Agenda packet — Roseville City Council, December 7, 2022 (part 7 of 8)

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-21 9:53:47 AM

PHASING PLAN -

COMPLETED PHASE
08/19/22
G1.12
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19

ITE LEGEND

PROPERTY LINE

EASEMENT AND SETBACK LINE

BUILDING OVERHANG

VEHICULAR CIRCULATION

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

BUILDING ENTRANCE
0 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:
60' 120' 180' 240'
Graphic Scale: 1 inch = 60 feet

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-16 5:16:24 PM
As indicated

VEHICULAR AND

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
08/19/22
L1.02
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 1 2022-02-07
1 MPP STAGE 1 RESPONSE 2022-03-22
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
F
.E
.C
.

F.E.C.

F
.E
.C
.

FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
V V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB UB
UB UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
CB UB

PARKINGNO

PARKINGNO
NO

PARK NI G
NO

PARK NI G

NOPARKING

NOPARKING EV CHARGING ONLY

CLEAN A R/ I VANPOOL EV /

CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV

EV CHARGING ONLY

NOPARKING

CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV

CLEAN A R/ I VANPOOL EV /

COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT

COMPACT
DO
NOT
ENTER

BUS ONLY

LOADING
ZONE
ONLY

OTS P OTS P
STOP
POTS
TS PO
STOP
OTS P
PED
XING
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
SLOW
WOLS
STOP
TS PO
TS PO

COMPA C T

COMPA C T
OTS P

XING PED GNI X DEP

PLANTED
MEDIAN

VEHICULAR DROP-OFF

VEHICULAR DROP-OFF PLANTED MEDIAN
ENTRY

SERVICE

LOOP ROAD
NEW
GARAGE

LEAD HILL BLVD

ROCKY RIDGE DR

EUREKA ROAD
GARAGE

NEW BED TOWER

HOSPITAL
ED

WOMEN &

CHILDREN
MOB 2
MOB 1
CUP

AUXILIARY
NEW

GENERATOR
YARD

EXISTING

BUS PAD

EXISTING

BUS STOP

EXISTING

BUS STOP

EXISTING

BUS STOP
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETRETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETRETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETRETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETRETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETRETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

AMBULANCE

DROP-OFF
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
1 1" = 60'-0"

VEHICULAR PLAN

PC EXHIBIT H
GEN.A
GEN.1
GEN.C
GEN.4
GEN.0
GEN.3A
GEN.5
GEN.B9
GEN.B10
GEN.3B
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
3 2022-10-13

SURFACE

IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
C2.1

PC EXHIBIT I
LEGEND

GRADING PLAN
C3.1
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

PC EXHIBIT J
LEGEND

GRADING PLAN
C3.2
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 AS

INDICATED
08/19/22
LEGEND

GRADING PLAN
C3.3
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22
LEGEND

GRADING PLAN
C3.4
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

SECTIONS
C7.1

PC EXHIBIT K
SCALE: 1" = 20' HORIZ.
1" = 1' VERT.

SCALE: 1" = 20' HORIZ.
1" = 1' VERT.
1" = 1' VERT.

SCALE: 1" = 20' HORIZ.
1" = 1' VERT.

UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

SECTIONS
C7.2
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

UTILITY PLAN
C4.1

PC EXHIBIT L
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

UTILITY PLAN
C4.2
1 A
A
B
B
C
C
D
D
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
C.8
B.8
B.4
A.4
A.4
C.6
C.4
A.2
A.2
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

UTILITY PLAN
C4.3
UP
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
In Association with
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
AS

INDICATED
08/19/22

UTILITY PLAN
C4.4
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
LEVEL 4
47' - 0"
LEVEL 5
62' - 0"
LEVEL 6
77' - 0"
ROOF
92' - 0"

PENTHOUSE
96' - 6"
T.O. SCREENWALL
107' - 0"
V1 VISION GLAZING
VF1 VISION GLAZING WITH FRIT PATTERN
S1 SPANDREL PANEL
SF1 SPANDREL PANEL WITH FRIT PATTERN
MP1 PAINTED HORIZONTAL METAL PANEL
MP2 PAINTED VERTICAL METAL PANEL
MP3 PAINTED CORRUGATED METAL PANEL
ML1 PAINTED METAL FRAME AND SUNSHADE

BF BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
WS1 WOOD LOOK METAL SOFFIT
MP4 PAINTED METAL COLUMN COVER
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
LEVEL 4
47' - 0"
LEVEL 5
62' - 0"
LEVEL 6
77' - 0"
ROOF
92' - 0"

PENTHOUSE
96' - 6"
T.O. SCREENWALL
107' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
ML2 PAINTED STEEL FRAME
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-14 11:53:14 AM
1/16" = 1'-0"

COLOR ELEVATIONS
08/19/22
A3.03
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - WEST

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
BF MP3 MP1 MP4 WS1 SF1 VF1 V1
MP2 MP2 VF1 SF1 SF1
2 1/16" = 1'-0"
COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - NORTH 2
MP2 MP1 S1 V1 MP2 SF1
BF VF1 V1 MP4
SF1
MP1 V1 MP3 BF
3 1/16" = 1'-0"

COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - NORTH
MP1 MP3 WS1 MP4 V1
4 1/16" = 1'-0"
COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - WEST 2
MP3 SF1 V1 V1 MP1
V1
ML2
ML2
VF1
ML2

GRADIENT
SF1

GRADIENT
V1 V1
V1
15' PARAPET
15' PARAPET
V1
MP2
MP3
ML1
BF BF
MP3
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13

PC EXHIBIT M
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
LEVEL 4
47' - 0"
LEVEL 5
62' - 0"
LEVEL 6
77' - 0"
ROOF
92' - 0"

PENTHOUSE
96' - 6"
T.O. SCREENWALL
107' - 0"
LEVEL 1
0"
LEVEL 2
16' - 0"
LEVEL 3
32' - 0"
LEVEL 4
47' - 0"
LEVEL 5
62' - 0"
LEVEL 6
77' - 0"
ROOF
92' - 0"

BF BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
WS1 WOOD LOOK METAL SOFFIT
MP4 PAINTED METAL COLUMN COVER
ML2 PAINTED STEEL FRAME
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-14 11:53:16 AM
1/16" = 1'-0"

COLOR ELEVATIONS
08/19/22
A3.04
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - SOUTH
MP4 V1 VF1 SF1 BF MP3
V1 MP2 MP1 SF1 S1 V1 ML1 MP1 MP1 MP2
2 1/16" = 1'-0"
COMPOSITE BUILDING ELEVATION - EAST 2
ML2 MP3 MP1
ML1 MP1 SF1 V1 S1 V1 MP2
MP4
ML2 SF1 V1 VF1

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
SF1
GRADIENT VF1 SF1 GRADIENT
15' PARAPET
15' PARAPET
MP2
MP2 MP2
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13
V1
PC1 PAINTED CONCRETE (BEIGE COLOR)
PC2 PAINTED CONCRETE (DARKER BEIGE COLOR)
CMU1 SPLITFACE CMU (BEIGE COLOR)

PP PERFORATED METAL PANEL - TREE IMPRESSIONS IMAGE

PF PAINTED METAL PICKET JUMP FENCE (SILVER COLOR)

PR PAINTED METAL STAIR AND RAILING (BEIGE COLOR)

VP VISION GLAZING WITH PAINTED METAL FRAME (BEIGE COLOR)

PM PAINTED METAL FRAME (DARK BRONZE)
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM
1/16" = 1'-0"

PARKING STRUCTURE

ELEVATIONS
08/19/22
A3.09
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763

GARAGE ELEVATION-WEST

GARAGE ELEVATION-SOUTH

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
PR VP PP PF PC1 PC2 PP CMU1
CMU1 PR PF PC1 PC2 PP CMU1
PM
PM
PP
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
PC1 PAINTED CONCRETE (BEIGE COLOR)
PC2 PAINTED CONCRETE (DARKER BEIGE COLOR)
CMU1 SPLITFACE CMU (BEIGE COLOR)

PP PERFORATED METAL PANEL - TREE IMPRESSIONS IMAGE

PF PAINTED METAL PICKET JUMP FENCE (SILVER COLOR)

PR PAINTED METAL STAIR AND RAILING (BEIGE COLOR)

VP VISION GLAZING WITH PAINTED METAL FRAME (BEIGE COLOR)

PM PAINTED METAL FRAME (DARK BRONZE)
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM
1/16" = 1'-0"

PARKING STRUCTURE

ELEVATIONS
08/19/22
A3.10
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763

GARAGE ELEVATION-EAST

GARAGE ELEVATION-NORTH

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
PP PF PC1 PC2 PP CMU1 PM
CMU1 PM PP PF PC1 PC2 PR CMU1
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
MP1 PAINTED HORIZONTAL METAL PANEL
MP3 PAINTED CORRUGATED METAL PANEL
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:53:00 PM
1/16" = 1'-0"

GENERATOR YARD

ELEVATIONS
08/19/22
A3.14
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
MP3 MP1 MP1
MP3 MP1 MP3 MP1
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
MP3

GENERATOR YARD ELEVATION-NORTHWEST GENERATOR YARD ELEVATION-NORTHEAST

GENERATOR YARD ELEVATION-SOUTHWEST GENERATOR YARD ELEVATION-SOUTHEAST Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-14 11:53:16 AM

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.05
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13

PC EXHIBIT N
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-14 11:53:16 AM

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.06
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-10-14 11:53:16 AM

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.07
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM

PARKING STRUCTURE

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.11
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM

PARKING STRUCTURE

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.12
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM

PARKING STRUCTURE

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.13
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:53:00 PM

GENERATOR YARD

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.15
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:53:00 PM

GENERATOR YARD

PERSPECTIVE
08/19/22
A3.16
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
V1 VISION GLAZING
VF1 VISION GLAZING WITH FRIT PATTERN
S1 SPANDREL PANEL
SF1 SPANDREL PANEL WITH FRIT PATTERN
MP1 PAINTED HORIZONTAL METAL PANEL
MP2 PAINTED VERTICAL METAL PANEL
MP3 PAINTED CORRUGATED METAL PANEL
ML1 PAINTED METAL FRAME AND SUNSHADE

BF BOARD FORMED CONCRETE
WS1 WOOD LOOK METAL SOFFIT
MP4 PAINTED METAL COLUMN COVER
ML2 PAINTED STEEL FRAME
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:52:59 PM
1/16" = 1'-0"

MATERIAL BOARD
08/19/22
A3.08
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
1 PC EXHIBIT O
PC1 PAINTED CONCRETE (BEIGE COLOR)
PC2 PAINTED CONCRETE (DARKER BEIGE COLOR)
CMU1 SPLITFACE CMU (BEIGE COLOR)

PP PERFORATED METAL PANEL - TREE IMPRESSIONS IMAGE

PF PAINTED METAL PICKET JUMP FENCE (SILVER COLOR)

PR PAINTED METAL STAIR AND RAILING (BEIGE COLOR)

VP VISION GLAZING WITH PAINTED METAL FRAME (BEIGE COLOR)

PM PAINTED METAL FRAME (DARK BRONZE)
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-17 12:53:00 PM
1/16" = 1'-0"

PARKING STRUCTURE

MATERIAL BOARD
08/19/22
A3.17
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763

EXTERIOR MATERIAL TYPES
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSES 2022-06-30
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
LEGEND

PROPERTY LINE

PLANTING

EXISTING TREE TO
REMAIN
ETR

PROPOSED TREE

SHEET NOTES

1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF

UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND REPORT ANY

CONFLICTS TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR
DECISION PRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION.

2. SEE SHEET L2.02 FOR PLANTING SCHEDULES.

3. SEE L3.21 & L3.22 FOR PLANTING DETAILS.

4. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
ALL PLANT QUANTITIES. REFER TO PLANT LIST AND

PLANTING DETAILS FOR SPACING REQUIREMENT FOR
EACH PLANT SPECIES.

5. SEE SHEET L3.21 FOR TREE PROTECTION DETAIL FOR
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN.
0 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Date:

Agency Approval
No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:
60' 120' 180' 240'
Graphic Scale: 1 inch = 60 feet

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-08-16 5:16:32 PM
As indicated

PLANTING PLAN
08/19/22
L1.04
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 1 2022-02-07
1 MPP STAGE 1 RESPONSE 2022-03-22
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
FH
FH
FH
F
H
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
FH
V V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
VV
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB CB
CB CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB UB
UB UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
UB
CB UB

PARKINGNO

PARKINGNO
NO

PARK NI G
NO

PARK NI G

NOPARKING

NOPARKING EV CHARGING ONLY

CLEAN A R/ I VANPOOL EV /

CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV

EV CHARGING ONLY

NOPARKING

CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV

CLEAN A R/ I VANPOOL EV /

COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT COMPACT

COMPACT
DO
NOT
ENTER

BUS ONLY

LOADING
ZONE
ONLY

OTS P OTS P
STOP
POTS
TS PO
STOP
OTS P
PED
XING
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
BIKE
LANE
SLOW
WOLS
STOP
TS PO
TS PO

COMPA C T

COMPA C T
OTS P

XING PED GNI X DEP

NEW BED TOWER
NEW
GARAGE

LEAD HILL BLVD

ROCKY RIDGE DR

EUREKA ROAD
GARAGE
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETRETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETRETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETRETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETRETR

ETR ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETRETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

HOSPITAL
ED

WOMEN &

CHILDREN
MOB 2
MOB 1
CUP

AUXILIARY
NEW

GENERATOR
YARD
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
CC
CC
CC
CC
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
CC
CC
CC
LI
LI
LI
LI
CC CC
CC
CC
PH
PH
PH
GB
GB
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
LI
NS
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
CC
CC
CC
CC
CC
PC
AEC
CC
PC
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
LI
CC
CC
CC
PC
PC
AEC
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETRETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETRETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETRETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETRETR

ETR ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETRETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR ETR ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR

ETR ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
LI LI
CC
CC
PH
PH
CC
CC
LI
AEC
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB

GB GB GB
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS

NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
GB
GB
GB
GB
PC PC
PC
PC
LI CC
CC
LI LI
LI PC
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB GB
GB
GB
GB
LI
CC
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH PH
CC
CC
LI
CC
CC
LI
CC
LI
PH
PH
PH
PH
LI
GB
GB
GB
GB

GB GB GB
GB
GB
PC
PC AEC
GB
GB
GB
GB
GB
AEC
AEC
CC
CC
CC
LI
AEC
AEC
AEC
AEC
AEC
CC
CC
CC
PC
PC
PC
PC
CC CC
CC
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
GB
GB PC
PC
LI
LI
LI
LI
CC
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
ETR
1 1" = 60'-0"

PLANTING PLAN

PC EXHIBIT P
0 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

INPATIENT BED TOWER
1600 EUREKA RD
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661
Kaiser Project # CAP015954
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
Professional Seals
Project
Facility
Agency Approval
No. Revi
sion Description YYYY-MM-DD
Scale:
60' 120' 180' 240'
Graphic Scale: 1 inch = 60 feet

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:30 PM

PARKING LOT SHADING
PLAN
L1.05
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
3 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2
UPDATE
2022-10-13
2 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:36 PM

PLANTING SCHEDULE
L3.02
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30

ABBREVIATION BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME HYDROZONE SPACING SIZE MATURE HEIGHT MATURE SPREAD ALLERGEN FC FESTUCA CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA FESCUE LOW 36" 5 GALLON 4' 3' MILD ALLERGEN SA SCABIOSA ATROPURPUREA SWEET SCABIOUS LOW 12" 1 GALLON 2' 1' NON ALLERGEN SPA SPOROBOLUS AIROIDES ALKALI SACATON LOW 24" 1 GALLON 4' 2' NON ALLERGEN EC ELYMUS CANADENSIS NODDING WILD RYE LOW 36" 5 GALLON 5' 3' MILD ALLERGEN AW ARCTOSTAPHYLOS 'WAYSIDE' WAYSIDE MANZANITA LOW 48" 5 GALLON 3' 5' MILD ALLERGEN AM ANAPHALIS MARGARITACEA PEARLY EVERLASTING LOW 24" 1 GALLON 3' 2' MILD ALLERGEN CG CEANOTHUS GRISEUS VAR. HORIZONTALIS 'YANKEE POINT' CALIFORNIA LILAC LOW 96" 5 GALLON 3' 8' MILD ALLERGEN CR CALAMAGROSTIS RUBESCENS PINEGRASS LOW 12" 1 GALLON 3' 1' MILD ALLERGEN CP COLEONEMA PULCHELLUM 'COMPACTA' DWARF BREATH OF HEAVEN MODERATE/MEDIUM 60" 1 GALLON 6' 5' MILD ALLERGEN EK ERIGERON KARVINSKIANUS SANTA BARBARA DAISY LOW 36" 1 GALLON 1' 3' MILD ALLERGEN ACM ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM FIREFLY SUNSHINE YARROW LOW 36" 1 GALLON 3' 3' MILD ALLERGEN EU ERIOGONUM UMBELLATUM SULPHURFLOWER BUCKWHEAT LOW 36" 1 GALLON 1' 3' MILD ALLERGEN SL SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA PURPLE SAGE LOW 60" 1 GALLON 5' 5' NON ALLERGEN SGA SALVIA GREGGII 'ALBA' WHITE AUTUMN SAGE LOW 24" 1 GALLON 2' 2' NON ALLERGEN SGR SALVIA GREGGII 'ROSEA/PINK' ROSE TEXAS SAGE LOW 24" 1 GALLON 2' 2' NON ALLERGEN HPM HEUCHERA 'PURPLE MOUNTAIN MAJESTY' PURPLE MOUNTAIN MAJESTY ALUMROOT MODERATE/MEDIUM 24" 1 GALLON 1' 2' NON ALLERGEN HPS HEUCHERA 'PEPPERMINT SPICE' PEPPERMINT SPICE CORAL BELLS MODERATE/MEDIUM 24" 1 GALLON 1' 2' NON ALLERGEN PM POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM WESTERN SWORDFERN MODERATE/MEDIUM 48" 5 GALLON 4' 4' NON ALLERGEN

GROUND PLANTING SCHEDULE

ABBREVIATION BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME TYPE WUCOLS CONTAINER/ROOTBALL SIZE MATURE HEIGHT MATURE SPREAD ALLERGEN AEC AESCULUS CALIFORNICA CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE DECIDUOUS VERY LOW 36" BOX 25' 20'-30' NON ALLERGEN CC CERCIS CANADANSIS 'OAKLAHOMA' EASTERN REDBUD DECIDUOUS LOW 36" BOX 10'-20' 10'-20' MILD ALLERGEN GB GINGKO BILOBA MAIDENHAIR TREE DECIDUOUS MODERATE 36" BOX 35'-65' 25'-30' MILD ALLERGEN LI LARGERSTROEMIA INDICA 'TUSCARORA' CREPE MYRTLE DECIDUOUS LOW 36" BOX 15'-25' 10'-20' NON ALLERGEN NS NYSSA SYLVATICA BLACK GUM DECIDUOUS MODERATE 36" BOX 30'-50' 15'-20' MILD ALLERGEN PC PISTACHIA CHINENSIS CHINESE PISTACHE DECIDUOUS LOW 36" BOX 30'-40' 25'-35' NON ALLERGEN PH PINUS HALEPENSIS ALEPPO PINE EVERGREEN LOW 36" BOX 60' 20'-40' NON ALLERGEN

TREE PLANTING SCHEDULE
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
0 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:30 PM

TREE MITIGATION PLAN
L2.01
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 1 2022-02-07
1 MPP STAGE 1 RESPONSE 2022-03-22
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30

EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN

EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED
TOTAL
354
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE 1
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1" = 40'-0
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 1
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1" = 40'-0
0 Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:30 PM

TREE MITIGATION PLAN
L2.02
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 1 2022-02-07
1 MPP STAGE 1 RESPONSE 2022-03-22
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30

EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN

EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED
TOTAL
354
LEGEND
PROPERTY LINE 1
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1" = 40'-0
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 1
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1 1" = 40'-0
TREE MITIGATION PLAN_
1" = 40'-0
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:42 PM

PLANTING DETAILS
L4.21
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
ON PLANTING SCHEDULE 1/2 SPACING
U.O.N
ON PLANTING SCHEDULE 1/2 SPACING
U.O.N
EQ 3/4 SHRUB SPACING EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ

GRID SPACING

LAYOUT PLAN

TRIANGULAR SPACING

LAYOUT PLAN

SHRUB PLANTING
PULL MULCH 6" FROM STEM
PLANTS
2" ORGANIC MULCH

PLANTING SOIL

FOOT - COMPACTED

TOPSOIL PEDESTAL

AMENDED SUBGRADE
1 1
12" MIN 6"
1 MAX
1 1'-0"
1'-0" 1'-0"
1:1
1:1
1:1 1:1

ROOT BALL

COMPACTED DRAIN

COURSE PEDESTAL
MIN 5%
MIN 5%

SECTION PLAN

PEDESTAL
BELOW

PROTECT BRANCHES

FROM DAMAGE

PLANT TRUNK PLUMB

REMOVE TREE TAG AT

SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION

ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH
FINISH GRADE +1-0"
2" MULCH AROUND TREE -

HOLD MULCH AWAY FROM

TREE FLARE

TEMPORARY SOIL SAUCER FOR

WATERING - REMOVE PRIOR TO

SURFACE FINISHING
PEDESTAL: DRAIN COURSE

PLANTING SOIL
4"DIA PERF PIPE
4" DIA PERF PIPE

SUB DRAINAGE, SEE CIVIL DRAWING
NOTE:

1. TESTING INFILTRATION: FOR EACH DIFFERENT SOIL PROFILE WITHOUT

UNDERDRAINAGE SELECT REPRESENTATIVE PITS/ TRENCHES, TEST TO INFILTRATION RATE. NOTIFY LANSCAPE ARCHITECT IF INFILTRATION RATE IS OUTSIDE THE ACCEPTABLE RANGE 0.5 TO 2 INCHES PER HOUR, OR IF THERE IS ANY EVIDENCE OF

WATER SEEPAGE INTO PITS/ TRENCHES AND IF SOIL WAS SATURATED OR EXTREMEY DRY PRIOR TO THE TEST. INSTALL SUBDRAINAGE OR SUMP TO SUCH PITS.

DRAIN ROCK
6"
1 MAX
1 1'-0"
1'-0" 1'-0"
1:1
1:1
1:1 1:1

ROOT BALL

COMPACTED DRAIN

COURSE PEDESTAL
MIN 5%
MIN 5%

SECTION
PLAN

PEDESTAL
BELOW

PROTECT BRANCHES

FROM DAMAGE

PLANT TRUNK PLUMB

REMOVE TREE TAG AT

SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION

ROOT FLARE EVEN WITH
FINISH GRADE +1-0"
2" MULCH AROUND TREE -

HOLD MULCH AWAY FROMTREE FLARE

TEMPORARY SOIL SAUCER FOR

WATERING - REMOVE PRIOR TO

SURFACE FINISHING
PEDESTAL: DRAIN COURSE

PLANTING SOIL

SUMP, SEE CIVIL DRAWING

SUMP, SEE CIVIL DRAWING
NOTE:

1. TESTING INFILTRATION: FOR EACH DIFFERENT SOIL PROFILE WITHOUT

WATER SEEPAGE INTO PITS/ TRENCHES AND IF SOIL WAS SATURATED OR EXTREMEY DRY PRIOR TO THE TEST. INSTALL SUBDRAINAGE OR SUMP TO SUCH PITS. 6"
1 1" = 1'-0"

SHRUB/ GROUND COVER PLANTING - TOWER
2 1/2" = 1'-0"

TREE PLANTING DETAIL - SUB DRAINAGE -
TOWER
3 1/2" = 1'-0"

TREE PLANTING DETAIL - SUMP - TOWER
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:42 PM

PLANTING DETAILS
L4.22
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
PLAN: TREE STAKING ALONG ROADS OR WALKS
PLAN: TREE STAKING IN OPEN SPACES

SECTION
180
°
180°

STAKESEQ
EQ

EDGE OF ROOTBALL
NOTE:

1. ALIGN STAKES PARALLEL WITH DIRECTION OF
PREVALING WIND.

2. ALL STAKES TO BE CONSISTENT.

3. STAKE ON TWO OPPOSING SIDES.

4. STAKES SHALL BE SPACED AT EQUAL

DISTANCE FROM THE CENTRAL LEADER ON ALL

TREES OF THE SAME SIZE AND AREA
MIN
2 1/2"
12" MIN

TRUNK GUARD

LOOP SYNTHETIC STRAPPING AROUND THE
CENTRAL LEADER BELOW FIRST BRANCH.
(ONE STRAP PER STAKE)

STAPLE TO STAKE WITH HEAVY DUTY STEEL
STAPLES.

HEIGHT OF STAKE ABOVE FINISHED GRADE IS

EQUAL TO FIRST BRANCH
WOODEN STAKES(2 PER TREE) PLACED NO
CLOSER THAN 12" FROM THE EDGE OF THE

ROOTBALL
3/4" FLAT WOVEN POLYPROPYLENE
FOR 900LB LOADS
1 1/2" = 1'-0"

TREE STAKING - TOWER
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:38 PM

ENLARGED DETAILS -

SEATWALL
L4.01
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30

OTS P OTS P
BIKE
LANE
3 L701-RB
3 L701-RB
3 L701-RB

CONCRETE SEATWALL
1'-9" 1'-6"
3'-3"
1'-1 1 4/ "
6"
1'-0"
2'-2 1/4"
11 7 8/ "
2'-1 1 8/ "
2'-9"
1'-0"
1'-0"

CONCRETE SEATWALL

CONCRETE CURB

CONCRETE FOOTING

CONCRETE FOOTING
2'-0"
2'-0"2'-0"
2'-0"
1"
R
1" R
1"
R
1" R
1"
R
0"
3" CLR
3" CLR
3" CLR
3" CLR
3 "
CLR
3"
CLR
3" CLR
12" HOOK, TYP
(2) #5
(3) #5
(4) #5
#5 @ 12" CC HORIZONTAL

EACH FACE
#5 CONT
#5 @ 16" CC
#4 @ 16" CC
#5 @ 16" CC
3" CLR
3"
CLR
3" CLR
3" CLR3
"
C
L
R
3" CLR
2"
3" CLR
1'-0"
#3 @ 16"
(2) #5
#5 @ 16" CC
(4) #5
(3) #5
(2) #5
12" HOOK, TYP
#4 @ 16" CC
#5 @ 16" CC
(2) #5
(2) #5
1 3/8" = 1'-0"

CUSTOM SEATWALL - AXON - TOWER
2 1/8" = 1'-0"

ENLARGEMENT PLAN - CUSTOM SEATWALL -
TOWER
3 1 1/2" = 1'-0"

CUSTOM SEATWALL - SECTIONS - TOWER
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19

PC EXHIBIT Q
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:40 PM

MATERIAL & FURNISHING

DETAILS
L4.11
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30

CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE
(SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR

REINFORCING)

COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE

COMPACTED SUBGRADE
1% MIN
FLUSH

PLANTING OR

CRUSHED STONE PAVING CAST
- IN - PLACE CONCRETE
6"

POLYURETHANE ELASTOMETRIC SELF-
LEVELING SEALANT , TOOL DOWN 1/8"

COLOR TO MATCH PAVEMENT SURFACE

BACKER ROD WITH NO BOND
3/4" DOWEL 18" LONG @ 12" O.C.

GREASE ONE END

PRE-FORMED COMPRESSIBLE FILLER

THROUGH FULL DEPTH OF SLAB
2" M NI 2" M NI
3/8" TYP. 1/8" TYP

SAW CUT CONTROL
JOINT @ SPACING PER
PLANS

POLYURETHANE ELASTOMETRIC SELF-
LEVELING SEALANT , TOOL DOWN 1/8"

COLOR TO MATCH PAVEMENT SURFACE

BACKER ROD WITH NO BOND

PRE-FORMED COMPRESSIBLE FILLER

THROUGH FULL DEPTH OF SLAB
3/8" TYP.

CURB / WALL VARIES, SEE PLAN

OF SLAB
1/4" DEPTH
EQ EQ
A. EXPANSION B. CONTROL C. ISOLATION

CAST- IN- PLACE CONCRETE ON GRADE CONCRETE UNIT PAVER ON GRADE SEATWALL

CONCRETE UNIT PAVER

LEVELING SAND COURSE

COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE

SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS

COMPACT SUB GRADE
1" M NI
CONCRETE UNIT PAVER ON GRADE NOM NI AL 4"

FILTER FABRIC

CAST- IN- PLACE CONCRETE ON GRADE CONCRETE UNIT PAVER ON GRADE CURB

CONCRETE UNIT PAVER

LEVELING SAND COURSE

COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE

SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS

COMPACTED SUB GRADE

SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS
1" M NI

CONCRETE UNIT PAVER ON GRADE

FILTER FABRIC

INTEGRAL COLOR CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE

SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR SECTION DETAIL

NOM NI AL
4"

CONCRETE UNIT PAVER ON GRADE PLANTING AREA
CONCRETE CURB 4"

COMPACTED AGGREGATE BASE,

SEE CIVIL DRAWING

COMPACTED SUBGRADE,

SEE CIVIL DRAWING

PLANTING SOIL
1"
1'-0"
∅9.5" BASE
3'-4"
9 1/4"
9" 9"
9" 9"

BOTTOM VIEW FRONT VIEW
1 3/8" TYP
∅8.6" SECURITY
CORE O.D.
∅5.76" SECURITY
CORE I.D.
48" WIDE X 30" DEEP, 4500 PSI,
CONTINUOUS CONCRETE FOOTING, TOF=-4"

FTG PER MANUFACTURER REQUESTS

REINFORCEMENT PER MANUFACTURER
4'-0"
2'-6" 4"
2'-3"
2'-0"

CONTINUOUS CONCRETE FOOTING

CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE PAVEMENT
1 1 1/2" = 1'-0"

CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE PAVING -
PEDESTRIAN CONDITION (CIP-P1 & P2) -
TOWER
2 3" = 1'-0"

CONCRETE PAVING JOINTS - TOWER
3 1 1/2" = 1'-0"

CONCRETE UNIT PAVING - PEDESTRIAN

CONDITION (CUP-P) - TOWER
4 1 1/2" = 1'-0"

CONCRETE UNIT PAVING - VEHICULAR

CONDITION (CUP-V) - TOWER
5 1 1/2" = 1'-0"

CONCRETE EDGING (ED) - TOWER
6 1" = 1'-0"

K-RATED BOLLARD (BO) - TOWER
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan
All reproduction & intellectual property
rights reserved © 2021

BKF ENGINEERS
980 9th St, Suite 2300
Sacramento, CA 95814
Civil Engineering
Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.

NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES
POST OFFICE BOX 12916
OAKLAND, CA 94604

KAISER PERMANENTE

KAISER FOUNDATION

HEALTH PLAN INC

KAISER PERMANENTE

ROSEVILLE MEDICAL
CENTER

ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
HOK Project # 17.04047.00
2022-06-29 2:16:42 PM

MATERIAL & FURNISHING

DETAILS
L4.12
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA
t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763
MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25
1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30
ELEVATION 1 ELEVATION 2
PLAN
9'-8 1/2"
1'-2 1/4".
1'-5 3/4"
1'-2 1/4".
1'-0 1 2/ ".
2'-5 1/2"

CONCRETE, ACID-ETCHED FINISH

ANCHOR BOLT OR CONSTRUCTION

ADHESIVE PER MANUFACTURER
6'-9 1/4"
1'-7 5/8"
1'-5 3 4/ "
1'-5 5 8/ "
4'-3 5/8"
2'-4 1 2/ "
PLAN

ELEVATION AXON

SURFACE MOUNT DETAIL
SURFACE MOUNT TABS WITH 7/16" DIA
HOLES FOR ANCHORING.

HARDWARE NOT INCLUDED.

OPTIONAL UMBRELLA HOLE
42" DIA CATENA POWDER COATED STEEL
PLAN

SECTION ELEVATION
F.S.
2'-6"
1'-0" 9"
1 1 2/ " 3 4/ "
1 1 2/ " 3 4/ "
6'-0"
1'-8" 8"
TYP
3"
2'-0"
2'-6" 1'-5 1/2"
TYP
3"
1/2"W X 1/4" DEEP GROOVES ON

THIS SIDE ONLY
1/2"W X 1/4" DEEP GROOVES ON

THIS SIDE ONLY
1 1/2" 1 1/2"
1'-6"
2'-5"
11"
4'-8"

GROOVES ON THIS SIDE ONLY

ANCHOR BOLT OR CONSTRUCTION

ADHESIVE PER MANUFACTURER

ANCHOR BOLT OR CONSTRUCTION

ADHESIVE PER MANUFACTURER
GRADE
2"
2'-6 7/8"
3'-0 1/8"
3 1/4"
TYP
6"
TYP
6"
TYP
6"
TYP
6"
6"6"
GRADE

ANCHOR BOLT PER MANUFACTURER
1 3/4" = 1'-0"

BENCH (BN) - TOWER
3 1" = 1'-0"
TABLE SET - TYPE 1 (TB-1) - TOWER
4 1" = 1'-0"
TABLE SET - TYPE 2 (TB-2) - TOWER
2 1" = 1'-0"

BIKE RACK (BR) - TOWER
Date:
08/19/22
MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19
E07A E07A E07A E07A E0 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E01 -2 E01A E01A-2 E01A E01A-2 E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01B-2 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E07A E07A E07A E07A E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E07B E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A-2 E01A-2 E01A-2 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03E03 E03E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E03 E04 E04 E04 E04 E04 E04 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E07B E07B E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E01A E01A E01A E12E12E12E12E12 E07B E12E12E12 E12 E12 E12 E12E12E12E12E12 E12 E12 E12 E12 E12 E01A E07B E07B E03 E03 E12E12E12E12 E12 E12 E07B E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E01A-2 E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A E01A-2 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02 E02E02E02 UP FD FD UP FD FD FD FD F.E.C. F.E.C. F.E.C. F.E.C. F.E.C. F.E.C.V EA-V EA-A EA-A EA-A V V CAV CAV CAV CAV CAV AMB AMB CAV CAV CAV FEV FEV AMB FEVEV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV EV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV FEV UTILITY BTR ECC01 STAIR 01 ELEV. 01 STAIR 02 ELEV. 02 ECC02 ELEC RAMP UP FIRE CONTROL BIKE STORAGE PARKING (20 SPACES) M M M M M M M M M M PATIENT / VISITER PARKING Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing.

Key Plan In Association with All reproduction & intellectual property rights reserved © 2021 BKF ENGINEERS 980 9th St, Suite 2300 Sacramento, CA 95814Civil Engineering
One Bush Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94104 USA t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763 Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 12916 OAKLAND, CA 94604 KAISER PERMANENTE KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA INPATIENT BED TOWER 1600 EUREKA RD ROSEVILLE, CA 95661 Kaiser Project # CAP015954 Sheet Number Sheet Title Professional Seals Project Facility Date: Agency Approval No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD Scale: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION HOK Project # 17.04047.00 MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30 SITE LIGHTING PLAN LT1.00 1" = 40'-0" 1. West Sector Site Plan 2. East Sector Site Plan 2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 08/19/22 STOP
PED
XING
BIKE
LANE
STOP
UBUB
STOP MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 UPDATE 2022-10-13 SITE LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE Original drawing is 42 x 30. Do not scale contents of this drawing. Key Plan In Association with All reproduction & intellectual property rights reserved © 2021 BKF ENGINEERS 980 9th St, Suite 2300 Sacramento, CA 95814 Civil Engineering One Bush Street, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94104 USA t +1 415 243 0555 f +1 415 882 7763 Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. NATIONAL FACILITIES SERVICES POST OFFICE BOX 12916 OAKLAND, CA 94604 KAISER PERMANENTE KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA INPATIENT BED TOWER 1600 EUREKA RD ROSEVILLE, CA 95661 Kaiser Project # CAP015954 Sheet Number Sheet Title Professional Seals Project Facility Date: Agency Approval No. Revision Description YYYY-MM-DD Scale: NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION HOK Project # 17.04047.00 MPP STAGE 2 2022-05-25 1 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2022-06-30 SITE LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE LT1.01 2 MPP STAGE 2 RESPONSE 2 2022-08-19 08/19/22
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center
View Studies
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 1
Rocky Ridge Dr & Douglas Blvd
1 1

LOCATION OF

PROPOSED TOWER
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 2
Rocky Ridge Dr
2 2

LOCATION OF

PROPOSED TOWER
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 3
Rocky Ridge Dr & Lead Hill Blvd
3 3

LOCATION OF

PROPOSED TOWER
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 4
Lead Hill Blvd
4 4

LOCATION OF

PROPOSED TOWER

LOCATION OF PROPOSED

PARKING STRUCTURE
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 5
Lead Hill Blvd
5 5

LOCATION OF PROPOSED

GENERATOR YARD
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 6
Lead Hill Blvd & Eureka Rd
6 6

LOCATION OF PROPOSED

PARKING STRUCTURE
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 7
Eureka Rd
7 7

LOCATION OF PROPOSED

PARKING STRUCTURE
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22
VIEW 8
8 8
Eureka Rd & Douglas Blvd

LOCATION OF

PROPOSED TOWER LOCATION OF PROPOSED

PARKING STRUCTURE
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22

SITE SECTION

LEAD HILL BLVD

ROCKY RIDGE DR
: 320

SITE SECTION LEAD HILL BLVD FOR VI
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22

SITE SECTION

INTERSECTION OF

ROCKY RIDGE DR
& LEAD HILL BLVD

ROCKY RIDGE DR
1 1 : 320

SITE SECTION LEAD HILL BLVD FOR VI
2 1 : 320

SITE SECTION ROCKY RIDGE DR FOR VI
KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER 09/08/22

SITE SECTION

INTERSECTION OF

ROCKY RIDGE DR
& LEAD HILL BLVD
3 1 : 320

SITE SECTION ROCKY RIDGE DR & LEAD HILL
BLVD FOR VI1
2 1 : 320

SITE SECTION ROCKY RIDGE DR FOR VI
RESOLUTION NO. 22-424

CONSIDER A CERTIFIED FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT RELATING TO THE KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER

CAMPUS INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT, AND ASSOCIATED FINDINGS OF FACT,

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES WHEREAS, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (“Kaiser”) submitted an application to the City of Roseville (“City”), in order expand the previously approved development intensity of the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Campus; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, the City certified an environmental impact report for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project (SCH #2003062014); and WHEREAS, the 2022 Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (“Project”) increases the development intensity approved in 2004 and allows for the construction of an approximate 278,000-square-foot, six-story inpatient bed tower building, a new 800 stall four-level parking garage with rooftop parking; relocation of the northwest corner loop road; new main hospital entrance and drop off area; expansion of the existing Emergency Department to add 36 new treatment bays; and a new generator yard and internal upgrades to the existing Central Utility Plant Foundation; and
WHEREAS, the Project required the approval of an Amendment to the North East Roseville Specific Plan, an Amendment to the Development Agreement by and between the City and Kaiser, an amendment to the Major Project Permit Stage 1 for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center and an amendment to the Major Project Permit Stage 2 for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center; and
WHEREAS, the City determined that a supplemental environmental impact report (“SEIR”) should be prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.; and WHEREAS, in February 2022, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of the SEIR; and
WHEREAS, the NOP was circulated for comment by responsible and trustee agencies and the public for a total of 30 days, from February 25, 2022 through March 28, 2022; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2022, the Draft SEIR for the Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2022020590) was distributed to the public for review and comment for a 45-day period that ended September 6, 2022; and
WHEREAS, written responses to all comments received on the Draft SEIR have been prepared and are presented in the Final SEIR, which was published on October 17, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Final SEIR (Exhibit C), consisting of the Draft SEIR and Final SEIR and all documents incorporated therein, were presented to the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville (“Planning Commission”) for their review and consideration on November 10, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission independently considered the environmental effects of the Project as shown in the Final SEIR; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final EIR prepared for the Project, all staff reports pertaining to the Project, and all other pertinent documents relating to the preparation of the Final SEIR, and certified that the Final SEIR is adequate, complete and has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and any related laws; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission certified the Final SEIR, finding that it reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville and that the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final SEIR prior to approving the Project; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations of the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (“Findings” – Exhibit D), on file with the City Clerk, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted and incorporated into the Project all the mitigation measures for the Project (Exhibit E) that are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City that are identified in the Findings; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission certified the Final SEIR for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission specified that the documents and other material that constitute the record of the proceedings on which the Planning Commission’s decision is based shall be located in the offices of the Planning Division and in the custody of the Development Services Director; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission directed staff to file a Notice of Determination, in the Office of the County Clerk of Placer County who, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21152, shall cause such Notice to be posted in the County Clerk’s Office, all within five working days after Planning Commission’s action to approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission approved the Major Project Permit Stage 1 and Major Project Permit Stage 2 entitlements for the Project and forwarded a recommendation that the City Council take the necessary actions to approve the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan Amendment and the Development Agreement Amendment by and between the City and Kaiser.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville, having independently considered the environmental effects of the Project as shown in the Final SEIR, as follows:

1. The City Council has reviewed the Final SEIR prepared for the Project, all staff reports pertaining to the Project, and all other pertinent documents relating to the preparation of the Final SEIR, and confirms that the Planning Commission has appropriately certified the Final SEIR as adequate, complete and prepared in compliance with CEQA and any related laws.

2. The City Council has considered and confirms the Planning Commission has appropriately certified that the Final SEIR reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the City Council of the City of Roseville and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final SEIR prior to approving the Project.

3. The City Council has considered and confirms that the Planning Commission has appropriately adopted the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations of the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville for the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (“Findings”), on file with the City Clerk, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.

4. The City Council has considered and confirms that the Planning Commission has appropriately adopted and incorporated into the Project all the mitigation measures for the Project that are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City that are identified in the Findings.

5. The City Council has considered and confirms that the Planning Commission has appropriately certified the Final SEIR for the Project.

6. The City Council specifies that the documents and other material that constitute the record of the proceedings on which the City Council’s decision is based shall be located in the offices of the Planning Division and in the custody of the Development Services Director.

7. The City Clerk is directed to file a Notice of Determination, together with this Resolution and its exhibits, if any, in the Office of the County Clerk of Placer County and, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21152, shall cause such Notice to be posted in the County Clerk’s Office, all within five working days after City Council action to approve the Project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this day of , 20 , by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk
Kaiser Permanente Roseville
Medical Center Inpatient
Bed Tower Project
Prepared by:

Prepared for:

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

PLANNING DIVISION
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
CONTACT:

Kinarik Shallow
Associate Planner
Final

SUPPLEMENTAL

ENVIROMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT
October 2022
SCH No. 2022020590
1102 R STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 95811

CC EXHIBIT C

Final Supplemental EIR (SCH 2022020590)
Kaiser Permanente Roseville
Medical Center Inpatient Bed
Tower Project
OCTOBER 2022
Prepared for:

CITY OF ROSEVILLE PLANNING DIVISION
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, California 95678
Contact: Kinarik Shallow, Associate Planner
Prepared by:
1102 R Street
Sacramento, California 95811
Contact: Christine Kronenberg, AICP
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.

SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 TOC-i
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Background......................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 CEQA Requirements ........................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.3 Use of the Final SEIR.......................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.4 Project Under Review......................................................................................................................... 1-3

1.5 Responses to Comments................................................................................................................... 1-3

1.6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ................................................................................. 1-3

1.7 Overview of the Public Participation and Review Process ............................................................... 1-4 2 Comments and Responses ............................................................................................................................. 2-1 Comment Letter 1............................................................................................................................................ 2-3 Comment Letter 2..........................................................................................................................................2-11 3 Changes to the Draft SEIR............................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Changes to the Draft SEIR ................................................................................................................. 3-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 TOC-ii

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 1-1
1 Introduction

1.0 Introduction
This Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) contains the public and agency comments received during the public review comment period for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (proposed Project or Project) Draft Supplemental EIR (Draft SEIR).

The EIR is an informational document intended to disclose to the Lead Agency (i.e., the City of Roseville (City)) and the public the environmental consequences of approving and implementing the Project. All written comments received during the Draft SEIR public review period of July 22 through September 6, 2022 are addressed in this Final SEIR. During the public review period, the City received a total of two comment letters from public agencies.

No comments were received from organizations or the public.

The responses in this Final SEIR clarify, correct, and/or amplify text in the Draft SEIR, as appropriate.

1.1 Background
In accordance with CEQA, the City released a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on February 25, 2022 for the required 30-day review period. The purpose of the NOP was to provide notification that a Supplement to the 2004 Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report (2004 Expansion Project EIR - SCH no.2003062014) was being prepared for the Project to evaluate proposed changes to what was previously evaluated in that document and to solicit guidance on the scope and content of the Project’s Supplemental CEQA document. The Draft SEIR was circulated for public review and comment for a period of 45 days from July 22 through September 6, 2022.

The comments and responses that make up this Final SEIR, in combination with the Draft SEIR, constitute the SEIR that will be considered for certification by the City Planning Commission and the City Council.

1.2 CEQA Requirements
The contents of a Final SEIR, which are the same as for an EIR, are specified in Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that a Final EIR shall consist of:
a) The Draft EIR or a revision of the Draft.
b) Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary. c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR. d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process.
e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency.

The Lead Agency must provide each agency that commented on the Draft SEIR with a copy of the Lead Agency’s response to their comments a minimum of 10-days before certifying the Final SEIR. 1 - INTRODUCTION
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 1-2

1.3 Use of the Final SEIR
The Final SEIR serves as the environmental document to inform the Lead Agency’s consideration of approval of the proposed Project, either in whole or in part, or one of the alternatives to the Project as discussed in the Draft SEIR.

The analysis of potential Project alternatives in Chapter 6, “Alternatives of the 2004 Expansion Project EIR,” is applicable to the proposed Project because the proposed Project would not result in any new or potentially significant Project level impacts. The City’s 2035 General Plan EIR concluded that the cumulative increase in light and glare with buildout would be a significant and unavoidable impact. The Medical Center Campus buildout was assumed in the General Plan EIR analysis. Therefore, the Project’s cumulative contribution to a light and glare impacts analysis now necessarily includes identification of this cumulative contribution to a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact. However, the 2035 General Plan EIR, which assumed buildout of the Campus, determined it is not feasible to mitigate light and glare impacts completely without prohibiting the use of light in new development and no other feasible mitigation measures are available. Therefore, the original alternatives analysis in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR remains adequate since a hypothetical alternative to avoid or reduce this significant cumulative impact would be infeasible.

As required by Section 15090 (a) (1)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency, in certifying a Final EIR, must make the following three determinations:

The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.

The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project.

The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency’s independent judgment and analysis.

As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding supported by substantial evidence in the record.

The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Additionally, pursuant to Section 15093(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, when a Lead Agency approves a project that would result in significant unavoidable impacts that are disclosed in the Final EIR, the agency must state in writing the reasons supporting the action. A Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the Lead Agency’s administrative record.
1 - INTRODUCTION
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 1-3

1.4 Project Under Review
The proposed Project would increase the size and capacity of the previously-approved 2004 Expansion Project on the existing Roseville Medical Center Campus. All of the buildings approved as part of the 2004 Expansion Project have been constructed, with the exception of: (i) a five-story, 155,000 square-foot Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility located along the north elevation of the existing main hospital building; (ii) a three-level, approximately 400-space parking garage located in the northeast corner of the Medical Center Campus; and (iii) a helicopter landing pad.

The proposed Project would replace the previously-approved but not constructed prior project elements with other uses that would increase the height and capacity of the project contemplated under the 2004 Expansion Project and would add a few additional elements. The proposed Project revises the 2004 Expansion Project to allow for an approximately 278,000 square foot, six-story, Inpatient Tower building on the site of the prior approved Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility; an expansion of the Emergency Department (which is part of the Main Hospital Building) to add 36 new treatment bays (change of use with no additional square footage); a new four-level garage with rooftop parking to accommodate approximately 800 stalls located on the site of the prior approved parking garage; relocation of the northwest corner loop road; a new main hospital entrance and drop off area; a new generator yard; and internal upgrades to the existing central utility plant. The helicopter landing pad is not proposed as part of the Project.

A detailed project description is contained in the Draft SEIR in Chapter 2, Project Description. The environmental impact analysis is included in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Draft SEIR.

1.5 Responses to Comments
During the public comment period, the City received two letters from public agencies—the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Placer County Air Pollution Control District. Responses to comments received appear in Chapter 2 of this Final SEIR. Each comment letter is numbered and presented with brackets indicating how the letter has been divided into individual comments. Each comment is given a binomial with the number of the comment letter appearing first, followed by the comment number. For example, comments in Letter 1 are numbered 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, and so on. Immediately following the letter are responses, each with binomials that correspond to the bracketed comments.

1.6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed Project includes all of the mitigation measures required of the Project as included in the Draft SEIR, including mitigation measures from the 2004 Expansion Project EIR still applicable to the proposed Project that could reduce or avoid significant environmental impacts. A copy of the MMRP is provided as a separate document to this Final SEIR.

If the City decides to approve the proposed Project, then the City Council will adopt the MMRP at the same time it adopts its CEQA Findings of Fact, as required by Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. 1 - INTRODUCTION
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 1-4

1.7 Overview of the Public Participation and
Review Process
The City notified all responsible and trustee agencies and all known interested groups, organizations, tribes, and individuals that the Draft SEIR was available for review. The following list of actions took place during the preparation, distribution, and review of the Draft SEIR:
▪ A Notice of Completion (NOC) was filed with the State Clearinghouse on February 25, 2022, along with copies of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the required 30-day public review period stating the City’s intention to prepare a SEIR for the proposed Project. The City also posted the NOP on its website (www.roseville.ca.us/environmentaldocuments).
▪ A Notice of Availability (NOA) along with the required NOC and copies of the Draft SEIR were filed with the State Clearinghouse on July 22, 2022 to start the required 45-day public review period. The City mailed a legal notice to property owners within 300 ft. of the Project, posted the notice on the City’s website and the Roseville Coalition of Neighborhood Associations’ (RCONA) website, and sent an email with the NOA attached noticing interested groups, organizations, and individuals regarding the availability of the Draft SEIR. The City also posted the Draft SEIR on its website (www.roseville.ca.us/environmentaldocuments). The public review comment period ended on September 6, 2022.
▪ Copies of the Draft SEIR were available for review on the City’s website ((https://www.roseville.ca. uswww.roseville.ca.us/environmentaldocuments); and at the City of Roseville Planning Division, 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, California.

SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-1
2 Comments and Responses
This chapter contains the comment letters received in response to the Draft SEIR during the 45-day public review period from July 22 through September 6, 2022. The City received letters from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Placer County Air Pollution Control District. No comments were received from any Tribe(s), organizations or the public. Each comment letter is numbered, each comment is bracketed, and responses are provided to each comment. To assist the reader, a brief summary of the comment has been provided; however, it is only a summary and does not repeat the comment verbatim. Please refer back to the letter for the specific comment. The responses amplify or clarify information provided in the Draft SEIR and/or refer the reader to the appropriate place in the document where the requested information can be found. No comments were received to indicate that any revisions or updates to the text of the Draft SEIR are required. However, the City of Roseville (City) staff have made minor corrections to one mitigation measure and the Project applicant has made one revision to Chapter 2, Project Description. The revised language can be found in Chapter 3, Changes to the Draft SEIR.
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-2

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-3
Comment Letter 1
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-4
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-5
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-6
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-7
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-8

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-9
Response to Letter 1
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
(Peter Minkel, Engineering Geologist)
1-1 The comment is referencing the requirement of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Water Board (CVRWQCB) to prepare and adopt Basin Plans for areas within the Central Valley Region. The comment does not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required.
1-2 The comment states that all discharged wastewater must comply with the Antidegradation Policy, which is a mandatory requirement in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDS) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements, and states the Draft SEIR should evaluate potential impacts to surface and groundwater quality.

Potential impacts to surface and groundwater quality are addressed in the Draft SEIR in Chapter 3, “Issues Addressed in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR” starting on page 3-21. As explained on page 3-22, the 2004 Expansion Project EIR requires that all construction sites greater than an acre obtain and comply with a NPDES Permit and prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and comply with the City’s Best Management Practices (BMPs) Guidance Manual that provides guidance on stormwater runoff control, pollution prevention and illicit discharge detection and elimination.

Therefore, the Project is required to obtain a NPDES Permit and prepare a SWPPP and comply with the City’s BMPs for construction projects, as well as the City’s Stormwater Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 14.20) and Stormwater Management Program. Lastly, the Project would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge to impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. As such, impacts to surface and groundwater quality were determined to remain less than significant
1-3 The comment provides additional information regarding Construction Stormwater General Permits when an acre or more of soil is disturbed.

In compliance with the State’s General Storm Water Permit, the City has prepared a construction site run-off program and a post-development run off program that includes a stormwater quality maintenance program to ensure stormwater quality treatment devices, such as Low Impact Design or LID features, are properly maintained by private landowners. The Project applicant will obtain all required permits prior to grading and will comply with the requirements set forth in the Construction General Permit, including preparation of a SWPPP and compliance with the City’s construction BMPs designed to prevent pollutants from entering the watershed and the City’s storm water requirements.

The comment does not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required.
1-4 The comment is referencing Phase I and II MS4 Permits and associated requirements under such permits.

The City operates under the Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), which requires implementation of new development standards to protect water quality. The Project applicant is required to comply with the City’s Stormwater Ordinance and Stormwater Management Program to minimize the impacts of pollutant-generating activities. Please see Response to Comment 1-3. The comment does not raise any 2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-10
concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required.
1-5 The comment is referencing the requirements under Sections 401 and 404 of the federal Clean Water Act and Waste Discharges to waters of the state, which refer to fill of wetlands, work within streams or other waters of the U.S., or fill of non-jurisdictional surface waters.

The Project site does not contain any wetlands, streams or waters of the U.S. and would not impact any of these resources. Therefore, the Project is not required to obtain or comply with these permits. The comment does not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required.
1-6 The comment is referencing the requirements of a dewatering permit that apply if a project requires removal or discharge of groundwater.

The Project would involve minimal excavation and would therefore have no effect on groundwater resources. The Project would not require a dewatering permit. The comment does not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required.
1-7 The comment is referencing the NPDES requirements for projects that require construction dewatering and other general NPDES requirements.

As explained in Response to Comment 1-2, the Project is required to obtain a NPDES Permit to ensure stormwater runoff is treated before entering any waterway, and it will comply with the requirements set forth under the permit. The comment does not raise any concerns regarding the adequacy of the Draft SEIR; therefore, the comment is noted and no further response is required. 2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-11
Comment Letter 2
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-12

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-13
Response to Letter 2
Placer County Air Pollution Control District
(Ann Hobbs, Associate Planner)
2-1 The comment states that the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) requires the Project applicant obtain a permit from the PCAPCD for any stationary sources, such as boilers or generators, as well as some construction equipment.

The Project applicant will coordinate with PCAPCD to obtain any required permits. The Project does not include any boilers or chiller units but does include a new generator yard to house two 2-megawatt emergency generators to support the Inpatient Tower building. As noted on page 4.2-31 of the Draft SEIR in Section 4.2, Air Quality, “the proposed Project would include two 2-megawatt emergency generators which would be subject to PCAPCD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Rule 501, General Permit Requirements and Rule 502, New Source Review.” 2-2 The comment reiterates the requirement that for projects that disturb more than an acre of land and are subject to a Condition of Approval, applicants must prepare and submit a dust control plan per District Rule 228 to the PCAPCD.

As discussed in the Draft SEIR in Section 4.2, Air Quality, mitigation measures identified in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR (i.e., Mitigation Measures 4.2-2 (a) thru (d)) would still be applicable during Project construction and operation to address the following: (i) construction emissions and dust (in compliance with Rule 228); (ii) compliance with best management practices; (iii) payment of air quality fees to offset long-term operational ozone precursor emissions; and (iv) limits on truck idling and installation of 110/280 volt power outlets at all loading docks. Compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.2-2(a) would ensure compliance with Rule 228 and other District requirements. 2 - COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2-14

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 3-1
3 Changes to the Draft SEIR

3.0 Introduction
This chapter presents minor corrections, additions, and revisions made to the Draft Supplemental EIR (SEIR) initiated by the Lead Agency, City of Roseville (City) and the Project applicant. New text is indicated in underline and text to be deleted is reflected by strike through, unless otherwise noted in the introduction that precedes the text change. Text changes are presented in the chapter or section and page order in which they appear in the Draft SEIR.

The changes represent minor clarifications/amplifications of the analysis contained in the Draft SEIR and do not constitute significant new information that, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, would trigger the need to recirculate portions or all of the Draft SEIR.

3.1 Changes to the Draft SEIR
Executive Summary
Mitigation Measure 4.2-2(b) on page ES-11 is revised to read:

Environmental Impact
Level of Significance
Prior to Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of Significance
After Mitigation

4.2-2(b) Contribute Air
Quality Fees to offset
long-term operational
ozone precursor
emissions.

The landowner shall
contribute fifty-six
thousand dollars
($56,000) $48,28079
per ton of NOx emissions
to the City Placer County
Air Pollution Control
District (PCAPCD) to
offset long-term
operational NOx
emissions (the “Air
Quality Fee”). The City
and PCAPCD shall enter
into an agreement for the
collection and
disbursement of the Air
Quality fee for off-site air
quality mitigation. The Air
Quality Fee is to shall be
used for projects,
3 – CHANGES TO THE DRAFT SEIR
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 3-2
Environmental Impact
Level of Significance
Prior to Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
programs and services
that result in reduced
emission sources that
directly benefit City
residents. Such projects,
programs and services
may include, but are not
limited to, replacing nonEPA certified wood
stoves, transit vehicle
conversions, and
retrofitting vehicles with
cleaner burning fuels,
and funding for public
transit services, programs
or operations that would
support the regional
transportation network
and provide greater
access between health
care facilities in the City
of Roseville and the
Sacramento region.
2 Project Description
The third and fifth bullets under the Project’s Sustainability Measures on page 2-20 have been removed.

Sustainability Measures
The proposed Project will be designed to meet Kaiser Permanente’s sustainability requirements, which include Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) HC v4 Gold certification. Developed specifically for hospitals, this healthcare version of the LEED rating system aligns with Kaiser’s sustainable design and performance goals. The proposed Project would include the following sustainability features:
▪ Daylight dimming of electric lighting
▪ Light pollution reduction, including LED lighting
▪ Electrochromic glass at select locations to reduce heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) energy use and improve occupant visual comfort
▪ Indoor environmental quality with an optimized HVAC system ▪ “Solar ready” approach to easily integrate solar photovoltaics at a later date ▪ Enhanced commissioning, as well as measurement and verification of energy usage ▪ Alternative transportation, including preferred parking spaces for high-efficient and low-emitting vehicles, and charging stations for electric vehicles
▪ Preferred parking for high-occupancy vehicles (two or more people) 3 – CHANGES TO THE DRAFT SEIR
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 3-3
▪ Bicycle facilities including storage and changing rooms for all occupants and showers for staff ▪ Indoor water use reduction, including low-flow and low-flush plumbing fixtures with flush and flow rates significantly below the national standard set by the US Department of Energy’s Energy Policy Act (EPACT) 1992 ▪ Outdoor water use reduction, including high efficiency irrigation systems ▪ Low-emitting materials such as adhesives, sealants, paint, coatings, flooring systems, and composite wood

4.2 Air Quality
Mitigation measure 4.2-2(b) on page 4.2-29 is revised to read:

4.2-2(b) Contribute Air Quality Fees to offset long-term operational ozone precursor emissions.

The landowner shall contribute fifty-six thousand dollars ($56,000) $48,27980 to the City Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) to offset long-term operational ozone precursors emissions (the “Air Quality Fee”). The City and PCAPCD shall enter into an agreement for the collection and disbursement of the Air Quality fee for off-site air quality mitigation. The Air Quality Fee is to shall be used for projects, programs and services that result in reduced emission sources that directly benefit City residents. Such projects, programs and services may include, but are not limited to, replacing non-EPA certified wood stoves, transit vehicle conversions, and retrofitting vehicles with cleaner burning fuels, and funding for public transit services, programs or operations that would support the regional transportation network and provide greater access between health care facilities in the City of Roseville and the Sacramento region. 3 – CHANGES TO THE DRAFT SEIR
SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 3-4

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

CC EXHIBIT D

CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
and

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF

THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
for the

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL

CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT
OCTOBER 2022

Page 1 of 47 ends

CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
and

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
I. INTRODUCTION
These findings, as well as the accompanying statement of overriding considerations, have been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.), and the local procedures adopted by the City of Roseville (City). The City is the lead agency for the environmental review of the project and has the principal responsibility for its approval. The project covered by these findings and the relevant CEQA documents is known as the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (Project).

The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR or DSEIR) prepared for the Project updates the CEQA analysis performed in the 2004 Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report (SCH no.2003062014) (2004 Expansion Project EIR) and addresses the potential environmental effects associated with constructing and operating the Project. These findings refer to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) or Final SEIR (FSEIR) where the material appears in either of those documents. Otherwise, references are to the DSEIR.

CEQA generally requires that a lead agency must take reasonable efforts to mitigate or avoid significant environmental impacts when approving a project. In order to effectively evaluate any potentially significant environmental impacts of a proposed project, an EIR must be prepared.

The EIR is an informational document that serves to inform the agency decision-making body and the public in general of any potentially significant environmental impacts. The preparation of an EIR also serves as a medium for identifying possible methods of minimizing any significant effects and assessing and describing a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives to the project.

The SEIR for this Project was prepared by the City as the “lead agency” in accordance with CEQA and has been prepared to identify and assess the anticipated effects of the Project. The City, as the lead agency, has the principal responsibility for approval of the Project.

II. TERMINOLOGY OF FINDINGS
CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require that, for each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency decision-making body must issue a written finding reaching one or more of the three allowable conclusions:

1. Changes or alterations which avoid or mitigate the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR have been required or incorporated into the project;

Page 2 of 47 ends

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding, and such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency; or

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including consideration for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the DSEIR. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subds. (a)(1)–(a)(3); see also CEQA Guidelines, §15091, subds. (a)(1)–(a)(3).)
III. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
The findings and determinations contained herein are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both verbal and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project and the SEIR. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations by the Planning Commission in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

Although the findings below identify specific pages within the Draft and Final SEIRs in support of various conclusions reached below, the Planning Commission hereby incorporates by reference and adopts as its own, the reasoning set forth in both environmental documents, and thus relies on that reasoning, even where not specifically mentioned or cited herein, in reaching the conclusions set forth below, except where additional evidence is specifically mentioned. This is especially true with respect to the Planning Commission’s approval of mitigation measures recommended in the SEIR, and the reasoning set forth in responses to comments in the Final SEIR. The Planning Commission further intends that if these findings fail to cross-reference or incorporate by reference any other part of these findings, any finding required or permitted to be made by this Planning Commission with respect to any particular subject matter of the Project must be deemed made if it appears in any portion of these findings or findings elsewhere in the record.

IV. DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS
“CEQA” means California Environmental Quality Act.
“City” means City of Roseville.
“Commission” or “Planning Commission” means the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville.
“Council” or “City Council” means the City Council of the City of Roseville. “DSEIR” or “Draft SEIR” means the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project, dated July 2022. “SEIR” means Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, including both the DSEIR and FSEIR.
“FSEIR” or “Final SEIR” means the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project, dated October 2022. “MMRP” means Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. “NERSP” means Northeast Roseville Specific Plan.
“NOP” means Notice of Preparation.

Page 3 of 47 ends

“PRC” means California Public Resources Code.

V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. PROJECT OVERVIEW
In 2004, the City evaluated an expansion to the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Campus (Medical Center Campus) to include construction and operation of a 705,360-square-foot expansion to the existing Medical Center Campus (2004 Expansion Project). The 2004 Expansion Project proposed a new medical office building, a new Women and Children’s Center, a new fivestory, 155,000 gross-square-foot Surgery and Intensive Care Unit addition to the existing hospital building, renovation and expansion of the Emergency Department and Radiology Department, two new parking structures (including a three-story 400-space parking garage), an expansion and remodeling of the cafeteria, a Central Utility Plant, a helicopter landing pad, and other existing buildings. The City approved the 2004 Expansion Project and certified that project’s EIR in 2004.

However, neither the Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility, nor the three-story parking garage, or the helicopter landing pad--approved as part of the 2004 Expansion Project--have been constructed. The Project would increase the height and capacity of the previously-approved 2004 Expansion Project plans, while retaining the same overall footprint.

B. THE PROJECT
Kaiser Permanente proposes to increase the size and capacity of the previously approved 2004 Kaiser Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project (2004 Expansion Project) on the existing Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Campus and add a few additional elements.

Specifically, the Project revises the approved 2004 Expansion Project to allow for the following:
an approximately 278,000 square foot, six-story, 138-bed Inpatient Tower building on the site of the prior approved Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility; expansion of the Emergency Department (part of the Main Hospital Building) to add 36 new treatment bays (change of use with no additional square footage); a new four-level garage with rooftop parking to accommodate approximately 800 stalls located on the site of the prior approved parking garage; relocation of the northwest corner loop road; a new main hospital entrance and drop off area; a new generator yard; and internal upgrades to the existing Central Utility Plant.

C. PROJECT SITE
The Project site is located within the existing Medical Center Campus at 1600 Eureka Road in the City (Assessor’s Parcel Number 048-012-001). The approximately 49-acre Project site is bounded by Lead Hill Boulevard on the north, Douglas Boulevard on the south, Rocky Ridge Drive on the west, and Eureka Road on the east. Interstate 80 is approximately 1 mile west of the Project site and the City’s eastern boundary is approximately 0.25 miles to the east of the site.

D. EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING
The Project site is designated Business Professional (BP) on the City’s General Plan land use map (last updated December 2021) and also in the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan (NERSP). Uses allowed under this land use designation include business park and professional office, medical campus, and research and development. The General Plan notes that hospitals and clinics may also

Page 4 of 47 ends

be permitted under this land use designation. The site is zoned Planned Development for Medical Campus (PD 470). Uses permitted include professional offices and general medical services.

E. ADJACENT USES
The area surrounding the Project site is characterized as developed and includes a mix of land uses.

Across Rocky Ridge Drive to the west is a retail center that includes Target and Walmart stores; to the north, across Lead Hill Boulevard is an office development with numerous medical-related services; to the east, across Eureka Road are more office buildings; and to the south, across Douglas Boulevard are more retail uses in the Rocky Ridge Town Center.

F. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the Project are to:

Expand the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Campus through the construction and operation of new medical facilities in order to accommodate future growth of Kaiser Permanente members and the need to provide additional medical services that benefit the community.

Optimize the use of the development potential on the existing Medical Center Campus by developing a comprehensively planned, integrated medical campus within the existing Campus boundaries. Construction of a new hospital tower and expanded emergency department services will keep pace with increasing population growth in the City and in the region.

Maintain current services at the existing Roseville Medical Center Campus, including 24/7 emergency services without interruption.

Provide parking sufficient to accommodate membership and patient parking needs, as well as staff parking to meet current and projected future demand.

Redesign internal circulation on the Roseville Medical Center Campus in order to optimize safety, provide enhanced health and wellness, and create a seamless flow between pedestrians and vehicle traffic throughout the Campus.

Foster the creation of employment opportunities in healthcare by providing jobs for skilled personnel in specialty healthcare departments and improving the jobs/housing balance within the City of Roseville and the surrounding area.

Implement the vision, objectives and policies of the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan and the City of Roseville General Plan (2035).

Incorporate sustainable green building design features developed by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) to meet the LEED Gold performance standards and Kaiser Permanente’s long-term environmental stewardship goals.

G. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Construction of the Project, if approved, would take approximately 56 months, or 4.5 years, to complete. Site grading, trenching for utilities and re-aligning the loop road would take approximately 6 months, followed by construction of the buildings. The intent is to have the parking structure built first in order to provide additional parking on site while the Inpatient Tower building is under construction in the northwest corner of the Campus.

Page 5 of 47 ends

An off-site parking lot located at 2130 Douglas Boulevard would provide temporary parking for Kaiser employees during Project construction.

H. PROJECT APPROVALS
Discretionary Project approvals by the City of Roseville are expected to include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:
 Certification of the SEIR
 Major Project Permit Stages 1-3
 Specific Plan Amendment to the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan  Amendment to the Development Agreement
In addition, the state Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) reviews and issues permits for hospital additions and renovation permits. In essence, HCAI serves as a building department for permit application review and issuance for all hospital projects in California. HCAI would review all Project components (with the exception of the parking garage and relocation of the loop road) and issue building permits for the Inpatient Tower building, internal improvements to the CUP and generator yard Project components.

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City issued a NOP for preparation of an SEIR on February 25, 2022 (SCH# 2022020590). This notice was circulated to the public, local, state, and federal agencies, and other interested parties to solicit comments on the scope of the SEIR analysis for the Project.

The City received a total of three letters in response to the NOP. All of the NOP comment letters received are included in Appendix A of the Draft SEIR.

The SEIR includes a discussion of prior impacts addressed in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR and an analysis of the following resource issue areas:
• Aesthetics
• Air Quality
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Land Use and Planning
• Public Utilities
• Transportation and Circulation
The topics of Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services and Recreation, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Wildfire are not studied further in the Draft SEIR because, as explained in Chapter 3 of the DSEIR (Issues Addressed in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR), impacts in these areas would be less than significant or no impacts would occur.

Page 6 of 47 ends

The City published the Draft SEIR for public and agency review on July 22, 2022. The public review period was 45 days, ending on September 6, 2022. In October 2022, the City published a Final SEIR for the Project.

VII. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For the purposes of CEQA, and the findings herein set forth, the administrative record for the Project consists of those items listed in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21167.6, subdivision (e). The record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the Project consists of the following documents, at a minimum:
• The NOP dated February 25, 2022, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project;
• All applications for approvals and development entitlements related to the Project and submitted to the City;
• Comments received on the NOP issued by the City;
• The Draft SEIR and all appendices to the Draft SEIR for the Project; • Notices of Completion and of Availability, providing notice that the Draft SEIR had been completed and was available for public review and comment; • All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment period on the Draft SEIR;
• All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the Project, in addition to timely comments on the Draft SEIR;
• The Final SEIR for the Project dated October 2022, including all documents referred to or relied upon therein, and documents relied upon or referenced in these findings, which include, but are not limited to the following:
• All timely comments received on the Draft SEIR and responses to those comments; • All Technical Appendices to the SEIR;
• Letters and correspondence submitted to the City following the release of the Final SEIR;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; • The Notices of Public Hearing issued in connection with City Planning Commission hearings on the Project;
• All findings and resolutions adopted by the Planning Commission in connection with Project approvals, and all documents cited or referred to therein; • All reports, studies, memoranda (including internal memoranda not protected by the attorney-client privilege), maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the

Page 7 of 47 ends

Project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the Project;
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents related to the Project cited or referenced in the preparation of the Draft SEIR or Final SEIR; • All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the Project, up through the close of the public hearing, including staff reports;
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at any other information sessions, public meetings or public hearings;
• The relevant files of the City of Roseville Planning Division for the Project; • The relevant City files and the materials submitted by the Project applicant; • The City of Roseville General Plan, the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan, and Roseville Municipal Code;
• Matters of common knowledge to the City including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations;
• Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and • Any other materials required for the record of proceedings by PRC section 21167.6(e).

The administrative record of these proceeding is the City’s Development Services Department, located at 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95678. The custodian of these documents and other materials is the City Clerk.

The Planning Commission has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decisions on the Project even if not every document was formally presented to the Planning Commission or City Staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the Project. Without exception, any documents set forth above not found in the Project files fall into one of two categories. Many of them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions with which the Planning Commission was aware in approving the Project. (See City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administration (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, fn. 6.) Other documents influenced the expert advice provided to City Staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the Planning Commission as the final decision making body.

For that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the Planning Commission’s decisions relating to approval of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21167.6, subd. (e)(10); Browning-Ferris Industries v. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 852, 866; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 153, 155.)

Page 8 of 47 ends

VIII. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
PRC section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” Section 21002 goes on to state that “in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.”
The mandate and principles announced in PRC section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (a); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a).) For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that “[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(1).)
The second permissible finding is that “[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(2).)
The third potential conclusion is that “[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(3).) PRC section 21061.1 defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors.” The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between “avoiding” a significant environmental effect and merely “substantially lessening” such an effect. The City must therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used. PRC section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses the term “mitigate” rather than “substantially lessen.” The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate “mitigating” with “substantially lessening.” Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002.) For purposes of these findings, the term “avoid” refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less-than-significant level. In contrast, the term “substantially lessen” refers to the effectiveness of such measure or measures to

Page 9 of 47 ends

substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that effect to a less-thansignificant level.

Although CEQA Guidelines section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is “avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed],” these findings, for purposes of clarity, will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a less than significant level, or has been substantially lessened but remains significant. Moreover, although section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely “potentially significant,” these findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final SEIR.

CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with some other agency. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a).) With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project’s “benefits” rendered “acceptable” its “unavoidable adverse environmental effects.” (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15093, 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b).)
In addition to describing the disposition of the various significant effects identified in the DSEIR, the findings must also explain why the project alternatives described in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR are not being selected for implementation. In other words, the City of Roseville is required to describe the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations that make each alternative infeasible.

The SEIR for the Project identified one cumulative aesthetic (light and glare) impact as significant and unavoidable resulting from the Project, and thus a Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared.

IX. LEGAL EFFECT OF FINDINGS
These findings constitute the City’s best efforts to set forth the evidentiary and policy bases for its decision to approve the VESP in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures outlined in the EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City hereby binds itself to require implementation of these measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts a resolution approving the Project.

X. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Project and is being approved by the Planning Commission by the same resolution that adopts these findings.

The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with adopted mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. The MMRP is a separate

Page 10 of 47 ends

document from the SEIR and will be approved in conjunction with certification of the SEIR and adoption of these Findings of Fact.

XI. FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATION

MEASURES
The Draft SEIR identified a number of significant and potentially significant environmental effects (or impacts) that the Project may cause. Most of these significant impacts can be reduced to a level of less than significant through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. One impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level and will be significant and unavoidable. For the reasons set forth in Section XI, infra, however, the City has determined that overriding economic, social or other considerations outweigh the significant, unavoidable effects of implementation of the Project.

The City’s findings with respect to Project impacts requiring mitigation are set forth in Table A, attached to these findings. The findings set forth in the table are hereby incorporated by reference and the Council adopts all of the mitigation measures identified therein. This table does not attempt to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the SEIR. Instead, the table provides a summary description of each impact, describes the applicable mitigation measures identified in the Draft or Final SEIR and adopted by the Planning Commission, and states the Planning Commission’s findings on the significance of each impact after imposition of the adopted mitigation measures. A full explanation of these environmental findings and conclusions can be found in the Draft and Final SEIRs, and these findings are hereby incorporated by reference the discussion and analysis in those documents supporting the SEIR’s determinations regarding mitigation measures and the Project’s impacts and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. In making these findings, the Planning Commission ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the analysis and explanation in the Draft and Final SEIRs, and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these findings the determinations and conclusions of the Draft and Final SEIRs relating to environmental impacts and mitigation measures, except to the extent any such determinations and conclusions are specifically and expressly modified by these findings.

XII. FINDINGS REGARDING RECIRCULATION OF THE DRAFT SEIR The Planning Commission adopts the following findings with respect to whether to recirculate the DSEIR. Under Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, recirculation of an EIR is required when “significant new information” is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the DEIR for public review but prior to certification of the FEIR. The term “information” can include changes in the project or environmental setting, as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.

Page 11 of 47 ends

(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it. (4) The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. (CEQA Guidelines, §15088.5.)
Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. The above standard is “not intend[ed] to promote endless rounds of revision and recirculation of EIRs.” (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1993) 6 Cal. 4th 1112, 1132.) “Recirculation was intended to be an exception, rather than the general rule.” (Ibid.) Here, the information contained within the Final SEIR involves no “significant new information” triggering recirculation because the information did not result in any new significant environmental effects or any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified significant effects and did not otherwise trigger recirculation. Under such circumstances, the City finds that recirculation of the SEIR is not required.

XIII. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
A. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR describe a reasonable range of alternatives to a project that would feasibly attain most of the basic project objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the project’s significant effects. (CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(a).) An EIR is not required to consider every conceivable alternative to a project, nor alternatives that are infeasible. (Id.)
Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires the consideration of a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that could reduce or eliminate any significant adverse environmental effects of the proposed project, including alternatives that may, to some degree, impede the project’s objectives.

PRC section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]” The procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” “[I]n the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects.”

Page 12 of 47 ends

The Project is generally consistent with the prior 2004 Expansion Project EIR; therefore, according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)(A), when an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows that the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15163(a) states “A Lead or Responsible Agency may prepare a supplement to an EIR rather than a Subsequent EIR if: (1) any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and (2) only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation.”
Furthermore, when the agency decides whether to approve the project, the decision-making body shall consider the previous EIR as revised by the Supplemental EIR (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15163[e]). A finding under Section 15091 shall be made for each significant effect shown in the previous EIR.

According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, a Supplemental EIR needs to contain only the information needed to analyze the modified Project, including changed circumstances and new information requiring additional environmental review. Where the existing information and analysis in the 2004 Expansion Project Final EIR is sufficient to evaluate the impacts of the Project, no additional environmental review is required.

Project alternatives were analyzed in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR and included a No Project Alternative, a Reduced Intensity Alternative, and an Off-Site Alternative. While the 2004 Expansion Project EIR determined the No Project Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative due to a decrease in air quality and traffic impacts, the CEQA Guidelines require that an environmentally superior alternative be designated if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior choice. Therefore, the Off-Site Alternative was determined to be the environmentally superior alternative due to a reduction in air quality and traffic impacts. The City’s 2035 General Plan EIR concluded that the cumulative increase in light and glare with buildout of the General Plan would be a significant and unavoidable impact. The Medical Center Campus buildout was assumed in the General Plan. Therefore, the Project’s cumulative contribution to light and glare impacts analysis now necessarily includes identification of this cumulative contribution to a significant and unavoidable impact. However, the 2035 General Plan EIR, which assumed buildout of the Campus, determined it is not feasible to mitigate light and glare impacts completely without prohibiting the use of light in new development, and no other feasible mitigation measures are available. The analysis of alternatives in the 2004 Expansion Project EIR’s Chapter 6 (Alternatives of the 2004 Expansion Project EIR) is still applicable to the Project because a hypothetical alternative to avoid or reduce this significant cumulative impact would be infeasible; therefore, the original alternatives analysis is still valid, and an analysis of additional Project alternatives is not required.

The 2004 Expansion Project Final EIR project alternatives (summarized below) were considered for analysis. As described in the Final SEIR, no additional analysis of the alternatives is warranted

Page 13 of 47 ends

for the Project, and the alternatives analysis comprehensively evaluated in the 2004 Expansion Final EIR remains adequate.

Alternative 1, No Project Alternative
The “No Project” alternative assumes no Kaiser Medical Center expansion on the project site but assumes medical office use buildout of the site as permitted under General Plan and Specific Plan policies and regulations. Under the General Plan and NERSP the undeveloped area of the 49-acre Kaiser site along Douglas Boulevard would be developed with medical office space.

Impacts: The No Project Alternative would result in a decrease in the following impacts associated with the Project:
• Transportation and Circulation
• Air Quality
The level of significance of other impacts would not be substantively changed.

Findings: The City of Roseville hereby makes finding (a)(3), as stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to this alternative. The No Project Alternative is hereby rejected as infeasible because it would not provide comprehensive medical services for members in Roseville and surrounding areas; and would provide fewer employment opportunities in the City. Under this alternative, Kaiser would consider moving some portion of its operations out of Roseville in order to consolidate its facilities and services at an alternative campus. This would further fragment Kaiser's facilities and services, and therefore would be in conflict with the objectives for the Project.

Alternative 2, Reduced Intensity Alternative
The Reduced Intensity Alternative assumes a reduced Medical Center expansion project on the project site. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would include a smaller expansion of the Medical Center. This alternative would construct approximately 491,130 gsf of new buildings and additions, approximately 214,230 gsf less than the proposed Project.

Impacts: The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a decrease in the following impacts associated with the Project:
• Transportation and Circulation
• Air Quality
The level of significance of other impacts would not be substantively changed.

Findings: The City of Roseville hereby makes finding (a)(3), as stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to this alternative. The Reduced Intensity Alternative is hereby rejected as infeasible because it would not maximize the quality and efficiency of use of the Kaiser Roseville Medical Center Campus to the same extent as the proposed Project, and therefore would not fully accommodate existing and future demands for medical care in the region. The Reduced

Page 14 of 47 ends

Intensity Alternative would also not create as many high-quality employment opportunities for the City. Under this alternative, Kaiser would consider additional site(s) in or around the Roseville area to provide supplementary services. This would fragment Kaiser's facilities and services and could result in the establishment of duplicative facilities. This alternative would not maximize the quality and efficiency of uses on the site, would reduce employment opportunities, and therefore would be in conflict with the objectives for the Project.

Alternative 3, Off-Site Alternative
The Off-Site Alternative assumes partial Medical Center use buildout on the project site and construction of Kaiser administrative and clinical space at the Stone Point Campus site at 1445 Eureka Road. The Off-Site Alternative would use nearby leased space to accommodate a portion of Kaiser’s proposed Medical Center Expansion project. The leased space would be located at the 130-acre Stone Point Campus development site at 1445 Eureka Road, within the NERSP area; the site is approximately ¾ mile (about 4,000 feet) northwest of the project site.

Impacts: The Off-Site Alternative would result in a decrease in the following impacts associated with the Project:
• Transportation and Circulation
• Air Quality
• Traffic Noise
The level of significance of other impacts would not be substantively changed.

Findings: The Off-Site Alternative is hereby rejected as infeasible because the Stone Point Campus site at 1445 Eureka Road (or 1 Adventist Health Way) was developed in 2019 with the Adventist Health Campus and would therefore be unable to accommodate any portion of the Project. In addition, any off-site alternative does not meet the basic objectives of the Project, as the primary purpose of the Project is to modify and expand the existing facility/site. Lastly, an offsite alternative would not change the outcome of the cumulative contribution to light and glare as significant and unavoidable.

XIV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
“CEQA recognizes that in determining whether and how a project should be approved, a public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives, including economic, environmental, and social factors and in particular the goal of providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15021, subd. (d).) To reflect the ultimate balancing of competing public objectives when the agency decides to approve a project that will cause one or more significant effects on the environment, an agency must prepare a statement of overriding considerations.” (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15021, subd. (d), 15093.)
A statement of overriding considerations must set forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project’s “specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits” rendered

Page 15 of 47 ends

“acceptable” its “unavoidable adverse environmental effects.” (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15093, subd. (a), 15043, subd. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b).) A. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
As set forth above, the approval of the Project will result in one significant adverse environmental effect in relation to Aesthetics (cumulative light and glare impact) that cannot be avoided even with the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures.

B. FINDING OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The following statement identifies the reasons why, in the City’s judgment, the benefits of the Project outweigh its unavoidable significant impact.

The City finds that each of the overriding considerations expressed as benefits and set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for such a finding. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the documents identified for inclusion in the Record of Proceedings.

The City has considered the SEIR, the public Record of Proceedings on the Project and other written materials presented to and prepared by the City, as well as verbal and written testimony received, and hereby determines that implementation of the Project would result in the following substantial public benefits:

Furtherance of City Goals and Policies
The Project will implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s General Plan and its Northeast Roseville Specific Plan by providing expanded medical services within the existing Medical Center Campus to accommodate existing and future demands for medical care in the City and the region, while ensuring compatibility with surrounding uses. The Project promotes General Plan Land Use Element Community Form – Jobs/Housing and Economic Development Policies LU5.1, LU5.6 and LU 5.7. Consistent with these policies, the Project will provide local employment and will help maintain the land use mix and the fiscal viability of the City.

Furthermore, the Project adheres to the City’s Design Guidelines and other regulatory requirements.

Expanded Development of an Existing Site
The Project will expand upon development on an existing medical campus site in an existing urbanized area. The Project will result in regional environmental benefits because it will not require the extension of utilities or roads into undeveloped areas, and it is convenient to major arterials, services, and transit.

Increased Economic Impacts to the City of Roseville

Page 16 of 47 ends

The Project would positively contribute to the City’s local economy through new capital investment. The Project will foster the creation of employment opportunities in healthcare by providing jobs for skilled personnel in specialty healthcare departments and improving the jobs/housing balance within the City of Roseville and the surrounding area. The approximate 278,000 square foot, six-story, Inpatient Tower building proposed with the Project would help ensure the retention of the approximately 2,800 existing Kaiser employees in the City, and is anticipated to generate approximately 728 new jobs. In addition to creating long-term employment opportunities through the new hospital tower building, project construction would generate approximately 370 new construction-related jobs at peak construction. The Project would help achieve a well-balanced mix of land uses, housing types, and job opportunities as identified in Land Use Element, Community Form – Jobs/Housing and Economic Development Goal LU5.1.

Given the proximity of employment opportunities and commercial services to residential areas, the Project plays a role in achieving the desirable goals set forth in the policy.

Enhanced Public Safety and Public Health
The Project expands a major medical care facility to serve existing and future demand in the City of Roseville and the greater region, which will in turn result in an increase in the quality and efficiency of medical care delivery to patients. Construction of a new hospital tower and expanded emergency department services will keep pace with increasing population growth in the City and in the region. The new parking structure will provide additional parking to accommodate membership and patient needs, as well as staff parking to meet current and projected future demand. The Project will supplement and support existing Kaiser Permanente medical offices, hospitals and other facilities in the region that are currently constrained in their ability to enhance existing services or to renovate clinical areas.

Implementation of Sustainable Development Strategies
The Project is designed to comply with Title 24 (California Energy Efficiency Standards) and meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) requirements, would be constructed in compliance with current CALGreen building codes, and would also include a variety of sustainability measures [see Chapter 2, Project Description]. ------------------------------------
Pursuant to PRC section 21081 and section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission of the City of Roseville adopts and makes the following statement of overriding considerations regarding the remaining significant unavoidable impact of the Project, as discussed above, and the anticipated economic, social, and other benefits of the Project.

The Planning Commission finds and determines that: (1) the majority of the significant impacts of the Project will be reduced to acceptable levels by implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in these findings; (2) the Planning Commission’s approval of the Project as proposed will result in one significant adverse environmental effect that cannot be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the Project; and (3) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternativesthat will further mitigate, avoid, or reduce to a less-than-significant level the remaining significant environmental impact.

Page 17 of 47 ends

After weighing the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project against the significant unavoidable impact of the Project identified in the SEIR, the City hereby determines that those benefits outweigh the risks and adverse environmental impacts of the Project, and further determines that the Project’s significant unavoidable impact is acceptable.

Accordingly, the City adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations, recognizing that a significant unavoidable impact will result from implementation of the Project. Having (i) adopted all feasible mitigation measures, as discussed in the SEIR and herein; (ii) rejected alternatives to the Project, as discussed in the SEIR and herein; and (iii) recognized the significant unavoidable impact of the Project, the City hereby finds that the benefits of the Project, as stated herein, are determined to be overriding considerations that warrant approval of the Project and outweigh and override its significant unavoidable Aesthetic impact, and thereby justify the approval of the Project.

Page 18 of 48 ends

4.1 Aesthetics
Impact 4.1-1: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with
applicable zoning and
other regulations
governing scenic quality
LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.1-2: The
proposed Project would
not create a new source
of light or glare which
would adversely affect
day or nighttime views
in the area.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.1-3: The
proposed Project would
contribute to a
cumulative increase in
light and glare.

PS Given the location of the Project within a
developed area of the City, the addition of
new lights would be relatively limited;
however, the 2035 General Plan EIR, which
considered build out of the project site,
determined it is not feasible to mitigate light
and glare impacts completely without
prohibiting the use of light in new
development, and no other feasible
mitigation measures are available. Therefore,
the Project’s cumulative contribution would
be considerable, and the impact would be
significant and unavoidable.

SU Finding: No mitigation
measures are available to
reduce this impact to a lessthan-significant level. The Planning Commission,
therefore, finds that there
are no feasible changes or
alterations that could be
incorporated into the Project
to avoid the significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding: Specific
economic, legal, social,
technological, other

Page 19 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
considerations, including
the City’s General Plan
finding that cumulative
increase in light and glare
would be a significant and
unavoidable impact, make
infeasible the mitigation
measures or Project
alternatives identified in the
2004 Expansion Project EIR
and the FSEIR.

4.2 Air Quality
Impact 4.2-1: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with or
obstruct
implementation of the
Sacramento Regional 8-
hour Ozone Attainment
and Reasonable Further
Progress Plan.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.2-2: The
proposed Project could
result in a cumulatively
considerable increase
of any criteria pollutant
for which the Project
region is in nonattainment.

PS Mitigation Measure 4.2-2(a): Prepare a
Construction Emission/Dust Control Plan
(note: the 2004 Expansion Project EIR
mitigation measure stated below includes
changes to reflect current air district
requirements)
Thirty days prior to the start of construction,
the Placer County Air Pollution Control District
(PCAPCD) requires, at a minimum,
preparation of a Construction Emission/Dust
LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measure 4.2-2
(subsections (a) thru (d))
has been required or
incorporated into the
Project, and will reduce this
impact to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring:
a Construction
Emission/Dust Control Plan
(CEDCP) is prepared and

Page 20 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
Control Plan (CEDCP) and submittal of the
CEDCP to the PCAPCD for review and
approval. The CEDCP shall identify mitigation
measures to reduce the level of constructionrelated emissions below the PCAPCD threshold of 82 pounds per day in
accordance with the standards of the
PCAPCD. Mitigation measures could include
some or all of the following to reduce
emissions to less-than-significant levels
(below the PCAPCD threshold of 82 pounds
per day): Construction equipment exhaust
emissions shall not exceed District Rule 202
Visible Emission limitations.
b. The prime contractor shall submit to the
District a comprehensive inventory (i.e.,
make, model, year, emission rating) of
all the heavy-duty off-road equipment
(50 horsepower or greater) that will be
used an aggregate of 40 or more hours
for the construction project. The
inventory shall be updated and
submitted monthly throughout the
duration of the Project, except that an
inventory shall not be required for any
30-day period in which no construction
activity occurs. At least 48 hours prior
to the use of subject heavy-duty offroad
equipment, the Project representative
shall provide the District with the
anticipated construction timeline
including start date, and name and
followed during
construction; payment of
required fees; and
compliance with the air
district’s best management
practices. The Planning
Commission hereby directs
that this mitigation measure
be adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
could result in a cumulative
increase in NOx emissions
generated during
construction and operation.

Significant impacts
associated with construction
and operation would be
reduced to a less-thansignificant level as a result
of the Project’s compliance

Page 21 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
phone number of the Project manager
and on-site foreman.
c. An enforcement plan shall be
established to evaluate project-related
on- and off-road heavy-duty vehicle
engine emission opacities weekly, using
standards as defined in California Code
of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2180
- 2194. An Environmental Coordinator,
CARB-certified to perform Visible
Emissions Evaluations (VEE), shall
routinely evaluate project-related offroad and heavy-duty on-road equipment emissions for compliance with this
requirement. Operators of vehicles and
equipment found to exceed opacity
limits will be notified and the equipment
must be repaired within 72 hours. An
Independent Environmental Coordinator
or Placer County Air Pollution Control
District staff, CARB-certified to perform
Visible Emissions Evaluations (VEE),
shall routinely evaluate Project-related
off-road and heavy-duty on-road
equipment emissions during
construction for compliance with engine
emission opacities, using standards as
defined in the California Code of
Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2180-
2194. Operators of vehicles and
equipment found to exceed opacity
limits shall be notified and the
with dust and emission
control plan, payment of
required fees, and
compliance with the air
district’s best management
practices. (DSEIR, p. 4.2-24
thru 4.2-30)

Page 22 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
equipment must be removed from
service and repaired prior to being
placed back in service. Equipment
owners and operators found to be
operating equipment that is out of
compliance shall be subject to a notice
of violation and monetary fines.
d. The Project shall provide a plan for
approval by the PCAPCD demonstrating
that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower)
off-road vehicles to be used in the
construction Project, including owned,
leased and subcontractor vehicles, will
achieve a Project-wide fleet-average 20
percent NOx reduction and 45 percent
particulate reduction compared to the
most recent CARB fleet average.

Acceptable options for reducing
emissions may include use of late model
engines, low-emission diesel products,
alternative fuels, engine retrofit
technology, after-treatment products,
and/or other options as they become
available.
e. There shall be no open burning of
removed vegetation during
infrastructure improvements.

Vegetative material should be chipped
or delivered to waste-to-energy
facilities.
f. Minimize idling time to 10 minutes.

Page 23 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
g. Earth-moving construction equipment
shall be cleaned with water once per day.
h. Soil binders shall be spread on unpaved
roads and employee/equipment
parking areas.
i. Approved chemical soil stabilizers shall
be applied according to manufacturer’s
specifications to all inactive construction
areas (i.e., previously graded areas
which remain inactive for 96 hours).
j. Use existing line power sources located
on the site or clean fuel generators
rather than temporary power
generators, except during the first four
weeks of construction of the first
structure, when temporary generators
may be used if line power sources are
not feasible.
k. All grading operations shall be
suspended when wind speeds (as
instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles
per hour (as measured by an on-site
anemometer) and dust is impacting
adjacent properties.
l. All truck and equipment wheels shall be
washed prior to leaving the site.
m. An operational water truck shall be on
site at all times. Apply water to control
dust at least twice daily (morning and
evening), and as needed to prevent
dust impacts off site.

Page 24 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
n. Streets shall be washed or wetbroomed if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares.
o. Traffic speeds on all unpaved surfaces
shall be 15 miles per hour or less.

In addition to the above measures, the
Project applicant shall consider any of the
following measures to further reduce
construction-related exhaust emissions:
p. Employ construction activity
management techniques, such as
extending the construction period
outside the ozone season of May
through October; reducing the number of
pieces used simultaneously; increasing
the distance between emission sources;
reducing or changing the hours of
construction; and scheduling activity
during off-peak hours.
q. Construction contracts shall include
language that prohibits the use of pre1996 off-road heavy-duty construction equipment on declared Spare the Air
Days and prohibits the use of all heavyduty diesel equipment on days forecast to exceed the federal one-house standard.
r. Use low-sulfur fuel for stationary
construction equipment.
s. The applicant shall include a provision
in contract language that earth-moving
contractors shall not operate pre-1996

Page 25 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
heavy-duty diesel equipment on
forecast Spare the Air Days.
t. Use low-emission stationary equipment
on site.
u. Provide a flag person to guide traffic
properly and ensure safety at
construction sites.
v. Schedule operations affecting traffic for
off-peak hours.
w. Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic
flow interference from construction
activities. The plan may include
advance public notice of routing, use of
public transportation, and satellite
parking areas with a shuttle service.
x. Minimize obstruction of through-traffic
lanes.
y. Develop trip reduction plan to achieve

1.5 AVR (average vehicle ridership) for
construction employees
In addition to the above PCAPCD measures,
the following dust control measures would be
required under the grading permit by the
Roseville Grading Ordinance:
aa. Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least
two feet of freeboard.
bb. Sweep all paved access roads, parking
areas, or staging areas on a daily basis
at construction sites, particularly where
silt has carried over to adjacent public
thoroughfares.

Page 26 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
cc. Cover, watering twice daily, or apply
(non-toxic) soil binders to any exposed
stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.), particularly
over weekends if stockpiles are located
in proximity to the existing hospital.
dd. If landscaping is not planted immediately
in areas where construction has been
completed, hydroseed undeveloped
areas. Appropriate application of such
materials (appropriate seed mixture used
in hydroseeding) shall be reviewed and
approved by a qualified biologist.

4.2-2(b) Contribute Air Quality Fees to offset
long-term operational ozone precursor
emissions.

The landowner shall contribute fifty-six
thousand dollars ($56,000) $48,279 per ton
of NOx emissions to the City to offset longterm operational NOx emissions (the “Air Quality Fee”). The City and PCAPCD shall
enter into an agreement for the collection
and disbursement of the Air Quality fee for
off-site air quality mitigation. The Air Quality
Fee is to be used for projects, programs and
services that result in reduced emission
sources that directly benefit City residents.

Such projects, programs and services may
include, but are not limited to, replacing nonEPA certified wood stoves, transit vehicle conversions, and retrofitting vehicles with
cleaner burning fuels.

Page 27 of 48 ends

4.2-2(c) All flat roofs shall be made of
material(s) that reduce energy demand.

4.2-2(d) Provide power outlet at loading
docks and prohibit diesel truck idling for more
than five minutes.

All truck loading and unloading docks shall be
equipped with one 110/208 volt power outlet
for every two dock doors. Diesel trucks shall
be prohibited from idling more than five
minutes and must be required to connect to
the 110/208 volt power to run any auxiliary
equipment. Signage shall be provided.

Impact 4.2-3: The
proposed Project would
not expose sensitive
receptors to substantial
pollutant
concentrations.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.2-4: The
proposed Project could
result in a cumulative
impact related to air
quality.

PS Implement Mitigation Measures 4.2-2(a)
through 4.2-2(d)
LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measures 4.2-
2(a) thru (d) which has been
required or incorporated
into the Project, will reduce
this impact to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring a Construction
Emission/Dust Control Plan
(CEDCP) is prepared and
followed during
construction, payment of

Page 28 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
required fees, and
compliance with the air
district’s best management
practices. The Planning
Commission hereby directs
that this mitigation measure
be adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in Support
of Finding: Construction of
the Project could result in a
cumulative increase in NOx
emissions generated during
construction and operation.

Significant impacts
associated with construction
and operation would be
reduced to a less-thansignificant level as a result of the Project’s compliance with
dust and emission control
plan, payment of required
fees, and compliance with the

Page 29 of 48 ends

4.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 4.3-1: The
proposed Project would
not generate GHG
emissions that may
have a significant effect
on the environment.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.3-2: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with any
plan policy or regulation
adopted for reducing
GHG emissions.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.3-3: The
proposed Project would
not result in a
cumulative impact
related to GHG
emissions.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)

4.4 Land Use and Planning
Impact 4.4-1: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with any
land use plan, policy or
regulation adopted for
LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA

Page 30 of 48 ends

Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)

4.5 Utilities
Impact 4.5-1: The
proposed Project would
not require the relocation
or construction of new or
expanded water,
wastewater treatment,
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural
gas, or
telecommunications
facilities.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.5-2: Sufficient
water supplies would be
available to serve the
proposed Project.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.5-3: The
proposed Project would
not result in inadequate
wastewater treatment
capacity to serve the
Project’s projected
increase in demand.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.5-4: The
proposed Project would
LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for

Page 31 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
not generate an
increase in solid waste
exceeding capacity of
the landfill or impair the
attainment of solid
waste reduction goals.
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.5-5: The
proposed Project would
comply with reduction
statutes and regulations
related to solid waste.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.5-6: The
proposed Project, when
combined with current
and reasonably
foreseeable future
projects, would not
result in cumulatively
considerable impacts
related to utilities and
service systems.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)

4.6 Transportation and Circulation
Impact 4.6-1: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with a
program, plan,
ordinance, or policy
addressing the
circulation system
LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)

Page 32 of 48 ends

Impact 4.6-2: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with
adopted programs,
plans, ordinances, or
policies regarding
bicycle facilities.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.6-3: The
proposed Project would
not conflict with
adopted programs,
plans, ordinances, or
policies regarding
pedestrian facilities.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.6-4: The
proposed Project would
not result in a
geometric design
feature that is
inconsistent with
applicable design
standards.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)
Impact 4.6-5: The
proposed Project would
not result in roadway
and transportation
facilities that impede
access for emergency
response vehicles.

LTS None required. LTS Under CEQA, no mitigation
measures are required for
impacts that are less than
significant. (Pub. Resources
Code, §21002; CEQA
Guidelines, §§15126.4,
subd. (a)(3), 15091.)

Page 33 of 48 ends

3.2.5 Cultural Resources
The proposed Project
could cause a
substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a
historical resource
pursuant to §15064.5.

The proposed Project
could cause a
substantial adverse
change in the
significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5.

The proposed Project
could disturb any
human remains,
including those interred
outside of formal
cemeteries.

The proposed Project
could cause a
substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource listed
or eligible for listing in
the California Register
of Historical Resources,
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Measure CUL-1
In the event of discovery of buried
paleontological, archaeological or historic
deposits, project activities in the vicinity of
the find shall be temporarily halted and a
qualified archaeologist consulted to assess
the resource and provide proper
management recommendations. Possible
management recommendations for important
resources could include resource avoidance
or data recovery excavations. If human
remains are found, the Placer County
Coroner’s Office shall be contacted
immediately. The coroner shall contact the
Native American Heritage Commission, which
shall notify the appropriate descendant.

Less than Significant Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measure CUL-1,
which has been required or
incorporated into the
Project, will reduce this
impact to a less-thansignificant level, by ensuring
any buried paleontological,
archeological, or historic
resources and human
remains unearthed during
construction to be properly
managed and the proper
agencies contacted. The
Planning Commission
hereby directs that this
mitigation measure be
adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have
been required in, or
incorporated into, the
Project that avoid the
potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Page 34 of 48 ends

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
could result in unearthing
significant geologic or
historic resources, as well
as human remains.

Significant impacts
associated with the
potential disturbance to
these resources and human
remains would be reduced
to a less-than-significant
level by ensuring a buffer
would be provided and
proper management
protocols were followed in
the event resources are
unearthed. (DSEIR, pp. 3-11
thru 3-12)

3.2.7 Geology and Soils
The project could result
in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of
topsoil.

The project could be
located on a geologic
unit or soil that is
PS Mitigation Measure GEO-11
The project sponsor has agreed to abide by
the recommendations of the Geotechnical
and Geohazards Reports prepared for the
proposed Project, which addresses the
following:
 General Earthwork and Grading
 Earthwork Shrinkage and Subsidence
LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measure GEO-1,
which has been required or
incorporated into the
Project, will reduce this
impact to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring
compliance with the
1 This mitigation measure was not named or numbered in the 2004 IS. For the purposes of identification in this IS, this mitigation measure has been labeled with an abbreviation of the topic it addresses and its chronological order of introduction within the analysis.

Page 35 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
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.

The project could 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.
 Removals and Overexcavation
 Rippability and Rock Disposal
 Subdrains
 Fill and Cut Slopes
 Faulting
 Seismic Design Parameters
 Liquefaction and Secondary Earthquake
Hazards
 Foundations
 Rock Anchors
 Foundation Setbacks from Slopes
 Slabs on Grade
 Miscellaneous Concrete Flatwork
 Footing Excavation and Slab Preparations
 Lateral Load Resistance
 Drainage and Moisture Proofing
 Cement Type and Corrosion Potential
 Temporary Slopes
 Utility Trench Backfill
 Pavement Sections
 Observation and Testing
Project’s Geotechnical and
Geohazards report. The
Planning Commission
hereby directs that this
mitigation measure be
adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
could include development
on unstable soils. Significant
impacts associated with
developing on unstable soils
would be reduced to a lessthan-significant level by
ensuring compliance with
the Project’s Geotechnical
and Geohazards report.
(DSEIR, pp. 3-15 thru 3-17)
The proposed Project
could directly or
indirectly destroy a
PS Implement Mitigation Measure CUL-1. LTS Finding: Compliance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1,
which has been required or

Page 36 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
unique paleontological
resource or site or
unique geologic feature.
incorporated into the
Project, will reduce this
impact to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring
any buried paleontological
resources unearthed during
construction are properly
managed and the proper
agencies contacted. The
Planning Commission
hereby directs that this
mitigation measure be
adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
could result in unearthing
significant geologic
resources. Significant
impacts associated with the
potential disturbance to
these resources would be

Page 37 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
reduced to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring
proper management
protocols are followed in the
event any paleontological
resources are unearthed.
(DSEIR, pp. 3-11 thru 3-12)

3.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project
could substantially alter
the existing drainage
pattern of the site or
area, including through
the alteration of the
course of a stream or
river or through the
addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner
which could:
i) result in
substantial
erosion or siltation
on- or off-site.
ii) substantially
increase the rate
or amount of
surface runoff in a
manner which
would result in
flooding on- or
offsite.

PS Mitigation Measure 4.6-2
Coordination with Placer County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District and
appropriation of drainage fees to support
implementation of the Dry Creek Watershed
Flood Control Plan.

Mitigation Measure 4.6-3
Coordination with City of Roseville Public
Works Department and appropriate drainage
fees to support improvement of the culvert
under Huntington Drive.

LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measures 4.6-2
and 4.6-3, which have been
required or incorporated
into the Project, will reduce
this impact to a less-thansignificant level by: (i)
ensuring coordination with
the City to provide the fees
for the City to pay
appropriate drainage fees to
the Placer County Flood
Control and Water
Conservation District for
funding flood control
projects and services
identified in the Dry Creek
Watershed Flood Control
Plan; (ii) Project payment of
appropriate drainage fees
towards improvement of the
culvert; and (iii) Project
compliance with the City’s
Flood Damage Prevention

Page 38 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
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.

Ordinance Ch. 9.80 of the
Roseville Municipal Code),
which includes standard
requirements for all new
construction, including
regulation of development
with the potential to impede
or redirect flood flows. The
Planning Commission
hereby directs that this
mitigation measure be
adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
could increase stormwater
flows, potentially
exacerbating flooding
conditions at an undersized
culvert. Significant impacts
associated with increased
flood risk and the potential

Page 39 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
for the Project to contribute
to increased stormwater
and exceeding the capacity
of an undersized culvert
would be reduced to a lessthan-significant level by the appropriation and payment
of drainage fees and
compliance with the City’s
flood prevention ordinance
and payment of required
drainage fees. (DSEIR, pp. 3-
23 thru 3-24)

3.2.13 Noise
The proposed Project
could cause the
generation of a
substantial temporary
or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the
project in excess of
standards established
in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of
other agencies.

The proposed Project
could cause the
generation of excessive
ground borne vibration
PS Mitigation Measure 4.5-1: Implement noise
controls on Medical Center campus.

Kaiser shall use best efforts to avoid
construction outside daytime hours
established by Municipal Code. All
construction equipment will be required
to be fitted with factory-installed
muffling devices, and all construction
equipment shall be maintained in good
working order. Such equipped and
maintained equipment shall generate
noise levels no greater than 75 dBA
(Leq) at 50 feet, except for pavers or
pneumatic tools, which can generate up
to 80 dBA (Leq) at 50 feet (see Table

4.5-2, with controls).

LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measures 4.5-1
and 4.5-2, which have been
required or incorporated
into the Project, will reduce
this impact to a less-thansignificant level by
minimizing noise associated
with Project construction
activities. The Planning
Commission hereby directs
that this mitigation measure
be adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid

Page 40 of 48 ends

The applicant’s contractor, as part of
Kaiser’s operational plan, shall use best
efforts to minimize disturbance of
hospital patients within the existing
hospital. The following measures shall
be implemented where construction
occurs within 100 feet of hospital
receptors (200 feet for impact
equipment) to the extent necessary to
help maintain acceptable interior noise
levels for patients in the hospital:
 Equipment used for project
construction shall be hydraulically- or
electrically-powered impact tools
(e.g., jackhammers, pavement
breakers, and rock drills) wherever
possible to avoid noise associated
with compressed air exhaust from
pneumatically-powered tools.

However, where use of pneumatically
powered tools is unavoidable, an
exhaust muffler on the compressed
air exhaust shall be used; this
muffler should lower noise levels
from the exhaust by up to about 10
dBA. External jackets on the tools
themselves shall be used where
feasible, and this should achieve a
reduction of 5 dBA. Quieter
procedures such as drilling rather
than impact equipment shall be used
whenever feasible.
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
would increase temporary
noise associated with
construction equipment.

Significant impacts
associated with the
potential for the Project to
generate noise during
construction would be
reduced to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring
all equipment is in good
working order, utilizing less
noisy equipment wherever
possible and muffling
devices, placing equipment
a minimum of 100 ft from
existing hospital facilities,
locating stationary
equipment as far away from
occupied buildings as
possible, and including
appropriate notes
attenuation building
materials in the new

Page 41 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
 Stationary noise sources shall be
located as far from hospital
receptors as possible. If they must be
located near hospital receptors, they
shall be adequately muffled and
enclosed within temporary sheds.

Portable sound blankets or existing
building facades should be used as
necessary to reduce noise generated
by construction and demolition
activities at hospital receptors and
nearby residential uses. Such
blankets can provide up to a 10- dBA
noise reduction.
 As part of Kaiser’s operational plan
to be implemented during all
construction phases, there shall be
close coordination between
construction staff, hospital staff, and
medical office building (MOB)
tenants. Hospital and medical office
staffs shall be made aware of the
construction schedule and activities.
 During all construction phases,
locations of staging areas, truck
routes, and loading areas shall
consider exposure to on-site hospital
patient receptors, utilizing existing
building facades to provide maximum
shielding for these receptors.

Mitigation Measure 4.5-2: Implement
appropriate noise attenuation measures in
hospital building. (DSEIR,
pp. 3-28 thru 3-29)

Page 42 of 48 ends

Proposed hospital facilities and medical
office buildings shall be designed with
appropriate noise attenuation measures
(increased insulation, fixed windows,
mechanical ventilation) to ensure that interior
noise levels do not exceed 45 dBA (CNEL) for
hospital facilities and 45 dBA (Leq) for
medical office buildings under future noise
conditions, considering future traffic
increases and proposed hospital operations
(including the Central Utility Plant expansion).

3.2.19 Tribal Cultural Resources
The Project could cause
a substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource 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).

The Project could cause
a substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a tribal
PS Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Post-Review
Discovery Procedures
If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural
or human in origin, or tribal cultural
resources, are discovered during
construction, all work shall halt within a 100-
foot radius of the discovery, and the
Construction Manager shall immediately
notify the City of Roseville Development
Services Director by phone. The Construction
Manager shall also immediately contact a
qualified professional archaeologist, meeting
the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for archaeology and
subject to approval by the City, to evaluate
the significance of the find and develop
appropriate management recommendations.

LTS Finding: Compliance with
Mitigation Measure TCR-1,
which has been required or
incorporated into the
Project, will reduce this
impact to a less-thansignificant level by ensuring
proper procedures are
followed during construction
in the event a tribal cultural
resource (TCR) is unearthed
during construction. The
Planning Commission
hereby directs that this
mitigation measure be
adopted. The Planning
Commission, therefore,

Page 43 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
cultural resource that is
significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1.

All management recommendations shall be
provided to the City in writing for the City’s
review and approval. If recommended by the
qualified professional and approved by the
City, this may include modification of the nowork radius.

The professional archaeologist must make a
determination, based on professional
judgement and supported by substantial
evidence, within one business day of being
notified, as to whether or not the find
represents a cultural resource or has the
potential to be a tribal cultural resource. The
subsequent actions will be determined by the
type of discovery, as described below. These
include: 1) a work pause that, upon further
investigation, is not actually a discovery and
the work pause was simply needed in order
to allow for closer examination of soil (a
“false alarm”); 2) a work pause and
subsequent action for discoveries that are
clearly not related to tribal resources, such as
can and bottle dumps, artifacts of European
origin, and remnants of built environment
features; and 3) a work pause and
subsequent action for discoveries that are
likely related to tribal resources, such as
midden soil, bedrock mortars, groundstone,
or other similar expressions.

Whenever there is question as to whether or
not the discovery represents a tribal
resource, culturally affiliated tribes shall be
finds that changes or
alterations have been
required in, or incorporated
into, the Project that avoid
the potentially significant
environmental effect as
identified in the SEIR and
that the resulting impacts
are less than significant.

Explanation/Facts in
Support of Finding:

Construction of the Project
would require earth
disturbing activities that
could unearth a TCR.

Significant impacts
associated with the
potential for the Project to
unearth TCRs would be
reduced to a less-thansignificant level by
establishing specific
protocols and management
procedures in the event
TCRs, including Native
American remains, are
unearthed. (DSEIR, pp. 3-38
thru 3-39)

Page 44 of 48 ends

Whenever a tribal monitor is present, the
monitor shall be consulted.

The following processes shall apply,
depending on the nature of the find, subject
to the review and approval of the City:
 Response to False Alarms: If the
professional archaeologist determines
that the find is negative for any cultural
indicators, then work may resume
immediately upon notice to proceed
from the City’s representative. No further
notifications or tribal consultation is
necessary because the discovery is not a
cultural resource of any kind. The
professional archaeologist shall provide
written documentation of this finding to
the City.
 Response to Non-Tribal Discoveries: If a
tribal monitor is not present at the time
of discovery and a professional
archaeologist determines that the find
represents a non-tribal cultural resource
from any time period or cultural
affiliation, the City shall be notified
immediately, to consult on a finding of
eligibility and implementation of
appropriate treatment measures, if the
find is determined to be a Historical
Resource under CEQA, as defined in
Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA

Page 45 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
Guidelines. The professional
archaeologist shall provide a photograph
of the find and a written description to
the City of Roseville. The City of Roseville
will notify the tribe(s) who, in writing,
requested notice of unanticipated
discovery of non-tribal resources. Notice
shall include the photograph and
description of the find, and a tribal
representative shall have the opportunity
to determine whether or not the find
represents a tribal cultural resource. If a
response is not received within 24 hours
of notification (none of which time period
may fall on weekends or City holidays),
the City will deem this portion of the
measure completed in good faith as long
as the notification was made and
documented. If requested by a tribe(s),
the City may extend this timeframe,
which shall be documented in writing
(electronic communication may be used
to satisfy this measure). If a notified tribe
responds within 24 hours to indicate that
the find represents a tribal cultural
resource, then the Response to Tribal
Discoveries portion of this measure
applies. If the tribe does not respond or
concurs that the discovery is non-tribal,
work shall not resume within the no-work
radius until the City, through consultation
as appropriate, determines that the site
either: 1) is not a Historical Resource

Page 46 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
under CEQA, as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; or 2)
that the treatment measures have been
completed to its satisfaction.
 Response to Tribal Discoveries: If the find
represents a tribal or potentially tribal
cultural resource that does not include
human remains, the tribe(s) and City
shall be notified. The City will consult with
the tribe(s) on a finding of eligibility and
implement appropriate treatment
measures, if the find is determined to be
either a Historical Resource under CEQA,
as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the
CEQA Guidelines, or a Tribal Cultural
Resource, as defined in Section 21074
of the Public Resources Code.

Preservation in place is the preferred
treatment, if feasible. Work shall not
resume within the no-work radius until
the City, through consultation as
appropriate, determines that the site
either: 1) is not a Historical Resource
under CEQA, as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; or 2)
not a Tribal Cultural Resource, as defined
in Section 21074 of the Public
Resources Code; or 3) that the treatment
measures have been completed to its
satisfaction.
 Response to Human Remains: If the find
includes human remains, or remains that

Page 47 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
are potentially human, the construction
supervisor or on-site archaeologist shall
ensure reasonable protection measures
are taken to protect the discovery from
disturbance (AB 2641) and shall notify the
City and Placer County Coroner (per §
7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).

The provisions of § 7050.5 of the
California Health and Safety Code, §
5097.98 of the California Public Resources
Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 shall be
implemented. If the Coroner determines
the remains are Native American and not
the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will
notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which then will
designate a Native American Most Likely
Descendant (MLD) for the project (§
5097.98 of the Public Resources Code).

The designated MLD will have 48 hours
from the time access to the property is
granted to make recommendations
concerning treatment of the remains.

Public Resources Code § 5097.94
provides structure for mediation through
the NAHC if necessary. If the landowner
does not agree with the recommendations
of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§
5097.94 of the Public Resources Code).

If no agreement is reached, the landowner
must rebury the remains in a respectful
manner where they will not be further

Page 48 of 48 ends

Table A. Impact Statements, Mitigation Measures and Findings Environmental Impact
Level of
Significance
Prior to
Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s)
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation Findings of Fact
disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code). This will also include either recording
the site with the NAHC or the appropriate
Information Center; using an open space or
conservation zoning designation or easement;
or recording a reinternment document with the
county in which the property is located (AB
2641). Work shall not resume within the nowork radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the treatment
measures have been completed to its
satisfaction.

Notes:

PS = potentially significant; LTS = less than significant, SU = significant and unavoidable SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 1

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT-PLANNING DIVISION
311 Vernon Street, Roseville, California 95678  916.774.5276

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Project Title/File Number: Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project – File #PL22-0038
Project Location: 1600 Eureka Road (APN 048-012-001); City of Roseville, Placer County, California.

Project Description: Kaiser Permanente proposes to increase the size and capacity of the previously approved 2004 Kaiser Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project (2004 Expansion Project) on the existing Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Campus. The 2004 Expansion Project included, among other components, construction and operation of a new five-story, 155,000 square-foot Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility located along the north elevation of the existing main hospital building, a three-level, approximately 400-space parking garage located in the northeast corner of the Campus, and a helicopter landing pad; however, these elements of the previously approved project were never constructed. The proposed Project revises the 2004 Expansion Project to allow for an approximately 278,000 square foot, sixstory Inpatient Tower building on the site of the prior approved Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility, expansion of the Emergency Department (part of the Main Hospital Building) to add 36 new treatment bays (change of use with no additional square footage); a new four-level parking garage with rooftop parking to accommodate approximately 800 stalls located on the site of the prior approved parking garage; relocation of the northwest corner loop road; a new main hospital entrance and drop off area; a new generator yard; and internal upgrades to the existing CUP.

Project Applicant: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals
Property Owner: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals
Lead Agency Contact Person: Kinarik Shallow, Associate Planner, 916.746.1309 Section 15097 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that, whenever a public agency approves a project based on a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the public agency shall establish a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) to ensure that all adopted mitigation measures are implemented. This MMRP is required for the Project as significant adverse impacts have been identified, and mitigation measures have subsequently been identified to mitigate those impacts.

Monitoring Process: As the CEQA lead agency, the City will coordinate review, monitor, and document the implementation of all mitigation measures. Existing monitoring mechanisms are in place that assist the City in meeting the intent of CEQA and eliminate the need to develop new monitoring processes for each mitigation measure. These mechanisms include grading plan review and approval, improvement/building plan review and approval and on-site inspections by City Departments. Given that these monitoring processes are requirements of the Project, they are not included in the MMRP. Therefore, only those mitigation measures that are unique to this Project are listed in the following monitoring table below. The table indicates the required mitigation, the responsible party for monitoring, when the monitoring is to occur, and when the monitoring has been completed.

CC EXHIBIT E

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 2
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification

4.2 Air Quality
Impact 4.2-2: The proposed
Project could result in a
cumulatively considerable
increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the Project region is in
non-attainment.

Mitigation Measure 4.2-2(a):

Prepare a Construction
Emission/Dust Control Plan
Thirty days prior to the
start of construction, the
Placer County Air
Pollution Control District
(PCAPCD) requires, at a
minimum, preparation of
a Construction
Emission/Dust Control
Plan (CEDCP) and
submittal of the CEDCP
to the PCAPCD for review
and approval. The
CEDCP shall identify
mitigation measures to
reduce the level of
construction-related
emissions below the
PCAPCD threshold of 82
pounds per day in
accordance with the
standards of the
PCAPCD. Mitigation
measures could include
some or all of the
following to reduce
emissions to less-thansignificant levels (below
30 days prior to any
construction activities the
Project applicant’s contractor
shall prepare a CEDCP for
review and approval by
PCAPCD, along with an
inventory of construction
equipment to be updated and
submitted monthly to the
PCAPCD. The Project
contractor shall also prepare a
plan demonstrating how
heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower)
off-road construction vehicles
will achieve a Project-wide
fleet-average 20% NOx
reduction and 45% particulate
reduction compared to the
most recent CARB fleet
average. The plan shall be
submitted to the PCAPCD for
their review and approval.

During construction all
personnel shall comply with
the other requirements listed.

Prior to
issuance of
grading
permit
Project applicant City
Development
Svcs/PCAPCD

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 3
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
the PCAPCD threshold of
82 pounds per day):

Construction equipment
exhaust emissions shall
not exceed District Rule
202 Visible Emission
limitations.

The prime contractor
shall submit to the
District a comprehensive
inventory (i.e., make,
model, year, emission
rating) of all the heavyduty off-road equipment
(50 horsepower or
greater) that will be used
an aggregate of 40 or
more hours for the
construction Project. The
inventory shall be
updated and submitted
monthly throughout the
duration of the Project,
except that an inventory
shall not be required for
any 30-day period in
which no construction
activity occurs. At least
48 hours prior to the use
of subject heavy-duty
offroad equipment, the
Project representative
shall provide the District

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 4
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
with the anticipated
construction timeline
including start date, and
name and phone
number of the Project
manager and on-site
foreman.

An enforcement plan
shall be established to
evaluate project-related
on- and off-road heavyduty vehicle engine
emission opacities
weekly, using standards
as defined in California
Code of Regulations,
Title 13, Sections 2180 -
2194. An Environmental
Coordinator, CARBcertified to perform
Visible Emissions
Evaluations (VEE), shall
routinely evaluate
project-related off-road
and heavy-duty on-road
equipment emissions for
compliance with this
requirement. Operators
of vehicles and
equipment found to
exceed opacity limits will
be notified and the
equipment must be

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 5
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
repaired within 72
hours. An Independent
Environmental
Coordinator or Placer
County Air Pollution
Control District staff,
CARB-certified to
perform Visible
Emissions Evaluations
(VEE), shall routinely
evaluate Project-related
off-road and heavy-duty
on-road equipment
emissions during
construction for
compliance with engine
emission opacities,
using standards as
defined in the California
Code of Regulations,
Title 13, Sections 2180-
2194. Operators of
vehicles and equipment
found to exceed opacity
limits shall be notified
and the equipment must
be removed from service
and repaired prior to
being placed back in
service. Equipment
owners and operators
found to be operating
equipment that is out of

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 6
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
compliance shall be
subject to a notice of
violation and monetary
fines.

The Project shall provide
a plan for approval by
the PCAPCD
demonstrating that the
heavy-duty (> 50
horsepower) off-road
vehicles to be used in
the construction Project,
including owned, leased
and subcontractor
vehicles, will achieve a
Project-wide fleetaverage 20 percent NOx
reduction and 45
percent particulate
reduction compared to
the most recent CARB
fleet average.

Acceptable options for
reducing emissions may
include use of late
model engines, lowemission diesel
products, alternative
fuels, engine retrofit
technology, aftertreatment products,

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 7
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
and/or other options as
they become available.

There shall be no open
burning of removed
vegetation during
infrastructure
improvements.

Vegetative material
should be chipped or
delivered to waste-toenergy facilities.

Minimize idling time to
10 minutes.

Earth-moving
construction equipment
shall be cleaned with
water once per day.

Soil binders shall be
spread on unpaved
roads and
employee/equipment
parking areas.

Approved chemical soil
stabilizers shall be
applied according to
manufacturer’s
specifications to all
inactive construction
areas (i.e., previously
graded areas which
remain inactive for 96
hours).

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 8
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
Use existing line power
sources located on the
site or clean fuel
generators rather than
temporary power
generators, except
during the first four
weeks of construction of
the first structure, when
temporary generators
may be used if line
power sources are not
feasible.

All grading operations
shall be suspended
when wind speeds (as
instantaneous gusts)
exceed 25 miles per
hour (as measured by an
on-site anemometer)
and dust is impacting
adjacent properties.

All truck and equipment
wheels shall be washed
prior to leaving the site.

An operational water
truck shall be on site at
all times. Apply water to
control dust at least
twice daily (morning and
evening), and as needed

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 9
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
to prevent dust impacts
off site.

Streets shall be washed
or wet-broomed if silt is
carried over to adjacent
public thoroughfares.

Traffic speeds on all
unpaved surfaces shall
be 15 miles per hour or
less.

In addition to the above
measures, the Project
applicant shall consider any
of the following measures to
further reduce constructionrelated exhaust emissions:

Employ construction
activity management
techniques, such as
extending the
construction period
outside the ozone
season of May through
October; reducing the
number of pieces used
simultaneously;
increasing the distance
between emission
sources; reducing or
changing the hours of
construction; and

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 10
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
scheduling activity
during off-peak hours.

Construction contracts
shall include language
that prohibits the use of
pre-1996 off-road heavyduty construction
equipment on declared
Spare the Air Days and
prohibits the use of all
heavy-duty diesel
equipment on days
forecast to exceed the
federal one-house
standard.

Use low-sulfur fuel for
stationary construction
equipment.

The applicant shall
include a provision in
contract language that
earth-moving
contractors shall not
operate pre-1996 heavyduty diesel equipment
on forecast Spare the Air
Days.

Use low-emission
stationary equipment on
site.

Provide a flag person to
guide traffic properly

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 11
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
and ensure safety at
construction sites.

Schedule operations
affecting traffic for offpeak hours.

Develop a traffic plan to
minimize traffic flow
interference from
construction activities.

The plan may include
advance public notice of
routing, use of public
transportation, and
satellite parking areas
with a shuttle service.

Minimize obstruction of
through-traffic lanes.

Develop trip reduction
plan to achieve 1.5 AVR
(average vehicle
ridership) for
construction employees
In addition to the above
PCAPCD measures, the
following dust control
measures would be required
under the grading permit by
the Roseville Grading
Ordinance:

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 12
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
Cover all haul trucks or
maintain at least two
feet of freeboard.

Sweep all paved
access roads, parking
areas, or staging areas
on a daily basis at
construction sites,
particularly where silt
has carried over to
adjacent public
thoroughfares.

Cover, watering twice
daily, or apply (nontoxic) soil binders to
any exposed stockpiles
(dirt, sand, etc.),
particularly over
weekends if stockpiles
are located in proximity
to the existing hospital.

If landscaping is not
planted immediately in
areas where
construction has been
completed, hydroseed
undeveloped areas.

Appropriate application
of such materials
(appropriate seed
mixture used in
hydroseeding) shall be

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 13
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
reviewed and approved
by a qualified biologist.

Power outlet for every two
dock doors. Diesel trucks
shall be prohibited from
idling more than five
minutes and must be
required to connect to the
110/208 volt power to run
any auxiliary equipment.

Signage shall be provided.

4.2-2(b) Contribute Air
Quality Fees to offset longterm operational ozone
precursor emissions.

The landowner shall
contribute fifty-six thousand
dollars ($56,000)
$48,27980 per ton of NOx
emissions to the City to
offset long-term operational
NOx emissions (the “Air
Quality Fee”). The City and
PCAPCD shall enter into an
agreement for the collection
and disbursement of the Air
Quality fee for off-site air
quality mitigation. The Air
Quality Fee is to be used for
projects, programs and
services that result in
Project application shall pay
applicable air quality fees. Flat
roofs to be made of materials
that reduce energy demand.

Provide power outlets at any
loading docks and prohibit
idling of diesel trucks.

Building
permits
Project applicant PCAPCD/City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 14
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
reduced emission sources
that directly benefit City
residents. Such projects,
programs and services may
include, but are not limited
to, replacing non-EPA
certified wood stoves, transit
vehicle conversions, and
retrofitting vehicles with
cleaner burning fuels, and
funding for public transit
services, programs or
operations that would
support the regional
transportation network and
provide greater access
between health care
facilities in the City of
Roseville and the
Sacramento region.

4.2-2(c) All flat roofs shall be
made of material(s) that
reduce energy demand.

4.2-2(d) Provide power
outlet at loading docks and
prohibit diesel truck idling
for more than five minutes.

All truck loading and
unloading docks shall be
equipped with one 110/208
volt power outlet for every

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 15
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
two dock doors. Diesel
trucks shall be prohibited
from idling more than five
minutes and must be
required to connect to the
110/208 volt power to run
any auxiliary equipment.

Signage shall be provided.

Impact 4.2-4: The proposed
Project could result in a
cumulative impact related to air
quality.

Implement Mitigation Measures 4.2-2(a) through 4.2-2(d) Chapter 3, Initial Study
Cultural Resources
The proposed Project could cause
a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to §15064.5.

The proposed Project could cause
a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5.

The proposed Project could
disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries.

The proposed Project could cause
a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
Mitigation Measure CUL-1
In the event of discovery of
buried paleontological,
archaeological or historic
deposits, project activities in
the vicinity of the find shall
be temporarily halted and a
qualified archaeologist
consulted to assess the
resource and provide proper
management
recommendations. Possible
management
recommendations for
important resources could
include resource avoidance
or data recovery
All work shall be temporarily
stopped in the event any
paleontological, archaeological
or historic resources are
unearthed and a qualified
archeologist assesses the find
to determine if a management
plan is required. If any human
remains are unearthed, the
County Coroner shall be
contacted and be in touch with
the Native American Heritage
Commission.

During site
clearing,
grading and
earth
disturbing
activities
Contractor/City City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 16
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
resource 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).
excavations. If human
remains are found, the
Placer County Coroner’s
Office shall be contacted
immediately. The coroner
shall contact the Native
American Heritage
Commission, which shall
notify the appropriate
descendant.

Geology and Soils
The project could result in
substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil.

The project could 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.

The project could 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.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1
The project sponsor has
agreed to abide by the
recommendations of the
Geotechnical and
Geohazards Reports
prepared for the proposed
Project, which addresses the
following:
 General Earthwork and
Grading
 Earthwork Shrinkage
and Subsidence
 Removals and Over
excavation
 Rippability and Rock
Disposal
 Subdrains
 Fill and Cut Slopes
Compliance with the
requirements set forth in the
Geotechnical and Geohazards
reports.

During
construction
Contractor City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 17
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
 Faulting
 Seismic Design
Parameters
 Liquefaction and
Secondary Earthquake
Hazards
 Foundations
 Rock Anchors
 Foundation Setbacks
from Slopes
 Slabs on Grade
 Miscellaneous Concrete
Flatwork
 Footing Excavation and
Slab Preparations
 Lateral Load Resistance
 Drainage and Moisture
Proofing
 Cement Type and
Corrosion Potential
 Temporary Slopes
 Utility Trench Backfill
 Pavement Sections
Observation and Testing
The proposed Project could
directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature.

Implement Mitigation Measure CUL-1.

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 18
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project could
substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces,
in a manner which could:
i) result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site.
ii) substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or
offsite.
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.

Mitigation Measure 4.6-2
Coordination with Placer
County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
and appropriation of
drainage fees to support
implementation of the Dry
Creek Watershed Flood
Control Plan.

Payment of appropriate fees to
the City for payment to the
Flood Control District for
funding flood control projects
and services identified in the
Dry Creek Watershed Flood
Control Plan.

Prior to
grading
permit
Contractor or
Project applicant
Placer County
Flood Control
and Water
Conservation
District/City
Mitigation Measure 4.6-3
Coordination with City of
Roseville Public Works
Department and payment of
appropriate drainage fees to
support improvement of the
culvert under Huntington
Drive.

Payment of City drainage fees Prior to
grading
permit
Contractor or
Project applicant
City of
Roseville
Public Works
Department
Noise
The proposed Project could cause
the generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of
Mitigation Measure 4.5-1:

Implement noise controls on
Medical Center campus.

Comply with City’s Municipal
Code for days/hours when
construction is allowed; ensure
all construction equipment is
muffled and in good working
During
construction
Contractor City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 19
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance,
or applicable standards of other
agencies.

The proposed Project could cause
the generation of excessive
ground borne vibration or ground
borne noise levels.

Such equipped and
maintained equipment
shall generate noise
levels no greater than
75 dBA (Leq) at 50 feet,
except for pavers or
pneumatic tools, which
can generate up to 80
dBA (Leq) at 50 feet (see
Table 4.5-2, with
controls).

The applicant’s
contractor, as part of
Kaiser’s operational
plan, shall use best
efforts to minimize
disturbance to hospital
patients within the
existing hospital. The
following measures shall
order; minimize disturbance to
on-site hospital patients; use
electric-powered impact tools
or use exhaust mufflers on any
pneumatic tools;; place
generators and other
stationary construction
equipment away from the
existing medical building on
the campus to the extent
possible; keep hospital and
medical office staff informed
of the construction schedule
and activities.

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 20
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
be implemented where
construction occurs
within 100 feet of
hospital receptors (200
feet for impact
equipment) to the extent
necessary to help
maintain acceptable
interior noise levels for
patients in the hospital:

Equipment used for
project construction
shall be hydraulically- or
electrically-powered
impact tools (e.g.,
jackhammers, pavement
breakers, and rock drills)
wherever possible to
avoid noise associated
with compressed air
exhaust from
pneumatically-powered
tools. However, where
use of pneumatically
powered tools is
unavoidable, an exhaust
muffler on the
compressed air exhaust
shall be used; this
muffler should lower
noise levels from the
exhaust by up to about
10 dBA. External jackets

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 21
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
on the tools themselves
shall be used where
feasible, and this should
achieve a reduction of 5
dBA. Quieter procedures
such as drilling rather
than impact equipment
shall be used whenever
feasible.

Stationary noise
sources shall be located
as far from hospital
receptors as possible. If
they must be located
near hospital receptors,
they shall be adequately
muffled and enclosed
within temporary sheds.

Portable sound blankets
or existing building
facades should be used
as necessary to reduce
noise generated by
construction and
demolition activities at
hospital receptors and
nearby residential uses.

Such blankets can
provide up to a 10- dBA
noise reduction.

As part of Kaiser’s
operational plan to be

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 22
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
implemented during all
construction phases,
there shall be close
coordination between
construction staff,
hospital staff, and
medical office building
(MOB) tenants. Hospital
and medical office staffs
shall be made aware of
the construction
schedule and activities.

During all construction
phases, locations of
staging areas, truck
routes, and loading
areas shall consider
exposure to on-site
hospital patient
receptors, utilizing
existing building facades
to provide maximum
shielding for these
receptors.

Mitigation Measure 4.5-2:

Implement appropriate noise
attenuation measures in
proposed hospital facilities
and medical buildings.

Proposed hospital facilities
and medical office buildings
The new hospital tower shall
include noise attenuation
features to ensure interior
noise levels do not exceed 45
dBA.

Building
permit
Contractor City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 23
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
shall be designed with
appropriate noise
attenuation measures
(increased insulation, fixed
windows, mechanical
ventilation) to ensure that
interior noise levels do not
exceed 45 dBA (CNEL) for
hospital facilities and 45
dBA (Leq) for medical office
buildings under future noise
conditions, considering
future traffic increases and
proposed hospital
operations (including the
Central Utility Plant
expansion).

Tribal Cultural Resources
The Project could cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural
resource 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).

The Project could cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural
resource that is significant
Mitigation Measure TCR-1:

Post-Review Discovery
Procedures
If subsurface deposits
believed to be cultural or
human in origin, or tribal
cultural resources are
discovered during
construction, all work shall
halt within a 100-foot radius
of the discovery, and the
Construction Manager shall
immediately notify the City of
All work shall stop within a
100-foot radius if any cultural,
human or tribal cultural
resource (TCR) is unearthed.

The City shall be contacted
immediately, along with a
qualified archeologist to
evaluate the find and develop
management
recommendations, if any. If
human remains are
unearthed, the City and Placer
County Coroner shall be
During
construction
Contractor City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 24
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1.

Roseville Development
Services Director by phone.

The Construction Manager
shall also immediately
contact a qualified
professional archaeologist,
meeting the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for
archaeology and subject to
approval by the City, to
evaluate the significance of
the find and develop
appropriate management
recommendations. All
management
recommendations shall be
provided to the City in writing
for the City’s review and
approval. If recommended
by the qualified professional
and approved by the City,
this may include
modification of the no-work
radius.

The professional
archaeologist must make a
determination, based on
professional judgement and
supported by substantial
evidence, within one
business day of being
contacted. If management is
required, the City shall review
and approve the proposed
management plan.

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 25
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
notified, as to whether or not
the find represents a cultural
resource or has the potential
to be a tribal cultural
resource. The subsequent
actions will be determined
by the type of discovery, as
described below. These
include: 1) a work pause
that, upon further
investigation, is not actually
a discovery and the work
pause was simply needed in
order to allow for closer
examination of soil (a “false
alarm”); 2) a work pause and
subsequent action for
discoveries that are clearly
not related to tribal
resources, such as can and
bottle dumps, artifacts of
European origin, and
remnants of built
environment features; and
3) a work pause and
subsequent action for
discoveries that are likely
related to tribal resources,
such as midden soil,
bedrock mortars,
groundstone, or other similar
expressions.

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 26
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
Whenever there is question
as to whether or not the
discovery represents a tribal
resource, culturally affiliated
tribes shall be consulted in
making the determination.

Whenever a tribal monitor is
present, the monitor shall be
consulted.

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 27
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
provide written
documentation of this
finding to the City.
 Response to Non-Tribal
Discoveries: If a tribal
monitor is not present at
the time of discovery
and a professional
archaeologist
determines that the find
represents a non-tribal
cultural resource from
any time period or
cultural affiliation, the
City shall be notified
immediately, to consult
on a finding of eligibility
and implementation of
appropriate treatment
measures, if the find is
determined to be a
Historical Resource
under CEQA, as defined
in Section 15064.5(a) of
the CEQA Guidelines.

The professional
archaeologist shall
provide a photograph of
the find and a written
description to the City of
Roseville. The City of
Roseville will notify the
tribe(s) who, in writing,

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 28
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
requested notice of
unanticipated discovery
of non-tribal resources.

Notice shall include the
photograph and
description of the find,
and a tribal
representative shall
have the opportunity to
determine whether or
not the find represents a
tribal cultural resource.

If a response is not
received within 24 hours
of notification (none of
which time period may
fall on weekends or City
holidays), the City will
deem this portion of the
measure completed in
good faith as long as the
notification was made
and documented. If
requested by a tribe(s),
the City may extend this
timeframe, which shall
be documented in
writing (electronic
communication may be
used to satisfy this
measure). If a notified
tribe responds within 24
hours to indicate that

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 29
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
the find represents a
tribal cultural resource,
then the Response to
Tribal Discoveries
portion of this measure
applies. If the tribe does
not respond or concurs
that the discovery is nontribal, work shall not
resume within the nowork radius until the
City, through
consultation as
appropriate, determines
that the site either: 1) is
not a Historical
Resource under CEQA,
as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA
Guidelines; or 2) that the
treatment measures
have been completed to
its satisfaction.
 Response to Tribal
Discoveries: If the find
represents a tribal or
potentially tribal cultural
resource that does not
include human remains,
the tribe(s) and City shall
be notified. The City will
consult with the tribe(s)
on a finding of eligibility

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 30
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
and implement
appropriate treatment
measures, if the find is
determined to be either
a Historical Resource
under CEQA, as defined
in Section 15064.5(a) of
the CEQA Guidelines, or
a Tribal Cultural
Resource, as defined in
Section 21074 of the
Public Resources Code.

Preservation in place is
the preferred treatment,
if feasible. Work shall
not resume within the
no-work radius until the
City, through
consultation as
appropriate, determines
that the site either: 1) is
not a Historical
Resource under CEQA,
as defined in Section
15064.5(a) of the CEQA
Guidelines; or 2) not a
Tribal Cultural Resource,
as defined in Section
21074 of the Public
Resources Code; or 3)
that the treatment
measures have been

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 31
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
completed to its
satisfaction.
 Response to Human
Remains: If the find
includes human
remains, or remains that
are potentially human,
the construction
supervisor or on-site
archaeologist shall
ensure reasonable
protection measures are
taken to protect the
discovery from
disturbance (AB 2641)
and shall notify the City
and Placer County
Coroner (per § 7050.5
of the Health and Safety
Code). The provisions of
§ 7050.5 of the
California Health and
Safety Code, § 5097.98
of the California Public
Resources Code, and
Assembly Bill 2641 shall
be implemented. If the
Coroner determines the
remains are Native
American and not the
result of a crime scene,
the Coroner will notify
the Native American

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 32
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
Heritage Commission
(NAHC), which then will
designate a Native
American Most Likely
Descendant (MLD) for
the project (§ 5097.98
of the Public Resources
Code). The designated
MLD will have 48 hours
from the time access to
the property is granted
to make
recommendations
concerning treatment of
the remains. Public
Resources Code §
5097.94 provides
structure for mediation
through the NAHC if
necessary. If the
landowner does not
agree with the
recommendations of the
MLD, the NAHC can
mediate (§ 5097.94 of
the Public Resources
Code).

If no agreement is reached,
the landowner must rebury
the remains in a respectful
manner where they will not
be further disturbed (§

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 33
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
5097.98 of the Public
Resources Code). This will
also include either recording
the site with the NAHC or the
appropriate Information
Center; using an open space
or conservation zoning
designation or easement; or
recording a reinternment
document with the county in
which the property is located
(AB 2641). Work shall not
resume within the no-work
radius until the City, through
consultation as appropriate,
determines that the
treatment measures have
been completed to its
satisfaction.

Biological Resources
Per the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
and the Fish and Game Code
Preconstruction Nesting
Bird Surveys. If
construction or tree
removal is proposed during
the breeding season
(February 1 through August
30), a preconstruction
nesting bird survey shall be
conducted at the project
site (including a 250-foot
buffer for raptors) by a
qualified biologist 14 days
If construction or tree removal
occurs between Feb 1 through
Aug 30, a preconstruction
nesting bird survey shall be
conducted by a biologist 14
days before any site clearing
occurs. If any nesting birds are
identified within 250 feet of
disturbance areas, the
biologist shall flag the
appropriate buffer and shall
make the final determination
14 days
prior to any
site clearing
Contractor City
Development
Svcs

KAISER PERMANENTE ROSEVILLE MEDICAL CENTER INPATIENT BED TOWER PROJECT /MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SEIR FOR KAISER BED TOWER PROJECT 11199
OCTOBER 2022 34
Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project MMRP Impact Mitigation Measures1,2
Monitoring/
Implementation
Verification
Timing
Party
Responsible for
Implementation
Party
Responsible
for
Verification
prior to the beginning of
construction activities, in
order to identify any active
nests in the vicinity of the
project area. If no active
nests are found during the
preconstruction survey, no
further actions are
required.

If any active nests are
found within 250 feet of
disturbance areas, a
temporary buffer shall be
determined and flagged by
the qualified biologist
based on the location of
the nest and planned
construction activity in the
vicinity of the nest. These
nests shall be avoided until
the chicks have fledged
and the nests are no longer
active, as determined by
the qualified biologist.
as to when construction in the
area can resume, after any
birds have fledged and the
nests are no longer active.

Notes: 1 Note: Some Mitigation Measures from the 2004 Expansion Project EIR have been modified to reflect current requirements and are shown in the table as strike out and underline text. 2 Mitigation measures not named or numbered in the 2004 IS are identified with an abbreviation of the topic it addresses and its chronological order of introduction within the analysis.

All numbered mitigation measures are from the 2004 Expansion Project EIR.

RESOLUTION NO. 22-425

AMENDING THE NORTHEAST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, a proposal has been submitted to amend the text of the Medical Campus Component in the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan to modify the minimum setback requirements for the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center, as shown in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan and unanimously recommended that the City Council approve the proposed Specific Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2022, the Planning Commission certified the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH #2022020590), adopted the Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopted the Mitigation Monitoring and ReportingProgram; WHEREAS, the Specific Plan Amendment as proposed and revised is consistent with the adopted City of Roseville General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing at which time the proposed amendment was considered; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2022, the City Council considered and reaffirmed the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project Final SEIR (certified by the Planning Commission on November 10, 2022); and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Roseville has reviewed the findings of the Planning Commission recommending approval of the Specific Plan Amendment, and makes the following findings:

The Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City of Roseville General Plan and the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville that the proposed changes to the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan are adopted as set forth in the attached Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this day of , 20 , by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk

NORTHEAST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN
MEDICAL CAMPUS COMPONENT__________________________________________ IMPLEMENTATION:
i. All development within the Medical Campus land use designation shall be subject to the City of Roseville design review process and all other applicable City permit requirements. The project proponent shall work with the City of Roseville and the California Department of Health Care Access and Information (HCAI) to ensure that all City required conditions are implemented.
ii. The following design standard shall apply:

Setback:
a. From the ultimate back of curb of any adjacent existing or planned public roadway:
• A minimum of 50 feetfor buildings of two stories and less in height, and any parking, paved or enclosed areas. This setback requirement shall also apply to the four-level parking garage with rooftop parking located at the northeast corner of Eureka Road and Lead Hill Boulevard on the Kaiser
Roseville Medical Campus site.
• A minimum of 100 feet for that portion of any building three stories or more in height.
• Ancillary right-turn lanes, bus turn-outs, and standard tapers are included into the required setback.
b. For the Roseville Community Hospital (EXHIBIT A) from the property line of any adjacent open space area:
• Adjacent to the Unnamed Tributary Ravine to the South: A minimum of 25 feetfor buildings of two stories or lessin height, and any parking, paved or enclosed areas.
• Adjacent or enclosed areas (excepting pedestrian or bike trails). • A minimum of 75 feet forthat portion of any building three stories or more in height.
c. For Roseville Community Hospital (EXHIBIT A) from any remaining interior property line:
• A minimum of 25 feetfor any buildings, parking, paved or enclosed areas.

Lot Coverage - Shall be calculated as the square footage of the building footprint, exclusive of overhangs and balconies, and shall not exceed 35% of the gross square footage of the parcel upon which the building is being constructed.

CC EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO.

ADOPTING A FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND

BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF

ROSEVILLE
THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS:

SECTION 1. In accordance with Chapter 19.84 of Title 19 of the Roseville Municipal Code (the Zoning Ordinance) of the City of Roseville, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City of Roseville enter into a First Amendment of the Development Agreement by and between the City of Roseville and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, pertaining to property located within the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan area.

SECTION 2. Prior to considering the proposed First Amendment to Development Agreement, the City Council considered and reaffirmed the Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH #2022020590, certified by the Planning Commission on November 10, 2022) and the associated Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.

SECTION 3. The Council of the City of Roseville has reviewed the findings of the Planning Commission recommending approval of the First Amendment to Development Agreement, and makes the following findings:

1. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, programs and land use designations of the City of Roseville General Plan and the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan;

2. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the City of Roseville Zoning Ordinance;

3. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is in conformance with the public health, safety and welfare;

4. The First Amendment to the Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of the property or the preservation of property values; and

5. The provisions of the First Amendment to the Development Agreement will provide sufficient benefit to the City to justify entering into said Amendment.

SECTION 4. The First Amendment to Development Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Department and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville. 2 SECTION 5. The City Clerk is directed to record the executed Development Agreement Amendment within ten (10) days of the execution of the agreement by the City Manager with the County Recorder's Office of the County of Placer.

SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be effective at the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of its adoption.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause this ordinance to be published in full at least once within fourteen (14) days after it is adopted in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, or shall within fourteen (14) days after its adoption cause this ordinance to be posted in full in at least three (3) public places in the City and enter in the Ordinance Book a certificate stating the time and place of said publication by posting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of ____________ 2022, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
___________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________________
City Clerk

OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Document entitled to free recording
Government Code Section 27383

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City Clerk
City of Roseville
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
(SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER’S USE)

FIRST AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS
This First Amendment of Development Agreement is entered into this ____ day of ________, 2022, by and between the CITY OF ROSEVILLE, a municipal corporation (“City”) and KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, a California non-profit benefit corporation (“Landowner”) pursuant to Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the Government Code of California.

RECITALS
A. Landowner and City entered into a Development Agreement (the “Development Agreement”), which the City Council of City approved on or about May 5, 2004, and recorded on or about July 8, 2004, in the Official Records of Placer County as Document No. 2004-0089092. Except as otherwise defined herein, all capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Development Agreement.

B. Landowner and City entered into the Development Agreement relative to development of the “Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center Expansion Project” (“2004 Expansion Project”) located at 1600 Eureka Road and within a portion of the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan Area as defined in Exhibit “A-1” and depicted in Exhibit “A-2” of the Development Agreement (the “Property”).

C. The City Council approved land use entitlements for the 2004 Expansion Project on or around April 21, 2004. The 2004 Expansion Project included construction and operation of a 705,360 square-foot expansion to the existing Kaiser Permanente Medical Center (“Medical Center”) located on the Property, which included a five-story, 155,000 gross-square-foot Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility located along the north elevation of the existing main hospital building and a three-level approximately 400-space parking garage located in the northeast corner of the Property. To date, neither the Surgery and Intensive Care Unit Facility nor the threestory parking garage have been constructed, although those sites have been developed with surface parking.

D. On or about February 9, 2022, Landowner applied to City for development approvals for the Roseville Medical Center Inpatient Bed Tower Project (“Tower Project”), to be located on a portion of the existing 52-acre Property. The Tower Project increases the size and capacity of the 2004 Expansion Project and includes an approximately 278,000 square-foot, six-story, 138-bed Inpatient Tower building on the site of the prior approved Intensive Care Unit Facility; a relocation of the northwest corner loop road; a new four-level garage with rooftop parking to accommodate approximately 800 stalls located in the northeast corner of the campus, on the site of the prior approved parking garage; a new main hospital entrance and drop off area; expansion of the existing Emergency Department to add 36 new treatment bays; a new generator yard and internal upgrades to the existing Central Utility Plant (“CUP”). The Tower Project will be constructed on portions of the Property currently occupied by surface parking lots.

E. Landowner and City entered into this First Amendment to the Development Agreement (the “First Amendment”) relative to the development of the Tower Project, with the intent for this First Amendment to incorporate the Tower Project’s increased use intensity and vested entitlements. This First Amendment affects certain portions of the Property (the “First Amendment Property”), the location of which more precisely depicted in Exhibit “C” of this First Amendment attached hereto. This First Amendment was approved by the City Council of City on _____________, and recorded on ___________, in the Official Records of Placer County as Document No. __________________.

F. City has taken several actions to review and plan for development of the Tower Project. These include, without limitation, the following:

1. Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”).
a. The environmental impacts of the Tower Project, including the Tower Project Entitlements, have properly been reviewed and assessed by City pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. (the “CEQA Guidelines”); and City’s local guidelines promulgated thereunder (collectively, “CEQA”). On ____, pursuant to CEQA and in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council certified the Tower Project SEIR (“Tower Project SEIR”) (State Clearinghouse Number 2022020590). As required by CEQA, the City adopted written findings and approved a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) concurrent with its consideration of the Tower Project Entitlements.

2. Planning Commission and City Council Approvals.
a. Major Project Permits, Stages 1-3, as approved by the Planning Commission on _______, 2022.
b. An amendment to the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan, as adopted by Resolution No. _______, to modify the minimum setback requirements for the new five-level parking garage located at the northeast corner of Eureka Road and Lead Hill Boulevard on the Kaiser Roseville Medical Campus site.
c. This First Amendment, as adopted by Ordinance No. _______. d. The Tower Project SEIR Findings and MMRP.

The approvals and permits described in this Recital F(2) are collectively referred to as the “Tower Project Entitlements.”
G. This First Amendment is authorized by Section 1.4 of the Development Agreement and shall run with the land.

NOW THEREFORE, THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Incorporation of Tower Project Entitlements. The Tower Project Entitlements described in Recital F above are hereby incorporated into and made a part of the “Entitlements” described and defined in Recital 5 of the Development Agreement.

2. Amendment of Development Agreement. The following sections and exhibits of the Development Agreement are hereby amended as follows:
a. REVISED SECTION 2.1. Section 2.1 is revised in its entirety to read as follows:
“Section 2.1 Permitted Uses. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed building, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, and location of public improvements, and other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Property shall be those set forth in the Entitlements and the Development Agreement, as amended.” b. REVISED SECTION 2.2. The first sentence of the first paragraph of Section 2.2 (Vested Entitlements) is revised in its entirety to read as follows:
“Subject to the provisions and conditions of the Development Agreement, as amended, City agrees that City is granting, and grants herewith, a fully vested entitlement and right to develop the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement, as amended, and the Entitlements.” c. REVISED SECTION 3.11. Section 3.11 is revised in its entirety to read as follows:
“Section 3.11. EIR Mitigation Measures. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, as and when Landowner elects to develop the Property, Landowner shall be bound by, and shall perform, all mitigation measures contained in the Project EIR and the Tower Project SEIR related to such development which are adopted by the City and are identified in such environmental documentation as being the responsibility of the Landowner.”
d. REVISED SECTION 4.7. Section 4.7 is revised in its entirety to read as follows:
“Section 4.7. Environmental Mitigation. The parties understand that the Project EIR and Tower Project SEIR were intended to be used in connection with necessary Entitlements. CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, particularly Sections 15153, 15162, 15163, and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, allow the City to use the NERSP EIR, the Project EIR, and the Tower Project SEIR (collectively, “EIRs”) to satisfy the environmental review requirements of CEQA for subsequent projects. City shall use the EIRs, including all related Findings, in connection with the processing of any Subsequent Approvals to the full extent allowed by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.”

3. Exhibits. The following exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference:

Exhibit “C” Tower Project Site Plan

4. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN. The City Council has found and determined that this First Amendment of the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan.

5. AMENDMENT LIMITED TO FIRST AMENDMENT PROPERTY. This First Amendment is limited to and applies only to development of the First Amendment Property and does not affect or apply in any manner with respect to the development of any other property within the Northeast Roseville Specific Plan Area, including without limitation, any other portion of the Property.

6. AMENDMENT. This First Amendment amends, but does not replace or supersede, the Development Agreement, except as specified herein. As amended hereby with respect to the First Amendment Property, the Development Agreement remains in full force and effect.

7. FORM OF AMENDMENT. This First Amendment is executed in two duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Roseville, a municipal corporation, has authorized the execution of this First Amendment in duplicate by its City Manager and attested to by its City Clerk under the authority of Ordinance No. ______, adopted by the Council of the City of Roseville on the ____ day of _______, 2022.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE,
a municipal corporation
By:______________________________
Dominick Casey
City Manager
ATTEST:

By:______________________________
Carman Avalos
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
By:______________________________
Michelle Sheidenberger
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO SUBSTANCE:

By:______________________________
Mike Isom
Development Services Director

KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS,
a California non-profit benefit corporation
By:____________________________
Name:_______________________
Its:_________________________
By:____________________________
Name:_______________________
Its:_________________________
Exhibit C
Tower Project Site Plan

COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
CC #: 2423
File #: 0206-03-01
Title:

Formation of Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)
Contact: Jeannine Thrash 916-774-5473 [email protected] Dennis Kauffman 916-774-5313 [email protected]
Meeting Date: 12/7/2022
Item #: 8.3.

RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the following resolutions and ordinance:
- A Resolution Calling Special Election of the City Council of the City of Roseville Regarding Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) - A Resolution Declaring Results of Special Election and Directing Recording of Notice of Special Tax Lien Regarding Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)
- A Resolution of Formation of the City Council of the City of Roseville to form Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) - A Resolution determining necessity to incur bonded indebtedness of the City Council of City of Roseville for Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) - An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Roseville Levying Special Taxes within City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)

BACKGROUND
The objective of establishing a Community Facilities District is to create a land-secured funding mechanism to fund construction of authorized facilities of the CFD.

A developer, FD-24 LLC, has requested to form a Community Facilities District within the Sierra Vista Specific Plan in order to finance the acquisition and construction of certain public facilities and development fees, as detailed in the list of authorized facilities. The Project is approximately 11 acres and will develop 135 medium density residential for-rent units. Bonds will not be issued until after a change in ownership of any parcel within the district, from FD-24 LLC, or any affiliate of FD-24 LLC, to a third party. At that time, the bond documents will be submitted to Council for approval.

On October 19, 2022, City Council adopted Resolution 22-400, of its Intention to Form a Community Facilities District and Levy a Special Tax in Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities), and set December 7, 2022 at 6:00 p.m., as a time and place to conduct a public hearing.

FISCAL IMPACT
The formation of the district will not impact the City's General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, or is otherwise not considered a project as defined by CEQA Statute §21065 and CEQA State Guidelines §15060(c)(3) and §15378. The formation of the CFD meets the above criteria and is not subject to CEQA. No additional environmental review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS
Goal F - Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth Respectfully Submitted,
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst
Dennis Kauffman, Assistant City Manager/Chief Financial Officer _____________________________
Dominick Casey, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Resolution 22-433
Resolution 22-434
Resolution 22-435
Resolution 22-436
Ordinance 6573
Public Hearing Report
Public Hearing Notice

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 22-433

A RESOLUTION CALLING SPECIAL ELECTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ROSEVILLE REGARDING PARKSIDE AT SIERRA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 (PUBLIC FACILITIES)
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Roseville (the “City”) has adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution of Formation of the City Council of the City of Roseville to Form City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” (the “Resolution of Formation”), ordering the formation of the “City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” (the “CFD”), authorizing the levy of a special tax on property within the CFD and preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for the CFD, all pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing with Section 53311, of the California Government Code (the “Act”); and
WHEREAS, this City Council has also adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution Determining Necessity to Incur Bonded Indebtedness of the City Council of the City of Roseville for Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” (the “Resolution Determining Necessity”), determining the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $15,000,000 upon the security of the special tax to be levied within the CFD pursuant to the Act; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Resolution of Formation and the Resolution Determining Necessity, the propositions of the levy of the special tax, the establishment of the appropriations limit and the incurring of the bonded indebtedness shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD as required by the provisions of the Act;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

1. Issues Submitted. Pursuant to Sections 53326, 53351 and 53325.7 of the Act, the issues of the levy of the special tax, the incurring of bonded indebtedness and the establishment of the appropriations limit shall be submitted to the qualified electors (as defined below) of the CFD at an election called therefor as provided below.

2. Qualified Electors. This City Council hereby finds that fewer than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the territory of the CFD for each of the 90 days preceding the close of the public hearings heretofore conducted and concluded by this Council for the purposes of these proceedings. Accordingly, and pursuant to Section 53326 of the Act, this City Council finds that, for these proceedings, the qualified electors are the landowners within the CFD and that the vote shall be by such landowners or their authorized representatives, each having one vote for each acre or portion thereof such landowner owns in the CFD as of the close of the public hearings.

3. Conduct of Election. This City Council hereby calls a special election to consider the measures described in section 1 above, which election shall be held on December 7, 2022, and the results thereof canvassed at the meeting of this City Council on December 7, 2022. The 2 City Clerk is hereby designated as the official to conduct the election and to receive all ballots until 6:00 p.m. on the election date. It is hereby acknowledged that the City Clerk has on file the Resolution of Formation, a certified map of the boundaries of the CFD, and a sufficient description to allow the City Clerk to determine the electors of the CFD. Pursuant to Section 53327 of the Act, the election shall be conducted by messenger or mail-delivered ballot pursuant to Section 4000 of the California Elections Code. This City Council hereby finds that paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) (1) of Section 4000 and Section 4108 are applicable to this special election, except that Sections 53326 and 53327 of the Act shall govern for purposes of determining the date of the election.

4. Ballot. As authorized by Section 53353.5 of the Act, the three propositions described in section 1 above shall be combined into a single ballot measure, the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and by this reference incorporated herein and the form of ballot is hereby approved. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a ballot, in substantially the form of Exhibit “A,” to be delivered to each of the qualified electors of the CFD.

Each ballot shall indicate the number of votes to be voted by the respective landowner to which the ballot pertains. Each ballot shall be accompanied by all supplies and written instructions necessary for the use and return of the ballot. The envelope to be used to return the ballot was enclosed with the ballot, had the return postage prepaid, and contained the following: (a) the name and address of the landowner, (b) a declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating that the voter is the owner of record or authorized representative of the landowner entitled to vote and is the person whose name appears on the envelope, (c) the printed name, signature and address of the voter, (d) the date of signing and place of execution of the declaration pursuant to clause (b) above, and (e) a notice that the envelope contains an official ballot and is to be opened only by the election official.

5. Waivers. This Council hereby further finds that the provisions of Section 53326 of the Act requiring a minimum of 90 days following the adoption of the Resolution of Formation to elapse before the special election are for the protection of the qualified electors of the CFD. There is on file with the City Clerk a written waiver executed by all of the qualified electors of the CFD allowing for a shortening of the time for the special election to expedite the process of formation of the CFD and waiving any requirement for notice, analysis and arguments in connection with the election. Accordingly, this Council finds and determines that the qualified electors have been fully apprised of and have agreed to the shortened time for the election and waiver of analysis and arguments, and have thereby been fully protected in these proceedings. This Council also finds and determines that the City Clerk has concurred in the shortened time for the election.

Analysis and arguments with respect to the ballot measures are hereby waived, as provided in Section 53327 of the Act.

6. Accountability. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed debt issuance constitutes a “local bond measure” within the meaning of Sections 53410, et seq. of the California Government Code. As a result, the bond measure shall include the propositions set forth above and the following: (a) the specific purpose of the bonds shall be as set forth in the propositions; (b) any proceeds received from the sale of any bonds shall be applied only to the purposes set forth in the propositions; (c) the proceeds of any bonds shall be deposited into special accounts to be created therefor as part of the issuance of the bonds; and (d) the City shall cause a report to be prepared annually under Section 53411 of the Government Code. 3 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. * * * * * *
The foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Roseville on the day of , 2022, on the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
A-1

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF ROSEVILLE
PARKSIDE AT SIERRA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 (PUBLIC FACILITIES)

OFFICIAL BALLOT MEASURE

SPECIAL TAX ELECTION
BALLOT MEASURE: Shall the measure pursuant to which
(i) the City of Roseville shall incur an indebtedness and issue bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $15,000,000 with interest at a rate or rates not to exceed the maximum interest rate permitted by law at the time of sale of such bonds on behalf of the City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) (the “CFD”), the proceeds of which bonds will be used to acquire and/or construct certain facilities and pay for the costs of issuing the bonds and related expenses; (ii) a special tax payable solely from lands within the CFD shall be levied annually, commencing in the City’s fiscal year 2023-24, upon lands within the CFD to pay for the principal and interest upon such bonds, to pay the costs of the City in administering the CFD, and to pay for the costs of acquiring and/or constructing certain facilities; and (iii) the annual appropriations limit of the CFD shall be established in the amount of $1,700,000 be adopted?
YES:

NO:

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 22-434

A RESOLUTION DECLARING RESULTS OF SPECIAL ELECTION AND DIRECTING

RECORDING OF NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN REGARDING PARKSIDE AT SIERRA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 (PUBLIC FACILITIES) WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Roseville (the “City”) has adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution of Formation of the City Council of the City of Roseville to Form City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” (the “Resolution of Formation”), ordering the formation of the "City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)" (the “CFD”) authorizing the levy of a special tax on property within the CFD and preliminarily establishing an appropriations limit for the CFD, all pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing with Section 53311, of the California Government Code (the “Act”); and WHEREAS, this City Council has also adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution Determining Necessity to Incur Bonded Indebtedness of the City Council of the City of Roseville for Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)" (the “Resolution of Necessity”), determining the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $15,000,000 upon the security of the special tax to be levied within the CFD pursuant to the Act; and
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Resolution of Formation and the Resolution Necessity and pursuant to “A Resolution Calling Special Election of the City Council of the City of Roseville Regarding Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” (the “Election Resolution”) heretofore adopted by this City Council the propositions of the levy of the special tax, the establishment of the appropriations limit and the incurring of the bonded indebtedness were submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD as required by the provisions of the Act; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Election Resolution, which are by this reference incorporated herein, the special election has been held and the City Clerk has on file a Canvass and Statement of Results of Election (the “Canvass”), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, this City Council has reviewed the Canvass, finds it appropriate and wishes to complete its proceedings for the CFD.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are all true and correct.

2. Issues Presented. The issues presented at the special election were the levy of a special tax within the CFD, the incurring of a bonded indebtedness in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $15,000,000, and the approval of an annual appropriations limit of not to exceed $15,000,000, all pursuant to the Resolution of Formation and the Resolution of Necessity.

3. Canvass and Issues Approved. The Council hereby approves the Canvass and finds that it shall be a permanent part of the record of its proceedings for the CFD. Pursuant to the Canvass, the issues presented at the special election were approved by the qualified electors of the CFD by more than two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast at the special election.

4. Proceedings Approved. Pursuant to the voter approval, the CFD is hereby declared to be fully formed with the authority to levy the special taxes, to incur the approved bonded indebtedness and to have the established appropriations limit, all as heretofore provided in these proceedings and in the Act. It is hereby found that all prior proceedings and actions taken by this City Council with respect to the CFD were valid and in conformity with the Act.

5. Notice of Tax Lien. The City Clerk is hereby directed to complete, execute and cause to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Placer a notice of special tax lien in the form required by the Act, such recording to occur no later than fifteen (15) days following adoption by the Council of this Resolution.

6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. * * * * * * * * * * * *
The foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Roseville on the day of , 2022, on the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
2 CANVASS AND STATEMENT OF RESULT OF ELECTION

CITY OF ROSEVILLE
PARKSIDE AT SIERRA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 (PUBLIC FACILITIES)
I hereby certify that on December 7, 2022, I canvassed the returns of the election held on December 7, 2022, in the City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) and the total number of ballots cast in said election and the total number of votes cast for and against the measure are as follows and the totals as shown for and against the measure are full, true and correct:

Qualified
Landowner Votes
Votes Cast YES NO
City of Roseville FD-24
Community Facilities District
No. 1 (Public Facilities),
Special Tax Election, December 7, 2022
BALLOT MEASURE: Shall the measure pursuant to which (i) the City of Roseville shall incur an indebtedness and issue bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $15,000,000 with interest at a rate or rates not to exceed the maximum interest rate permitted by law at the time of sale of such bonds on behalf of the City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) (the “CFD”), the proceeds of which bonds will be used to acquire and/or construct certain facilities and pay for the costs of issuing the bonds and related expenses; (ii) a special tax payable solely from lands within the CFD shall be levied annually, commencing in the City’s fiscal year 2023-24, upon lands within the CFD to pay for the principal and interest upon such bonds, to pay the costs of the City in administering the CFD, and to pay for the costs of acquiring and/or constructing certain facilities; and (iii) the annual appropriations limit of the CFD shall be established in the amount of $1,700,000 be adopted? IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND this day of , 2022.

By:

City Clerk

EXHIBIT A

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 22-435

A RESOLUTION OF FORMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

ROSEVILLE TO FORM PARKSIDE AT SIERRA VISTA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1
(PUBLIC FACILITIES)
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2022, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Roseville (the “City”) adopted a resolution entitled “A Resolution of Intention of the City Council of the City of Roseville to Form a Community Facilities District and Levy a Special Tax in City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities) to Finance the Acquisition and Construction of Certain Public Facilities in and for Such Community Facilities District” (the “Resolution of Intention”), stating its intention to form "City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)" (the “CFD”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended, Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing with Section 53311, of the California Government Code (the “Act”); and WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention, describing a map of the proposed boundaries of the CFD, and stating the facilities to be provided, the cost of providing such facilities, and the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied within the CFD to pay the principal and interest on bonds proposed to be issued with respect to the CFD, is on file with the City Clerk and the provisions thereof are incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein; and WHEREAS, on this date, this City Council held a noticed public hearing as required by the Act and the Resolution of Intention relative to the proposed formation of the CFD; and WHEREAS, at the hearing all interested persons desiring to be heard on all matters pertaining to the formation of the CFD, the facilities to be provided therein and the levy of said special tax were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; and WHEREAS, at the hearing evidence was presented to this City Council on said matters before it, including a report prepared by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (the “Report”) at the request of the Chief Financial Officer of the City, as to the facilities to be provided through the CFD and the costs thereof, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk, and this City Council at the conclusion of said hearing is fully advised as to its substance; and WHEREAS, written protests with respect to the proposed formation of the CFD, the furnishing of specified types of facilities and the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes have not been filed with the City Clerk by 50% or more of the registered voters residing within the territory of the CFD or property owners of one-half or more of the area of land within the CFD and not exempt from the proposed special tax; and WHEREAS, the special tax proposed to be levied in the CFD to pay for the proposed facilities to be provided therein, as set forth in the Rate and Method of Apportionment attached as Exhibit B hereto, has not been eliminated by protest by 50% or more of the registered voters residing within the territory of the CFD or the owners of one-half or more of the area of land within the CFD and not exempt from the special tax.
2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

1. Recitals Correct. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

2. No Majority Protest. The proposed special tax to be levied within the CFD has not been precluded by majority protest pursuant to section 53324 of the Act.

3. Prior Proceedings Valid. All prior proceedings taken by this City Council in connection with the establishment of the CFD, and the levy of the special tax have been duly considered and are hereby found and determined to be valid and in conformity with the Act.

4. Name of CFD. The community facilities district designated “City of Roseville Parkside at Sierra Vista Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities)” is hereby established pursuant to the Act.

5. Boundaries of CFD. The boundaries of the CFD, as set forth in the map of the CFD heretofore recorded in the Placer County Recorder’s Office on October 21, 2022 in Book 4 at Page 79, as Document No. 2022-0078831 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts, are hereby approved, are incorporated herein by reference and shall be the boundaries of the CFD, respectively.

6. Description of Facilities. The type of public facilities proposed to be financed by the CFD and pursuant to the Act shall consist of those items listed as facilities in Exhibit A hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (the “Facilities”), which list of facilities has not been amended since the Resolution of Intention. The financing of the costs of Facilities may include, without limitation, the payment of principal of and interest on bonds together with all direct, indirect periodic, and/or other related costs (including, without limitation, costs of administering the CFD, levying, securing and administering the Special Tax and the bonds, and establishing and replenishing reserve funds).

7. Special Tax.
a. Except to the extent that funds are otherwise available to the CFD to pay for the Facilities and/or the principal and interest as it becomes due on bonds of the CFD issued to finance the Facilities, a special tax (the “Special Tax”) sufficient to pay the costs thereof, secured by the recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the CFD, is intended to be levied annually within the CFD, and collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes or in such other manner as may be prescribed by this City Council.
b. The proposed rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax among the parcels of real property within the CFD, in sufficient detail to allow each landowner within the proposed CFD to estimate the maximum amount such owner will have to pay, is shown in Exhibit B attached hereto and hereby incorporated herein. c. The Special Tax shall not be levied in the CFD after fiscal year 2082-83, except that a Special Tax that was lawfully levied in or before the final tax year and that remains delinquent may be collected in subsequent years. Under no circumstances shall the Special Tax levied against any parcel in the CFD to be used for private residential 3 purposes be increased as a consequence of delinquency or default by the owner of any other parcel or parcels within the CFD by more than 10%. d. As required by Section 53339.3(d) of the Act, the City Council hereby determines that the special tax proposed to pay for public facilities financed with bonds that have already been issued and that are secured by the existing CFD shall be the same as the tax levied in the existing CFD for that purpose, except that a higher special tax may be levied for that purpose within the territory proposed to be annexed or to be annexed in the future to compensate for the interest and principal previously paid by the existing CFD, less any depreciation allocable to the public facility. In so finding, the City Council does not intend to limit its ability to levy a special tax within territory to be annexed or to be annexed in the future to pay for new or additional public facilities, with or without bond financing.

8. Increased Demands. It is hereby found and determined that the Facilities are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon local agencies as the result of development occurring in the CFD.

9. Responsible Official. The Assistant City Manager/Chief Financial Officer of the City of Roseville, 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95678, (916) 774-5313, is the officer of the City who will be responsible for preparing annually a current roll of special tax levy obligations by assessor’s parcel number and who will be responsible for estimating future special tax levies pursuant to the Act.

10. Tax Lien. Upon recordation of a notice of special tax lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of California, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the special tax shall attach to all nonexempt real property in the CFD, including property annexed into the CFD, and this lien shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the City ceases.

11. Appropriations Limit. In accordance with the Act, the annual appropriations limit, as defined by subdivision (h) of Section 8 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution, of the CFD is hereby preliminarily established at $1,700,000, and said appropriations limit shall be submitted to the voters of the CFD as hereafter provided. The proposition establishing said annual appropriations limit shall become effective if approved by the qualified electors voting thereon and shall be adjusted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Act.

In connection with the designation as an improvement area of any territory annexing to the CFD, in the event the rate and method of apportionment of special tax for such improvement area and/or the appropriations limit for such improvement area shall be other than as adopted for the CFD, such changes shall be identified and approved in the Unanimous Approval executed by property owners in connection with their annexation to the CFD.

12. Election. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the proposition of the levy of the special tax and the proposition of the establishment of the appropriations limit specified above shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the CFD at an election. The time, place and conditions of the election shall be as specified by a separate resolution of this City Council.

13. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. 4 * * * * * * * * * * *
The foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of Roseville on the ______ day of _______, 2022, on the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
Exhibit A

Page 1 ends

Roseville City CouncilDecember 7, 2022

Roseville City Council
December 7, 2022