Fire Code provides building standards for access roads, building clearances and other fire-related requirements such as fire apparatus, construction materials and methods, and automatic sprinkler systems. Compliance with these requirements would be verified by the City of Rocklin and Rocklin Fire Department prior to the issuance of building permits for the proposed Project. As such, the proposed Project would not exacerbate wildfire risks as compared to existing conditions because it is representative of existing development in the area. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed project would not result in a peculiar impact related to the exacerbation of wildfire risks that would expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire pursuant to Section 15183. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR. 1221
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 172
As described in the previous responses, the Project site is not located within or near an SRA or a VHFHSZ and is located within a predominantly developed setting. The Project site is located within an urbanized area that is not identified as a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE, 2026). Accordingly, the Project site is not subject to wildfire-related hazards typically associated with undeveloped or wildland interface areas.

The proposed Project does not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (including roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that would exacerbate fire risk or that would result in impacts to the environment. Although the proposed Project includes proposed roadway improvements and new driveways within the Project site, the proposed Project does not include any changes to public or private roadways that would exacerbate fire risk or that would result in impacts to the environment. Although utility improvements, including domestic water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain lines proposed as part of the proposed Project would be extended throughout the Project site, these utility improvements would be underground and would not exacerbate fire risk. Furthermore, the proposed Project represents infill development within an existing urbanized area and would not introduce new infrastructure into previously undeveloped or wildfire-prone areas. As such, the Project would not create or exacerbate wildfire risk conditions beyond those typical of urban residential development.

Project design and implementation of utility improvements would be reviewed and approved by the City as part of the Project approval process to ensure the proposed Project is compliant with all applicable design standards and regulations. Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed Project would not result in a peculiar impact related to wildfire infrastructure pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. Therefore, the proposed Project would not include infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities), that would exacerbate fire risk or that would result in impacts to the environment. Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No New Impact. This topic was not evaluated in the GP EIR.

As described in the previous responses, the Project site is not within or near an SRA or VHFHSZ. The Project site is located within an urbanized area that is not identified as a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE, 2026). As discussed in Section 6.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed Project would not result in increased impacts related to flooding or drainage changes. Also as discussed in Section

6.7, Geology and Soils, the Project site is relatively flat and is not susceptible to landslides. In addition, the Project site is located in a flat area that does not contain or is adjacent to large slopes, and the proposed Project would not generate large slopes.

Construction activities related to the proposed Project would be subject to compliance with the CBC and would include BMPs. BMPs may include but are not limited to covering of the soil, use of a dust-inhibiting material, landscaping, use of straw and jute, hydroseeding, and grading in a pattern that slows stormwater 1222
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 173
flow and reduces the potential for erosion, landslides, and downstream flooding. The site would include a combination of on-site storm drain infrastructure and a biofiltration basin designed to comply with applicable City of Rocklin stormwater management and Water Quality Management Plan requirements.

Because this impact was not identified in the GP EIR and the Project would not introduce conditions that would result in a new or more severe impact, the proposed project would not result in a peculiar impact related to the exposure of people or structures to significant risks pursuant to Section 15183. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in impacts related to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Based on the foregoing analysis, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, the criteria for requiring further CEQA review are not met, therefore no subsequent review is required.

Cumulative Impacts
While wildfire was not included as a chapter within the GP EIR, the GP EIR evaluated hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan and determined that impacts related to emergency response and evacuation, hazardous materials use, airport hazards, and wildfire exposure would be less than significant with compliance with existing regulations and General Plan policies. The Project site is located within an urbanized area of the City of Rocklin and is not located within or near an SRA or a VHFHSZ. The Project would be required to comply with applicable fire protection regulations, including the California Fire Code, California Building Code, and City of Rocklin fire safety standards, which address requirements related to emergency access, fire suppression systems, and building design features intended to minimize wildfire risks. In addition, the Project would not result in substantial impacts associated with wildland fire risk, such as locating new structures in high fire hazard areas, impairing emergency response access, or increasing risks associated with evacuation. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a new significant wildfire impact or substantially more severe wildfire impact than previously identified in the General Plan EIR, and cumulative wildfire impacts would be less than significant pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.

Conclusion
Regarding the issue area of wildfire, the following findings can be made:
15183 Findings

1. No peculiar impacts to the Project or its site have been identified.

2. There are no significant effects that were not analyzed as part of the GP EIR.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which were not discussed by the GP EIR.

4. The GP EIR did not include a standalone wildfire section; however, the hazards analysis evaluated emergency response, evacuation, and wildfire exposure impacts associated with General Plan buildout. Based on the analysis provided in this section, the Project’s consistency with the General Plan and zoning designation, the Project’s site-specific conditions, and required compliance with applicable fire safety regulations, no substantial information has been identified that would result in a significant wildfire impact.
1223
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 174

5. No new mitigation measures would be required. Project specific impacts would be less than significant with adherence to GP EIR mitigation measures, as listed below.

Uniformly Applied Development Policies or Standards (DP/S) Rocklin Municipal Code Chapter 15.04.050: Fire Code. As listed previously in Section 6.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

GP Goals and Policies
Policy S-2: Emergency Operations Plan. Maintain a City Emergency Operations Plan, to include the National Incident Management System (N.I.M.S.).

Policy S-5: Roadway Standards. Maintain appropriate standards for minimum road widths and turnarounds.

GP EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures related to wildfire are included in the GP EIR. 1224
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 175

7. DOCUMENT PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
Lead Agency:

City of Rocklin Community Development Department
3970 Rocklin Road
Rocklin, CA 95677
CEQA Document Preparer:

EPD Solutions, Inc.

Konnie Dobreva, Vice President of Environmental Planning Brady Connolly, Assistant Planner
Alexis Brito, Assistant Planner
Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis and Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis:

EPD Solutions, Inc.

Elaina Chambers
Alex Garber
Tina Yuan
General Biological Assessment:

EPD Solutions, Inc.

Shawn Gatchel Hernandez
Cruz Hernandez
Geotechnical Engineering Study Update:

Youngdahl Consulting Group, Inc.

Mahdi Sultani
Brandon K. Shimizu
Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment:

Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.

Jennifer Alvarado
Alicia Jansen
Joshua Sargent
Kyle Emerson
Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening Analysis:

EPD Solutions, Inc.

Jordan Mower
Simon Lin
Alex Garber
1225
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project CEQA Consistency Analysis and Checklist City of Rocklin 176

8. REFERENCES
CAL FIRE. (2026). California Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). Retrieved from https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/firehazard-severity-zones California Department of Conservation. (2025). California Important Farmland Finder. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/
California Department of Conservation. (2026). Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/ California Department of Finance. (2025, January). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2025, with 2020 Benchmark. Retrieved from https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimatesfor-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2025/ California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. (2022, December). CaCensus. Retrieved from
https://cacensus.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=67f7e4aa0bc6450e8a05 2176a12d86b9
California Department of Transportation. (2025). Caltrans State Scenic Highway System Map. Retrieved from
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/47e2009986264718a5a13a2c81382774#data_s=id%3 AdataSource_2-199ba60323a-layer-3%3A171
City of Rocklin. (2011). City of Rocklin Proposed General Plan Draft EIR. Retrieved from https://www.rocklin.ca.us/post/draft-general-plan-update-environmental-impact-report-0 Executive Department State of California. (2005). Executive Order S-3-05. Retrieved from https://www.library.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/GovernmentPublications/executive-orderproclamation/5129-5130.pdf Placer County. (2024, December). Placer County General Plan Demographics Trends. Retrieved from chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.placer.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/Vi ew/85000/9_DemographicTrendsReport_123024
1226
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 1
July 2026
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Introduction
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead or public agency that approves or carries out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified, which identifies one or more significant adverse environmental effects and where findings with respect to changes or alterations in the project have been made, to adopt a “…reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment” (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21081, 21081.6).

A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is required to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are successfully implemented. The City of Rocklin is the Lead Agency for the project and is responsible for implementation of the MMRP. This report describes the MMRP for the Project and identifies the parties that will be responsible for monitoring implementation of the individual mitigation measures in the MMRP.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The MMRP for the Project will be active through all phases of the Project, including design, construction, and operation. The attached table identifies the mitigation program required to be implemented by the City for the Project. The table identifies mitigation measures required by the City to mitigate or avoid significant impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, the timing of implementation, and the responsible party or parties for monitoring compliance.

The MMRP also includes a column that will be used by the compliance monitor (individual responsible for monitoring compliance) to document when implementation of the measure is completed. As individual Plan, Program, Policies; and mitigation measures are completed, the compliance monitor will sign and date the MMRP, indicating that the required actions have been completed.

This MMRP incorporates mitigation measures from the City of Rocklin General Plan Draft EIR SCH No. 2008072115 (GP EIR) as well as Project specific measures implementing the programmatic measures and policies identified in the GP EIR.
1227
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 2
July 2026
This page intentionally left blank.
1228
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 3
July 2026

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials

AIR QUALITY
GP EIR Mitigation Measure 4.2.1 Reduce Exposure to Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). Residential development projects and projects categorized as sensitive receptors shall be located an adequate distance from existing and potential sources of toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions such as freeways, major arterials, industrial sites, and hazardous material locations. “Adequate distance” will be based on site-specific conditions, the type and location of sensitive receptors, the types and amounts of potential TAC emissions, mitigation measures which reduce potential health risks from TAC emissions, and other factors.

Project
application and CEQA
documentation
Project
Applicant and
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
Review and approval of
CEQA documentation
Initials: ______
Date: ______

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
GP EIR Mitigation Measure 4.10.1: MM 4.10.1 The following shall be added as action steps to the General Plan Update Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element:
• To offset possible losses of sensitive native wildlife and plant habitat (e.g., wetland habitat, riparian habitat, and oak woodlands) due to development projects, developers shall be responsible for mitigation. Such mitigation measures may include providing and permanently maintaining similar quality and quantity of replacement habitat, enhancing existing habitat areas, or paying fees towards an approved habitat mitigation bank. Replacement habitat may occur either on-site or at approved off-site locations.
• For those areas in which special-status species are found or are likely to occur, the City shall require feasible mitigation of impacts to those species that ensure that the activity does not Before and during
construction
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
The City of Rocklin
Community Development
Department will examine
Project contracts for these
requirements and monitor
for compliance
Initials: ______
Date: ______
1229
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 4
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
contribute to the decline of the affected species such that their decline would impact the viability of the species. Mitigation shall be determined by the City after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG) are provided an opportunity to comment.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Crotch’s Bumble Bee Surveys and Avoidance.

If ground-disturbing activities are scheduled to begin between February 1 and October 31, Crotch’s bumble bee pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist based on CDFW’s survey guidance for CESA candidate bumble bee species. Surveys shall consist of a habitat assessment evaluating the likelihood of bumble bees occurring within and adjacent to the Project site. If the habitat assessment finds that the site does not contain suitable habitat for Crotch’s bumble bee, no further surveys shall be required. If suitable habitat is present, focused surveys shall be conducted, consisting of three onsite surveys spaced two to four weeks apart during the colony active period from April through August. If Crotch’s bumble bee is detected on the Project site, the Project shall develop a plan to fully avoid impacts to the species. If impacts cannot be feasibly avoided, the Project applicant shall consult with CDFW and obtain appropriate take authorization pursuant to Fish and Game Code Section 2080 et seq. The Project shall comply with the mitigation measures detailed in the take authorization issued by CDFW.

Prior to issuance of
grading permits
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
Results of pre-activity field
survey shall be submitted
to the City of Rocklin
Community Development
Department
If Crotch’s Bumble Bees
are encountered, focused
survey report shall be
submitted to the City of
Rocklin Community
Development Department
Initials: ______
Date: ______
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. To avoid direct and indirect impacts to raptors and/or migratory birds, grubbing and clearing of vegetation that may support active nests and construction activities adjacent to nesting habitat shall occur outside of the breeding season, generally January 15 through August 31. If removal of habitat and/or construction activities adjacent to nesting habitat are necessary during the breeding season, the Project shall retain a qualified biologist Prior to issuance of
grading permits
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
Results of pre-activity field
survey shall be submitted
to the City of Rocklin
Community Development
Department
If nests are encountered,
monitoring report shall be
Initials: ______
Date: ______
1230
Pacific and Midas 15183 Consistency Analysis and Checklist Appendices A–G are available for public review at Rocklin City Hall, 3970 Rocklin Road, Rocklin, CA.

For questions, please contact the Planner of the Day:

Email: [email protected]
Phone: (916) 625-5100
1231
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 5
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
to conduct a pre-construction survey to determine the presence or absence of non-listed nesting migratory birds on or within 300 feet of the construction area, and federally or State-listed birds and raptors on or within 500 feet of the construction area. The pre-construction survey shall be conducted within three calendar days prior to the start of construction. If nesting birds are detected, no-work buffers shall be established, including 300 feet for non-listed nesting migratory birds and 500 feet for listed birds or raptors, unless reduced by a qualified biologist based on site-specific conditions. If construction must occur within the recommended buffer, a qualified biologist shall be present to monitor nesting behavior and determine the appropriate nest buffer. submitted to the City of
Rocklin Community
Development Department
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Seasonal Depression Avoidance. The Project has been designed to avoid direct impacts to the onsite portion of the seasonal depression. To ensure no indirect impacts to the seasonal depression, Project impact areas shall be clearly demarcated prior to construction, and all workers shall be made aware of the impact limits and avoided areas. No ground- or vegetation-disturbing activities shall occur outside of the Project impact limits, and all vehicles and equipment shall be restricted to the Project impact limits or existing designated access roads and staging areas. Erosion control measures shall be placed between the avoided seasonal depression and the outer edge of the impact limits prior to commencement of construction activities and shall be maintained until construction is completed and soils have stabilized. A qualified biologist shall conduct worker environmental awareness training for all contractors, work crews, and onsite personnel to aid workers in recognizing sensitive biological resources known to occur on the Project site. The Project shall retain a qualified biologist on an asneeded basis to assist with potential biological issues that may arise during construction. To avoid introduction and spread of non-native Prior to issuance of
grading permits
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
The City of Rocklin
Community Development
Department will examine
Project contracts for these
requirements and monitor
for compliance
Initials: ______
Date: ______
1232
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 6
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
invasive plant species, clothing, vehicles, and equipment shall be cleaned prior to entering the Project site, and materials used for the Project, such as fill dirt or erosion control materials, shall be from weed-free locations or certified weed-free.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Oak Tree Survey and Compliance. In accordance with the City of Rocklin Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 17.77 of the Rocklin Municipal Code, an oak tree survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist to document the type, size, and condition of all oak trees measuring 6 inches or greater in diameter at breast height on the Project site for the purpose of determining whether an oak tree removal permit is required. If impacts to onsite oak trees would occur, mitigation shall be provided in accordance with the City of Rocklin Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance, which may include off-site tree replacement, contributions to the Rocklin Oak Tree Preservation Fund, and/or dedication of land, as determined by the City.

Prior to issuance of
grading permits
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
Verify: (1) completion and
acceptance of the oak tree
survey prior to issuance of
grading permits; (2)
issuance of any required
oak tree removal permits;
and (3) implementation of
required mitigation
measures, including
documentation of
replacement trees,
preservation areas, land
dedication, and/or
payment to the Rocklin
Oak Tree Preservation
Fund, as applicable
Initials: ______
Date: ______

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unanticipated Resources. The
developer/permit holder or any successor in interest shall comply with the following for the life of this permit. If during ground disturbance activities, unanticipated cultural resources are discovered, the following procedures shall be followed:

All ground disturbance activities within 100 feet of the discovered cultural resource shall be halted and the Project archaeologist shall call During ground
disturbing activities
City of Rocklin
Community
Development
Department,
City
Environmental
Services
Manager, or
Confirmation of written
authorization to resume
ground disturbance was
provided by the City
following completion of
the required measures.

Initials: ______
Date: ______
1233
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 7
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
the City Environmental Services Manager immediately upon discovery of the cultural resource. A meeting shall be convened between the developer, the Project archaeologist, the Native American tribal representative, and the City Environmental Services Manager to discuss the significance of the find. At the meeting with the aforementioned parties, a decision is to be made, with the concurrence of the City Environmental Services Manager, as to the appropriate treatment (documentation, recovery, avoidance, etc.) for the cultural resource.

Resource evaluations shall be limited to nondestructive analysis.

Further ground disturbance shall not resume within the area of the discovery until the appropriate treatment has been accomplished. designated
Tribal Monitor

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of grading permits and commencement of earthwork activities, the Project Applicant shall implement the recommendations identified in the Phase II Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project site. Specifically, shallow soils (approximately one foot below ground surface) containing arsenic and lead impacts identified near historical boring location G-1 and assessment borings SB-9 and SB-10 shall be removed from the project site. Additionally, shallow soils in the vicinity of historical boring locations G-10 and G-13 shall be removed as a precautionary measure due to historically documented arsenic impacts.

Project
Applicant,
Qualified
Environmental
Professional
(QEP); City of
Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
City of Rocklin Community
Development Department
shall verify that: (1) the
recommendations of the
Phase II ESA have been
incorporated into grading
activities; (2)
contaminated soils have
been removed under the
oversight of a Qualified
Environmental
Professional in accordance
with applicable regulatory
requirements; and (3)
documentation has been
submitted demonstrating
the extent of excavation,
Initials: ______
Date: ______
1234
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 8
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
to disposal and transported to an appropriately permitted disposal facility or managed in accordance with regulatory agency requirements.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Soil Management Plan. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be prepared by a qualified hazardous materials consultant in coordination with the Community Development Department, Building Division, for review and approval, and shall detail procedures and protocols for excavation and disposal of on-site hazardous materials, including:
• Any subsurface materials exposed during construction
activities that appear potentially contaminated, based on either visual observation or suspect odors, shall be
segregated, stockpiled, and tested for potential
contamination. If contamination is found to be present per the California Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC) Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) for the
applicable use, and cannot be reused on the Project site, it shall be transported by a certified hazardous waste hauler to a landfill permitted by the state to accept hazardous materials and disposed of per California Hazardous Waste Regulations. The appropriate regulatory agency (e.g., DTSC, RWQCB, or County Department of Public Health) shall be
notified as required by law, and all agency directives shall be implemented.

Prior to the issuance
of the grading permit.

Project
Applicant,
Qualified
Environmental
Professional
(QEP); City of
Rocklin
Community
Development
Department
City of Rocklin Community
Development Department
shall verify: (1) approval of
the Soil Management Plan
and Health and Safety
Plan prior to issuance of
grading permits; (2)
incorporation of SMP
requirements into
construction plans and
contract documents; (3)
implementation of the
SMP during grading
activities; and (4) receipt
and approval of
documentation
demonstrating
compliance with the SMP,
including laboratory
analytical results, waste
disposal manifests, and
Initials: ______
Date: ______
1235
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 9
July 2026
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Timing
Responsible
Party Verification Method
Date Completed
and Initials
• A Health and Safety Plan (HASP) shall be prepared in
accordance with Cal/OSHA requirements for each
contractor that addresses potential safety and health
hazards and includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection. The HASP shall also outline proper soil handling procedures and health and safety
requirements to minimize worker and public exposure to
hazardous materials during construction.
• All SMP measures shall be printed on the construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of grading permits. Documentation demonstrating
compliance with the SMP, including laboratory results and waste disposal manifests (if applicable), shall be provided to the Community Development Department, Building
Division prior to final grading approval.
any required agency
correspondence, prior to
final grading approval.
1236
Pacific and Midas Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program City of Rocklin 10
July 2026
This page intentionally left blank.
1237
Appendices A–G are available for public review at Rocklin City Hall, 3970 Rocklin Road, Rocklin, CA.

For questions, please contact the Planner of the Day:

Email: [email protected]
Phone: (916) 625-5100
1238
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF ROCKLIN APPROVING OF A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
(Midas Apartments / ENV2026-0008)
WHEREAS, the Midas Apartments project consists of a Design Review (DR2026- 0002) and Notice of Exemption (ENV2026-0008) to develop a 281-unit multi-family apartment project on a 7.1± acre vacant site; and
WHEREAS, the City of Rocklin’s Environmental Coordinator has reviewed the project, and determined that it is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Code of Regulations Section 15183 – Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning and Public Resources Code Section 21083.3; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Exemption has been prepared for the Project.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rocklin recommended approval of the Notice of Exemption by a vote of 5-0 on August 4, 2026.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rocklin as follows:

Section 1. The City Council of the City of Rocklin finds as follows:

A. The project is exempt from environmental review under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning).

B. Pursuant to Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines, the project is consistent with the use and density established under the existing 2012 General Plan for which the City has a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

C. The Midas Apartments project CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Consistency Checklist, prepared as provided for in the CEQA Guidelines, concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant impacts that were: 1) peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located; 2) were not analyzed as significant effects in the General Plan EIR with which the project is consistent; 3) were not potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the General Plan EIR, and 4) were not previously identified significant effects, and which as a result of substantial new information that was not known at the time the General Plan EIR was certified, were determined to have a more severe impact than discussed in the General Plan EIR.
1239

Page 2 ends

Rocklin City CouncilOctober 13, 2026

Rocklin City Council
October 13, 2026