Roseville City Council
March 15, 2023

City of Roseville
2022-23 CDBG Program
Subrecipient:

Program/project:

Award: 15,000.00$
Project 2022-4
Activity 449 Balance Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
0 0% 0% 100%
Line item description of cost Total program CDBG Other funds 14,980.00 15,000.00 - (15,000.00) - - (15,000.00) - - - - - - -
- -
70 residents @ $214.00 per head
This covers one veteran's entire 3 day/2
night stay at The Grounds in Roseville,
including all necessary expenses for
shelter, food and supplies - -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
Total 14,980.00$ 15,000.00$ -$ (20.00) - (15,000.00) - - - (15,000.00) Balance of CDBG award (should = 0) - - - Percent expended 100.0%
Beneficiaries planned/actual/percent 70 70 100.0% 0 70 0 0 70 Service units planned/actual/percent 140 140 100.0% 0 140 0 0 140 Placer Veterans Stand Down
Stand Down 2023 Event
Host 70 Roseville residents at the 2023
Stand Down event
RESOLUTION NO. 23-086

APPROVING THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK

GRANT RATING AND RANKING GUIDELINES

WHEREAS, the City of Roseville Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”) program receives applications from various organizations on an annual basis, and each application must be reviewed, rated, and ranked in order to determine which programs will receive funding; and

WHEREAS, in order to ensure the rating and ranking guidelines stay up-to-date, staff will review and suggest updates to the guidelines during each 5-year Consolidated Plan process; and

WHEREAS, the proposed revisions will align the guidelines with the current needs of the community and current average annual grant allocations received from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; and

WHEREAS, the City of Roseville CDBG Rating and Ranking Guidelines have been reviewed by the City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said City of Roseville CDBG Rating and Ranking Guidelines are hereby approved and will go into effect for the 2024/25 CDBG funding cycle.

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
1 CITY OF ROSEVILLE
Community Development Block Grant
Rating and Ranking Guidelines

The City’s Community Development Block Grant Rating and Ranking Guidelines are in place to ensure an unbiased review process. The Housing Division practice for rating and ranking CDBG applications will constitute the following:

 A Professional Review Team will review, rate and rank application requests to establish an unbiased review process. The members will include a City staff person (outside of Housing Division) with expertise in programs or projects assisting low-income members of the community, CDBG staff from surrounding jurisdictions or other individuals with similar experience and knowledge of the CDBG program or the needs of low-income individuals.

 A minimum of $10,000 and maximum amount of $25,000 per funding request, under the category of Public Services. This funding category is limited to 15% of the City’s annual grant allocation and averages $120,000 annually).

 At City’s option, may only fund a special population, (Families, Homeless, Seniors, Youth, etc.).

 Higher points will be awarded to applicants who can demonstrate leveraging of CDBG dollars with other funding sources.

 Rate and Rank applications based on the attached Rating and Ranking System. Generally, the highest ranked proposals will be recommended for funding; see the attached rating and ranking sheet.
2 CITY OF ROSEVILLE
Community Development Block Grant
Application Rating and Ranking Criteria

Threshold Criteria – Proposed programs or projects must be able to answer yes for questions 1 and 2 in order to be eligible for CDBG funding and considered for rating and ranking process.

1. Does the program or project meet a national objective of the CDBG Program?

2. Is the proposed program or project an eligible CDBG activity?

3. Has applicant met timely expenditures of CDBG funding in prior three-year funding allocation? (New applicants are exempt.)

4. If awarded CDBG funds within the last three years, were quarterly reports complete and submitted in a timely manner?

5. Did applicant have any unresolved monitoring findings in the last three years? (i.e. no income verification)

6. Does the activity meet a Consolidated Plan priority need? ___________________________________________________________________________________________

I. Administrative Capability (Total 20 points)

1. Prior experience of the entity—Has th e entity successfully administered a program or project with similar administrative requirements? (10 points)

2. Staffing—Is the staffing adequate? Does the staff’s experi ence provide the ability to compile and submit accurate and timely reports? (10 points)

II. Need & Justification (Total 10 Points)

3. Does the applicant clearly state the need to be met and describe how the proposed activity will meet that need? (10 points)

III. Feasibility (Total 40 Points)

4. Extent to which the program or project is ready to be implemented (10 points)

5. Extent to which applicant is able to meet stated performance objectives (10 points)

6. Extent to which applicant will sustain program/service after CDBG is awarded (10 points)

7. Applicant’s ability to leverage/match grant amount; value of volunteer hours allowed (10 points)

IV. Fiscal Responsibility (Total 30 Points)

8. Budget Demonstrates Adequate funding (10 points)

9. Reasonable Cost/Benefit Ratio (10 points)

10. Reasonable Administrative Costs (10 points)

NOTE: Special conditions may be attached to the proj ect, depending on the nature of the request and/or activity, including time limits for use of funds.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
CC #:
2579
File #:
0800-03
Title:

Hydroelectric Adjustment - Roseville Municipal Code Update Contact:

Joanna Cucchi 916-746-1609 [email protected]

Meeting Date: 3/15/2023
Item #: 8.3.

RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Staff recommends the Roseville City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance amending section 14.24.052 of the Roseville Municipal Code to update the hydroelectric adjustment calculation to reflect forecasted energy deliveries and update the an nual expected energy from
hydroelectric resources from 222 Gigawatt-Hour (GWh) to 277 GWh.

BACKGROUND
Beginning in 2009, Roseville Electric Utility implemented a hydroelectric adjustment to mitigate the cost impacts of varying hydroelectric energy resources. Depending on precipitation, reservoir conditions, timing of snow melt, multi-year droughts and other factors, the delivery of hydroelectric generation energy to the City can vary. The current calculation only considers a single year of precipitation in the calculation of the hydroelectric adjustment.

When the hydroelectric adjustment was first implemented, the use of precipitation tracked well with energy deliveries to the City. However, beginning in 2017 the direct relationship between the single year precipitation and the energy deliveries from hydroelectric resources began to deviate.

In some years, this resulted in the hydroelectric adjustment being higher than needed and in other years lower than needed to offset costs.

The proposed updates to the municipal code change the current calculation of the hydroelectric adjustment from precipitation in the 8-station index to forecasted hydroelectric energy deliveries.

The Electric Utility receives hydroelectric energy forecasts from both the federal government and the Northern California Power Agency. These forecasts have proven to be a more accurate measure of the next year hydroelectric energy deliveries. By updating the code to use these forecasts instead of the 8-station index precipitation, the utility can more accurately calculate the cost impact of hydroelectric energy and charge or credit customers a rate more in line with that impact.

In addition to the changes above, the utility is proposing to update the annual expected energy from hydroelectric resources from 222 GWh to 277 GWh. The annual expected energy from hydroelectric resources is a variable in the hydroelectric adjustment calculation and needs to be updated periodically to reflect the amount of exposure the utility has from hydroelectric resources.

This change reflects the recent purchased power agreement for 55 GWh of generation from the Feather River.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed changes to the municipal code will result in a changed hydroelectric adjustment calculation. Depending on the year, this could result in increased or decreased revenue. However, the revenue received will be more aligned with the impacts related to hydroelectric generation.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) only applies to projects which have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3)).

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS
Goal A - Remain fiscally responsible in a changing world

Respectfully Submitted,
Joanna Cucchi, Interim Electric Utility Financial Administrator Dan Bean, Electric Utility Director

_____________________________
Dominick Casey, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
RMC edits
ORDINANCE NO. ____

ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AMENDING SECTION

14.24.052 OF CHAPTER 14.24 OF TITLE 14 OF THE ROSEVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE

REGARDING HYDROELECTRIC ADJUSTMENT
THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS:

SECTION 1. Section 14.24.052 of Chapter 14.24 of Title 14 of the Roseville Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

14.24.052 Hydroelectric adjustment.

A. Effective on billings as of July 1, 2009, a hydroelectric adjustment will be implemented for all residential and general service electric billings.

1. Purpose. The hydroelectric adjustment is calculated annually, effective July 1st through June 30th of each year, and is based on the cost impacts associated with varying precipitation levels and related hydroelectric energy supplies.

2. Definitions.
a. “Actual precipitationHydroelectric energy delivery forecast” means precipitation measurements taken at NS8 for the months of July through April each year, plus the average precipitation for the months of May and June based on 1956-2005 measurement records.the 2 forecasted electricity deliveries from hydroelectric energy resources on May 1 for the following July through June period.
b. “Annual budgeted retail energy” means the forecasted sale of energy at retail in kilowatt-hours for the period July through June.
c. “Annual budgeted retail revenue” means the forecasted revenue to be received for energy sold at retail for the period July through June. d. “Annual expected energy from average precipitationhydroelectric resources” means 27722 gigawatt hours.
e. “Annual forward market price” means the estimated relevant future energy price for electricity delivered to North Path 15 (electricity market hub for Roseville electricity purchases). If North Path 15 is no longer available, a suitable replacement will be used as determined by Roseville Electric.
f. “Average precipitation” means 52 inches, based on measurement statistics from the Northern Sierra 8 Station Index (NS8) from 1956-2005, July through June. g. “Hydroelectric energy generated per inch of precipitation” means 4.27 gigawatt hours.
fh. “Rate stabilization fund” means the fund established in accordance with Roseville Electric financial policies and adopted by the city council for the purpose of providing financial reserves to respond to the effects of major economic contingencies.

3. Calculation. The calculated hydroelectric adjustment will be determined by the following method, no later than June 30th of each year:
3 a. Average precipitation minus actual precipitation = precipitation variance. ab. Precipitation variance times hydroelectric energy generated per inch of precipitationHydroelectric energy delivery forecast minus annual expected energy from hydroelectric resources = energy variance.
c. Energy variance times annual forward market price = budget impact. d. Budget impact divided by annual budgeted retail revenue = calculated hydroelectric adjustment percentage.

Total service charges to customers for a monthly billing period will be increased or decreased by the calculated hydroelectric adjustment percentage.

If the calculated hydroelectric adjustment is a positive number, i.e., due to lower than average precipitation annual expected energy from hydroelectric resources, a hydroelectric adjustment charge, not to exceed five percent will be implemented.

If the calculated hydroelectric adjustment is a negative number, i.e., due to higher than annual expected energy from hydroelectric resourcesaverage precipitation, and the rate stabilization fund balance is estimated to remain above the maximum policy level for the following 12 months, a hydroelectric adjustment credit, not to exceed five percent, will be implemented.

SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be effective at the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of adoption.

4 SECTION 3. 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 _______________, 20__, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

_________________________________
City Clerk

COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
CC #:
2582
File #:
0400-04 & 0400-04-09-1
Title:

West Roseville Specific Plan Parcel F-22 (5251 Fiddyment Road) - Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Amendment
Contact:

Kinarik Shallow 916-746-1309 [email protected]

Meeting Date: 3/15/2023
Item #: 8.4.

RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
At the February 9, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council take the following actions on the project:

1 .

Adopt a resolution approving text amendments to the West Roseville Specific Plan; and 2 .

Adopt the five (5) findings of fact and introduce for first reading an ordinance approving the Tenth Amendment of the Fiddyment Land Venture Development Agreement relative to the West Roseville Specific Plan.

BACKGROUND
This Council Communication provides a summary evaluation of the project and a summary of the February 9, 2023 Planning Commission hearing.

Background/Project Description

The project site is located on Parcel F-22 of the West Roseville Specific Plan (WRSP), at 5251 Fiddyment Road, at the northeast corner of Harvey Way and Fiddyment Road (see Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map).

The site is currently vacant and has a General Plan land use designation of High Density Residential (HDR-24.9) and a zoning designation of Multi-Family Housing (R3).

Surrounding uses include an Open Space parcel to the north, a Medium Density Residential subdivision to the east, the Plaza at Blue Oaks retail center to the south across Harvey Way, and a vacant Community Commercial parcel and Open Space parcel to the west across Fiddyment Road.

Parcel F-22 has a current unit allocation of 244 units and 184 of these units are designated as affordable rental units (91 very low-income and 93 low-income) in the WRSP.

As part of the
proposed project, the Planning Commission approved a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the

9.84-acre site into two parcels, F-22A and F-22B, and a Tree Permit to remove a valley oak tree on site to accommodate future development.

These entitlements were approved at the February
9, 2023 Planning Commission meeting and are further discussed in the staff report included as Attachment 2.

The project also includes a request for a Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Amendment to reallocate affordable housing units among the subject parcels.

Parcel F-22A will
be 2.7 net acres with a unit allocation of 82 units (81 very low), and Parcel F-22B will be 7.15 net acres with a unit allocation of 162 units (10 very low and 93 low).

No changes to the overall
WRSP unit count will be made.

The requested entitlements will facilitate the development of an apartment project on each of the resultant parcels.

The projects are subject to the City’s Objective Design Standards (ODS) process because at least 20% of the units will be provided as affordable to lower income households.

The ODS process was adopted by City Council on April 21, 2021 (Resolution 21- 152) in order to streamline the construction of qualified affordable housing projects and to comply with State housing legislation.

An ODS application is currently in review for Parcel F-22A (File #PL22-0380) and for Parcel F-22B (File #PL22-0383), however, the approval of these projects are dependent on the approval of the requested entitlements mentioned above.

Summary Evaluation

Specific Plan Amendment

The project includes a text only amendment to the West Roseville Specific Plan (WRSP).

No
changes are being made to the existing zoning and land use designation of the site.

The SPA
exhibit and WRSP change pages are included as Exhibits A and B.

Changes to the text, tables,
and figures of the WRSP will be made to reflect the subdivision of the site into two parcels (F-22A and F-22B) and the resulting unit allocations.

Of the 244 units currently allocated to Parcel F-22,
82 units will be allocated to Parcel F-22A and 162 units will be allocated to Parcel F-22B.

The
proposed unit allocations result in a density that is consistent with the existing High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation of the site.

Consistent with the General Plan affordable housing goal, the WRSP includes an Affordable Housing Plan (Chapter 5) which designates 10% of the units in the WRSP for middle-, low- and very low-income households.

This includes a mix of purchase housing that is affordable to middle-income households, and rental housing that is affordable to low- and very low-income households.

The WRSP affordable housing goal is allocated to specific MDR and HDR parcels as identified in Table 5-3 of the WRSP.

The intent is to distribute affordable units throughout the WRSP area.

Parcel F-22, which is a HDR parcel, is allocated 184 affordable rental units, with 91 units allocated for very low-income households and 93 units allocated for low-income households.

Given the project includes a subdivision of Parcel F-22, the Affordable Housing Plan will be amended to revise the affordable housing obligations among the parcels.

Parcel F-22A will be
allocated 81 affordable units (all very low) and Parcel F-22B will be allocated 103 affordable units (10 very low and 93 low).

The project will maintain the same number of units in the WRSP, therefore there will be no impacts to planned infrastructure, roadways, or other public facilities.

In addition, the project will maintain
the existing obligation of 184 affordable units, which will be divided between the parcels as discussed above.

Development Agreement Amendment

The project includes a tenth amendment of the Development Agreement (DA) by and between the City of Roseville and Fiddyment Land Venture. The DA Amendment is included as Exhibit C. Development Agreements are binding contracts that set the terms, rules, conditions, regulations, entitlements, responsibilities, and other provisions relating to the development of the covered properties. The DA Amendment includes a revision to the land use plan exhibit contained in the original DA to reflect the subdivision of Parcel F-22.

The DA Amendment will
also amend the relevant sections of the original DA to address the revised affordable housing obligations resulting from the Tentative Parcel Map.

The City’s Housing Division reviewed the
project and determined the proposed affordable unit allocations are acceptable and consistent with City policy.

Items that are not addressed in the amendment are subject to the terms of the original DA.

In summary, City staff has found the proposed DA Amendment is consistent with the General Plan, WRSP, and the Zoning Ordinance.

The DA Amendment is in conformance with the
public health, safety, and welfare, and will not adversely affect the orderly development of the property or the preservation of property values.

Summary of Planning Commission Meeting

The project was heard by the City's Planning Commission on February 9, 2023. The applicant addressed the Commission, spoke in favor of the project, and requested approval by the Commission. No public testimony was received at the hearing. After deliberating on the item, the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Amendment, and approved the Tentative Parcel Map and Tree Permit, with a vote of 7 aye, 0 nay, 0 absent.

Public Outreach

The proposed project was distributed to all internal and external agencies and departments who have requested such notice, and all comments or recommended conditions of approval have been incorporated into the project, as appropriate.

Early notification of the project was posted on
the Roseville Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (RCONA)’s website and on the City’s Projects of Interest website.

On November 29, 2022 the applicant held a public informational meeting at St. John’s Episcopal Church.

Notice of this meeting was posted on the RCONA
website and mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project.

In attendance were
applicant representatives and City staff.

Two members of the public attended and asked
questions about the project.

None of the attendees expressed opposition.

Notices of both the Planning Commission hearing and the City Council hearing were published in the Roseville Press Tribune and on the RCONA website, and mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the site.

As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any public comments regarding the project.

FISCAL IMPACT
The entitlements would facilitate eventual construction of two apartment complex projects. The eventual construction of the apartment complex projects would generate revenue to the City through the payment of development impact fees.

The project is not anticipated to result in any
negative impacts to the City’s General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project is statutorily exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as a residential project pursuant to a Specific Plan. A project is eligible for this exemption if the public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, and the criteria to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are not met. The EIR for the West Roseville Specific Plan (SCH #2002082057) was certified by the City Council on February 4, 2004. No significant changes to the site or new, potentially significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, and the proposed project is consistent with the previously completed analysis.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS
Goal F - Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth

Respectfully Submitted,
Kinarik Shallow, Associate Planner
Mike Isom, Development Services Director

_____________________________
Dominick Casey, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1 Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 February 9, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report and Exhibits Resolution 23-089
Resolution 23-089
Exhibit A Specific Plan Amendment
Exhibit B West Roseville Specific Plan Change Pages
Ordinance DAA
Exhibit C DA Amendment
Vicinity Map
City of Roseville, Nearmap, Maxar
Roseville Parcel
Roseville Street Label
2/15/2023, 3:53:49 PM 0 0.06 0.120.03 mi
0 0.1 0.190.05 km
1:4,514
City of Roseville - Development Services
City of Roseville | Development Services
CC ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Division Staff Report
Planning Commission Meeting February 9, 2023
Prepared by: Kinarik Shallow, Associate Planner
ITEM 6.1: Specific Plan Amendment, Development Agreement Amendment, Tentative Parcel Map, and Tree Permit – 5251 Fiddyment Road – WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – File #PL22-0304

REQUEST
The applicant requests a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide West Roseville Specific Plan Parcel F- 22 into two parcels, F-22A and F-22B. Parcel F-22A will have a unit allocation of 82 units and Parcel F-22B will have a unit allocation of 162 units. No changes to the overall WRSP unit count will be made. A Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Amendment are requested to reallocate affordable housing units among the subject parcels. Lastly, a Tree Permit is requested to allow removal of one 68” valley oak tree on site to accommodate future development.

Applicant – Kris Steward, Plan Steward, Inc.

Property Owner – West Roseville Development Company Inc.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
T
he Planning Division recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions:

1. R
ecommend the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Specific Plan Amendment;

2. Recommend the City Council adopt the five (5) findings of fact and approve the Tenth Amendment of the Fiddyment Land Venture Development Agreement;

3. Adopt the three (3) findings of fact and approve the Tentative Parcel Map subject to seventeen (17) conditions of approval; and

4. Adopt the two (2) findings of fact and approve the Tree Permit subject to nineteen (19) conditions of approval.

SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES
T
here are no outstanding issues associated with this request. The applicant has reviewed and is in agreement with all recommended conditions of approval.

BACKGROUND
The project site is located on Parcel
F-22 of the West Roseville Specific
Plan (WRSP), at the northeast corner
of Harvey Way and Fiddyment Road
(see Figure 1 below). The site is
c
urrently vacant and has a General
Plan land use designation of High
Density Residential (HDR- 24.9) and
a zoning designation of Multi-Family
Housing (R3) . Surrounding uses
include an Open Space parcel to the
north, a Medium Density Residential
subdivision to the east, the Plaza at
Blue Oaks retail center to the south
Figure 1: Project Location
Fiddyment Rd
Harvey Way
CC ATTACHMENT 2
WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 2 of 9

across Harvey Way, and a vacant Community Commercial parcel and Open Space parcel to the west across Fiddyment Road.

Parcel F-22 has a current unit allocation of 244 units and 184 of these units are designated as affordable rental units (91 very low -income and 93 low -income) in the WRSP. The applicant is requesting a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the 9.84-acre parcel into two parcels, F-22A and F-22B. Parcel F-22A will be 2.7 net acres with a unit allocation of 82 units (81 very low), and Parcel F-22B will be 7.15 net acres with a unit allocation of 162 units (10 very low and 93 low). No changes to the overall WRSP unit count will be made. A Specific Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Amendment are requested to reallocate affordable housing units among the subject parcels. Lastly, a Tree Permit is requested to allow removal of one 68” valley oak tree on site to accommodate future development.

The requested entitlements will facilitate the development of an apartment project on each of the resultant parcels. The projects are subject to the City’s Objective Design Standards (ODS) process because at least 20% of the units will be provided as affordable to lower income households. The ODS process was adopted by City Council on April 21, 2021 (Resolution 21-152) in order to streamline the construction of qualified affordable housing projects and to comply with State housing legi slation. An ODS application is currently in review for Parcel F -22A (File #PL22- 0380) and for Parcel F- 22B (File #PL22 -0383), however, the approval of these projects are dependent on the approval of the requested entitlem ents mentioned above.

Figure 2: Proposed Parcels F-22A & F-22B

EVALUATION – SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
Specific Plan Amendments (SPA) are analyzed for consistency with the goals and policies of the affected plan. The project includes a text only amendment to the West Roseville Specific Plan (WRSP). No changes are being made to the existing zoning and land use designation of the site. The SPA exhibit and WRSP change pages are included as Exhibits A and B. Changes to the text, tables, and figures of the WRSP will be made to reflect the subdivision of the site into two parcels (F-22A and F-22B) and the resulting unit allocations. Of the 244 units currently allocated to Parcel F-22, 82 units will be allocated to Parcel F-22A and 162 units will be allocated to Parcel F- 22B. The proposed unit allocations result in a density that is consistent with the existing High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation of the site.

WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 3 of 9

Consistent with the General Plan affordable housing goal, the WRSP includes an Affordable Housing Plan (Chapter 5) which designates 10% of the units in the WRSP for middle-, low- and very low-income households. This includes a mix of purchase housing that is affordable to middle- income households, and rental housing that is affordable to low- and very low-income households. The WRSP affordable housing goal is allocated to specific MDR and HDR parcels as identified in Table 5-3 of the WRSP. The intent is to distribute affordable units throughout the WRSP area. Parcel F-22, which is a HDR parcel, is allocated 184 affordable rental units, with 91 units allocated for very-low income households and 93 units allocated for low -income households. Given the project includes a subdivision of Parcel F- 22, the Affordable Housing Plan will be amended to revise the affordable housing obligations among the parcels.

Table 1 identifies the proposed unit allocations and the proposed affordable unit allocations.

Table 1: Unit Allocations

Existing Proposed
Specific Plan Parcel F-22 F-22A F-22B Total
Acres 9.85 2.70 7.15 9.85
Unit Allocation 244 82 162 244
Density 24.8 30.4 22.7 n/a

Affordable Units 184 81 103 184
Very low income units 91 81 10 91
Low income units 93 0 93 93

The project will maintain the same number of units in the WRSP. As such, there will be no impacts to planned infrastructure, roadway s, or other public facilities. In addition, t he project will maintain the existing obligation of 184 affordable units, which will be divided between the parcels as shown in Table 1 above. Based on the foregoing, staff supports the proposed SPA.

EVALUATION – DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT

Section 19.84.040 of the City of Roseville Zoning Ordinance specifies that recommendations for approval or denial of a Development Agreement (DA), including Amendments, shall include consideration of the following:

1. Consistency with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and the West Roseville Specific Plan;

2. Consistency with the provisions of the City of Roseville Zoning Ordinance;

3. Conformity with the public health, safety and general welfare;

4. The effect on the orderly development of the property or the preservation of property values; and

5. Whether the provisions of the Agreement shall provide sufficient benefit to the City to justify entering into the Agreement.

The project includes a tenth amendment of the Fiddyment Land Venture Development Agreement (DA).

The DA Amendment is included as Exhibit C. Development Agreements are binding contracts that set the terms, rules, conditions, regulations, entitlements, responsibilities, and other provisions relating to the development of the covered properties.

The DA Amendment includes a revision to the land use plan exhibit contained in the original DA to reflect the subdivision of Parcel F-22. The DA Amendment will also amend the relevant sections of the original WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 4 of 9

DA to address the revised affordable housing obligations resulting from the proposed Tentative Parcel Map. The City’s Housing Division reviewed the project and determined the proposed affordable unit allocations are acceptable and consistent with City policy. Items that are not addressed in the amendment are subject to the terms of the original DA . In summary, City staff has found the proposed DA Amendment is c onsistent with the General Plan, WRSP, and the Zoning Ordinance. The DA Amendment is in conformance with the public health, safety, and welfare, and will not adversely affect the orderly development of the property or the preservation of property values. Therefore, the proposed DA Amendment is consistent with items 1-5 above.

EVALUATION – TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
Section 18.06.180 of the City of Roseville Subdivision Ordinance requires that three (3) findings be made prior to the approval of the Tentative Parcel Map. The required findings are listed below in italicized, bold text and are followed by an evaluation.

1. The size, design, character, grading, location, orientation, and configuration of lots, roads, and all improvements for the tentative subdivision map are consistent with the density, uses, circulation and open space systems, applicable policies and standar ds of the General Plan and the Community Design Guidelines, and the design standards of Title 18 (Subdivision Ordinance) of the Roseville Municipal Code.

The proposed subdivision will result in the creation of two development parcels: F-22A and F-22B. Parcel F-22A will be 2.7 net acres and Parcel F- 22B will be 7.15 net acres. The Subdivision Map Act and Subdivision Ordinance do not contain any maximum or minimum lot size. The site has already been mass graded and all of the surrounding roadways have been constructed, pursuant to previous land approvals in the area. The design, character, location, orientation, and configuration of the lots conform to all requirements.

2. The subdivision will result in lots which can be used or built upon. The subdivision wi ll not create lots which are impractical for improvement or use due to: the steepness of terrain or location of watercourses in the area; the size or shape of the lots or inadequate building area; inadequate frontage or access, or some other physical condition of the area.

There are no physical conditions in the area which would constrain the ability to build upon or use the parcels, and both parcels will retain roadway front age and access to utilities. The resultant lots are of sufficient size and shape to accommodate future development . There are no watercourses or other natural features on the site that would impede development. The development of these parcels are being reviewed separately through the Objective Design Standards process, which will ensure compliance with the City’s design and development standards.

3. The design and density of the subdivision will not violate the existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the discharge of waste into the sewage system, pursuant to Division 7 of the Water Code.

Approval of the Tentative Parcel Map will not change the existing development intensity and allowed uses on the site, and thus will not increase demands on sewage services; there will be no impacts to the existing requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

EVALUATION – TREE PERMIT
Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 19.66.030, a Tree Permit is required for any removal of native oak trees or for more than 20% encroachment into the dripline of a native oak tree. The proposed project will result in the removal of one native oak tree in preparation of future development of the site. The required findings to approve a Tree Permit are listed below.

WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 5 of 9

1. Approval of the Tree Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, and approval of the Tree Permit is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 19.66.

2. Measures have been incorporated into the project or permit to mitigate impacts to remaining trees or to provide replacement for trees removed.

An arborist report including a tree inventory summary was provided by California Tree and Landscape Consulting, Inc., dated November 16, 2022 (see Exhibit E). A total of one (1) tree was found on the southern side of the property. The tree (Tree #181) is a protected valley oak tree with a total diameter of 68 inches.

According to the arborist report, the tree is in fair health but has minor problems including an above average amount of dead branches and overextended/over-weighted branches. The tree would require installation of a rotary cable support system to maintain it. Removal of the tree is requested in order to accommodate the future development of the parcels.

The applicant has proposed to comply with the compensation requirements of the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The total number of mitigation inches for this project is 68 . Mitigation can be completed with a combination of on- site planting and payment into the City’s in -lieu fee program. The funds in the City’s in-lieu fee program are used for the replanting and preservation of trees throughout the City and are calculated at a rate of $118 per inch of tree removed when measured at the tree’s diameter at breast height (DBH). The tree mitigation fee is required to be paid prior to the removal of the tree and prior to issuance of any permits.

The Tree Permit contains all of the standard conditions of approval, which includes a requirement to follow all of the recommendations of the Arborist Report. The removal of the tree will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, and measures have been incorporated to mitigate impacts.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
The proposed project was distributed to all internal and external agencies and departments who have requested such notice, and all comments or recommended conditions of approval have been incorporated into the project, as appropriate. Early notification of the project was posted on the Roseville Coalition of Neighborhood Associations (RCONA)’s website and on the City’s Projects of Interest website.

On November 29, 2022 the applicant held a public informational meeting at St. John’s Episcopal Church.

Notice of this meeting was posted on the RCONA website and mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project. In attendance were applicant representatives and City staff. Two members of the public attended and asked questions about the project. None of the attendees expressed opposition.

A notice of the public hearing was published in the Roseville Press Tribune on January 28, 2023 and a notice of the hearing was also distributed to all property owners within 300 feet of the site and posted on the RCONA website. No comments have been received as of publication of the staff report.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION

The proposed project is statutorily exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as a residential project pursuant to a Specific Plan. A project is eligible for this exemption if the public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, and the criteria to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are not met. The EIR for the West Roseville Specific Plan (SCH #2002082057) was certif ied by the City Council on February 4, 2004. No significant changes to the site or new, potentially significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, and the proposed project is consistent with the previously completed analysis.

WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 6 of 9

RECOMMENDATION

The Planning Division recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions:

1. Recommend the City Council adopt a resolution approving the SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT – 5251 FIDDYMENT ROAD – WRSP PCL F-22 – PARCEL MAP AND UNIT TRANSFER – FILE #PL22-0304;

2. Recommend the City Council adopt the five (5) findings of fact and approve the DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT – 5251 FIDDYMENT ROAD – WRSP PCL F-22 – PARCEL MAP AND UNIT TRANSFER – FILE #PL22-0304;

3. Adopt the three (3) findings of fact and approve the TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – 5251 FIDDYMENT ROAD – WRSP PCL F-22 – PARCEL MAP AND UNIT TRANSFER – FILE #PL22- 0304 subject to seventeen (17) conditions of approval; and

4. Adopt the two (2) findings of fact and approve the TREE PERMIT – 5251 FIDDYMENT ROAD – WRSP PCL F -22 – PARCEL MAP AND UNIT TRANSFER – FILE #PL22- 0304 subject to nineteen (19) conditions of approval.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP – FILE #PL22-0304

1. This Tentative Map approval shall be effectuated within a period of two (2) years from February 9, 2023 and if not effectuated shall expire on February 9, 2025. Prior to said expiration date, the applicant may apply for an extension of time, provided this approval does not extend the expiration beyond February 9, 2029. (Planning)

2. The project is approved as shown in Exhibit D, and as conditioned or modified below. (Planning)

3. The approval of a Tentative Map and/or tentative site plan does not constitute approval of proposed improvements as to size, design, materials, or location, unless specifically addressed in these conditions of approval. (Engineering)

4. The applicant shall pay City’s actual costs for providing plan check, mapping, GIS, and inspection services. This may be a combination of staff costs and direct billing for contract professional services. (Engineering, Environmental Utilities, Finance)

5. The project shall comply with all required environmental mitigation identified in the West Roseville Specific Plan EIR, and shall include all applicable mitigation measures as notes on the plans. (Planning)

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT AND/OR IMPROVEMENT PLANS

6. Grading around the native oak trees or other natural features shal l be as shown on the Grading Plan/Tree Removal Plan, or as approved in these conditions. (Planning)

7. The applicant shall submit to the Planning and Engineering Departments the applicable Army Corps of Engineers permit or clearance, the California Department of Fish and Game Stream Bed Alteration Agreement, and/or the Regional Water Quality Control Board Water Quality Certificate. (Planning)

PRIOR TO OR UPON RECORDATION OF FINAL MAP

8. All existing easements shall be maintained, unless otherwise provided for in these conditions. (Environmental Utilities, Electric, Engineering)

WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 7 of 9

9. The vacation of the right of way and vacation of the drainage easement as shown on the Tentative Parcel Map shall occur with recordation of the Parcel Map. (Engineering)

10. Separate document easements required by the City shall be prepared in accordance with the City’s “Policy for Dedication of Easements to the City of Roseville.” All legal descriptions shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor (Environmental Utilities, Electric, Engineering)

11. In the event that the Final (Parcel) Map will record prior to the completion of on-site construction, all utility and access easements shall be placed on the face of the Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If all on -site i mprovements are complete prior to the recordation of the map, then a separate agreement allowing all parcels/lots the rights of reciprocal access, rights to construct, and parking shall be submitted to the City as a part of final/parcel map submittal. Sai d agreement shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and referenced on the face of the recorded map. (Engineering)

12. The Final/Parcel Map shall include an irrevocable offer to dedicate public rights -of-way and public and/or private easements as required by the City. (Engineering)

13. The words "traffic control appurtenances" shall be included in the list of utilities allowed in public utilities easements (PUEs) located along public roadways. (Engineering)

14. The Final/Parcel Map shall be submitted per “The Digital Submittal of Cadastral Surveys.” A plot or print of the submittal shall accompany the electronic copy. The complete submittal shall occur after the Engineering Department approval but prior to City Council approval of the Final/Parcel Map. (Engineering)

15. The Environmental Utilities Department shall make a determination that there is adequate conveyance and treatment capacity in the City sewer system to handle the newly created Lot/Parcels. (Environmental Utilities)

16. The applicant shall pay all applicable water and sewer fees. (Environmental Utilities)

OTHER CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

17. The Tentative Parcel Map shall not be deemed approved until the actions on the Development Agreement Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment are approved and become effe ctive. (Planning)

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE TREE PERMIT – FILE #PL22-0304

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY PERMITS OR ANY CONSTRUCTION ON-SITE

1. All recommendations contained in the Arborist Report (Exhibit E ) are incorporated by reference into these conditions, except as modified herein. (Planning)

2. Tree #181 (or as listed in Exhibit E) are approved for removal with this tree permit. All other native oak trees shall remain in place. Trees to be removed shall be clearly marked in the field and inspected by Planning Staff prior to removal. Removal of the trees shall be performed by or under the supervision of a certified arborist. (Planning)

3. The developer shall be responsible for the replacement of the total number of inches proposed for removal prior to any tree removal. The total number of inches for this project is 68. Mitigation must be WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 8 of 9

provided prior to tree removal unless otherwise approved in the tree replacement plan or in these conditions. (Planning)

4. No activity shall be permitted within the protected zone of any native oak tree beyond those identified by this report. Encroachment into the protected zone of Tree #181 as shown in Attachment 1 and Exhibit E, and as described in the staff report is permitted. (Planning)

5. A violation of any of the conditions of this Tree Permit is a violation of the Roseville Municipal Code, the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 19.74) and the Tree Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 19.66). Penalties for violation of any of the conditions of approval may include forfeiture of the bond, suspension or revocation of the permit, payment of restitution, and criminal penalties. (Planning)

6. A fencing plan shall be shown on the approved site plan and/or improvement plans demonstrating the Protected Zone for the affected trees. A maximum of three feet beyond the edge of the walls, driveways, or walkways will be allowed for construction activity and shall be shown on the fencing plan. The fencing plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the placement of the protective fencing. (Planning)

7. The applicant shall install a minimum of a five-foot high chain link fence (or acceptable alternative) at the outermost edge of the Protected Zone of the oak tree. Where encroachment is permitted pursuant to Condition 4, above, the fencing for encroachments shall be installed at the limit of construction activity.

The applicant shall install signs at two equidistant locations on the temporary fence that are clearly visible from the front of the lot and where constr uction activity will occur. The size of each sign shall be a minimum of two feet (2’) by two feet (2’) and must contain the following language: “WARNING THIS

FENCE SHALL NOT BE REMOVED OR RELOCATED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE PLANNING DIVISION”. (Planning)

8. Once the fencing is installed, the applicant shall schedule an appointment with the Planning Division to inspect and approve the temporary fencing before beginning any construction. (Planning)

9. The applicant shall arrange with the arborist to perform, and certify in writing, the completion of deadwooding, fertilization, and all other work recommended for completion prior to the approval of improvement plans. Pruning shall be done by an Arborist or under the direct supervision of a Certified Arborist, in conformance with International Society of Arboriculture (I.S.A.) standards. Any watering and deep root fertilization which the arborist deems necessary to protect the health of the trees as noted in the arborist report or as otherwise require d by the arborist shall be completed by the applicant. (Planning)

10. A utility trenching pathway plan shall be submitted depicting all of the following systems: storm drains, sewers, water mains, and underground utilities. The trenching pathway plan shall show the proposed locations of all lateral lines. (Planning)

11. A Site Planning Meeting shall be held with the applicant, the applicant's primary contractor, the Planning Division and the Engineering Division to review this permit, the approved grading or improvement plans, and the tree fencing prior to any grading on -site. The Developer shall call the Planning Division and Engineering Division two weeks prior to the start of grading work to schedule the meeting and fencing inspection. (Planning)

12. The follow ing information must be located on- site during construction activities: Arborist Report, approved site plan/improvement plans including fencing plan, and conditions of approval for the Tree WRSP PCL F-22 – Parcel Map and Unit Transfer – 5251 Fiddyment Rd.; File #PL22-0304 Planning Commission – February 9, 2023 – Page 9 of 9
P
ermit. All construction must follow the approved plans for this tree permit without exception. (Planning)

13. A
ll preservation devices (aeration systems, oak tree wells, drains, special paving, etc.) shall be designed and installed as required by these conditions and the arborist’s recommendations, and shall be shown on the improvement plans or grading plans. (Planning)

14. I
f any native ground surface fabric within the Protected Zone must be removed for any reason, it shall be replaced within forty-eight (48) hours. (Planning)

15. S
torage or parking of materials, equipment, or vehicles is not permitted within the Protected Zone of any oak tree. Vehicles and other heavy equipment shall not be operated within the Protected Zone of any oak tree. (Planning)

16. W
here recommended by the arborist, portions of the foundation shall be h and dug under the direct supervision of the project arborist. The certified arborist shall immediately treat any severed or damaged r
oots. Minor roots less than one (1) inch in diameter may be cut, but damaged roots shall be traced back and cleanly cut behind any split, cracked or damaged area. Major roots over one (1) inch in diameter may not be cut without approval of an arborist and any arborist recommendations shall be implemented. (Planning)

17. T
he temporary fencing shall remain in place throughout the entire construction period and shall not be r
emoved without obtaining written authorization from the Planning Division. In no event shall the fencing be removed before the written authorization is received from the Planning Division. (Planning) P

RIOR TO ISSUANCE OF FINAL

18. W
ithin 5 days of the completion of construction, a Certification Letter from a certified arborist shall be s
ubmitted to and approved by the Planning Division. The certification letter shall attest to all of the work (regulated activity) that was conducted in the protected zone of the tree, either being in conformance with this permit or of the required mitigation still needing to be performed. (Planning)

19. T
he approval of this Tree Permit shall expire on February 9, 2025. (Planning)

ATTACHMENT

1. Conceptual Grading Plan

EXHIBITS
A. Specific Plan Amendment Exhibit
B. WRSP Change Pages
C. Tenth Amendment of the Fiddyment Land Venture DA
D. Tentative Parcel Map
E. Arborist Report
Note to Applicant and/or Developer: Please contact Planning Division staff at (916) 774-5276 prior to the Commission meeting if you have any questions on any of the recommended conditions for your project. If you challenge the decision of the Commission in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues which you or someone else raised at the public hearing held for this project, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Manager at, or prior to, the public hearing.

NOTE: Exhibits A-C are not included
with the Planning Commission Staff
Report because they are already
included as exhibits to the Council
Communication.

A
C1.1
BC1.1
C
C1.1
EC1.1
DC1.1
EC1.1
TSD ENGINEERING, INC.
785 Orchard Drive, Suite #110
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 608-0707
Fax: (916) 608-0701
expect more.

HARVEY WAY

FIDDYMENT ROAD
PROPOSED PARCEL 1
±3.320 AC - GROSS
±2.701 - NET (EXCLUDES ROW)
PROPOSED PARCEL 2
±7.562 AC - GROSS
±7.147 - NET (EXCLUDES ROW)
N
S
E W

WRSP PARCEL
F-22
PC ATTACHMENT 1
(E) RESIDENCE

HARVEY WAY APARTMENTS HARVEY WAY APARTMENTS OPEN SPACE

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

FIDDYMENT
ROAD

HARVEY WAY APARTMENTS

HARVEY WAY

HARVEY WAY APARTMENTS

HARVEY WAY

HARVEY WAY APARTMENTS

PRELIMINARY GRADING SECTIONS
-

A TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1"=10'
HARVEY WAY APARTMENTSROSEVILLE, CA C1.1
-

B TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1"=10'
-

C TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1"=10' -

D TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1"=10'
-

E TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1"=10'
PC ATTACHMENT 1
BOVBOV

TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
WRSP PARCEL F-22

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CA
TSD ENGINEERING, INC.
785 Orchard Drive, Suite #110
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 608-0707
Fax: (916) 608-0701
expect more.

N
S
EW
scale: 1"=40'

HARVEY WAY

FIDDYMENT ROAD

SERVICE PROVIDERS

PARKS & RECREATION DISTRICT

SCHOOL DISTRICT
WATER

SANITARY SEWER

STORM DRAIN

SOLID WASTE
GAS

ELECTRIC

TELEPHONE
CABLE

POLICE DEPARTMENT

FIRE DEPARTMENT

VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
SITE
N.T.S.ORTHN
623.78'89.25'
503.50'54.50'

20.14'

52.59'
265.29'

21.00'
N00°26'58"W
1002.12'N89°59'59"E
558.00'N00°00'01"W

53.32'
N87°02'20"E
101.42'
N75°18'37"E
237.13'N86°33'03"E
111.45'
N67°10'54"E
259.95'N86°49'20"E
235.19'
N59°07'49"E

72.73'N45°49'18"E
244.18'
S00°26'58"E
238.17'
N89°59'59"EL=142.29'Δ=8°18'37"R=981.00'
L=147.80'Δ=8°18'37"R=1019.00'
120.27'S86°11'10"E
199.14'N89°59'59"E 40.50'
N89°59'59"E

48.00'
N00°00'01"W
PARCEL 1
±3.320 AC - GROSS
±2.701 - NET (EXCLUDES ROW)
PARCEL 2
±7.562 AC - GROSS
±7.147 - NET (EXCLUDES ROW)

GENERAL NOTES
OWNER

DEVELOPER / APPLICANT

ENGINEER

PROPOSED USE
ZONING

NUMBER OF PARCELS

ASSESSORS PARCEL NO & AREA

PROJECT SUMMARY
N00°00'00"E
420.06'
154.52'
105.43'

21.29'267.81'

51.45'68.82'

OAK MEADOW
DRIVE

FLOOD ZONEBASIS OF BEARINGBENCHMARK

PC EXHIBIT D
Califo
rnia Tree and Landscape Consulting, Inc.
359 Nevada Street, #201, Auburn, CA 95603 www.caltlc.com 530.745.4086 November 16, 2022
USA Pr
operties Fund
3200 Douglas Blvd, Suite 200
Roseville, CA 95661
[email protected]
C/O: Kris Steward
Via Email: [email protected]

PRELIMINARY ARBORIST REPORT & TREE INVENTORY
RE: Harve
y Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, APN #017-117-097-000; City of Roseville, CA jurisdiction Executive Summary
Kris Steward, on behalf of USA Properties Fund, contacted California Tree and Landscape Consulting, Inc. to inventory and evaluate the trees protected by the City of Roseville Tree Preservation code, chapter 19.66, and offsite trees which may be impacted by the development of the site for purposes of providing documentation of the tree species and sizes for planning the development of the site. The property is located at 5251 Fiddyment Road, the northeast corner of Fiddyment Road and Harvey Way, directly across from Raleys ONE Market at 1970 Blue Oaks Blvd., in the City of Roseville, California. The property is currently vacant land. See Supporting Information Appendix 1 –Tree Location Map.

Edwin Stirtz, ISA Certified Arborist #WE-0510A, was on site on October 27th, 2022. A total of 1 trees was evaluated on this property. The tree is protected by size and species according to the City of Roseville Tree Preservation ordinance.

Tree Species Trees
Inventoried
Trees on the
Site1
Trees Proposed
for Removal
Total diameter
inches which may
require
mitigation
Valley Oak, Quercus lobata 1 1 TBD 68
Totals 1 1 68
See Appendic
es for specific information on each tree
1 CalTLC is not a licensed land surveyor. Tree locations are approximate and we do not determine tree ownership. Trees which appear to be on another parcel are listed as off-site and treated as the property of that parcel. No evaluation of easement locations, such as required for street tree status, was conducted.

PC EXHIBIT E
USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 2 of 12

Methods

Appendix 2 in this report is the detailed inventory of the trees. The following terms will further explain our methods and findings.

The protected trees evaluated as part of this report have a numbered tag that was placed on each one with a pre- stamped tree number and Tree Tag. They are attached with a nail, installed at approximately 5 feet above ground level on the approximate south side of the fence.

A Level 2 – Basic Visual Assessment was performed in accordance with the International Society of Arboriculture’s best management practices. This assessment level is limited to the observation of conditions and defects which are readily visible. Additional limiting factors, such as blackberries, poison oak, and/or debris piled at the base of a tree can inhibit the visual assessment.

Tree Location: The GPS location of each tree was collected using the ESRI’s ArcGIS collector application on an Apple iPhone or Samsung. The data was then processed in ESRI’s ArcMap by Julie McNamara, M.S. GISci, to produce the tree location map.

Tree Measurements: DBH (diameter breast high) is normally measured at 4’6” (above the average ground height for “Urban Forestry”), but if that varies then the location where it is measured is noted in the ‘Measured at’ column. A steel diameter tape was used to measure all of the trees. A laser distance meter was used to measure distances. Canopy radius measurements may also have been estimated due to obstructions, such as steep slopes or other trees.

Terms
Field Tag # The pre-stamped tree number on the tag which is installed at approximately 6 feet above ground level on the north side of the tree.

Old Tag # If additional field tags are found on the trees and are legible, they are listed here.

Species The species of a tree is listed by our local and correct common name and botanical name by genus (capitalized) and species (lower case). Oaks frequently cross-pollinate and hybridize, but the identification is towards the strongest characteristics.

DBH Diameter breast high' is normally measured at 4’6” (above the average ground height for “Urban Forestry”), but if that varies then the location where it is measured is noted in the next column “measured at” Measured
at
Height above average ground level where the measurement of DBH was taken Canopy
radius
The farthest extent of the crown composed of leaves and small twigs. Most trees are not evenly balanced.

This measurement represents the longest extension from the trunk to the outer canopy. The dripline measurement is from the center point of the tree and is shown on the Tree Location Map as a circle. This measurement can further define a protection zone if specified in the local ordinance as such or can indicate if pruning may be required for development.

Arborist
Rating
Subjective to condition and is based on both the health and structure of the tree. All of the trees were rated for condition, per the recognized national standard as set up by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) on a numeric scale of 5 (being the highest) to 0 (the worst condition, dead) as in Chart A. The rating was done in the field at the time of the measuring and inspection.

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 3 of 12

Roseville Rating Arborist Rating
Excellent Excellent 5 No problems found from a visual ground inspection. Structurally, these trees have properly
spaced branches and near perfect
Good Good 4 The tree is in good condition and there are no apparent problems that can be seen from a visual
ground inspection.

Fair Fair 3 The tree is in fair condition. There are some minor structural or health problems that pose no
immediate risk of death or failure. When the
recommended actions in an arborist report are
completed correctly the defect(s) can be minimized
or eliminated and/or health can be improved.

Fair to Poor Poor 2 The tree has major problems. If the option is taken to preserve the tree, additional evaluation to
identify if health or structure can be improved with
correct arboricultural work including, but not
limited to: pruning, cabling, bracing, bolting, guying, spraying, mistletoe removal, vertical mulching,
fertilization, etc. Additionally, risk should be
evaluated as a tree rated 2 may have structural
conditions which indicate there is a high likelihood
of failure. Trees rated 2 should be removed if these
additional evaluations will not be performed.

Poor Very Poor 1 The problems are extreme. This rating is assigned to a tree that has structural and/or health problems
that no amount of work or effort can change. The
issues may or may not be considered a high risk.

Dead Dead 0 This indicates the tree has no significant sign of life.

Notes: Provide notable details about each tree which are factors considered in the determination of the tree rating including: (a) condition of root crown and/or roots; (b) condition of trunk; (c) condition of limbs and structure; (d) growth history and twig condition; (e) leaf appearance; and (f) dripline environment.

Notes also indicate if the standard tree evaluation procedure was not followed (for example - why dbh may have been measured at a location other than the standard 54”). Additionally, notes will list any evaluation limiting factors such as debris at the base of a tree.

Actions Recommended actions to increase health and longevity.

Development
Status
Projected development impacts are based solely on distance relationships between tree location and grading. Field inspections and findings during the project at the time of grading and trenching can change relative impacts. Closely followed guidelines and requirements can result in a higher chance of survival, while requirements that are overlooked can result in a dramatically lower chance of survival. Impacts are measured as follows:

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 4 of 12

Impact Term Long Term Result of Impact
Negligible Tree is unlikely to show any symptoms. Chance of survival post development is excellent. Impacts to the Protected Root Zone are less than 5%.

Minor Tree is likely to show minor symptoms. Chance of survival post development is good.

Impacts to the Protected Root Zone are less than 15% and species tolerance is good.

Moderate Tree is likely to show moderate symptoms. Chance of survival post development is fair.

Impacts to the Protected Root Zone are less than 35% and species tolerance is good or moderate.

Severe Tree is likely to show moderate symptoms annually and a pattern of decline. Chance of long term survival post development is low. Impacts to the Protected Root Zone are up to 50% and species tolerance is moderate to poor.

Critical Tree is likely to show moderate to severe symptoms annually and a pattern of decline.

Chance of long term survival post development is negligible. Impacts to the Protected Root Zone are up to 80%.

Discussion
Trees need to be protected from normal construction practices if they are to remain on the site and are expected to survive long term. While construction damage in the root zone is often the death of a tree, the time from when the damage occurs to when the symptoms begin and/or the tree dies can be years. Our recommendations are based on experience and the local ordinance requirements to enhance tree longevity. It requires the calculated root zone must remain intact as an underground ecosystem despite the use of heavy equipment to install foundations, driveways, underground utilities, and landscape irrigation systems. Simply walking and driving on soil can have serious consequences to tree health. The Tree Preservation Requirements and General Development Guidelines should be incorporated into the site plans and enforced onsite. The project arborist should be included in the development team during construction to provide expertise and make additional recommendations if additional impacts occur or tree response is poor.

Root Structure
The majority of a tree’s roots are contained in a radius from the main trunk outward approximately two to three times the canopy of the tree. These roots are located in the top 6” to 3’ of soil. It is a common misconception that a tree underground resembles the canopy. The correct root structure of a tree is in the drawing below. All plants’ roots need both water and air for survival. Poor canopy development or canopy decline in mature trees after development is often the result of inadequate root space and/or soil compaction.

The reality of where roots are generally located (Menzer, 2008)

Pruning Mature Trees for Risk Reduction and/or Development Clearance

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 5 of 12

There are few good reasons to prune mature trees. Removal of deadwood, directional pruning, removal of decayed or damaged wood, and end-weight reduction as a method of mitigation for structural faults are the only reasons a mature tree should be pruned. Live wood over 3” should not be pruned unless absolutely necessary. Pruning cuts should be clean and correctly placed. Pruning should be done in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 standards.

Pruning causes an open wound in the tree. Trees do not “heal” they compartmentalize. It is far better to use more small cuts than a few large cuts as small pruning wounds reduce risk while large wounds increase risk. Any wound made today will always remain, but a healthy tree, in the absence of decay in the wound, will ‘cover it’ with callus tissue.

Large, old pruning wounds which did not close with callous tissue often have advanced decay. These wounds are a likely failure point. Mature trees with large wounds have a high risk of failure.

Overweight limbs are a common structural fault in suppressed trees. There are two remedial actions for over- weight limbs (1) prune the limb to reduce the extension of the canopy, or (2) cable the limb to reduce movement. Cables do not hold weight they only stabilize the limb and additionally require annual inspection.

Arborist Classifications
There are different types of Arborists:

Tree Removal and/or Pruning Companies: These companies may be licensed by the State of California to do business as a tree removal company, but they do not necessarily know anything about trees biology.

Arborists: Arborist is a broad term intended to mean someone with specialized knowledge of trees, but it is often used to imply knowledge that is not there.

ISA Certified Arborist: An International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist is someone who has trained, met the qualifications for application, and been tested to have specialized knowledge of trees. You can look up certified arborists at the International Society of Arboriculture website: isa-arbor.org.

Consulting Arborist: An American Society of Consulting Arborists Registered Consulting Arborist is someone who has been trained and then tested to have specialized knowledge of trees; and trained and tested to provide high quality reports and documentation. You can look up registered consulting arborists at the American Society of Consulting Arborists website: ASCA-consultants.org.

RECOMMENTATIONS: SUMMARY OF TREE PROTECTION MEASURES

The Owner and/or Developer should ensure the project arborist’s protection measures are incorporated into the site plans and followed. Tree specific protection measures can be developed when we have received a copy of the grading plans for the site.

For Project Submittal to the City:
• If the tree is to remain, identify it on final construction drawings and show the root protection zone as shown in the arborist recommendations. Note – This area is not for use during construction unless under direct supervision of the project arborist.
• List the name and telephone number of the project arborist on the final construction drawings (grading plans) and a monitoring schedule a minimum of once per month during development.

Prior to Onsite Activity:

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 6 of 12

• The project arborist should inspect the installed tree protection fencing prior to grading and/or grubbing for compliance with the recommended protection zones.

• The project arborist should directly supervise the irrigation, fertilization, placement of mulch and chemical treatments.
• Prior to any grading, or other work on the site that will come within 20’ of a tree, irrigation will be required from April through October and placement of a 4-6” layer of chip mulch over the protected root zone (They are expensive to buy and bark and/or redwood and cedar will not be accepted) • Clearance pruning should include removal of all the lower foliage that may interfere with equipment PRIOR to having grading or other equipment on site. The Project Arborist should approve the extent of foliage elevation and directly oversee the pruning to be performed by a contractor who is an ISA Certified Arborist.

During Construction:
• Any and all work to be performed inside the protected root zone fencing shall be supervised by the project arborist.
• The project arborist shall monitor the site a minimum of once per month during development and may require additional measures as a result of changing tree response.

Report Prepared by:

.

Nicole Harrison
Registered Consulting Arborist #719
ISA Certified Arborist #WC-6500AM, TRAQ
American Society of Consulting Arborists

Attachments
Appendix 1 – Tree Location Map
Appendix 2 – Tree Data
Appendix 3 – General Development Guidelines
Appendix 4 – Site Photos

Bibliography
International Society of Arboriculture. (2015). Glossary of Arboricultural Terms. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture.

L.R., C. (2003). Reducing Infrastructure Damage by Tree Roots. Porterville: International Society of Arboriculture.

Matheny, J. C. (1994). Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, Second Edition. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture.

Menzer, K. (2008). Consulting Arborist Report.

Smiley. (2008). Managing Trees During Construction, Best Management Practices. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture.

Stamen, R. (1997). California Arboriculture Law. Riverside: Law Offices of Randall S. Stamen.

Tree Care Industry Association. (2017). Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management - Standard Practices (Pruning).

Londonderry: Tree Care Industry Association.

Urban, J. (2008). Up by the Roots. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture.

181
Property Line
Measured Tree Canopy
Arborist Rating
0 Dead
1 Extreme Structure or Health Problems
2 Major Structure or Health Problems
3 Fair - Minor Problems
4 Good - No Apparent Problems
5 Excellent
O
Sheet No.
5251 FiddymenRoad
Prepared for USA Properties
Date: 11/8/2022
Harvey Way Apartments
TPP 1.0
0 80 16040
Feet
California Tree &
Landscape Consulting, Inc.
359 Nevada Street, Suite 201
Auburn, CA 95603
>Tree locations are approximate and were
collected using apple iOS products.
>Property line information was downloaded
from Placer County on 05/15/2020.

Document Path: C:\Users\User\Desktop\Personal- net\CalTLC\Maps 2022\RSVL HArvey Way Appt\Template.mxd

TREE INVENTORY MAP
USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CalTLC www.caltlc.com Page 8 of 12

APPENDIX 2 – TREE INFORMATION DATA

Field
Tag #
Old
Tag #
Protected
By Code
Off
site
Species
Common
Name
Species
Botanical
Name
Multi
Stems
DBH Measu
red At
Canopy
Radius
Arborist
Rating
Roseville
Rating
Dvlpmt
Status
Notes
181 1674 Yes No Valley
Oak
Quercus
lobata
22,23,23 68 54 35 3 Fair -
Minor
Problems
TBD Tree forks 3’ above grade
with weak attachments and
inclusions; above average
amount of dead branches;
overextended/overweighted
branches. Tree requires a
crown clean out and
reduction pruning and
installation of a rotary cable
support system.

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CalTLC www.caltlc.com Page 9 of 12

APPENDIX 3

GENERAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

Definitions

Root zone: The roots of trees grow fairly close to the surface of the soil, and spread out in a radial direction from the trunk of tree. A general rule of thumb is that they spread 2 to 3 times the radius of the canopy, or 1 to 1 ½ times the height of the tree. It is generally accepted that disturbance to root zones should be kept as far as possible from the trunk of a tree. The root protection zone (RPZ) is normally calculated using the BMP’s which include an analysis of tree species, age, and current condition.

Inner Bark: The bark on most large trees is quite thick, usually 1” to 2”. If the bark is knocked off a tree, the inner bark, or cambial region, is exposed and/or removed. The cambial zone is the area where tissues responsible for adding new layers to the tree each year are located. Removing or damaging this tissue results in a tree that can only grow new tissue from the edges of the wound. In addition, the interior wood of the tree is exposed to decay fungi and becomes susceptible to decay. Tree protection measures require that no activities occur which can knock the bark off the trees.

Methods Used in Tree Protection:

No matter how detailed Tree Protection Measures are in the initial Arborist Report, they will not accomplish their stated purpose unless they are applied correctly and a Project Arborist oversees the construction. The Project Arborist should have the ability to enforce the Protection Measures. It is advisable for the Project Arborist to be present at the Pre-Construction meeting to answer questions the contractors may have about Tree Protection Measures. This also lets the contractors know how important tree preservation is to the developer.

Root Protection Zone (RPZ): Since in most construction projects it is not possible to protect the entire root zone of a tree, a Root Protection Zone is established for each tree to be preserved. The minimum Root Protection Zone is the area calculated as 1 to 1.25’ for every inch of trunk diameter (ie. A 10” diameter tree will have an RPZ of 10’) or the dripline, whichever is greater. The Project Arborist must approve work within the RPZ.

Irrigate, Fertilize, Mulch: Prior to grading on the site near any tree, the area within the Tree Protection fence should be fertilized with 4 pounds of nitrogen per 1000 square feet, and the fertilizer irrigated in. The irrigation should percolate at least 24 inches into the soil. This should be done no less than 2 weeks prior to grading or other root disturbing activities. After irrigating, cover the RPZ with at least 12” of leaf and twig mulch. Such mulch can be obtained from chipping or grinding the limbs of any trees removed on the site.

Acceptable mulches can be obtained from nurseries or other commercial sources. Fibrous or shredded redwood or cedar bark mulch shall not be used anywhere on site.

Fence: F ence around the Root Protection Zone and restrict activity therein to prevent soil compaction by vehicles, foot traffic or material storage. The fenced area shall be off limits to all construction equipment, unless there is express written notification provided by the Project Arborist, and impacts are discussed and mitigated prior to work commencing.

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 10 of 12

No storage or cleaning of equipment or materials, or parking of any equipment can take place within the fenced off area, known as the RPZ.

The fence should be highly visible, and stout enough to keep vehicles and other equipment out. I recommend the fence be made of orange plastic protective fencing, kept in place by t-posts set no farther apart than 6’.

In areas of intense impact, a 6’ chain link fence is preferred.

In areas with many trees, the RPZ can be fenced as one unit, rather than separately for each tree.

Where tree trunks are within 3’ of the construction area, place 2” by 4” boards vertically against the tree trunks, even if fenced off. Hold the boards in place with wire. Do not nail them directly to the tree. The purpose of the boards is to protect the trunk, should any equipment stray into the RPZ.

Elevate Foliage: Where indicated, remove lower foliage from a tree to prevent limb breakage by equipment.

Low foliage can usually be removed without harming the tree, unless more than 25% of the foliage is removed. Branches need to be removed at the anatomically correct location in order to prevent decay organisms from entering the trunk. For this reason, a contractor who is an ISA Certified Arborist should perform all pruning on protected trees.2
Expose and Cut Roots: Breaking roots with a backhoe, or crushing them with a grader, causes significant injury, which may subject the roots to decay. Ripping roots may cause them to splinter toward the base of the tree, creating much more injury than a clean cut would make. At any location where the root zone of a tree will be impacted by a trench or a cut (including a cut required for a fill and compaction), the roots shall be exposed with either a backhoe digging radially to the trunk, by hand digging, or by a hydraulic air spade, and then cut cleanly with a sharp instrument, such as chainsaw with a carbide chain. Once the roots are severed, the area behind the cut should be moistened and mulched. A root protection fence should also be erected to protect the remaining roots, if it is not already in place. Further grading or backhoe work required outside the established RPZ can then continue without further protection measures.

Protect R oots in Deeper Trenches: The location of utilities on the site can be very detrimental to trees. Design the project to use as few trenches as possible, and to keep them away from the major trees to be protected.

Wherever possible, in areas where trenches will be very deep, consider boring under the roots of the trees, rather than digging the trench through the roots. This technique can be quite useful for utility trenches and pipelines.

Protect R oots in Small Trenches: After all construction is complete on a site, it is not unusual for the landscape contractor to come in and sever a large number of “preserved” roots during the installation of irrigation systems. The Project Arborist must therefore approve the landscape and irrigation plans. The irrigation system needs to be designed so the main lines are located outside the root zone of major trees, and the secondary lines are either laid on the surface (drip systems), or carefully dug with a hydraulic or air spade, and the flexible pipe fed underneath the major roots.

2 International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), maintains a program of Certifying individuals. Each Certified Arborist has a number and must maintain continuing education credits to remain Certified.

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CALTLC www.caltlc.com Page 11 of 12

Design the irrigation system so it can slowly apply water (no more than ¼” to ½” of water per hour) over a longer period of time. This allows deep soaking of root zones. The system also needs to accommodate infrequent irrigation settings of once or twice a month, rather than several times a week.

Monitoring Tree Health During and After Construction: The Project Arborist should visit the site at least twice a month during construction to be certain the tree protection measures are being followed, to monitor the health of impacted trees, and make recommendations as to irrigation or other needs. A monitoring contract with the developer is recommended. After construction is complete, the arborist should monitor the site monthly for one year and make recommendations for care where needed.

Chemical T reatment s: The owner or developer shall be responsible to contact an arborist with a pesticide applicators license to arrange for an application of a root enhancing hormone, such as Paclobutrazol, to mitigate the stress produced by the development. Additionally, at the discretion of the project arborist, an insect infestation preventative for both boring insects and leaf feeding insects and/or fungal preventative for leaf surfaces may be required. Roots pruned during the course of performing a cut may be required to be treated with a biofungicide such as Bio-Tam.

USA Properties, Harvey Way Apartments, 5251 Fiddyment Road, Roseville, CA November 16, 2022

CalTLC www.caltlc.com Page 12 of 12

APPENDIX 4 – SITE PHOTOS

Tree 181, Looking west Looking south

Site Photographs by Edwin Stirtz, October 27, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. 23-089

AMENDING THE WEST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN

WHEREAS, Parcel F-22 of the West Roseville Specific Plan was subdivided into two parcels (F-22A and F-22B), as shown in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, a proposal has been submitted to reallocate affordable housing units among Parcels F-22A and F-22B, which necessitates a Specific Plan Amendment to change the text within the West Roseville Specific Plan, as shown in Exhibit B, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as a residential project pursuant to a Specific Plan. A project is eligible for this exemption if the public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, and the criteria to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are not met. The EIR for the West Roseville Specific Plan (SCH #2002082057) was certified by the City Council on February 4, 2004. No significant changes to the site or new, potentially significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, and the project is consistent with the previously completed analysis; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the West Roseville Specific Plan on February 9, 2023; and

WHEREAS, the Specific Plan Amendment as proposed and revised is consistent with the adopted City of Roseville General Plan; and

WHEREAS, on March 15, 2023, the City Council 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 West Roseville Specific Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville that the proposed changes to the West Roseville Specific Plan are adopted as set forth in the attached Exhibits A and B.

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
RESOLUTION NO. 23-089

AMENDING THE WEST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN

WHEREAS, Parcel F-22 of the West Roseville Specific Plan was subdivided into two parcels (F-22A and F-22B), as shown in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, a proposal has been submitted to reallocate affordable housing units among Parcels F-22A and F-22B, which necessitates a Specific Plan Amendment to change the text within the West Roseville Specific Plan, as shown in Exhibit B, attached and incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as a residential project pursuant to a Specific Plan. A project is eligible for this exemption if the public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, and the criteria to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are not met. The EIR for the West Roseville Specific Plan (SCH #2002082057) was certified by the City Council on February 4, 2004. No significant changes to the site or new, potentially significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, and the project is consistent with the previously completed analysis; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the West Roseville Specific Plan on February 9, 2023; and

WHEREAS, the Specific Plan Amendment as proposed and revised is consistent with the adopted City of Roseville General Plan; and

WHEREAS, on March 15, 2023, the City Council 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 West Roseville Specific Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville that the proposed changes to the West Roseville Specific Plan are adopted as set forth in the attached Exhibits A and B.

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

SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
JULY 25, 2022
TSD ENGINEERING, INC.
785 Orchard Drive, Suite #110
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 608-0707
Fax: (916) 608-0701
expect more.

SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CA

OAK MEADOW
DRIVE
F-22
HDR
±9.85 AC
F-22A
HDR
±2.70 AC
F-22B
HDR
±7.15 AC

HARVEY WAY

FIDDYMENT ROAD

OAK MEADOW
DRIVE
F-83
OS
F-84
OS
F-30
CC
F-23
MDR
F-35
CC
F-31
CC
F-24
CC

HARVEY WAY

FIDDYMENT ROAD
F-83
OS
F-84
OS
F-30
CC
F-23
MDR
F-35
CC
F-31
CC
F-24
CC

EXISTING PROPOSED
N
S
EW
scale: 1"=150'

CC EXHIBIT A
F-20
HDR-22.6

6.9ac
F-85
OS

26.92ac
F-22A
HDR

2.7ac

MARKETST

MONUMENTDR

BOBDOYLEDR

VILLAGE GREEN DR

PLEASANT

GROVEBL

BROOKSTONE DR

VILLAGECENTERDRMARKETST

ORCHARD
VIEW
RD

FIDDYMENTRD

WESTPARK DR

PLEASANT GROVE BL
W

ESTBROOK
BL

HAYDENPW

HARVEY WY

N HAYDEN PW
N
HAYDEN
PW
FIDDYM
ENT
RD
FIDDYM
ENT
RD

BLUE OAKS BL

CRAWFORD PW

HOLT PW
VC-Residential /
Senior
Fire
Station
Age
Restricted
Age
Restricted
Elementary
School
Elementary
School
Elementary
School
Paseo
Paseo
Paseo
Paseo
Paseo
WWTP
Paseo
Fiddyment
Park
High
School
Pocket
Park
Paseo
Paseo
Paseo
Paseo
Middle
School
Sports
Complex
F-67
P/QP

0.2ac
W-72

P/QP/VC

10.9ac
W-54
PR/VC

3.3ac
W-82
OS

5.18ac
W-28
MDR/VC-7
4ac
W-25
HDR/VC-18.8

12.3ac
W-22
MDR/VC-8.3

16.6ac
F-21
HDR-23.7

14.5ac
F-34
CC

5.3ac
W-29
MDR/VC-7
4ac
W-26
HDR/VC-16.4

9.4ac
W-21
MDR/VC-8.2

16.9ac
W-24
MDR/VC-9.6

12.7ac
W-53
PR/VC
9ac
F-35
CC
2ac
F-73
P/QP

2.5ac
F-87
OS
9ac
F-31
CC

13.3ac
F-20
HDR-22.6

6.9ac
F-24
HDR-25
12ac
W-1
LDR-5

81.1ac
W-2
LDR-5.4

55.7ac
W-16
HDR-20.5

12.2ac
F-53
PR

6.3ac
F-65
P/QP

1.5ac
F-30
CC

8.5ac
F-17
MDR-8

16.3ac
W-20
CC

0.6ac
W-10
LDR-4.8
51ac W-8
LDR-4

42.2ac
F-98
LDR
2ac
W-3
LDR-5.5

35.9acW-75
P/QP

9.91ac
W-55
PR

8.4ac
W-11
LDR-4.3

30.2ac
F-97
LDR

1.5ac
F-6B
HDR-23.2

8.4ac
F-51
PR

11.9ac
F-71
P/QP

10.7ac
F-81
CC
2ac
F-9B
LDR-4.9

14.4ac
F-94
LDR

1.4ac
F-101
LDR

1.1ac
F-10A
LDR-4.1

30.1ac
F-13B
LDR-5.1

31.5acF-13A
LDR-4.3

21.4ac
F-9A
LDR-4.6

26.2ac
F-10B
LDR-5.3

21.9ac
F-10C
LDR-4

19.9ac
F-96
LDR

1.3ac
F-84
OS

81.2ac
F-66
P/QP
0ac
F-14
LDR-4.2
101.1ac
F-70
P/QP

8.5ac
F-50
PR

7.8ac
F-9C
LDR-4.7

17.8ac
F-92B
OS

0.6ac
F-92A
OS

0.8ac
F-80
OS
132ac
F-8C
LDR-5.8

15.2ac
F-90B
OS

0.7ac
F-6D
CC

5.1ac
F-91B
OS

0.4ac
F-91A
OS

0.9ac
F-90C
OS
1ac
F-11B
MDR-9.4

16.1ac
F-11A
LDR-5.9

29.9ac F-93
OS

0.9ac
F-12
LDR-5.1
19ac
F-19B
LDR-4.5

31.8ac
F-19A
LDR-5.2

29.6ac
W-71
P/QP
15ac
W-74
P/QP

5.36ac
F-86A
OS

12.9ac
W-61B
IND

11.8ac
W-61A
IND

21.1ac
W-60A
PR

25.2ac
W-50E
PR

3.1ac
W-27
HDR-21.5

7.9ac
W-77
P/QP

0.3ac
W-87
OS

2.8ac
F-16
LDR-4

27.8ac
F-32
CC

4.7ac F-15B
LDR-4.5

9.9ac
F-4
LDR-2.4
33ac
F-100
LDR

2.5ac
F-88
OS

18.3ac
F-1B
LDR-4.1

20.4ac
F-54
PR

95.6ac
F-89
OS

0.7ac
W-51
PR

4.7ac
F-33
CC

4.7ac F-26
HDR-25

5.6ac
F-52
PR

6.3ac
F-15A
LDR-4

18.8ac
F-15C
LDR-3.7

12.4ac
F-25
HDR-24.9

5.5ac
F-72
P/QP

52.8ac
F-1A
LDR-4.8

19.3ac
F-99
LDR

2.8ac
F-2
LDR-4.1

30.8ac
F-5
LDR-3.2

48.6ac
W-30
CC
3ac
W-60B
LI
30ac
F-8D
LDR-3.6

10.7ac
F-8B
MDR-12.1

10.5ac
F-8A
HDR-23.7

11.7ac
F-9D
LDR-3.1

12.9ac
F-95
LDR

1.5ac
F-6C
MDR-11.7

26.3ac
F-6A
LDR-5.5

32.4ac
F-91C
OS

1.1ac
F-85
OS

26.9ac
F-55-A
LDR-4.1

24.3ac
F-90A
OS

0.1ac
W-50C
PR

1.2ac
W-17D
LDR-4

13.1ac
W-17C
LDR-4.6
15ac
W-17E
LDR-3.6

11.3ac
W-50A
PR

6.5ac
W-50B
PR

1.9ac
W-70
P/QP

8.5acW-18F
LDR-4.2

4.5ac
W-19A
LDR-5.5

19.7ac
W-18E
LDR-3.7

14.2ac
W-50D
PR

1.2ac
W-18C
LDR-4.4

23.1ac
W-18A
LDR-5.1

16.9ac
W-18D
LDR-4.3

21.5ac
W-18B
LDR-4.5

12.6ac
W-17A
LDR-4.6

14.3ac
W-17B
LDR-4
14ac
W-19B
LDR-5.3

15.9ac
F-23
MDR-8.9

10.8ac
W-88
OS

1.5ac
F-83
OS

59.2ac
W-12
LDR-4.5

17.5ac
F-22B
HDR

7.1ac
W-4
LDR-4.7

31.3ac
W-85
OS

1.1ac
W-7
LDR-4.2

26.6ac
W-89
OS

1.8ac
W-5
LDR-4.1

21.3ac
W-52
PR
8ac
W-73
P/QP

20.3ac
W-81
OS
268.07ac
W-6
LDR-4.2

22.8ac
F-56
PR

45.3ac
F-3
LDR-5.6

24.1ac
W-13
LDR-5.1

61.3ac
W-83
OS

78.2ac
W-15
LDR-5.2

43.4ac
F-7
LDR-6.2
21ac
W-32
CC/VC

3.3ac
W-33
CC/VC

3.1ac
Last Updated: November 3, 2022

WEST ROSEVILLE LAND USE PLAN
Figure 4-1
0 0.50.25
Miles
/
4-3

CC EXHIBIT B
Land Use Plan & Regulations

WEST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN 4-4

Table 4 -2: Land Use, Zoning, and Units by P arcel
Parcel General Plan Land Use
(Specific Plan Land Use) Zoning Acres Allocated
Units Density
F-1A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 19.34 93 4.8
F-1B LDR (Residential) RS/DS 20.94 83 4.0
F-2 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 31.58 127 4.0
F-3 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 24.58 135 5.5
F-4 LDR (Residential) R1/DS 34.66 78 2.3
F-5 LDR (Residential) R1/DS 51.61 157 3.0
F-6A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 32.35 179 5.5
F-6B HDR (Residential) R3 8.43 195 23.1
F-6C MDR (Residential) RS/DS 26.33 307 11.7
F-6D CC (Commercial) CC 5.05
F-7 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 20.99 131 6.2
F-8A HDR (Residential) R3 11.69 277 23.7
F-8B MDR (Residential) RS/DS 10.54 127 12.0
F-8C LDR (Residential) RS/DS 15.19 88 5.8
F-8D LDR (Residential) RS/DS 10.64 38 3.6
F-9A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 28.32 121 4.3
F-9B LDR (Residential) RS/DS 15.2 70 4.6
F-9C LDR (Residential) RS/DS 17.81 83 4.7
F-9D LDR (Residential) RS/DS 12.95 40 3.1
F-10A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 30.05 122 4.1
F-10B LDR (Residential) RS/DS 22.0 115 5.2
F-10C LDR (Residential) RS/DS 19.9 80 4.0
F-11A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 30.95 175 5.7
F-11B MDR (Residential) RS/DS 16.11 152 9.4
F-12 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 19.84 97 4.9
F-13A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 21.84 93 4.3
F-13B LDR (Residential) RS/DS 31.9 161 5.0
F-14 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 104.62 422 4.0
F-15A LDR (Residential) R1/DS 19.88 76 3.8
F-15B LDR (Residential) R1/DS 9.94 45 4.5
F-15C LDR (Residential) R1/DS 12.39 46 3.7
F-16 LDR (Residential) RS/DS 29.14 110 3.8
F-17 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 17.13 131 7.6
F-19A LDR (Residential) RS/DS 31.28 155 5.0
F-19B LDR (Residential) RS/DS 32.62 143 4.4
F-20A HDR (Residential) R3 6.92 156 22.5
F-20B HDR (Residential) R3 0.49
F-21 HDR (Residential) R3 14.46 343 23.7
F-22A HDR (Residential) R3 2.70 82 30.4
F-22B HDR (Residential) R3 7.15 162 22.7
F-23 MDR (Residential) RS/DS 10.83 96 8.9
F-24 HDR (Residential) R3 11.98 300 25.0
F-25 HDR (Residential) R3 5.49 137 25.0
F-26 HDR (Residential) R3 5.60 140 25.0
F-30 CC (Commercial) CC 8.46
F-31 CC (Commercial) CC 13.35
F-32 CC (Commercial) CC 4.67
F-33 CC (Commercial) CC 4.68
F-34 CC (Commercial) CC 5.29
F-35 CC (Commercial) CC 2.02
F-50 PR (Park) P/R 7.79
F-51 PR (Park) P/R 11.83
F-52 PR (Park) P/R 6.34
F-53 PR (Park) P/R 6.31
F-54 PR (Fiddyment Park) P/R 95.56

Affordable Housing Plan

5-3 WEST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN
Table 5-3: Affordable Housing Allocation

Parcel Land Use
Total
Units in
Parcel
Total
Affordable
Allocation
Very Low-
Income
Rental
Low-
Income Rental
Middle-
Income
Purchase
W-27 HDR 170 150 89 61
W-25(Senior) VC-HDR 232 150 75 75
Subtotal 300 164 136
F-6B HDR 195 195 66 66 63
F-8A HDR 277 53 53
F-20 HDR 156 154 78 76
F-22A HDR 82 81 81
F-22B HDR 162 103 10 93
Subtotal 586 235 235 116
TOTAL 886 399 371 116
Note: The WRSP (Section 5.4) allows for the transfer of affordable units. Check with the City of Roseville to confirm current affordable housing allocations. Last Updated: February 2023, Parcel F-22 DAA (File #PL22-0304)

1. The obligation for 162 affordable units was transferred from WRSP Parcel W-16 to the Sierra Vista Specific Plan via specific plan amendments approved in 2016. This obligation, combined with the affordable allocation identified in Table 5-3 above, meets the total affordable housing goal identified in Table 5-2.

A Supplemental Affordable Housing Dev elopment Agreement (or substitute form as specified by the City) is required for each parcel with an affordable housing allocation to detail and secure specific requirements and obligations. Among other provisions, the Supplemental Affordable Housing Devel opment Agreement will:

• Specify the number of affordable units to be reserved at each income level; • Specify the term of the affordability obligation;
• Set initial rent or purchase prices for the designated affordable units; • Establish criteria and a basis for annual rent or purchase price increases; • Provide the City with a mechanism to monitor actual rents and purchase prices paid; and
• Identify any City or other subsidies required to assist in meeting the affordability requirement and, if applicable, the basis and terms for refunding such subsidies.

Supplemental Affordable Housing Development Agreements require City approval prior to the issuance of building permits, or recordation of a final map where a subdivision map is requ ired, for any large -lot WRSP parcel with an affordable housing allocation.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITESLEGEND
F-50P/R
F-70P/QP
F-52P/R
F-26HDRF-25HDR
F-33CCF-32CC
F-83OS
F-23HDR
F-24HDRF-31CC F-17MDRF-84OSF-65P/RSub-StationF-30CC
F-35CC
F-85OS
F-34CCF-55ALDRF-20HDR F-5LDR
F-53P/R
F-4LDR
F-21HDR
P/RF-54Fiddyment Park
WellF-67
Fire StationP/QPF-73
P/RF-56
OSF-86A
OSF-87
P/QPHigh SchoolF-72
LDRF-3 LDRF-2
Pocket ParkF-99
OSF-88
F-100Pocket ParkLDRF-1BLDRF-1AF-89OS
F-66P/QPWell
Pocket ParkF-98
F-15ALDR
F-15BLDR
F-15CLDRF-16LDR
F-14LDR
West Park Drive
ParkwayHolt
Angus RoadFiddyment
Blue Oaks BoulevardFiddyment Road
Road
Parkway
Bob Doyle Drive
West Park Drive
SchoolElementary
ComplexSportsHayden
Blue Oaks Boulevard
F-6CMDRF-8AHDRF-8BMDR-10.8F-90B
F-92AF-92B
F-11ALDR
F-90C
F-91A F-96
F-97 F-101
F-71P/QPF-51P/R
F-13ALDR
F-10ALDR
F-11BMDR
F-9BLDR
F-7LDR
F-8CLDR
F-12LDR
F-81CC
F-9CLDR
F-93
F-9ALDR
F-13BLDR
F-8DLDR F-9DLDR
F-19BLDR
F-90A
HDRF-6B
F-91B
F-6ALDRCCF-6D
F-10CLDRF-10BLDR
F-91C
F-94Hayden
ParkwayHolt
Parkway
CrawfordParkway
F-95
F-19ALDR
Paseo
PaseoPaseoPaseo
Pocket Park
Pocket ParkPocket Park
Paseo
Paseo
PaseoPaseo
Pocket Park
SchoolElementary
Paseo
Pocket Park
North
F-80OS
LDR
LDR
OSOS
OS
OS
LDR
OSOS
LDR
OS
OS
OS
LDR
LDRLDR
PQP
LDR
W-30CC
W-81OS
W-18DLDR
Reason Farms(NAPOTS)
RosevilleEnergy Park
Pleasant GroveWWTP(NAPOTS)
W-18BLDRW-27HDR W-50EP/R
W-50DP/R
W-18ALDRW-18CLDRW-19BLDRW-70DPQP
W-18ELDR
W-17ELDR
W-18FLDR
W-60AP/R
W-60BLIW-19ALDR
W-50BP/RW-50AP/R
W-17CLDRW-17DLDR
W-50CP/R
W-17ALDR
W-17BLDR
W-71PQPWWTP
W-61AIND
W-74PQP
W-61BIND
W-51P/RW-13LDRW-16HDR
W-77PQP
W-15LDR
W-87OSPaseo
W-83OS W-6LDRW-88OSPaseo
Drive
Brookstone
Westbrook
Boulevard LDRW-5 OSW-89LDRW-4Paseo OSW-82
LDRW-3PRW-55P/QPW-75Elementary SchoolLDRW-7
MDR/VC-7W-28
HDR/VCW-26
PR/VCW-54LDRW-2
CC/VCW-33
LDRW-1
AgeRestricted
AgeRestricted
CCW-20LDRW-8LDRW-10PR/VCW-53
P/QP/VCW-72
MDR/VCW-24
MDR/VCW-21
MDR/VCW-29LDRW-11
HDR/VCW-25VC-Residential /Senior
LDRW-12
CC/VCW-32
MDR/VCW-22P/QPW-73Middle
OSW-85PaseoSchoolPRW-52
Market
Village Center Drive
Monument Drive
PleasantGrove Boulevard
Bob Doyle DriveVillage Green DriveStreet
NORTH

AFFORDABLE HOUSING DISTRIBUTION
DEVELOPING INNOVATIVE DESIGN SOLUTIONS3301 C St, Bldg. 100-BTel 916.341.7760Fax 916.341.7767Sacramento, CA 95816 (ORIGINAL EXHIBITS ARE AVAILABLE AT THE ROSEVILLE CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT) F-22BHDR
F-22BHDR
Note: Underlying parcel basemap used in this figure is not regularly updated.Refer to Figure 4-1 for the most up to date parcel basemap.Miles00.1250.250.5 Figure 5-1
ORDINANCE NO.

ADOPTING A TENTH AMENDMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND JEN CALIFORNIA 15, LLC, TAYLOR

MORRISON OF CALIFORNIA, LLC, AND WEST ROSEVILLE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. RELATIVE TO THE WEST ROSEVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN 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 Rosevi lle, the City Council has received the recommendation of the Planning Commission that the City of Roseville enter into a Tenth Amendment of the Development Agreement by an d between the City of Roseville and Jen California 15, LLC, Taylor Morrison of Califo rnia, LLC, and West Roseville Development Company, Inc., pertaining to property located within the West Roseville Specific Plan area.

SECTION 2 . The Tenth Amendment to Development Agreement is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as a residential project pursuant to a Specific Plan. A project is eligible for this exemption if the public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, and the criteria to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR are not met. The EIR for the West Roseville Specific Plan (SCH #2002082057) was certified by the City Council on February 4, 2004. No significant changes to the site or new, potentially significant impacts have been identified that would require the preparation of a subsequent or sup plemental EIR, and the Development Agreement Amendment is consistent with the previously completed analysis.

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

1. The Tenth 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 West Roseville Specific Plan;

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

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

4. The Tenth 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 Tenth Amendment to the Development Agreement will provide sufficient benefit to the City to justify entering into said Amendment.

2 SECTION 4. The Tenth Amendment to Development Agreement by and between the City of Roseville and Jen California 15, LLC, Taylor Morrison of California, LLC, and West Roseville Development Company, Inc. , 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.

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 ____________ 2023, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
___________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:

______________________________________
City Clerk