Roseville City Council
August 16, 2023

Table of Contents
Project Description …………………………………………………………………………………… 3
City of Roseville Mitigation Ordinances, Guidelines, and Standards ……………………………. 4 Other Environmental Documents Relied Upon …………………………………………………….. 5 Explanation of Initial Study Checklist ........................................................................................ 5 Initial Study Checklist
I. Aesthetics ……………………………………………. 6
II. Agricultural & Forestry Resources ………………….. 8
III. Air Quality ……………………………………………. 9
IV. Biological Resources ………………………………… 12
V. Cultural Resources ………………………………….. 15
VI. Energy ……………………………………………….. 16
VII. Geology and Soils ………………………………….. 17
VIII. Greenhouse Gases ………………………………….. 20
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ………………….. 22
X. Hydrology and Water Quality ………………………… 25
XI. Land Use and Planning ……………………………… 27
XII. Mineral Resources …………………………………… 28
XIII. Noise …………………………………………………. 29
XIV. Population and Housing ……………………………... 32
XV. Public Services ……………………………………….. 33
XVI. Recreation …………………………………………… 34
XVII. Transportation ……………………………………… 34
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources ……………………………. 36
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems ………………………… 38
XX. Wildfire ……………………………………………………. 40
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance ………………….. 41
Environmental Determination …………………………………………………………………….. 43 Attachments ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 43

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project Location
The project site is located on Parcel 175 in the Infill area of the City of Roseville (see Figure 1), at the northeast intersection of Auburn Boulevard and Orlando Avenue. The property is 1.23 acres and has an address of 1100 Orlando Av. (APN 471-060-060-000).

Figure 1 – Project Location
Background and Environmental Setting
The site is currently developed with a restaurant and paved parking area. The site was originally developed in 1980 with an approximate 6,000 square foot building that was occupied by a beauty college, which ceased operations in the early to mid-1980s. Subsequently, several rail cars were relocated to the site from a train station in Sacramento. The addition of the rail cars expanded the square footage of the facility by approximately 1,000 square feet. Various restaurants occupied the site following the beauty college’s closure.

The site is served by two existing driveways on Orlando Av. An existing landscape setback is located around the perimeter of the site’s frontage. The site has a zoning designation of Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and a General Plan land use designation of Community Commercial (CC). Table 1 below identifies the site and surrounding zoning and land use designations. Surrounding land uses include a freeway on-ramp (Auburn Bl.) to the north of the site, a gas station and a transit center to the south, Auburn Bl. and Interstate 80 to the west, and a restaurant to the east with single-family residences beyond. The single-family residences are located outside of the City of Roseville limits and are separated from the existing restaurant at 1201 Orlando Av. by a masonry wall.

Project Site
Auburn Bl
Interstate 80

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Table 1 – Site and Surrounding Zoning/Land Use
Proposed Project
The proposed project is a 4,542 square foot automated car wash facility with 21 vacuum stalls and nine (9) parking spaces. All interior planters, lighting, existing paving, and front curbs will be removed and replaced. New landscape planters will be added to the interior and property frontage. According to the project description, hours of operation will be 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and there will be three (3) employees per shift. The project entitlements include a Rezone to change the zoning designation from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Community Commercial (CC), a Conditional Use Permit to allow the carwash use in the CC zone, and a Design Review Permit to review the site design.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE MITIGATION ORDINANCES, GUIDELINES, AND STANDARDS For projects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified, CEQA Guidelines section 15183(f) allows a lead agency to rely on previously adopted development policies or standards as mitigation for the environmental effects, when the standards have been adopted by the City, with findings based on substantial evidence, that the policies or standards will substantially mitigate environmental effects, unless substantial new information shows otherwise (CEQA Guidelines §15183(f)). The City of Roseville adopted CEQA Implementing Procedures (Implementing Procedures) which are consistent with this CEQA Guidelines section. The current version of the Implementing Procedures were adopted in April 2008 (Resolution 08-172), along with Findings of Fact, and were updated in January 2021 (Resolution 21-018). The below regulations and ordinances were found to provide uniform mitigating policies and standards, and are applicable to development projects. The City’s Mitigating Policies and Standards are referenced, where applicable, in the Initial Study Checklist. • Noise Regulation (RMC Ch.9.24)
• Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (RMC Ch.9.80)
• Traffic Mitigation Fee (RMC Ch.4.44)
• Drainage Fees (Dry Creek [RMC Ch.4.49] and Pleasant Grove Creek [RMC Ch.4.48]) • City of Roseville Improvement Standards (Resolution 02-37 and as further amended) • City of Roseville Design and Construction Standards (Resolution 01-208 and as further amended) Location Zoning General Plan Land Use Actual Use of Property Site NC (Neighborhood
Commercial)
CC (Community
Commercial)
Restaurant
North n/a n/a Interstate 80 freeway on-ramp
South
NC and CC
(Community
Commercial)
across Orlando
Av.

CC
Gas station and Louis Orlando Transit Center
East CC across
Orlando Av. CC Restaurant
West
NC and GC
(General
Commercial)
across Auburn Bl.

CC
Easement/Right of Way

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

• Tree Preservation Ordinance (RMC Ch.19.66)
• Internal Guidance for Management of Tribal Cultural Resources and Consultation (Tribal Consultation Policy) (Resolution 20-294)
• Subdivision Ordinance (RMC Title 18)
• Community Design Guidelines
• Specific Plan Design Guidelines:
o Development Guidelines Del Webb Specific Plan
o Landscape Design Guidelines for North Central Roseville Specific Plan o North Roseville Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
o Northeast Roseville Specific Plan (Olympus Pointe) Signage Guidelines o North Roseville Area Design Guidelines
o Northeast Roseville Specific Plan Landscape Design Guidelines o Southeast Roseville Specific Plan Landscape Design Guidelines o Stoneridge Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
o Highland Reserve North Specific Plan and Design Guidelines o West Roseville Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
o Sierra Vista Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
o Creekview Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
o Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan and Design Guidelines
• City of Roseville 2035 General Plan

OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
• 2035 General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report, certified August 5, 2020 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, any project which is consistent with the development densities established by zoning, a Community Plan, or a General Plan for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as may be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. The 2035 General Plan Update EIR (General Plan EIR) updated all Citywide analyses, including for vehicle miles traveled, greenhouse gas emissions, water supply, water treatment, wastewater treatment, and waste disposal. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted land use designations examined within the environmental documents listed above, and thus this Initial Study focuses on effects particular to the specific project site, impacts which were not analyzed within the EIR, and impacts which may require revisiting due to substantial new information. When applicable, the topical sections within the Initial Study summarize the findings within the environmental documents listed above. The analysis, supporting technical materials, and findings of the environmental document are incorporated by reference, and are available for review at the Civic Center, 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA.

EXPLANATION OF INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines recommend that lead agencies use an Initial Study Checklist to determine potential impacts of the proposed project on the physical environment. The Initial Study Checklist provides a list of questions concerning a comprehensive array of environmental issue areas potentially affected by this project. This section of the Initial Study incorporates a portion of Appendix G Environmental

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Checklist Form, contained in the CEQA Guidelines. Within each topical section (e.g. Air Quality) a description of the setting is provided, followed by the checklist responses, thresholds used, and finally a discussion of each checklist answer.

There are four (4) possible answers to the Environmental Impacts Checklist on the following pages. Each possible answer is explained below:
1) A “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from the information that a fair argument based on substantial evidence can be made to support a conclusion that a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change may occur to any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project. When one or more “Potentially significant Impact” entries are made, an EIR is required.
2) A “Less Than Significant With Mitigation” answer is appropriate when the lead agency incorporates mitigation measures to reduce an impact from “Potentially Significant” to “Less than Significant.” For example, floodwater impacts could be reduced from a potentially-significant level to a less-thansignificant level by relocating a building to an area outside of the floodway. The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation measures are identified as MM followed by a number. 3) A “Less Than significant Impact” answer is appropriate if there is evidence that one or more environmental impacts may occur, but the impacts are determined to be less than significant, or the application of development policies and standards to the project will reduce the impact(s) to a less-than-significant level. For instance, the application of the City’s Improvement Standards reduces potential erosion impacts to a less-than-significant level.
4) A “No Impact” answer is appropriate where it can be demonstrated that the impact does not have the potential to adversely affect the environment. For instance, a project in the center of an urbanized area with no agricultural lands on or adjacent to the project area clearly would not have an adverse effect on agricultural resources or operations. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources cited in the Initial Study. Where a “No Impact” answer is adequately supported by the information sources cited in the Initial Study, further narrative explanation is not required. A “No Impact” answer is explained when it is based on projectspecific factors as well as generous standards.

All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off- and on-site, indirect, direct, construction, and operation impacts, except as provided for under State CEQA Guidelines.

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
I. Aesthetics
The project site is located at the northeast intersection of Auburn Bl. and Orlando Av. in the Infill area of the City of Roseville. The site is developed with a restaurant building, a parking area, and landscaping. The site is bounded by Auburn Bl. to the west, Orlando Av. to the south and east, and a freeway on-ramp for Interstate 80 to the north. Surrounding uses include a gas station and transit center to the south and a restaurant to the east with single-family residential uses beyond.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
X
b) Substantially damage
scenic resources,
including, but not limited
to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state
scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized area,
substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality of public views of
the site and its
surroundings? (Public
views are those that are
experienced from a
publicly accessible
vantage point.) If the
project is in an urbanized
area, would the project
conflict with applicable
zoning and other
regulations governing
scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of
substantial light or glare,
which would adversely
affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of an environmental impact cannot always be determined through the use of a specific, quantifiable threshold. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b) affirms this by the statement “an ironclad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting.” This is particularly true of aesthetic impacts. As an example, a proposed parking lot in a dense urban center would have markedly different visual effects than a parking lot in an open space area. For the purpose of this study, the significance thresholds are as stated in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, as shown in a–d of the checklist below. The Findings of the Implementing Procedures indicate that compliance with the Zoning Ordinance (e.g. building height, setbacks, etc), Subdivision Ordinance (RMC Ch. 18), Community Design Guidelines (Resolution 95-347), and applicable Specific Plan Policies and/or Specific Plan Design Guidelines will prevent significant impacts in urban settings as it relates to items a, b, and c, below.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–b) There are no designated or eligible scenic vistas or scenic highways within or adjacent to the City of Roseville.
c) The project site is in an urban setting, and as a result lacks any prominent or high-quality natural features which could be negatively impacted by development. The City of Roseville has adopted Community Design Guidelines (CDG) for the purpose of creating building and community designs which are a visual asset to the community. The CDG includes guidelines for building design, site design and landscape design, which will result in a project that enhances the existing urban visual environment. Accordingly, the aesthetic impacts of the project are less than significant.
d) The project involves nighttime lighting to provide for the security and safety of project users. However, the project is already located within an urbanized setting with many existing lighting sources. Lighting is conditioned to comply with City standards (i.e. CDG) to limit the height of light standards and to require cut-off lenses and glare shields to minimize light and glare impacts. The project will not create a new source of substantial light. None of the project elements are highly reflective, and thus the project will not contribute to an increased source of glare.

II. Agricultural & Forestry Resources
The State Department of Conservation oversees the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, which was established to document the location, quality, and quantity of agricultural lands, and the conversion of those lands over time. The primary land use classifications on the maps generated through this program are: Urban and Built Up Land, Grazing Land, Farmland of Local Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Prime Farmland. According to the current California Department of Conservation Placer County Important Farmland Map (2012), the majority of the City of Roseville is designated as Urban and Built Up Land and most of the open space areas of the City are designated as Grazing Land. There are a few areas designated as Farmland of Local Importance and two small areas designated as Unique Farmland located on the western side of the City along Baseline Road. The current Williamson Act Contract map (2013/2014) produced by the Department of Conservation shows that there are no Williamson Act contracts within the City, and only one (on PFE Road) that is adjacent to the City. None of the land within the City is considered forest land by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
X
b) Conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act
contract?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
c) Conflict with existing
zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public
Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public
Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as
defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest
land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest
use?
X
e) Involve other changes in
the existing environment
which, due to their location
or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Prime Farmland are called out as protected farmland categories within CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. Neither the City nor the State has adopted quantified significance thresholds related to impacts to protected farmland categories or to agricultural and forestry resources. For the purpose of this study, the significance thresholds are as stated in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, as shown in a–e of the checklist above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–e) The project site is not used for agricultural purposes, does not include agricultural zoning, is not within or adjacent to one of the areas of the City designated as a protected farmland category on the Placer County Important Farmland map, is not within or adjacent to land within a Williamson Act Contract, and is not considered forest land. Given the foregoing, the proposed project will have no impact on agricultural resources.

III. Air Quality
The City of Roseville, along with the south Placer County area, is located in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB). The SVAB is within the Sacramento Federal Ozone Non-Attainment Area. Under the Clean Air Act, Placer County has been designated a "serious non-attainment" area for the federal 8-hour ozone standard, “nonattainment” for the state ozone standard, and a "non-attainment" area for the federal and state PM10 standard (particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter). Within Placer County, the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) is responsible for ensuring that emission standards are not violated. Would the project:

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase
of any criteria for which the
project region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or state
ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors
to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions
(such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting
a substantial number of
people?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

In responding to checklist items a–c, project-related air emissions would have a significant effect if they would result in concentrations that either violate an ambient air quality standard or contribute to an existing air quality violation. To assist in making this determination, the PCAPCD adopted thresholds of significance, which were developed by considering both the health-based ambient air quality standards and the attainment strategies outlined in the State Implementation Plan. The PCAPCD-recommended significance threshold for reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) is 82 pounds daily during construction and 55 pounds daily during operation, and for particulate matter (PM) is 82 pounds per day during both construction and operation.

For all other constituents, significance is determined based on the concentration-based limits in the Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards. Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) are also of public health concern, but no thresholds or standards are provided because they are considered to have no safe level of exposure. Analysis of TAC is based on the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook – A Community Health Perspective (April 2005, California Air Resources Board), which lists TAC sources and recommended buffer distances from sensitive uses. For checklist item c, the PCAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (Handbook) recommends that the same thresholds used for the project analysis be used for the cumulative impact analysis.

With regard to checklist item d, there are no quantified significance thresholds for exposure to objectionable odors or other emissions. Significance is determined after taking into account multiple factors, including screening distances from odor sources (as found in the PCAPCD CEQA Handbook), the direction and frequency of prevailing winds, the time of day when emissions are detectable/present, and the nature and intensity of the emission source.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–c) Analyses are not included for sulfur dioxide, lead, and other constituents because there are no mass emission thresholds; these are concentration-based limits in the Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards which require substantial, point-source emissions (e.g. refineries, concrete plants, etc) before exceedance will occur, and the SVAB is in attainment for these constituents. Likewise, carbon monoxide is not

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

analyzed because the SVAB is in attainment for this constituent, and it requires high localized concentrations (called carbon monoxide “hot spots”) before the ambient air quality standard would be exceeded. “Hot spots” are typically associated with heavy traffic congestion occurring at high-volume roadway intersections. The General Plan EIR analysis of Citywide traffic indicated that more than 70% of signalized intersections would operate at level of service C or better—that is, they will not experience heavy traffic congestion. It further indicated that analyses of existing CO concentrations at the most congested intersections in Roseville show that CO levels are well below federal and state ambient air quality standards. The discussions below focus on emissions of ROG, NOx, or PM. A project-level analysis has been prepared to determine whether the project will, on a singular level, exceed the established thresholds.

The PCACPD recommends that lead agencies use the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) to quantify a project’s construction and operational emissions for criteria air pollutants (NOX, ROG, and MP). The results are the compared to the significance thresholds established by the district, as detailed above. According to PCAPCD’s published screening table, general commercial projects smaller than 249,099 square feet will not result in NOX emissions that exceed 55 lbs/day. Typically, NOX emissions are substantially higher than ROG and PM10; therefore, it can be assumed that projects that do not exceed the NOX threshold will not exceed the ROG and PM10 thresholds, and will not result in a significant impact related to operational emissions. The project proposes the construction of a 4,542 square foot building, which is well below PCAPCD’s modeled example.

Given its small size, the project is not expected to result in construction or operational emissions that would exceed the district’s thresholds for significance.

The proposed project would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance for air pollutant emissions during construction or operation. As such, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment and Reasonable Further Progress Plan (which is the SIP) or contribute substantially to the PCAPCD’s nonattainment status for ozone. In addition, because the proposed project would not produce substantial emissions of criteria air pollutants, CO, or TACs, adjacent residents would not be exposed to significant levels of pollutant concentrations during construction or operation. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts, and consistent with the analysis methodology outlined in the Significance Thresholds and Regulatory Setting section, cumulative impacts are less than significant.

With regard to TAC, there are hundreds of constituents which are considered toxic, but they are typically generated by stationary sources like gas stations, facilities using solvents, and heavy industrial operations. The proposed project is not a TAC-generating use, nor is it within the specified buffer area of a TAC-generating use, as established in the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook – A Community Health Perspective. Impacts due to substantial pollutant concentrations are less than significant. e) Diesel fumes from construction equipment and delivery trucks are often found to be objectionable; however, construction is temporary and diesel emissions are minimal and regulated. Typical urban projects such as residences and retail businesses generally do not result in substantial objectionable odors when operated in compliance with City Ordinances (e.g. proper trash disposal and storage). The Project is a typical urban development that lacks any characteristics that would cause the generation of substantial unpleasant odors.

Thus, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in the creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. A review of the project surroundings indicates that there are no substantial odor-generating uses near the project site; the project location meets the recommended screening distances from odor-generators provided by the PCAPCD. Impacts related to odors are less than significant.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

IV. Biological Resources
The project is an infill development within an urban area of the City of Roseville. The site has been graded and paved, with existing maintained landscape areas.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial
adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any
species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in
local or regional plans,
policies or regulations, or
by the California
Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial
adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural
community identified in
local or regional plans,
policies or regulations or
by the California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial
adverse effect on state or
federally protected
wetlands (including, but
not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal,
filling, hydrological
interruption, or other
means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with
the movement of any
native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established
native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery
sites?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with any local
policies or ordinances
protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or
ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions
of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

There is no ironclad definition of significance as it relates to biological resources. Thus, the significance of impacts to biological resources is defined by the use of expert judgment supported by facts, and relies on the policies, codes, and regulations adopted by the City and by regulatory agencies which relate to biological resources (as cited and described in the Discussion of Checklist Answers section). Thresholds for assessing the significance of environmental impacts are based on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–f, above.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15065, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if:

The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; [or] substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species . . .

Various agencies regulate impacts to the habitats and animals addressed by the CEQA Guidelines checklist.

These include the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration– Fisheries, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The primary regulations affecting biological resources are described in the sections below.

Checklist item a addresses impacts to special status species. A “special status” species is one which has been identified as having relative scarcity and/or declining populations. Special status species include those formally listed as threatened or endangered, those proposed for formal listing, candidates for federal listing, and those classified as species of special concern. Also included are those species considered to be “fully protected” by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (California Fish and Wildlife), those granted “special animal” status for tracking and monitoring purposes, and those plant species considered to be rare, threatened, or endangered in California by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). The primary regulatory protections for special status species are within the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, California Fish and Game Code, and the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Checklist item b addresses all “sensitive natural communities” and riparian (creekside) habitat that may be affected by local, state, or federal regulations/policies while checklist item c focuses specifically on one type of such a community: protected wetlands. Focusing first on wetlands, the 1987 Army Corps Wetlands Delineation Manual is used to determine whether an area meets the technical criteria for a wetland. A delineation verification by the Army Corps verifies the size and condition of the wetlands and other waters in question, and determines

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

the extent of government jurisdiction as it relates to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and Section 401 of the State Clean Water Act.

The Clean Water Act protects all “navigable waters”, which are defined as traditional navigable waters that are or were used for commerce, or may be used for interstate commerce; tributaries of covered waters; and wetlands adjacent to covered waters, including tributaries. Non-navigable waters are called isolated wetlands, and are not subject to either the Federal or State Clean Water Act. Thus, isolated wetlands are not subject to federal wetland protection regulations. However, in addition to the Clean Water Act, the State also has jurisdiction over impacts to surface waters through the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne), which does not require that waters be “navigable”. For this reason, isolated wetlands are regulated by the State of California pursuant to Porter-Cologne. The City of Roseville General Plan also provides protection for wetlands, including isolated wetlands, pursuant to the General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element. Federal, State and City regulations/policies all seek to achieve no net loss of wetland acreage, values, or function.

Aside from wetlands, checklist item b also addresses other “sensitive natural communities” and riparian habitat, which includes any habitats protected by local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The City of Roseville General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element includes policies for the protection of riparian areas and floodplain areas; these are Vegetation and Wildlife section Policies 2 and 3. Policy 4 also directs preservation of additional area around stream corridors and floodplain if there is sensitive woodland, grassland, or other habitat which could be made part of a contiguous open space area. Other than wetlands, which were already discussed, US Fish and Wildlife and California Department of Fish and Wildlife habitat protections generally result from species protections, and are thus addressed via checklist item a.

For checklist item d, there are no regulations specific to the protection of migratory corridors. This item is addressed by an analysis of the habitats present in the vicinity and analyzing the probable effects on access to those habitats which will result from a project.

The City of Roseville Tree Preservation ordinance (RMC Ch.19.66) requires protection of native oak trees, and compensation for oak tree removal. The Findings of the Implementing Procedures indicate that compliance with the City of Roseville Tree Preservation ordinance (RMC Ch.19.66) will prevent significant impacts related to loss of native oak trees, referenced by item e, above.

Regarding checklist item f, there are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans within the City of Roseville.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a-c) The project site is within an urban area of the City and is developed with an existing restaurant building.

The site has been graded, paved with a parking area, and has landscape areas and sidewalk installed. No wetland or riparian habitat exists on the project site. No special status species are known to exist within the project area.
d) The City includes an interconnected network of open space corridors and preserves located throughout the City, to ensure that the movement of wildlife is not substantially impeded as the City develops. The development of the project site will not negatively impact these existing and planned open space corridors, nor is the project site located in an area that has been designated by the City, United States Fish and Wildlife, or California Department of Fish and Wildlife as vital or important for the movement of wildlife or the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
e) No oak trees will be removed as a part of the proposed project, and no other conflicts with City policy adopted for the purpose of mitigating environmental effects have been identified. There is no impact.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

f) There are no Habitat Conservation Plans; Natural Community Conservation Plans; or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans that apply to the project site.

V. Cultural Resources
As described within the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City of Roseville General Plan, the Roseville region was within the territory of the Nisenan (also Southern Maidu or Valley Maidu). Two large permanent Nisenan habitation sites have been identified and protected within the City’s open space (in Maidu Park). Numerous smaller cultural resources, such as midden deposits and bedrock mortars, have also been recorded in the City. The gold rush which began in 1848 marked another settlement period, and evidence of Roseville’s ranching and mining past are still found today. Historic features include rock walls, ditches, low terraces, and other remnants of settlement and activity. A majority of documented sites within the City are located in areas designated for open space uses.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an historic
resource pursuant to in
Section 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to Section
15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human
remains, including those
interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts to cultural resources is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–e listed above. The Archaeological, Historic, and Cultural Resources section of the City of Roseville General Plan also directs the proper evaluation of and, when feasible, protection of significant resources (Policies 1 and 2).

There are also various federal and State regulations regarding the treatment and protection of cultural resources, including the National Historic Preservation Act and the Antiquities Act (which regulate items of significance in history), Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.9 of the California Public Resources Code (which regulates the treatment of human remains) and Section 21073 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code (regarding Tribal Cultural Resources). The CEQA Guidelines also contains specific sections, other than the checklist items, related to the treatment of effects on historic resources.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, if it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that they cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (Section 21083.2 (a), (b), and (c)). A historical resource is a resource listed, or determined to be eligible for listing, in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

(Section 21084.1); a resource included in a local register of historical resources (Section 15064.5(a)(2)); or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant (Section 15064.5 (a)(3)). Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 requires evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing on the CRHR.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–b and d) No cultural resources are known to exist on the project site; however, standard mitigation measures (Mitigation Measure CUL-01) apply which are designed to reduce impacts to cultural resources, should any be found on-site. The project is an infill site that has already experienced ground disturbance. Additionally, no requests to consult were received from tribal entities in response to AB-52 notification. The mitigation measure requires an immediate cessation of work, and contact with the appropriate agencies to address the resource before work can resume. With mitigation, project-specific impacts are less than significant. c) No paleontological resources are known to exist on the project site; however, standard mitigation measures (Mitigation Measure CUL-02) apply which are designed to reduce impacts to such resources, should any be found on-site. The measure requires an immediate cessation of work, and contact with the appropriate agencies to address the resource before work can resume. With mitigation; project-specific impacts are less than significant.

VI. Energy
Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially
significant environmental
impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy
resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a
state or local plan for
renewable energy or
energy inefficiency?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

Established in 2002, California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) currently requires that 33 percent of electricity retail sales by served by renewable energy resources by 2020, and 50 percent by 2030. The City published a Renewables Portfolio Standard Procurement Plan in June 2018, and continues to comply with the RPS reporting and requirements and standards. There are no numeric significance thresholds to define “wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary” energy consumption, and therefore significance is based on CEQA Guidelines checklist items a and b, above, and by the use of expert judgment supported by facts, relying on the policies, codes, and regulations adopted by the City and by regulatory agencies which relate to energy. The analysis considers compliance with regulations and standards, project design as it relates to energy use (including transportation energy), whether the project will result in a substantial unplanned demand on the City’s energy resources, and whether the project will impede the ability of the City to meet the RPS standards.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a & b) Roseville Electric provided an estimated energy usage for the proposed carwash, based on data from a similar use. The total annual kilowatt hour (kWh) use for the site is approximately 554,240 kWh, with an average monthly usage of 48,167 kWh. As stated in the thresholds of significance section, there is no stated numeric significance threshold to define “wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary”; however, Roseville Electric has reviewed the proposed project and found that the Department has adequate capacity to serve the site. The project would consume energy both during project construction and during project operation.

During construction, fossil fuels, electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. However, the energy consumed during construction would be temporary, and would not represent a significant demand on available resources. There are no unusual project characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment or methods that would be less energy-efficient or which would be wasteful.

The completed project would consume energy related to building operation, exterior lighting, landscape irrigation and maintenance, and vehicle trips to and from the use. In accordance with California Energy Code Title 24, the project would be required to meet the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. This includes standards for water and space heating and cooling equipment; insulation for doors, pipes, walls, and ceilings; and appliances, to name a few. The project would also be eligible for rebates and other financial incentives from both the electric and gas providers for the purchase of energy-efficient appliances and systems, which would further reduce the operational energy demand of the project. The project was distributed to both PG&E and Roseville Electric for comments, and was found to conform to the standards of both providers; energy supplies are available to serve the project.

The project is consistent with the existing Community Commercial (CC) land use designation in the General Plan, as the project is not located within a Specific Plan area. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan included an assessment of energy impacts for the entire City. The analysis included consideration of transportation energy, and evaluated walkability, alternative transportation modes, and the degree to which the mix and location of uses would reduce vehicle miles traveled in the plan area. The EIR also included a citywide assessment of energy demand based on the existing and proposed land uses within the City and Specific Plan. Impacts related to energy consumption were found to be less than significant. The project is consistent with the existing land use designation, and therefore is consistent with the current citywide assessment of energy demand, and will not result in substantial unplanned, inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy; impacts are less than significant.

VII. Geology and Soils
As described in the Safety Element of the City of Roseville General Plan, there are three inactive faults (Volcano Hill, Linda Creek, and an unnamed fault) in the vicinity, but there are no known active seismic faults within Placer County. The last seismic event recorded in the South Placer area occurred in 1908, and is estimated to have been at least a 4.0 on the Richter Scale. Due to the geographic location and soil characteristics within the City, the General Plan indicates that soil liquefaction, landslides, and subsidence are not a significant risk in the area.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause
potential substantial
adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
i) Ruptures of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or
based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault? (Refer to
Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication

42.)
X
ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
X
c) Be located in a geological
unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become
unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially
result in on or off-site
landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or
property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of
adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater
disposal systems where
sewers are not available
for the disposal of
wastewater?
X
f) Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological resource or
site or unique geological
feature?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to geology and soils is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–f listed above. Regulations applicable to this topic include the Alquist-Priolo Act, which addresses earthquake safety in building permits, and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, which requires the state to gather and publish data on the location and risk of seismic faults. The Archaeological, Historic, and Cultural Resources section of the City of Roseville General Plan also directs the proper evaluation of and, when feasible, protection of significant archeological resources, which for this evaluation will include paleontological resources (Policies 1 and 2). Section 50987.5 of the California Public Code Section is only applicable to public land; this section prohibits the excavation, removal, destruction, or defacement/injury to any vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints or other paleontological feature.

The Findings of the Implementing Procedures indicate that compliance with the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (RMC Ch.9.80) and Design/Construction Standards (Resolution 07-107) will prevent significant impacts related to checklist item b. The Ordinance and standards include permit requirements for construction and development in erosion-prone areas and ensure that grading activities will not result in significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil. The use of septic tanks or alternative waste systems is not permitted in the City of Roseville, and therefore no analysis of criterion e is necessary.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic shaking, ground failure or landslides.
i–iii) According to United States Geological Service mapping and literature, active faults are largely considered to be those which have had movement within the last 10,000 years (within the Holocene or Historic time periods)1 and there are no major active faults in Placer County. The California Geological Survey has prepared a map of the state which shows the earthquake shaking potential of areas throughout California based primarily on an area’s distance from known active faults. The map shows that the City lies in a relatively lowintensity ground-shaking zone. Commercial, institutional, and residential buildings as well as all related infrastructure are required, in conformance with Chapter 16, Structural Design Requirements, Division IV, Earthquake Design of the California Building Code, to lessen the exposure to potentially damaging vibrations through seismic-resistant design. In compliance with the Code, all structures in the Project area would be wellbuilt to withstand ground shaking from possible earthquakes in the region; impacts are less than significant. iv) Landslides typically occur where soils on steep slopes become saturated or where natural or manmade conditions have taken away supporting structures and vegetation. The existing and proposed slopes of the project site are not steep enough to present a hazard during development or upon completion of the project. In addition, measures would be incorporated during construction to shore minor slopes and prevent potential earth movement. Therefore, impacts associated with landslides are less than significant. b) Grading activities will result in the disruption, displacement, compaction and over-covering of soils associated with site preparation (grading and trenching for utilities). Grading activities for the project will be limited to the project site. Grading activities require a grading permit from the Engineering Division. The grading permit is reviewed for compliance with the City’s Improvement Standards, including the provision of proper drainage, appropriate dust control, and erosion control measures. Grading and erosion control measures will be incorporated into the required grading plans and improvement plans. Therefore, the impacts associated with disruption, displacement, and compaction of soils associated with the project are less than significant. 1 United States Geological Survey, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/glossary/?term=active%20fault, Accessed January 2016

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

c, d) A review of the Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey for Placer County, accessed via the Web Soil Survey (http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/), indicates that the soils on the site are CometaFiddyment complex, 1 to 5 percent slopes, and Xerorthents, cut and fill areas. Both soils are not listed as geologically unstable or sensitive.
f) No paleontological resources are known to exist on the project site per the General Plan EIR; however, standard mitigation measures apply which are designed to reduce impacts to such resources, should any be found on-site. The measure requires an immediate cessation of work, and contact with the appropriate agencies to address the resource before work can resume. The project will not result in any new impacts beyond those already discussed and disclosed in the General Plan EIR; project-specific impacts are less than significant.

VIII. Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse gases trap heat in the earth’s atmosphere. The principal greenhouse gases (GHGs) that enter the atmosphere because of human activities are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases. As explained by the United States Environmental Protection Agency2, global average temperature has increased by more than 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the late 1800s, and most of the warming of the past half century has been caused by human emissions. The City has taken proactive steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which include the introduction of General Plan policies to reduce emissions, changes to City operations, and climate action initiatives.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable
plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

In Assembly Bill 32 (the California Global Warming Solutions Act), signed by Governor Schwarzenegger of California in September 2006, the legislature found that climate change resulting from global warming was a threat to California, and directed that “the State Air Resources Board design emissions reduction measures to meet the statewide emissions limits for greenhouse gases . . .”. The target established in AB 32 was to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. CARB subsequently prepared the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) for California, which was approved in 2008. The Scoping Plan provides the outline for actions to reduce California’s GHG emissions, and has been updated twice.

The current 2017 Scoping Plan updated the target year from 2020 to 2030, based on the targets established in Senate Bill 32 (SB 32). SB 32 was signed by the Governor on September 8, 2016, to establish a reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Critically, the 2017 Scoping Plan also sets the path toward compliance 2 http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/science/overview.html, Accessed January 2016

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

with the 2050 target embodied within Executive Order S-3-05 as well. According to the 2017 Scoping Plan the statewide 2030 target is 260 million metric tons. The Scoping Plan recommends an efficiency target approach for local governments for 2030 and 2050 target years.

The Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) recommends that thresholds of significance for GHG be related to statewide reduction goals and has adopted thresholds of significance which take into account the 2030 reduction target. The thresholds include a de minimis and a bright-line maximum threshold, as well as residential and non-residential efficiency thresholds. However, the City developed its own thresholds as part of the 2035 General Plan Update project approved in July 2020. The justification for the City’s thresholds is contained within the General Plan EIR. The thresholds were developed based on statewide emissions data adjusted for relevant local conditions and land uses. The significance thresholds are shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1: GHG Significance Thresholds
2020 2030 2035 2050
Per Capita Emissions Efficiency Targets
(MT CO2e/capita/yr) 7.21 4.00 3.22 1.19
Per Service Population Emissions
Efficiency Targets
(MT CO2e/SP/yr)

5.07 2.79 2.25 0.83
Projects which use these thresholds for environmental analysis should include a brief justification of the type of efficiency target and the target year selected. Per capita is most applicable to projects which only include residential uses, or in cases where reliable data to generate a service population estimate is unavailable. Projects should generally use the 2035 target year. Note that future projects consistent with the General Plan will not require further analysis, per the tiering provisions of CEQA.

Note: MMT CO2e = million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; Service Population (SP) = population + employment Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–b) Greenhouse gases are primarily emitted as a result of vehicle operation associated with trips to and from a project, and energy consumption from operation of the buildings. Greenhouse gases from vehicles is assessed based on the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) resulting from the project, on a Citywide basis. Residential projects, destination centers (such as a regional mall), and major employers tend to increase VMT in a study area, either by adding new residents traveling in an area, or by encouraging longer trip lengths and drawing in trips from a broader regional area. However, non-residential projects and neighborhood-serving uses (e.g. neighborhood parks) tend to lower VMT in a study area because they do not generate new trips within the study area, they divert existing trips. These trips are diverted because the new use location is closer to home, on their way to another destination (e.g. work), or is otherwise more convenient.

The proposed project is a 4,542 square foot carwash facility. While the project requires a rezone from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial, the existing land use designation is Community Commercial, which is designated for commercial uses such as carwash facilities. As further discussed and evaluated in Section XVII (Transportation) of this Initial Study, the project is considered a locally-serving use that does not include any unique characteristics that would draw regional traffic, or would prompt longer trips. The project is presumed to have a less than significant impact to the transportation system on the basis of projectgenerated VMT. Additionally, the project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and will not create additional trips that have not already been evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

The City’s General Plan EIR included an analysis of GHG emissions, which would result from buildout of the City’s General Plan. The EIR concluded that the General Plan build out would exceed the City’s threshold of

2.25 MT CO2e per service population and that the effect was cumulatively considerable. Although mitigation

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

measures were adopted as part of the General Plan, those measures would not reduce impacts to less than significant levels, and impacts were considered significant and unavoidable. The proposed project is consistent with the land use assumptions in the General Plan EIR and does not require further analysis per the tiering provisions of CEQ. The project includes reasonable and feasible design measures to reduce emissions, including implementation of the latest Cal-Green and energy efficiency code requirements. The project complies with General Plan policy related to GHG and the project does not result in any new GHG impacts not previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR; therefore, impacts are less than significant.

IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
No hazardous sites or potential for hazardous materials have been identified within 1000 feet of the project site, as indicated by a search of the State of California’s Envirostor database (http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/) on April 11, 2023. However, according to the California State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website (http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/), there are three hazardous cleanup sites of record within 1,000 feet of the site. All three sites were Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) cleanup sites. The cleanup status of all three sites is completed and the cases have been closed. Of the three sites, the nearest cleanup site is the underground fuel storage tank at the Exxon gas station located approximately 80 feet south of the project site.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment though
reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident
conditions involving the
release of hazardous
materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions
or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
d) Be located on a site which
is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project located within
an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would
the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing
or working in the project
area?
X
f) Impair implementation of
or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
X
g) Expose people or
structures either directly or
indirectly to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to hazardous materials is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–g listed above. A material is defined as hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a federal, state or local regulatory agency, or if it has characteristics defined as hazardous by such an agency.

The determination of significance based on the above criteria depends on the probable frequency and severity of consequences to people who might be exposed to the health hazard, and the degree to which Project design or existing regulations would reduce the frequency of or severity of exposure. As an example, products commonly used for household cleaning are classified as hazardous when transported in large quantities, but one would not conclude that the presence of small quantities of household cleaners at a home would pose a risk to a school located within ¼-mile.

Many federal and State agencies regulate hazards and hazardous substances, including the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board), and the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA). The state has been granted primacy (primary responsibility for oversight) by the US EPA to administer and enforce hazardous waste management programs. State regulations also have detailed planning and management requirements to ensure that hazardous materials are handled, stored, and

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

disposed of properly to reduce human health risks. California regulations pertaining to hazardous waste management are published in the California Code of Regulations (see 8 CCR, 22 CCR, and 23 CCR).

The project is not within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or private use airport. Therefore, no further discussion is provided for item e.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a, b) Standard construction activities would require the use of hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, lubricants, glues, paints and paint thinners, soaps, bleach, and solvents. These are common household and commercial materials routinely used by both businesses and average members of the public. The materials only pose a hazard if they are improperly used, stored, or transported either through upset conditions (e.g. a vehicle accident) or mishandling. In addition to construction use, the operational project would result in the use of common hazardous materials as well, including bleach, solvents, and herbicides. Regulations pertaining to the transport of materials are codified in 49 Code of Federal Regulations 171–180, and transport regulations are enforced and monitored by the California Department of Transportation and by the California Highway Patrol.

Specifications for storage on a construction site are contained in various regulations and codes, including the California Code of Regulations, the Uniform Fire Code, and the California Health and Safety Code. These same codes require that all hazardous materials be used and stored in the manner specified on the material packaging.

Existing regulations and programs are sufficient to ensure that potential impacts as a result of the use or storage of hazardous materials are reduced to less than significant levels. c) See response to Items (a) and (b) above. While development of the site will result in the use, handling, and transport of materials deemed to be hazardous, the materials in question are commonly used in both residential and commercial applications, and include materials such as bleach and herbicides. The project will not result in the use of any acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. The nearest school to the site, Merryhill Elementary and Middle School, is located approximately 0.2 miles to the north. d) The project is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.53; therefore, no impact will occur. e) This project is located within an area currently receiving City emergency services and development of the site has been anticipated and incorporated into emergency response plans. As such, the project will cause a less than significant impact to the City's Emergency Response or Management Plans. Furthermore, the project will be required to comply with all local, State and federal requirements for the handling of hazardous materials, which will ensure less-than-significant impacts. These will require the following programs:
• A Risk Management and Prevention Program (RMPP) is required of uses that handle toxic and/or hazardous materials in quantities regulated by the California Health and Safety Code and/or the City. • Businesses that handle toxic or hazardous materials are required to complete a Hazardous Materials Management Program (HMMP) pursuant to local, State, or federal requirements. g) The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) is the state agency responsible for wildland fire protection and management. As part of that task, CAL FIRE maintains maps designating Wildland Fire Hazard Severity zones. The City is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and is not in a CAL FIRE responsibility area; fire suppression is entirely within local responsibility. The project site is in an urban area, and therefore would not expose people to any risk from wildland fire. There would be no impact with regard to this criterion.
3 http://www.calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/SectionA.htm

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

X. Hydrology and Water Quality
As described in the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City of Roseville General Plan, the City is located within the Pleasant Grove Creek Basin and the Dry Creek Basin. Pleasant Grove Creek and its tributaries drain most of the western and central areas of the City and Dry Creek and its tributaries drain the remainder of the City. Most major stream areas in the City are located within designated open space. The project site in an infill parcel and has been previously developed with a restaurant and parking lot. The use, a carwash facility, is consistent with the site’s Community Commercial land use designation.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality
standards or waste
discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground
water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge
such that the project may
impede sustainable
groundwater management
of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern
of the site or area,
including through the
alteration of the course of
a stream or river or
through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:

X
i) result in substantial
erosion or siltation on
or off-site;
X
ii) substantially increase
the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a
manner which would
result in flooding onor off-site;
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
iii) create or contribute
runoff water which
would exceed the
capacity of existing or
planned stormwater
systems or provide
substantial additional
sources of polluted
runoff; or
X
iv) impede or redirect
flood flows? X
d) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water
quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
e) In flood hazard, tsunami,
or seiches zones, risk
release of pollutants due to
project innundation?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to hydrology and water quality is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–e listed above. For checklist item a, c (i), d, and e, the Findings of the Implementing Procedures indicate that compliance with the City of Roseville Design/Construction Standards (Resolution 07-107), Urban Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (RMC Ch. 14.20), and Stormwater Quality Design Manual (Resolution 16-152) will prevent significant impacts related to water quality or erosion. The standards require preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan for construction activities and includes designs to control pollutants within post-construction urban water runoff. Likewise, it is indicated that the Drainage Fees for the Dry Creek and Pleasant Grove Watersheds (RMC Ch.4.48) and City of Roseville Design/Construction Standards (Resolution 07-107) will prevent significant impacts related to checklist items c (ii) and c (iii). The ordinance and standards require the collection of drainage fees to fund improvements that mitigate potential flooding impacts, and require the design of a water drainage system that will adequately convey anticipated stormwater flows without increasing the rate or amount of surface runoff. These same ordinances and standards prevent impacts related to groundwater (items a and d), because developers are required to treat and detain all stormwater onsite using stormwater swales and other methods which slow flows and preserve infiltration. Finally, it is indicated that compliance with the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (RMC Ch. 9.80) will prevent significant impacts related to items c (iv) and e. The Ordinance includes standard requirements for all new construction, including regulation of development with the potential to impede or redirect flood flows, and prohibits development within flood hazard areas. Impacts from tsunamis and seiches were screened out of the analysis (item e) because the project is not located near a water body or other feature that would pose a risk of such an event.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a,c (i),d, e) The project will involve the disturbance of on-site soils and the construction of impervious surfaces, such as asphalt paving and buildings. Disturbing the soil can allow sediment to be mobilized by rain or wind, and cause displacement into waterways. To address this and other issues, the developer is required to receive

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

approval of a grading permit and/or improvement plants prior to the start of construction. The permit or plans are required to incorporate mitigation measures for dust and erosion control. In addition, the City has a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater Permit issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board which requires the City to reduce pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable. The City does this, in part, by means of the City’s 2016 Design/Construction Standards, which require preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. All permanent stormwater quality control measures must be designed to comply with the City’s Manual for Stormwater Quality Control Standards for New Development, the City’s 2016 Design/Construction Standards, Urban Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, and Stormwater Quality Design Manual. For these reasons, impacts related to water quality are less than significant. b, d) The project does not involve the installation of groundwater wells. The City maintains wells to supplement surface water supplies during multiple dry years, but the effect of groundwater extraction on the aquifer was addressed in the City’s Urban Water Master Plan and evaluated in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, and is thus consistent with the citywide evaluation of water supply. Project impacts related to groundwater extraction are less than significant. Furthermore, all permanent stormwater quality control measures must be designed to comply with the Stormwater Quality Design Manual, which requires the use of bioswales and other onsite detention and infiltration methods. These standards ensure that stormwater will continue to infiltrate into the groundwater aquifer. c (ii and iii)) The project has been reviewed by City Engineering staff for conformance with City ordinances and standards. The project includes adequate and appropriate facilities to ensure no net increase in the amount or rate of stormwater runoff from the site, and which will adequately convey stormwater flows. c (iv) and e) The project has been reviewed by City Engineering staff for conformance with City ordinances and standards. The project is not located within either the Federal Emergency Management Agency floodplain or the City’s Regulatory Floodplain (defined as the floodplain which will result from full buildout of the City).

Therefore, the project will not impede or redirect flood flows, nor will it be inundated. The proposed project is located within an area of flat topography and is not near a waterbody or other feature which could cause a seiche or tsunami. There would be no impact with regard to these criterion.

XI. Land Use and Planning
The project site is located in an infill area of the City, with a zoning designation of Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and a land use designation of Community Commercial (CC). Surrounding land uses include a freeway onramp (Auburn Bl.) to the north of the site, a gas station to the south, Auburn Bl. and Interstate 80 to the west, and a restaurant to the east. Single-family residences outside of the City limits are located to the east of the restaurant building.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an
established community? X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
b) Cause a significant
environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to land use is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a and b listed above. Consistency with applicable City General Plan policies, Improvement Standards, and design standards is already required and part of the City’s processing of permits and plans, so these requirements do not appear as mitigation measures.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The project area has been master planned for development, including adequate roads, pedestrian paths, and bicycle paths to provide connections within the community. The project will not physically divide an established community.
b) The project includes a Rezone to change the zoning from NC to CC to be consistent with the land use designation. A carwash facility is conditionally compatible with the CC land use and zoning designation, and therefore requires a Conditional Use Permit. The Conditional Use Permit will place restrictions on the site operations, including hours of operation. No conflicts with any policies adopted to mitigate an environmental effect have been identified.

XII. Mineral Resources
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975 requires the State Geologist to classify land into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ’s) based on the known or inferred mineral resource potential of that land. The California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) was historically responsible for the classification and designation of areas containing—or potentially containing—significant mineral resources, though that responsibility now lies with the California Geological Survey (CGS). CDMG published Open File Report 95-10, which provides the mineral classification map for Placer County. A detailed evaluation of mineral resources has not been conducted within the City limits, but MRZ’s have been identified. There are four broad MRZ categories (MRZ-1 through MRZ-4), and only MRZ-2 represents an area of known significant mineral resources. The City of Roseville General Plan EIR included Exhibit 4.1-3, depicting the location of MRZ’s in the City limits. There is only one small MRZ-2 designation area, located at the far eastern edge of the City.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of
availability of a known
mineral resource that
would be of value to the
region and the residents of
the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of
availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource
recovery site delineated on
a local general plan,
specific plan or other land
use plan?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to mineral resources is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a and b listed above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–b) The project site is not in the area of the City known to include any mineral resources that would be of local, regional, or statewide importance; therefore, the project has no impacts on mineral resources.

XIII. Noise
The project site is located at the northeast intersection of Auburn Bl. and Orlando Av. and is bounded by Auburn Bl. to the west, Orlando Av. to the south and east, and a freeway on-ramp for Interstate 80 to the north.

Surrounding uses include a gas station and transit center to the south and a restaurant to the east, across Orlando Av. The nearest sensitive receptors are located outside of the City boundaries, approximately 180 feet to the east of the site. An existing CMU masonry wall is located along the single-family residences between the adjacent restaurant use at 1201 Orlando Av.

Would the project result in:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of
standards established in
the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of
other agencies?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
b) Generation of excessive
ground borne vibration of
ground borne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within
the vicinity of a private
airstrip or an airport land
use plan or, where such a
plan has not been
adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public
use airport, would the
project expose people
residing or working in the
project area to excessive
noise levels?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

Standards for transportation noise and non-transportation noise affecting existing or proposed land uses are established within the City of Roseville General Plan Noise Element, and these standards are used as the thresholds to determine the significance of impacts related to items a and c. The significance of other noise impacts is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items b and c listed above. The Findings of the Implementing Procedures indicate that compliance with the City Noise Regulation (RMC Ch. 9.24) will prevent significant non-transportation noise as it relates to items a and b. The Ordinance establishes noise exposure standards that protect noise-sensitive receptors from a variety of noise sources, including nontransportation/fixed noise, amplified sound, industrial noise, and events on public property. The project is not within an airport land use plan, within two miles of a public or public use airport and there are also no private airstrips in the vicinity of the project area. Therefore, item c has been ruled out from further analysis.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) Due to the nature of the carwash machinery, including the air dryers within the carwash tunnel and the vacuum stations, a site-specific noise study was prepared to evaluate the potential impact of noise from the project on adjacent receptors. An Environmental Noise Assessment was prepared by Saxelby Acoustics, LLC on March 6, 2023 (Attachment 1) to determine whether the proposed project would result in a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise in excess of standards established within the General Plan and Noise Ordinance.

According to General Plan Noise Element Table IX-3, an acceptable exterior noise level during daytime hours (7:00 am to 10:00 pm) for stationary noise sources is 50dBA Leq, or an average sound level of 50 decibels, with a maximum allowable level of 70 dB. On page 7 of the noise study, included in Attachment 1 of this Initial Study, existing background noise levels were collected at various points throughout the site. The study found that the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily defined by traffic on Interstate 80, resulting in an average daytime noise level to the east of the site (adjacent to the single-family residential uses) to be 61 Leq. These measurements were taken at the property line on the restaurant side of the existing CMU masonry wall.

The study evaluated several noise-generating components of the project, including the air blowers, central vacuum producer, vacuum station area, rooftop HVAC, and vehicle circulation. The data used in the study relied on manufacturer’s data, as well as Saxelby Acoustics data from similar car wash operations. Since the

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

sensitive receptors (i.e., the residential uses to the east) are located outside of the City of Roseville limits and are under the jurisdiction of Placer County, the project noise levels were compared against Placer County’s stationary noise level standards. A model (SoundPLAN noise prediction model) incorporated the sound power levels for the proposed carwash tunnel, existing and proposed buildings, terrain type, and locations of sensitive receptors, and found that property line noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors would be less than 60 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), which would comply with Placer County’s exterior noise level standards. The Figure 2 below from the study shows the project noise contours.

Figure 2 – Project Noise Levels
As the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed noise standards at the residential property line during daytime hours, no mitigation measures are recommended. The project includes a Conditional Use Permit, which will include a condition of approval to limit operations to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.). Therefore, project impacts related to noise will be less than significant. b) Surrounding uses may experience short-term increases in groundborne vibration, groundborne noise, and airborne noise levels during construction. However, these increases would only occur for a short period of time. When conducted during daytime hours, construction activities are exempt from Noise Ordinance

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

standards, but the standards do apply to construction occurring during nighttime hours. While the noise generated may be a minor nuisance, the City Noise Regulation standards are designed to ensure that impacts are not unduly intrusive. Based on this, the impact is less than significant.

XIV. Population and Housing
The project site is located within the Infill area of the City and has a land use designation of Community Commercial. The City of Roseville General Plan Table II-4 identifies the total number of residential units and population anticipated as a result of buildout of the City, and the Specific Plan likewise includes unit allocations and population projections for the Plan Area. Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial
unplanned population
growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly
(for example, though
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial
numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating
the construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to population and housing is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a and b listed above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The CEQA Guidelines identify several ways in which a project could have growth-inducing impacts (Public Resources Code Section 15126.2), either directly or indirectly. Growth-inducement may be the result of fostering economic growth, fostering population growth, providing new housing, or removing barriers to growth.

Growth inducement may be detrimental, beneficial, or of no impact or significance under CEQA. An impact is only deemed to occur when it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be shown that the growth will significantly affect the environment in some other way. The project is consistent with the land use designation of the site. Therefore, while the project in question will induce some level of growth, this growth was already identified and its effects disclosed and mitigated within the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the impact of the project is less than significant. b) The project site is designated for commercial uses, and is developed with a restaurant and parking. No housing exists on the project site, and there would be no impact with respect to these criteria.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

XV. Public Services
Fire protection, police protection, park services, and library services are provided by the City. The project is located within the Roseville Elementary and Roseville Joint Union High School Districts. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to public services is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–e listed above. The EIR for the Specific Plan addressed the level of public services which would need to be provided in order to serve planned growth in the community. Development Agreements and other conditions have been adopted in all proposed growth areas of the City which identify the physical facilities needed to serve growth, and the funding needed to provide for the construction and operation of those facilities and services; the project is consistent with the General Plan. In addition, the project has been routed to the various public service agencies, both internal and external, to ensure that the project meets the agencies’ design standards (where applicable) and to provide an opportunity to recommend appropriate conditions of approval.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) Existing City codes and regulations require adequate water pressure in the water lines, and construction must comply with the Uniform Fire and Building Codes used by the City of Roseville. Additionally, the applicant is required to pay a fire service construction tax, which is used for purchasing capital facilities for the Fire Department. Existing codes, regulations, funding agreements, and facilities plans are sufficient to ensure less than significant impacts.
b) Sales taxes and property taxes resulting from development will add revenue to the General Fund, which provides funding for police services. Existing codes, regulations, funding agreements, and facilities plans are sufficient to ensure less than significant impacts.
c) The project is not a residential use and will not have an impact on school services. d) The project is not a residential use and will not have an impact on parks facilities. e) The City charges fees for end-users for other services, such as garbage and greenwaste collection, in order to fund those services. Existing codes, regulations, funding agreements, and facilities plans are sufficient to ensure less than significant impacts.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

XVI. Recreation
The proposed project is a new carwash facility, located on a parcel designated for Community Commercial uses.

The nearest park facility, Cresthaven Park, is approximately 1.1 miles to the northwest of the project site.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase
the use of existing
neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational
facilities such that physical
deterioration of the facility
would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or
require the construction or
expansion of recreational
facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to recreation services is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–b listed above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The EIR for the General Plan addressed the level of park services—including new construction, maintenance, and operations—which would need to be provided in order to serve planned growth in the community. Given that the project is a commercial project and is consistent with the General Plan, the project would not cause any unforeseen or new impacts related to the use of existing or proposed parks and recreational facilities. There is no impact to use of park facilities as a result of this project. b) The proposed project is a carwash, and is not located within the vicinity of any existing parks. The project will not cause any unforeseen or new impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.

XVII. Transportation
The proposed project is located on Orlando Av., at the northeast intersection of Orlando Av. and Auburn Bl. Two driveways, one on the north end and one on the south end of the project site, provide access to Orlando Av.

These existing driveways will be used by the proposed development. Sidewalks are fully constructed along the perimeter of the site, except for the northern property line, which is adjacent to the Interstate 80 on-ramp. Existing bikeways are located on Orlando Av. adjacent to the site. In addition, the site is adjacent to the Louis Orlando Transit Center to the south, across Orlando Av., which includes bus services for Roseville Transit, Sacramento Regional Transit and Placer County Transit buses.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program,
plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase
hazards due to a
geometric design
feature(s) (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate
emergency access? X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The City has adopted the following plans, ordinances, or policies applicable to checklist item a: Pedestrian Master Plan, Bicycle Master Plan, and Short-Range Transit Plan, and General Plan Circulation Element. The project is evaluated for consistency with these plans and the policies contained within them. For checklist item b, the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 establishes a detailed process for evaluating the significance of transportation impacts. In accordance with this section, the analysis must focus on the generation of vehicle miles traveled (VMT); effects on automobile delay cannot be considered a significant impact. The City developed analysis guidance and thresholds as part of the 2035 General Plan Update project approved in July 2020. The detailed evaluation and justification is contained within the General Plan EIR.

Future projects consistent with the General Plan will not require further VMT analysis, pursuant to the tiering provisions of CEQA. For projects which are inconsistent, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) allows lead agencies discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) allows lead agencies the discretion to select their own thresholds and allow for differences in thresholds based on context.

Quantitative analysis would not be required if it can be demonstrated that the project would generate VMT which is equivalent to or less than what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. Examples of such projects include:
• Local-serving retail and other local-serving development, which generally reduces existing trip distances by providing services in closer proximity to residential areas, and therefore reduce VMT. • Multi-family residences, which generally have fewer trips per household than single-family residences, and therefore also produce less VMT per unit.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

• Infill projects in developed areas generally have shorter trips, reduced vehicle trips, and therefore less VMT.
• Pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and electric vehicle transportation projects. • Residential projects in low per-capita household VMT areas and office projects in low per-worker VMT areas (85 percent or less than the regional average) as shown on maps maintained by SACOG or within low VMT areas as shown within Table 4.3-8 of the General Plan EIR.

When quantitative analysis is required, the threshold of 12.8 VMT/capita may be used for projects not within the scope of the General Plan EIR, provided the cumulative context of the 2035 General Plan has not changed substantially. Since approval of the 2035 General Plan, the City has not annexed new land, substantially changed roadway network assumptions, or made any other changes to the 2035 assumptions which would require an update to the City’s VMT thresholds contained within the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the threshold of 12.8 VMT/capita remains appropriate.

No qualitative VMT analysis was conducted for the proposed project, as the development is both consistent with the General Plan land use designation and will be an infill project in a development area.

Impacts with regard to items c and d are assessed based on the expert judgment of the City Engineer and City Fire Department, as based upon facts and consistency with the City’s Design and Construction Standards.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The City of Roseville has adopted a Pedestrian Master Plan, Bicycle Master Plan, and Short-Range Transit Plan. The project was reviewed for consistency with these documents, and no conflicts were identified. b) No qualitative VMT analysis was completed for the proposed project because it is consistent with the existing land use designation, is a local-serving commercial development, and will be constructed on an infill parcel. It is assumed (based on the thresholds of significance) that the proposed project will reduce VMT.

Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
c, d) The project has been reviewed by the City Engineering and City Fire Department staff, and has been found to be consistent with the City’s Design Standards. Furthermore, standard conditions of approval added to all City project require compliance with Fire Codes and other design standards. Compliance with existing regulations ensure that impacts are less than significant.

XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources
As described within the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City of Roseville General Plan, the Roseville region was within the territory of the Nisenan (also Southern Maidu or Valley Maidu). Two large permanent Nisenan habitation sites have been identified and protected within the City’s open space (in Maidu Park). Numerous smaller cultural resources, such as midden deposits and bedrock mortars, have also been recorded in the City. A majority of documented sites within the City are located in areas designated for open space uses.

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing
in the California Register
of Historical Resources, or
in a local register of
historical resources as
defined in Public
Resources Code section
5020.1(k)?
X
b) A resource determined by
the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1? In applying the
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1 the lead agency
shall consider the
significance of the
resource to a California
Native American tribe.

X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

In addition to archeological resources, tribal cultural resources are also given particular treatment. Tribal cultural resources are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074, as either 1) a site, feature, place, geographically-defined cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, that is listed or eligible for listing on the California Register or Historical Resources, or on a local register of historical resources or as 2) a resource determined by the lead agency, supported by substantial evidence, to be significant according to the historical register criteria in Public Resources Code section 5024.1(c), and considering the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The project site is located within the Infill area of the City, and no tribal cultural resources are known to exist on the site. However, standard mitigation measures apply which are designed to reduce impacts to any previously undiscovered resources, should any be found on-site. The measure requires an immediate cessation of work, and contact with the appropriate agencies to address the resource before work can resume. With mitigation; project-specific impacts are less than significant. b) Notice of the proposed project was mailed to tribes which had requested such notice pursuant to AB 52.

A request for consultation was not received. As discussed in item a, above, no resources are known to occur in the area. However, standard mitigation measures apply which are designed to reduce impacts to resources, should any be found on-site. The measure requires an immediate cessation of work, and contact with the

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

appropriate agencies to address the resource before work can resume. With mitigation; project-specific impacts are less than significant.

XIX. Utilities and Service Systems
The project site is located within a developed area of the City of Roseville, and will be served by the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the
relocation or construction
of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas,
or telecommunications
facilities, the construction
or relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water
supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably
foreseeable future
development during
normal, dry, and multiple
dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination
by the wastewater
treatment provider which
serves the project that it
has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s
projected demand in
addition of the provider’s
existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in
excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction
goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state,
and local management
and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid
waste?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to utilities and service systems is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–e listed above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a) The project is consistent with the zoning and land use designation of Community Commercial, and will be required to construct any utilities infrastructure necessary to serve the project, as well as pay fees which fund the operation of the facilities and the construction of major infrastructure. Minor additional infrastructure will be constructed within the project site to tie the project into the major systems, but these facilities will be constructed in locations where site development is already occurring as part of the overall project; there are no additional substantial impacts specific or particular to the minor infrastructure improvements. b) The City of Roseville 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), adopted May 2016, estimates water demand and supply for the City through the year 2040, based on existing land use designations and population projections. In addition, the General Plan EIR estimates water demand and supply for ultimate General Plan buildout. The project is consistent with existing land use designations, and is therefore consistent with the assumptions of the UWMP and General Plan EIR. The UWMP indicates that existing water supply sources are sufficient to meet all near term needs, estimating an annual water demand of 48,762 acre-feet per year (AFY) by the year 2035 and existing surface and recycled water supplies in the amount of 60,400 AFY in normal years.

The UWMP establishes some water supply deficit during dry year scenarios, but establishes that mandatory water conservation measures and the use of groundwater to offset reductions in surface water supplies are sufficient to offset the deficit. The project, which is consistent with existing land use designations, would not require new or expanded water supply entitlements.
c) The proposed project would be served by the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (DCWWTP). The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulates water quality and quantity of effluent discharged from the City’s wastewater treatment facilities. The DCWWTP has the capacity to treat 18 million gallons per day (mgd) and is currently treating 8.9 mgd. The project is consistent with existing land use designations, which is how infrastructure capacity is planned. Therefore, the volume of wastewater generated by the proposed project could be accommodated by the facility; the proposed project will not contribute to an exceedance of applicable wastewater treatment requirements. The impact would be less than significant. d, e) The Western Placer Waste Management Authority is the regional agency handling recycling and waste disposal for Roseville and surrounding areas. The regional waste facilities include a Material Recovery Facility (MRF) and the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill (WRSL). Currently, the WRSL is permitted to accept up to 1,900 tons of municipal solid waste per day. According to the solid waste analysis of the General Plan EIR, under current projected development conditions the WRSL has a projected lifespan extending through 2058. There is sufficient existing capacity to serve the proposed project. Though the project will contribute incrementally to an eventual need to find other means of waste disposal, this impact of City buildout has already been disclosed and mitigation applied as part of each Specific Plan the City has approved. All residences and business in the City pay fees for solid waste collection, a portion of which is collected to fund eventual solid waste disposal expansion.

The project will not result in any new impacts associated with major infrastructure. Environmental Utilities staff has reviewed the project for consistency with policies, codes, and regulations related to waste disposal and waste reduction regulations and policies and has found that the project design is in compliance.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

XX. Wildfire
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an
adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing
winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose
project occupants to
pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources,
power lines or other
utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the
environment?
X
d) Expose people or
structures to significant
risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage
changes?
X
Thresholds of Significance and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to wildfire is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–d listed above. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) is the state agency responsible for wildland fire protection and management. As part of that task, CAL FIRE maintains maps designating Wildland Fire Hazard Severity zones. The City is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and is not in a CAL FIRE responsibility area; fire suppression is entirely within local responsibility.

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–d) Checklist questions a–d above do not apply, because the project site is not within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and is not in a CAL FIRE responsibility area.

XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Issue Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than Significant
With Mitigation
Less Than
Significant Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially
reduce the number or
restrict the range of an
endangered, threatened or
rare species, or eliminate
important examples of the
major periods of California
history or prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have
impacts which are
individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively
considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a
project are considerable
when viewed in connection
with the effects of past
projects, the effects of
other current projects, and
the effects of probable
future projects.)
X
c) Does the project have
environmental effects
which will cause
substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
X

INITIAL STUDY
May 1, 2023
INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash – 1100 Orlando Av.

File #PL22-0316

Significance Criteria and Regulatory Setting:

The significance of impacts related to mandatory findings of significance is based directly on the CEQA Guidelines checklist items a–c listed above.

Discussion of Checklist Answers:
a–c) Long term environmental goals are not impacted by the proposed project. The cumulative impacts do not deviate beyond what was contemplated in the General Plan EIR, and mitigation measures have already been incorporated via the General Plan EIR. With implementation of the City’s Mitigating Ordinances, Guidelines, and Standards and best management practices, mitigation measures described in this chapter, and permit conditions, the proposed project will not have a significant impact on the habitat of any plant or animal species.

Based on the foregoing, the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of any wildlife species, or create adverse effects on human beings.

Last Revised March 2019
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

In reviewing the site specific information provided for this project and acting as Lead Agency, the City of Roseville, Development Services Department, Planning Division has analyzed the potential environmental impacts created by this project and determined that with mitigation the impacts are less than significant. As demonstrated in the initial study checklist, there are no “project specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or site” that cannot be reduced to less than significant effects through mitigation (CEQA Section 15183) and therefore an EIR is not required. Therefore, on the basis of the foregoing initial study:
[ X ] I find that the proposed project COULD, but with mitigation agreed to by the applicant, clearly will not have a significant effect on the environment and a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared.

Initial Study Prepared by:
____________________________________________
Shelby Maples, Associate Planner
City of Roseville, Development Services – Planning Division Attachments:

1. Environmental Noise Assessment, Saxelby Acoustics, LLC

2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Environmental Noise Assessment
Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, California
March 6, 2023
Project #230207
Prepared for:

K12 Architects, Inc.
3090 Fite Circle, Suite 104
Sacramento, CA 95827
Prepared by:

Saxelby Acoustics LLC
Luke Saxelby, INCE Bd. Cert.

Principal Consultant
Board Certified, Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) ATTACHMENT 1
Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx

INTRODUCTION
The Bee Shine Car Wash project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Auburn Boulevard and Orlando Avenue in the City of Roseville, California. Nearby sensitive uses include single family residential uses located east of the proposed project. The primary noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily driven by Interstate 80 (I-80). The primary noise sources associated with operation of the proposed project include car wash blowers, the vacuum station, the central vacuum producer, HVAC equipment, and on-site vehicle circulation.

Figure 1 shows the project site plan. Figure 2 shows an aerial photo of the project site.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NOISE
Fundamentals of Acoustics
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).

Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.

Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers.

To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.

The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A-weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A-weighted levels, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, California
Figure 1
Project Site Plan
Project Location
Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, California
Figure 2
Noise Measurement Sites
Livoti Ave.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10-dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted, an increase of 10-dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70-dBA sound is half as loud as an 80-dBA sound, and twice as loud as a 60 dBA sound.

Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the allencompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.

The day/night average level (Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10- decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment.

Table 1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations. Appendix A provides a summary of acoustical terms used in this report.

TABLE 1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities --110-- Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft.) --100--
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft.) --90--
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft.),
at 80 km/hr. (50 mph) --80-- Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft.)Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft.) Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft.) --70-- Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft.) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft.) --60-- Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft.) Quiet Urban Daytime --50-- Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime --40-- Theater, Large Conference Room (Background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime --30-- Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime --20-- Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background) --10-- Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing --0-- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans, Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September, 2013.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx Effects of Noise on People
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
• Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction • Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning • Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.

Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called ambient noise level. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it.

With regard to increases in A-weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1-dBA cannot be perceived; • Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference; • A change in level of at least 5-dBA is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
• A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness, and can cause an adverse response.

Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6-dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres, or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx

EXISTING AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
The existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily defined by traffic on Interstate

80. To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity, Saxelby Acoustics conducted a continuous (24-hr.) noise level measurement at one location on the project site and shortterm noise level measurements at two locations. Noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 2. A summary of the noise level measurement survey results is provided in Table 2. Appendix B contains the complete results of the noise monitoring.

The sound level meters were programmed to record the maximum, median, and average noise levels at each site during the survey. The maximum value, denoted Lmax, represents the highest noise level measured. The average value, denoted Leq, represents the energy average of all of the noise received by the sound level meter microphone during the monitoring period. The median value, denoted L50, represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the monitoring period.

Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) model 820 and 831 precision integrating sound level meters were used for the ambient noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before and after use with a CAL 200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).

TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EXISTING BACKGROUND NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA Location Date Ldn
Daytime
Leq
Daytime
L50
Daytime
Lmax
Nighttime
Leq
Nighttime
L50
Nighttime
Lmax
LT-1: 520 ft. to
CL of I-80
3/2/23 to
3/3/23 72 65 62 84 65 62 78
ST-1: 650 ft. to
CL of I-80 3/2/23 N/A 61 59 68 N/A N/A N/A
ST-2: 670 ft. to
CL of I-80 3/2/23 N/A 60 59 73 N/A N/A N/A
Notes:
• All values shown in dBA
• Daytime hours: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
• Nighttime Hours: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
• Source: Saxelby Acoustics 2023
Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx

REGULATORY CONTEXT

FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations related to noise that apply to the Proposed Project.

STATE
There are no state regulations related to noise that apply to the Proposed Project.

LOCAL
City of Roseville General Plan
The City of Roseville General Plan Noise Element Table 1X-3 (Table 3) establishes an acceptable exterior noise level of 50 dBA Leq for daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) for stationary noise sources.

TABLE 3: CITY OF ROSEVILLE STATIONARY NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS Noise Level Descriptor Daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)
Hourly Leq, dB 50 45
Maximum Level, dB 70 65
Source : City of Roseville General Plan Noise Element 2035, Table 1X-3 1For municipal power plants consisting primarily of broadband, steady state noise sources, the hourly (Leq) noise standard may be increased up to 10 dB(A), but not exceed 55 dB(A) Hourly Leq dB.

Each of the noise levels specified above should be lowered by five dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises. Such noises are generally considered by residents to be particularly annyoing and are a primary source of noise complaints. These noise level standards do not apply to residential units established in conjunction with industrial or commercial uses (e.g. caretaker dwellings).

No standards have been included for interior noise levels. Standard construction practices, should, with exterior noise level identified, result in acceptable interior noise levels.

Placer County Municipal Code
The Placer County Noise Ordinance (Article 9.36.060 Sound limits for sensitive receptors of the Placer County Code) defines sound level performance standards for sensitive receptors (Table 4). The ordinance states that it is unlawful for any person at any location to create any sound, or to allow the creation of any sound, on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such a person that causes the exterior sound level, when measured at the property line of any affected sensitive receptor, to exceed the ambient sound level by 5 dBA or exceed the sound level standards as set forth in Table 4, whichever is greater.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx Each of the sound level standards specified in Table 4 shall be reduced by 5 dBA for simple tone noises, consisting of speech and music. However, in no case shall the sound level standard be lower than the ambient sound level plus 5 dBA.

TABLE 4: PLACER COUNTY NOISE ORDINANCE NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS FOR SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Sound Level Descriptor Daytime (7 am to 10 pm) Nighttime (10 pm to 7 am) Hourly Leq, dB 55 45
Maximum Level Lmax, dB 70 65
Source : Placer County Municipal Code Section 9.36.060 Table 1.

SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS
While the proposed project will be located in Roseville, California, the sensitive receptors adjacent to the project are located outside of the City boundaries. Therefore, the Placer County stationary noise level standards shall apply to the proposed project.

The Placer County stationary noise level standards state “in no case shall the sound level standard be lower than the ambient sound level plus 5 dBA.” Saxelby Acoustics measured traffic noise levels of 61 dBA Leq and 68 dBA Lmax at location ST-1 during daytime hours. Ambient noise levels at the outdoor activity areas east of the project were calculated to be approximately 57 dBA Leq and 64 dBA Lmax due to shielding from the existing sound wall. The proposed project is expected to operate during daytime hours only.

Therefore, the applicable noise level standards shall be 62 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax.

EVALUATION OF CAR WASH NOISE AT RESIDENTIAL RECEPTORS

METHODOLOGY
The primary noise sources associated with operation of the proposed car wash are the air blowers, central vacuum producer, vacuum station area, rooftop HVAC equipment, and vehicle circulation. The following is a list of assumptions used for the noise modeling. The data used is based upon a combination of manufacturer’s provided data and Saxelby Acoustics data from similar car wash operations.

Car Wash Blowers: Dryer system with a noise level of 78 dBA Leq at 50 feet from car wash exit.

Maximum (Lmax) noise levels are approximately equal to continuous average (Leq) noise levels for steady state operation. Saxelby Acoustics data.

Central Vacuum Producer: 50 dBA Leq measured at 50 feet outside enclosure. Maximum (Lmax) noise levels are approximately equal to continuous average (Leq) noise levels for steady state operation. Saxelby Acoustics data.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx Vacuum Station Area: 70 dBA Leq measured at the edge of vacuum area. Maximum (Lmax) noise levels are approximately equal to continuous average (Leq) noise levels for steady state operation. Saxelby Acoustics data.

Rooftop HVAC: One ten-ton packaged unit operating continuously during the daytime.

Maximum (Lmax) noise levels are approximately equal to continuous average (Leq) noise levels for steady state operation. Manufacturer’s data.

Vehicle Circulation: Saxelby Acoustics assumed that the car wash would attract a maximum of 71 peak hour trips in the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) @ 71 dBA SEL at 50 feet. The model also included two semi-truck fuel or food delivery in the peak hour at 85 dBA SEL at 50 feet. Maximum noise levels are approximately 10 dBA higher than average (Leq) noise levels. Saxelby Acoustics data.

Saxelby Acoustics used the SoundPLAN noise prediction model. Inputs to the model included sound power levels for the proposed car wash tunnel, existing and proposed buildings, terrain type, and locations of sensitive receptors. These predictions are made in accordance with International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard 9613‐2:1996 (Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors). ISO 9613 is the most commonly used method for calculating exterior noise propagation.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Figure 3 shows the predicted daytime car wash noise level contours in terms of the average (Leq) noise descriptor. The noise analysis indicates that daytime (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) property line noise levels at the existing residential uses to the east would be 60 dBA Leq, or less, at the property line. This meets the Placer County adjusted daytime noise level standard of 62 dBA Leq.

It should be noted that steady state mechanical noise associated with the car wash blowers, vacuums, and HVAC are not predicted to generate maximum noise levels higher than the average noise levels.

Therefore, vehicle circulation would be the driver of the project maximum noise levels. The maximum noise level generated by vehicle circulation at the sensitive receptors is predicted to be 44 dBA Lmax. This complies with the Placer County noise level standard of 70 dBA Lmax.

Therefore, the project complies with the Placer County noise level standards with no additional noise control measures required.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CaliforniaFigure 3Project Noise Levels (dB(A) Leq) Legend
Project BuildingExisting BuildingProject SiteExisting Sound WallNoise Level, dBA Bee Shine Car Wash
62 dBA
67 dBA
72 dBA
3 60
57 55
44 49
54 Auburn Blvd.

Orlando Ave.

I Livoti Ave. nterstate 80
Noise level
Leq
in dB(A)
<= 62
62 < <= 6767 < <= 7272 < Scale 1:100
0 20 40 80 120 160
feet
Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx

CONCLUSIONS
The noise analysis indicates that property line noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors would be less than 60 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) This would comply with the County’s exterior noise level standards. Therefore, no additional noise control measures are recommended. These conclusions are based on the following assumptions:
• The car wash dryer used for the project shall not exceed 78 dBA Leq at 50 feet outside the car wash tunnel exit.
• The vacuum producer(s) shall be enclosed and shall not exceed a noise level of 50 dBA Leq at 50 feet outside of the enclosure(s).
• The car wash should operate only during daytime (7:00 am to 10:00 pm) hours.

Bee Shine Car Wash
City of Roseville, CA
Job #230207
March 6, 2023 www.SaxNoise.com

\\192.168.68.50\Saxelby Acoustics\General\Job Folders\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash\Word\230207 Bee Shine Car Wash.docx

REFERENCES
American National Standards Institute. (1998). [Standard] ANSI S1.43-1997 (R2007): Specifications for integrating-averaging sound level meters. New York: Acoustical Society of America.

American Standard Testing Methods, Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels, American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM) E1014-08, 2008.

ASTM E1014-12. Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

ASTM E1780-12. Standard Guide for Measuring Outdoor Sound Received from a Nearby Fixed Source.

ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

Barry, T M. (1978). FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108). Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of transportation, Federal highway administration, Office of research, Office of environmental policy.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, May 2011.

Egan, M. D. (1988). Architectural acoustics. United States of America: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Federal Highway Administration. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP05-054 DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-05-01. January 2006.

Hanson, Carl E. (Carl Elmer). (2006). Transit noise and vibration impact assessment. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment.

International Electrotechnical Commission. Technical committee 29: Electroacoustics. International Organization of Legal Metrology. (2013). Electroacoustics: Sound level meters.

International Organization for Standardization. (1996). Acoustic - ISO 9613-2: Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. Part 2: General methods of calculation. Ginevra: I.S.O.

Miller, L. N., Bolt, Beranek, & and Newman, Inc. (1981). Noise control for buildings and manufacturing plants. Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc.

SoundPLAN. SoundPLAN GmbH. Backnang, Germany. http://www.soundplan.eu/english/ Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Acoustics   The science of sound.

Ambient Noise  The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre‐project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.

ASTC  Apparent  Sound  Transmission  Class.    Similar  to  STC  but  includes  sound  from  flanking  paths  and  correct  for  room reverberation. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Attenuation   The reduction of an acoustic signal.

A‐Weighting   A  frequency‐response  adjustment  of  a  sound  level meter  that  conditions  the  output  signal  to  approximate  human response.

Decibel or dB   Fundamental  unit  of  sound, A Bell is  defined as  the logarithm  of  the  ratio  of  the  sound  pressure  squared  over  the reference pressure squared. A Decibel is one‐tenth of a Bell.

CNEL   Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as  the 24‐hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 ‐ 10 p.m.) weighted by +5 dBA and nighttime hours weighted by +10 dBA.

DNL  See definition of Ldn.

IIC  Impact  Insulation  Class.  An  integer‐number  rating  of  how  well  a  building  floor  attenuates  impact  sounds,  such  as footsteps. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Frequency   The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic signal, expressed in cycles per second or hertz (Hz).

Ldn     Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.

Leq     Equivalent or energy‐averaged sound level.

Lmax     The highest root‐mean‐square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.

L(n)   The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period. For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50% of the time during the one‐hour period.

Loudness   A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.

NIC  Noise Isolation Class.  A rating of the noise reduction between two spaces.  Similar to STC but includes sound  from flanking paths and no correction for room reverberation.

NNIC  Normalized Noise Isolation Class.  Similar to NIC but includes a correction for room reverberation.

Noise     Unwanted sound.

NRC   Noise Reduction Coefficient. NRC is a single‐number rating of the sound‐absorption of a material equal to the arithmetic mean of the sound‐absorption coefficients in the 250, 500, 1000, and 2,000 Hz octave frequency bands rounded to the nearest multiple  of  0.05. It  is  a  representation  of  the  amount of  sound energy  absorbed  upon  striking  a  particular surface. An NRC of 0 indicates perfect reflection; an NRC of 1 indicates perfect absorption.

RT60     The time it takes reverberant sound to decay by 60 dB once the source has been removed.

Sabin   The unit of sound absorption. One square foot of material absorbing 100% of incident sound has an absorption of 1 Sabin.

SEL   Sound Exposure Level. SEL is a rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train pass by, that compresses the total sound energy into a one‐second event.

SPC  Speech Privacy Class. SPC is a method of rating speech privacy in buildings. It is designed  to measure the degree of speech  privacy  provided  by  a  closed  room,  indicating  the  degree  to  which  conversations  occurring  within  are  kept private from listeners outside the room.

STC   Sound Transmission Class. STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. It is widely used  to  rate  interior  partitions,  ceilings/floors,  doors,  windows  and  exterior  wall  configurations.    The  STC  rating  is typically used to rate the sound transmission of a specific building element when tested in laboratory conditions where flanking paths around the assembly don’t exist.   A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Threshold  The lowest sound that can be perceived by the human auditory system, generally considered of Hearing   to be 0 dB for persons with perfect hearing.

Threshold   Approximately 120 dB above the threshold of hearing. of Pain
Impulsive   Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.

Simple Tone         Any sound which can be judged as audible as a single pitch or set of single pitches.

Appendix B: Continuous and Short-Term
Ambient Noise Measurement Results
Site: LT-1
Project: Meter:

Leq Lmax L50 L90 Location: Calibrator:

Thursday, March 2, 2023 11:00 64 83 61 57 Coordinates:

Thursday, March 2, 2023 12:00 63 78 61 56
Thursday, March 2, 2023 13:00 65 85 61 57
Thursday, March 2, 2023 14:00 64 79 62 57
Thursday, March 2, 2023 15:00 65 87 62 57
Thursday, March 2, 2023 16:00 65 85 63 58
Thursday, March 2, 2023 17:00 66 81 63 58
Thursday, March 2, 2023 18:00 65 87 62 58
Thursday, March 2, 2023 19:00 64 83 61 57
Thursday, March 2, 2023 20:00 65 92 58 55
Thursday, March 2, 2023 21:00 64 80 61 58
Thursday, March 2, 2023 22:00 65 81 60 57
Thursday, March 2, 2023 23:00 68 84 68 67
Friday, March 3, 2023 0:00 68 72 68 67
Friday, March 3, 2023 1:00 69 81 68 67
Friday, March 3, 2023 2:00 63 78 56 52
Friday, March 3, 2023 3:00 57 70 56 53
Friday, March 3, 2023 4:00 58 73 57 55
Friday, March 3, 2023 5:00 61 76 59 56
Friday, March 3, 2023 6:00 65 86 63 59
Friday, March 3, 2023 7:00 67 86 65 62
Friday, March 3, 2023 8:00 67 89 65 62
Friday, March 3, 2023 9:00 65 81 63 60
Friday, March 3, 2023 10:00 64 81 62 59
Leq Lmax L50 L90
65 84 62 58
65 78 62 59
63 78 58 55
67 92 65 62
57 70 56 52
69 86 68 67
72 61
72 39
Appendix B1: Continuous Noise Monitoring Results
Date Time
Measured Level, dBA Bee Shine Car Wash
Northern Project Boundary
LDL 820-2
Night Average
CAL200
Thursday, March 2, 2023 Friday, March 3, 2023
Statistics
Day Average
(38.7237188, -121.2890883)
CNEL Night %
Day Low
Day High
Night Low
Night High
Ldn Day %
83 78
85 79
87 85
81 87
83 92
80 81
84 72
81 78
70 73
76 86 86
89 81 81
57 56 57 57 57 58 58 58 57
55 58 57
67 67 67
52 53 55 56
59 62 62
60 59
64 63 65 64 65 65 66 65 64 65 64 65
68 68 69
63 57
58 61
65 67 67
65 64
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
Time of Day
Measured Ambient Noise Levels vs. Time of Day
Lmax L90 Leq
Noise Measurement Site
LT-1
Auburn Blvd.

Site: ST-1
Project: Bee Shine Car Wash Meter:

Location: East of the project site Calibrator:

Coordinates:

Start:

Stop:

SLM: Model 831
Serial: 2658
Duration: 0:10
Leq: 61
Lmax: 68
Lmin: 55
L50: 59
L90: 57
Measurement Results, dBA
Notes
LDL 831-5
CAL200
: Short Term Noise Monitoring Results
2023-03-02 11:03:01
2023-03-02 11:13:01
Appendix B2
(38.7235660, -121.2886250)
Primary noise source was traffic noise from Orlando Avenue and Interstate 80 exit ramp.

Noise Measurement Site
22 29
35 40
44 46 48 47 47 47 47 48 50 52 53 52 50 48
45 42
39 37 36 35 35
31 43
49 57 57
64 62 60
57 59 57 55
58 59 60 61
57 54 53 51 50
46 44
46 50
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Measured Noise Level, dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Measured Ambient Noise Frequency Spectrum
Overall 1/3 Spectra Max 1/3 Spectra
ST-1
Auburn Blvd.

Site: ST-2
Project: Bee Shine Car Wash Meter:

Location: North East of the project site Calibrator:

Coordinates:

Start:

Stop:

SLM: Model 831
Serial: 2658
Duration: 0:10
Leq: 60
Lmax: 73
Lmin: 51
L50: 59
L90: 57
(38.7239037, -121.2882018)
Appendix B2 : Short Term Noise Monitoring Results
LDL 831-5
CAL200
2023-03-02 11:14:38
2023-03-02 11:24:38
Measurement Results, dBA
Notes
Primary noise sources were traffic noises from Orlando Avenue and Interstate 80 exit ramp.

Noise Measurement Site
22 29
35 40
44 46 48 47 47 47 47 48 50 52 53 52 50 48
45 42
39 37 36 35 35
31 43
49 57 57
64 62 60
57 59 57 55
58 59 60 61
57 54 53 51 50
46 44
46 50
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 Measured Noise Level, dBA
1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency
Measured Ambient Noise Frequency Spectrum
Overall 1/3 Spectra Max 1/3 Spectra
ST-2
Auburn Blvd.

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Project Title/File Number: INFILL PCL 175 – Bee Shine Car Wash, File #PL22-0316 Project Location: 1100 Orlando Avenue, Roseville, Placer County, CA 95661 (APN 471-060-060- 000)
Project Description:

The proposed project is a new 4,542 square foot automatic carwash facility with 21 vacuum spaces and 9 parking spaces. The project entitlements include a Rezone to change the zoning designation from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Community Commercial (CC), a Conditional Use Permit to allow the carwash use in the CC zone, and a Design Review Permit to review the site design.

Environmental Document Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Project Applicant: David Heumann, K12 Architects, Inc.

Property Owner: Bethany Lee Angeles and Jesus Angeles
Lead Agency Contact Person: Shelby Maples, Associate Planner, City of Roseville Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code requires public agencies to "adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment." This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been adopted for the purpose of avoiding environmental impacts MONITORING PROCESS: Existing monitoring mechanisms are in place that assist the City of Roseville in meeting the intent of CEQA. These existing monitoring mechanisms eliminate the need to develop new monitoring processes for each mitigation measure. These mechanisms include grading plan review and approval, improvement/building plan review and approval and on-site inspections by City Departments. Given that these monitoring processes are requirements of the project, they are not included in the mitigation monitoring program.

It shall be the responsibility of the project applicant/owner to provide written notification to the City using the Mitigation Verification Cover Sheet and Forms, in a timely manner, of the completion of each Mitigation Measure as identified on the following pages. The City will verify that the project is in compliance with the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Any non-compliance will be reported by the City to the applicant/owner, and it shall be the project applicant’s/owner’s responsibility to rectify the situation by bringing the project into compliance. The purpose of this program is to ensure diligent and good faith compliance with the Mitigation Measures which have been adopted as part of the project.

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT – PLANNING DIVISION
311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 774-5276
ATTACHMENT 2

TABLE OF MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation Measure Implementation Timing Reviewing Party Documents to be Submitted to City
Staff Use Only
MM CUL-01 Unanticipated Discovery. If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin, or tribal cultural resources, are discovered during construction, all work shall halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery, and the Construction Manager shall immediately notify the City of Roseville Development Services Director by phone. The Construction Manager shall also immediately coordinate with the monitoring archeologist or project archaeologist and (if present) tribal monitor, or, in the absence of either, contact consulting tribes and a qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology and subject to approval by the City, to evaluate the significance of the find and develop appropriate management recommendations.

All management recommendations shall be provided to the City in writing for the City’s review and approval. If recommended by the qualified professional and consulting tribes and approved by the City, this may include modification of the no-work radius.

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

Whenever there is question as to whether or not the discovery represents a tribal resource, culturally affiliated tribes shall be consulted in making the determination. Whenever a tribal monitor is present, the monitor shall be consulted.

The following processes shall apply, depending on the nature of the find, subject to the review and approval of the City:

Response to False Alarms: If the professional archaeologist determines that the find is negative for any cultural indicators, then work may resume immediately upon notice to proceed from the City’s representative. No further notifications or tribal consultation is necessary, because the discovery is not a cultural resource of any kind. The professional archaeologist shall provide written documentation of this finding to the City.

Response to Non-Tribal Discoveries: If a tribal monitor is not present at the time of discovery and a professional archaeologist determines that the find represents a non-tribal cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the City shall be notified immediately, to consult on a finding of eligibility and implementation of appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. The professional archaeologist shall provide a photograph of the find and a written description to the City of Roseville. The City of Roseville will notify any [tribe(s)] who, in writing, requested notice of unanticipated discovery of non-tribal resources.

Notice shall include the photograph and description of the find, and a tribal representative shall have the opportunity to determine whether or not the find represents a tribal cultural resource. If a response is not received within 24 hours of notification (none of which time period may fall on weekends or City holidays), the City will deem this portion of the measure completed in good faith as long as the notification was made and documented. If requested by a [tribe(s)], the City may extend this timeframe, which shall be documented in writing (electronic communication may be used to satisfy this measure). If a notified tribe responds within 24 hours to indicate that the find represents a tribal cultural resource, then the Response to Tribal Discoveries portion of this measure applies. If the tribe does not respond This condition shall be reflected in all
construction and building plans, and
construction site workers shall be
advised by the site manager of this
measure.

Construction: Measure applies if
resources are discovered during
construction.

Add as note on Improvement Plans
and Building Plans.

Engineering and Building None
or concurs that the discovery is non-tribal, work shall not resume within the no-work radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.

Response to Tribal Discoveries: If the find represents a tribal or potentially tribal cultural resource that does not include human remains, the UAIC and City shall be notified. The City will consult with the tribe(s) on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be either a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, or a Tribal Cultural Resource, as defined in Section 21074 of the Public Resources Code. Preservation in place is the preferred treatment, if feasible. Work shall not resume within the no-work radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines; or 2) not a Tribal Cultural Resource, as defined in Section 21074 of the Public Resources Code; or 3) that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.

Response to Human Remains: If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, the construction supervisor or on-site archaeologist shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641) and shall notify the City and Placer County Coroner (per § 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, § 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 shall be implemented. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the Coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the project (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. Public Resources Code § 5097.94 provides structure for mediation through the NAHC if necessary.

If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (§ 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code).

If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains in a respectful manner where they will not be further disturbed (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work shall not resume within the no-work radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the treatment measures have been completed to its satisfaction.

MM CUL-02 Cease Work and Consult with Qualified Paleontologist. Should any evidence of paleontological resources (e.g. fossils) be encountered during grading or excavation, work shall be suspended within 100 feet of the find, and the City of Roseville shall be immediately notified. At that time, the City shall coordinate any necessary investigation of the site with a qualified paleontologist to assess the resource and provide proper management recommendations. Possible management recommendations for important resources could include resource avoidance, if feasible in light of project design or layout, or data recovery excavations. The contractor shall implement any measures deemed feasible and necessary by City staff in consultation with the paleontologist for the protection of the paleontological resources.

This condition shall be reflected in all
construction and building plans, and
construction site workers shall be
advised by the site manager of this
measure.

Construction: Measure applies if
resources are discovered during
construction.

Add as note on Improvement Plans
and Building Plans.

Engineering and Building None

MITIGATION VERIFICATION SUBMITTAL COVER SHEET
Project Title/Planning File #
Project Address
Property Owner
Planning Division Contact

SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL Mitigation Measure Supporting Attachments Included Date Complete
I HAVE ATTACHED THE FOLLOWING REQUIRED ITEMS:
☐ Table of Applicable Mitigation Measures
☐ Mitigation Verification Form(s)
☐ Specific supporting documentation required by measure(s), if applicable (e.g. biologist’s report) I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the property owner or an agent of the property owner and am authorized to submit this Mitigation Verification Form. I also certify that the above-listed mitigation measures have been completed in the manner required, and that all of the information in this submittal is true and correct, to the best of my knowledge:

Signature and Date Print Name Contact Number

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 774-5276

MITIGATION VERIFICATION FORM
Mitigation Measure
Description of Monitoring and Verification Work Performed. The following information is a required part of the description:
dates, personnel names or titles, and the stage/phase of construction work. Additional notes sheets may be attached, if necessary, or the below may simply reference a separate attachment that provides the required information.

INSTRUCTIONS
COVER SHEET:

A Cover Sheet for the project/development is prepared by City staff, with the top portion filled out. Each time Mitigation Verification Forms(s) are being submitted, a Cover Sheet completed by the Developer, Contractor, or Designee is required. An example of a completed summary table is provided below. The signature on the Cover Sheet must be original wet ink.

EXAMPLE MITIGATION VERIFICATION SUBMITTAL COVER SHEET
Project Title/Planning File # New Coffee Shop, PL15-0000 Project Address 10 Justashort Street
Property Owner Jane Owner
Planning Division Contact Joe Planner, Associate Planner, (916) 774-####

SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL Mitigation
Measure Supporting Attachments Included Date Complete
MM-3 Copy of survey report signed by biologist 5/10/2016 MM-4 All information included in Mitigation Verification Form 5/12/2016 MM-5 E-mail from Air District approving Dust Control Plan 5/05/2016 MITIGATION VERIFICATION FORM:

A Mitigation Verification Form is provided by City staff, along with the Cover Sheet and Table of Applicable Mitigation Measures. A form is filled in and submitted for each mitigation measure by the Developer, Contractor, or Designee. The form needs only the mitigation number to be filled in, along with the Description of Monitoring and Verification Work Performed. Multiple forms may be submitted simultaneously, under one cover sheet. It is also permissible to submit a form for each part of a measure, on separate dates. For instance, in the example measure MM-4 in the table above, the actual mitigation requires informing construction workers and retaining a qualified archeologist if resources are uncovered.

Thus, a developer may submit a form in May certifying that construction workers have been informed, and also submit a second copy of the form in July because resources were discovered and additional actions had to be undertaken.

Each mitigation measure specifies the type of supporting documentation required; this must be submitted in order for the City to accept the mitigation as complete. An example of a completed Mitigation Verification Form is provided below.

EXAMPLE

MITIGATION VERIFICATION FORM
Mitigation Measure MM3
Description of Monitoring and Verification Work Performed. The following information is a required part of the description:
dates, personnel names or titles, and the stage/phase of construction work. Additional notes sheets may be attached, if necessary, or the below may simply reference a separate attachment that provides the required information.

The mitigation measure text is included on the Improvement Plans General Notes page (Improvement Plan EN15-0001).

On May 4, 2016, prior to any ground-disturbing activities (the pre-construction phase), a site meeting was held. At this meeting, workers on the site were informed of the potential to unearth remains, and were instructed to cease work and notify their supervisor immediately if any resources were observed.

PARKING NO PARKING NO

EV CHARGER EV CHARGER
Large SUV K12
Large SUV K12 Large SUV K12
Large SUV K12

NOT AN EXIT FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER
20 SITE PLAN A104

ZONING MAP
SCALE: 1" = 50'-0"

PROJECT DATA
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
C
A
B

PROJECT SITE- ZONE NC , REZONING TO CC

ZONE CC

ZONE RI- NOT IN ROSEVILLE
NC
NC
NC
CC
R1
R1
R1

B ZONE CC
NC
CC
CC
NC to CC

PC EXHIBIT B

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

EV CHARGER

EV CHARGER
Large SUV
K12
Large SUV
K12
Large SUV K12
Large SUV K12

NOT AN EXIT FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER
20 SITE PLAN A101

PROPOSED

SITE PLAN
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 CAR WASH MONUMENT SIGN.

CONCRETE CURB.

CONCRETE WALK.

SITE AREA LIGHT. WITH CONCRETE BASE SHALL HAVE A DRY SACK FINISH.

TYPICAL. SEE DETAIL(S) 10/A104, 6 & 18 A107
LANDSCAPING, SEE LANDSCAPING DRAWING'S.

CONCRETE PAVING, SEE CIVIL DRAWING'S.

TRASH ENCLOSURE AND CONC. APPROACH SLAB. SEE SHEET A102 FOR DETAILS 138'-0" LF OF VEHICLE STACKING (138 X 3 LANES/ 22' = 15 VEHICLES) ACCESSIBLE VAN PARKING STALL.

NEW DRIVEWAY - SEE CIVIL DWGS
60" WIDE STRIPED ACCESS WALK WAY
TRUNCATED DOMES - WIDTH OF ACCESS x 36" DEEP

EV CHARGING STATION

CAR WASH VACUUM STATION
24 25
26 27
28 DOG WASH

ACCESSIBLITY PATH OF TRAVEL
ALL WALKWAYS AND SIDEWALKS ALONG ACCESSIBLE ROUTES OF TRAVEL (1) ARE CONTINUOUSLY ACCESSIBLE, (2) HAVE A MAXIMUM 1/2" CHANGE IN ELEVATION, (3) ARE MINIMUM 48" IN WIDTH, (4) HAVE A MAXIMUM 2% CROSS SLOPE, AND (5) WHERE NECESSARY TO CHANGE ELEVATION AT A SLOPE EXCEEDING 5% (I.E., 1:20) SHALL HAVE RAMPS COMPLYING WITH 2019 CBC, SECTION 11B-405 OR 11B406 AS APPROPRIATE. WHERE

A WALK CROSSES OR ADJOINS A VEHICULAR WAY, AND THE WALKING SURFACES ARE

NOT SEPARATED BY CURBS, RAILINGS OR OTHER ELEMENTS BETWEEN THE PEDESTRIAN

AREAS AND VEHICULAR AREAS SHALL BE DEFINED BY A CONTINUOUS DETECTABLE WARNING WHICH IS 36" WIDE, COMPLYING 2019 CBC, SECTION 11B-705.1.2.5.

PATH OF TRAVEL

CAR WASH PAY STATION - BY OWNER HIRED CONSULTANT
CLEAN AIR VEHICLE' PARKING SPACES WHITE LETTERING.

CAR WASH CLARIFIER TANKS.

PATH OF ACCESSIBLE TRAVEL SIGNAGE, SEE DETAIL
SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
PERCENTAGE OF SITE LANDSCAPED:

TOTAL AREA OF LANDSCAPING:

LANDSCAPING DATA:

PARKING PROVIDED

REGULAR SPACES

ACCESSIBLE SPACES
PARKING DATA:

BUILDING AREA PARKING RATIO
%16.45
15,162 S.F.

TOTAL REQ'D PARKING
=
=
8 1
=
REQ'D.

TOTAL AREA OF SITE:

TOTAL AREA OF BLDGS:

FLOOR TO AREA RATIO:
(W/O CANOPY)
S.F.

S.F.
59,601
(8%) 4,542
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER(S):

BUILDING DATA:

STRUCTURE
ZONING:

CBC TYPE OF
OCCUP. CONST. AREA

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL- PD-C
471-060-060-000 (53,601 S.F., 1.23 AC)
CAR WASH 4 EMPLOYEES MAX PER SHIFT = 4
4 RETAIL FACILITY BUILDING AREA(S):

CAR WASH TUNNEL B II B 4,542 S.F.

PROJECT DATA

ORIGINAL PARCELS
VACUUM SPACES 21=
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LC - LIMITED COMMERCIAL
TOTAL ( REQUIRED SPACES ) 9
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
PROJECT SITE AREA (GROSS): +/- 59,601 S.F. +/- 1.37 ACRES 5'-2"
3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
9'-7" 3'-0"
43'-9"
24'-4"
19'-0"
7'-1"
13'-11"
2'-8"
9'-11"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
9'-7"
3'-0"
12'-0" 5'-0" 2'-8"
18'-3" 36'-0"
6'-11"
3'-6" 9'-7"
3'-6" 10'-0"
3'-6" 10'-2"
6'-0"
6'-0"
25'-10"
15'-0"
86'-10"
8'-0"
12'-0"
10'-8"
6'-5"4'-0"
16'-1"
12'-0"
6'-0"
6'-8" 10'-10" 12'-6"
94'-9"
9'-0" 5'-0" 12'-0" 9'-0"
11'-11"
40'-0"
15'-5"
12'-6"
19'-0"
9'-6"
12'-0"
15'-7"
10'-8"
13'-0" 10'-0"
41'-3"
29'-6" R20'-0"
R20'-0"
R256'-0"
R20'-0"
R20'-0" R16'-6" R10'-0"
R16'-6"
R8'-0"

KEYNOTES
3 3
3 3
3 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5
5 8
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
10 10
6 6
6 6
2 2
2 2
27 2
2 2
9 9
9 11
12 13
13 14
14 15
19 19
5 27'-0" 24'-9"
28'-0"
19'-0"
13'-0"
30'-2"
11'-0"
20'-4"
5'-2"
38'-10" 51'-1"
5'-0"
12'-0"
12'-0"
13'-6"
11'-3"
21'-9"
6 16
17 7
2 12'-6" P.U.E.
15'-0" LANDSCAPE SETBACK
22 21

EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT
23 23

EXISTING POLE SIGN TO REMAIN
24 8

EXISTING TREES, NOT ON OUR PROPERTY
25 25
25 25

EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
26 26
26 ORLANDO AVE AUBURN BLVD
HIGHWYA 80 ON-RAMP
16'-0"
22'-7"
5'-6"

EMERGENCY GATE, PER FIRE DEPARTMENT DETAIL, GATE TO REMAIN LOCKED IN CLOSED POSITION. EMERGENCY ENTRANCE/EXIT ONLY.
36" HIGH CMU SCREEN WALL WITH STONE VENEER ON BOTH SIDE AND STONE CAP ON TOP. VEENER TO MATCH BUILDING. SEE DETAIL 13/A102 28 PC EXHIBIT C
A102

SITE DETAILS
8 18
12 6
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"

TRASH ENCLOSURE PLAN
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS SLOPE 1/4": 1'-0"
4" THK. CONC. APRON W/
FIBERMESH AND #4 BARS AT 16"
O.C. EA WAY OVER 4"
AGGREGATE BASE.
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITHEL
DORADO STONE VENEER , SEE A301
AND A302 FOR EXTERIOR FINISHES. 7'-4"
6" CONC. CURB
CONC. WALK

LANDSCAPING AREA
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL
CAIN BOLT SLEEVE 7'-4"
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL
DORADO STONE VENEER , SEE A301
AND A302 FOR EXTERIOR FINISHES.
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL
DORADO STONE VENEER , SEE A301
AND A302 FOR EXTERIOR FINISHES. 7'-4"
13'-4"
26'-0"
12'-8" 9'-4" 5'-8" 7'-3"
6'-4" STEEL GATE

ACCESS DOMES

REAR VIEW

FRONT VIEW
SIDE VIEW 14'-8" 24'-0" 7'-4"SIDE VIEW
BOLLARDS SLOPE 1/4": 1'-0"

EXPANSION JOINT

CONTROL JOINT
PER PLANS, 10'-0" O.C. MAX. SPACING
@ 20'-0" O.C. MAX. SPACING 2" MIN. 1" DEEP TOOLED JOINT

FIBER EXPANSION JOINT
W/ 1/2" RADIUS
CONCRETE WALK, TYP.

SEALANT
SCALE: 1 1/2"=1'-0"
CONC. WALK

EXPANSION & CONTROL JOINTS

RAIN WATER LEADER TO

DAYLIGHT WHERE OCCURS
14 19
17 SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"
TRASH ENCLOSURE WALL SEC. 4'-0" MIN. LAP 6'-0" MAX. CMU-GRAY BLK 2'-6"
GRADE 1'-6"
#4 x6"
6" CONC. CURB
2'-6"
2- #4 HORIZ..
#5 VERT. @ 32" O.C.

STONETRANSITIONS 9"X20"

EASED EDGE PEAKED
2 1/2" CONCRETE CAP.

COLOR = CANYON (12B)
7/8" STUCCO PROCESS TO

MATCH BUILDING
#5 CONTINUOUS TOP AND
BOTTOM
MATERIAL SPAECIFICATIONS:

MASONRY UNITS: ASTM C90 (1,900 PSI)
MORTAR: ASTM C270 TYPE S (1,800 PSI)
GROUT: ASTM C476 (2,000 PSI)
CONCRETE: 2500 PSI
REINFORCING STEEL: SEE SHEET S1.0
TOP OF FOOTING 1374.40 5'-3"
3"
#5 VERT DOWELS @32" o.c.

CTRD IN WALL
1- #4 HORIZ..
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL. INTERIOR

FINISH TO BE SMOOTH,

CLEANABLE AND LIGHT IN

COLOR PER HEALTH
DEPARTMENT. 1'-0" 6"
6"

AND PAVING REQ'MTS
#4 CONT. REBAR

TOP & BOTTOM

REFER TO CIVIL DRAWING
FOR SUBGRADE PREP.

TOOLED EDGE
CONC. PAVING
TOP OF A.C. PAVING OR

LANDSCAPING
SCALE: 1 1/2"=1'-0"
CONC. CURB @ LANDSCAPING 1'-0" 6"
6"
#4 CONT. REBAR

TOP & BOTTOM
6" COMPACTED

TOOLED EDGE
GRAVEL
SCALE: 1 1/2"=1'-0"
CONC. WALK CURB

REFER TO CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR
SUBGRADE PREP. & PAVING

REQ'MTS
TOP OF A.C. PAVING OR CONC.

PAVING
1/2" EXPANSION JOINT, FLEXIBLE
CAULK OVER EXPANSION JOINT.

SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"

TRASH AND VACUUM ENCLOSURE GATE DETAILS
NOTE: PAINT DOORS AND POSTS TO MATCH STRUCTURE
BOBCO METALS 4" HEAVY

DUTY HINGES- STEEL BUTT

HINGE FOR HEAVY GATES

AND DOORS
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME

DOOR FRAME WELDED

TOGETHER AT CORNERS
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME
CORNERS 45 DEGREE CUTS
WELDED TO TOGETHER.

STANLEY 827-550 CD 1009

CANE BOLT FASTEN TO ANGLE

FRAME- WELD OR DRILL HOLES

FOR MACHINE BOLTS
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE - DRILL
.5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET FOR

THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.
1"X 7" LONG X 1/8" THICK STEEL
LATCH BENT AS SHOWNFASTENED TO FRAME WITH
THROUGH BOLT.
1"X 1/4" X 1" "Z" CLIP OF 1/8" THICK

STEEL LATCH CATCH WELDED

TO GATE FRAME
1/4'X 3/4" x 1/16" THICK X 7" LONG

STEEL ANGLE STOP -WELED TO
FRAME
AEP SPAN HR-36 METAL
SIDING- 24GA. GATE FRAME AND LATCH TOP VIEW

LATCH TO GATE FRAME ELEVATION

CANE BOLTS TO GATE FRAME

ELEVATION
4"X 4" TUBE STEEL POST
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE -
DRILL .5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET

FOR THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE - DRILL
.5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET FOR

THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.

AEP SPAN HR-36 METAL
SIDING- 24GA.
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME

DOOR FRAME WELDED

TOGETHER AT CORNERS
3/8" THREADED ROD FROM

CORNER TO OPPOSITE

CORNER FASTENED WITH

WASHER AND NUT TO
GUSSET

GUSSET AND TIE ROD

GATE AT POST

CONCRETE BASE

ACCESS PANEL
NOTE:

FINISHED GRADE

BASECOVER TO MATCH
POLE COLOR.

SCALE: NTS

POLE MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE
24" 5'-0" 24" 24" MIN.

LIGHT FIXTURE, FULL CUTOFF

TYPE, AREA LIGHT SEE FIXTURE
SCHEDULE ON SHEET E001.

GROUT AROUND BASE AFTER
PLUMB. SLOPE TO GRADE FOR
DRAINAGE.
4" SQUARE POLE ANODIZED
DARK BRONZE FINISH. SEE

FIXTURE SCHEDULE FOR HEIGHTS
REINF. STEEL #3-HORIZ. @ 12" O.C.
6-#5-VERT

CONNECT GROUND WIRE TO

GROUNDING LUG OF POLE AT

HANDHOLE
ANCHOR BOLTS (4) (SIZE PER
MFG. STANDARDS)

FIXTURE WIRE THROUGH
POLE TO LUMINAIRE.
3" CLEAR IF CAST AGAINST EARTH
(TYP.)
16 20'-0"
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"

SCREEN WALL
34'-6" TYP.
68'-6" 2'-0"
2'-0" 4'-0" 3'-4"
34'-6" TYP.

CMU COLUMN, TYP.
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL

DORADO STONE VENEER , SEE
A301 AND A302 FOR EXTERIOR
FINISHES.

EL DORADO STONE VENEER
CAP
13 A103
VACUUM

ENCLOSURE DETAILS
8 18
12 SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23

OT ENTER
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
VACUUM ENCLOSURE ROOF & FRAMING PLAN 11'-4" 8"
1'-2"
HSS 3x3x3/16
1'-2"
HSS 3x3x3/16
HSS 3x3x3/16 HSS 3x3x3/16
HSS 3x3x3/16 HSS 3x3x3/16
HSS 8x3x3/16
HSS 8x3x3/16
HSS 8x3x3/16

CMU WALL BELOW
VERCO TYPE PLB-36, 20 GAGE, METAL
DECK WITH 'PNEUTEK' SDK63 36/7

PATTERN AT SUPPORTS, AND
'PUNCHLOK' SIDELAP CONNECTIONS @
18"c. 16 GA. CAP
16 GA. CAP 4"
4" 16 GA. CAP 4"4"
4" 4" 8" 4'-6" 5'-2" 1 : 12 SLOPE
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"

VACUUM ENCLOSURE ELEVATIONS
HSS 3X3X3/16
16'-0" 10'-8"
4'-0" 12'-0"
16'-0"
6" CONC. CURB

LANDSCAPING AREA
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL SLOPE 1/4": 1'-0"
16'-0"
FRONT VIEW 7'-4" 1'-0"
FOOTING, SEE STRUCT.

DRAWINGS.

VACUUM PRODUCER GATE
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL

DORADO STONE VENEER ,
SEE A301 AND A302 FOR
EXTERIOR FINISHES.

HSS 3x3X3/16 7'-4"
10'-8" 1'-0" 7'-4" 1'-9"
12 1
FOOTING, SEE STRUCT.

DRAWINGS.

HSS 3x3X3/16
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL

DORADO STONE VENEER ,
SEE A301 AND A302 FOR
EXTERIOR FINISHES.
4 A103
16'-0"
REAR VIEW 7'-4" 1'-0"
FOOTING, SEE STRUCT.

DRAWINGS.

HSS 3x3X3/16
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL WITH EL

DORADO STONE VENEER ,
SEE A301 AND A302 FOR
EXTERIOR FINISHES.

SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"

VACUUM EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE
4" THK. CONC. APRON W/
FIBERMESH AND #4 BARS AT
16" O.C. EA WAY OVER 4"
AGGREGATE BASE.

VACUUM CANOPY
CONC. WALK

LANDSCAPE AREA
6" CONC. CURB
3'-4"
1'-0" 10'-8" 1'-0"
12'-8" 12'-6" 1'-0" 13'-6"

VACUUM EQUIPMENT
5'-10" STEEL GATE 1'-0"
20 16
19 15
14 17 13
SCALE: 1" = 1'-0"

VACUUM ENCLOSURE GATE DETAILS
NOTE: PAINT DOORS AND POSTS TO MATCH STRUCTURE
BOBCO METALS 4" HEAVY

DUTY HINGES- STEEL BUTT

HINGE FOR HEAVY GATES

AND DOORS
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME

DOOR FRAME WELDED

TOGETHER AT CORNERS
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME
CORNERS 45 DEGREE CUTS
WELDED TO TOGETHER.

STANLEY 827-550 CD 1009

CANE BOLT FASTEN TO ANGLE

FRAME- WELD OR DRILL HOLES

FOR MACHINE BOLTS
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE - DRILL
.5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET FOR

THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.
1"X 7" LONG X 1/8" THICK STEEL
LATCH BENT AS SHOWNFASTENED TO FRAME WITH
THROUGH BOLT.
1"X 1/4" X 1" "Z" CLIP OF 1/8" THICK

STEEL LATCH CATCH WELDED

TO GATE FRAME
1/4'X 3/4" x 1/16" THICK X 7" LONG

STEEL ANGLE STOP -WELED TO
FRAME
AEP SPAN HR-36 METAL
SIDING- 24GA. GATE FRAME AND LATCH TOP VIEW

LATCH TO GATE FRAME ELEVATION

CANE BOLTS TO GATE FRAME

ELEVATION
4"X 4" TUBE STEEL POST
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE -
DRILL .5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET

FOR THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.
4" x 1.25" WIDE X .125" THICK

CORNED GUSSET PLATE - DRILL
.5" DIA HOLE IN GUSSET FOR

THREADED TIE-ROD TO
STABILIZE THE FRAME.

AEP SPAN HR-36 METAL
SIDING- 24GA.
4" x 4" STEEL ANGLE FRAME

DOOR FRAME WELDED

TOGETHER AT CORNERS
3/8" THREADED ROD FROM

CORNER TO OPPOSITE

CORNER FASTENED WITH

WASHER AND NUT TO
GUSSET

GUSSET AND TIE ROD

GATE AT POST
SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"

VACUUM PRODUCER

ROOF TO CMU WALL CONNECTION

7.5" X 7.5" X 1/2" EMBED PLATE

METAL DECKING
#4 VERT @24" O.C. CTRD IN WALL
8"x8"x16" CMU WALL. INTERIOR

FINISH TO BE SMOOTH,

CLEANABLE AND LIGHT IN

COLOR PER HEALTH
DEPARTMENT.

HSS BEAM

HSS STEEL POST
3 16" #4 DOWELS - 12" LONG BY 2.5" "L"
3 16"
3 16"
SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"

CMU WALL
2'-0" 3'-0"
2 #4 CONT. TOP TWO COURSES
STONETRANSITIONS 9"X20"

EASED EDGE PEAKED
2 1/2" CONCRETE CAP.

MATERIAL SPAECIFICATIONS:

MASONRY UNITS: ASTM C90 (1,900 PSI)
MORTAR: ASTM C270 TYPE S (1,800 PSI)
GROUT: ASTM C476 (2,000 PSI)
CONCRETE: 2500 PSI

TOP OF FOOTING
#5 VERT @32" O.C. CTRD IN WALL
2 #4 CONT.
#5 CONT. TIE TO VERT. LAP 24"
MIN.

SPLITFACE 8"x8"x16" CMU WALL.

INTERIOR FINISH TO BE SMOOTH,
CLEANABLE 7'-4" MAX.
#5 HORIZ. @16" O.C. 3'-6"
TOP OF CONC. SLAB
A200

OVERALL

FLOOR PLAN

OVERALL CAR WASH FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 3/16"= 1'-0"
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
20 11'-0" 7'-4" 12'-7 1/8" 10'-10" 7'-10" 73'-1" 12'-0" 7'-4" 26'-4" 23'-4 7/8" 9625'-0"
142'-0" 2'-0" 24'-8" 10'-8" 9'-9" 20'-5" 45'-1"
20'-0" 10'-0" 82'-4 1/2" 1816'-0" 26'-8 1/2"
112'-5" 45'-7 1/2"
158'-0" 24'-8" 10'-8" 9'-9" 20'-5" 45'-0 7/8"

CAR WASH TUNNEL
OFFICE
SALES

BREAK ROOM
RESTROOM 02 EQUIPMENT ROOM ELECTRICAL
RESTROOM 01

DOG WASH

FIRE CONTROL
ROOM

PC EXHIBIT D
A201

FLOOR PLAN

CAR WASH FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 3/16"= 1'-0"
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
20 MATCH LINE MATCH LINE MATCH LINE
1'-8"
6'-4" 10'-4" 5'-11" 2'-0" 4'-7" 1'-3"
10'-10"
7'-10" 4'-1" 3'-4" 3'-11" 6'-4"
18'-6" 12'-6" 60'-3" 2'-0" 21'-4" 2'-0" 10'-8" 25'-4" 9'-1" 45'-1" 7'-6" 10'-0" 15'-10" 2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 58'-10"
12'-1"
13'-0" 3'-4" 3'-4" 4'-0" 3'-10" 2'-2" 3'-4" 1'-4" 9'-0 3/4" 9'-1" 27'-8" 3'-4"
15'-8" 1'-6"

CAR WASH TUNNEL

ROOM TITLE
OFFICE
SALES
STORAGE RESTROOM 01
2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 11'-2" 2'-10" 3'-11" 1'-6"

FIRE CONTROL
ROOM
A202

FLOOR PLAN

CAR WASH FLOOR PLAN
SCALE: 3/16"= 1'-0"
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
20 MATCH LINE MATCH LINE MATCH LINE
15'-8" 10'-11"
3'-10" 3'-4" 19'-6" 7'-6"
26'-8" 1'-11 1/2" 8'-0" 12'-0" 5'-4" 2'-0" 2'-8" 3'-4" 4'-8" 25'-4" 10'-8" 7'-6"
7'-4"
405'-4" 1321'-6" 298'-8" 213'-4" 256'-0"
12'-0" 36'-0"
27'-0"
3'-4" 9'-8" 2'-0" 4'-1" 20'-7"

EQUIPMENT ROOM

CAR WASH TUNNEL

ELECTRICAL ROOM
RESTROOM 02

DOG WASH

FIRE CONTROL ROOM
1100
A302

CAR WASH

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
18 20

KEY NOTES
1 2
3 4
5 6

SIGNAGE BY OWNER

HOLLOW CORE METAL DOOR

ROOF TRIM

ACM PANEL

STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING

FOAM PARAPET - PAINTED

WALL LIGHT BY OWNER

DRIVE-THRU WINDOW

NOT USED
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 THREE COAT STUCCO SYSTEM OVER WATER

RESISTANT BARRIER
STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM; DARK BRONZE ANODIZED, 2"x4.5" CENTER GLAZING SYSTEM; WITH 1" CLEAR DUAL GLAZING
STREET ADDRESS, 12" HIGH LETTERS, 1 1/2" STROKE, BLACK, BACKGROUND COLOR TO

MATCH TRIM COLOR, WALL WASH ILLUMINATION
6"X16" PRIMED & PAINTED GALV. LOUVERED VENT W/ SCREEN (TYP. OF 4), SEE DETAIL 13, 14, AND 15 ON SHEET A803.

COLOR LEGEND

CAR WASH EAST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0"

CAR WASH SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0"
+0'-0"
+17'-0" A.F.F.
+12'-6" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET

TOP OF OVERHANG

FINISH FLOOR

FINISH GRADE
-0'-6" B.F.F.
+10'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF REVEAL
+3'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF WAINSCOT
+7'-2" A.F.F.

TOP OF METAL DOOR
+30'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER PARAPET
+38'-11" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER
+20'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET BEYOND
C
D
A
B
AEP SPAN METALS- "MIDNIGHT BRONZE"
E DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6361- "BABY SEAL"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE5353- "GOLDEN CREST"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6360- "FOIL"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6358- "VAPOR"
F DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6364- "CAVERNOUS"
G ALPOLIC METAL PANELS- "YLW YELLOW"
1 D B
1 B D
E F
F C B 1
6 G
1 B C
G 6
5 F

ROLL UP DOOR

NOT USED
4 E
2 G 6
-0'-6" B.F.F.

FINISH GRADE
+10'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF REVEAL/CAR WASH OPENING
+12'-6" A.F.F.

TOP OF OVERHANG
+17'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET
+30'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER PARAPET
+0'-0"

FINISH FLOOR
+38'-11" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER
+3'-4 A.F.F."

TOP OF WAINSCOT
1 B C F
7 A
3 F B E
16 CAR WASH CANOPY
16 B
7 A
14 E
5 F
+15'-9" A.F.F.

TOP OF RIDGE
H EL DORADO STONE: WAISCOT SILL-GREY SKY
J EL DORADO STONE: STAKED STONE: SILVER LINING
H J
1 1
C
1 F
1 F
14 E
14 E
4 E
1 1 1
H J
3 17 "FIRE CONTROL ROOM". 3" HIGH LETTERS MIN. W/ 1/2" STROKE AND SHALL BE RED ON

WHITE REFLECTIVE BACKGROUND
17 7
A 8
B
F
8 B
F
12 12
8 12
8 12
8 12
8 12
8 12
8 PC EXHIBIT E
A301

CAR WASH

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
18 20

KEY NOTES
1 2
3 4
5 6

SIGNAGE BY OWNER

HOLLOW CORE METAL DOOR

ROOF TRIM

ACM PANEL

STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING

FOAM PARAPET - PAINTED

WALL LIGHT- WEDGE DOWN LIGHT

DRIVE-THRU WINDOW

NOT USED
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 THREE COAT STUCCO SYSTEM OVER WATER

RESISTANT BARRIER
STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM; DARK BRONZE ANODIZED, 2"x4.5" CENTER GLAZING SYSTEM; WITH 1" CLEAR DUAL GLAZING
STREET ADDRESS, 12" HIGH LETTERS, 1 1/2" STROKE, BLACK, BACKGROUND COLOR TO

MATCH TRIM COLOR, WALL WASH ILLUMINATION
24"X66" PRIMED & PAINTED GALV. LOUVERED VENT W/ SCREEN (TYP. OF 4), SEE DETAIL 13, 14, AND 15 ON SHEET A803.

COLOR LEGEND

CAR WASH WEST ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0"

CAR WASH NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/8"= 1'-0"
+0'-0"
+17'-0" A.F.F.
+12'-6" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET

TOP OF OVERHANG

FINISH FLOOR

FINISH GRADE
-0'-6" B.F.F.
+10'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF REVEAL
+3'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF WAINSCOT
+7'-2" A.F.F.

TOP OF METAL DOOR
+30'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER PARAPET
+38'-11" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER
+20'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET BEYOND
C
D
A
B
AEP SPAN METALS- "MIDNIGHT BRONZE"
E
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE5353- "GOLDEN CREST"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6360- "FOIL"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6358- "VAPOR"
F DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6364- "CAVERNOUS"
G ALPOLIC METAL PANELS- "YLW YELLOW"
1 C
D
B
E
F
1 B D
E F
F C B 1
6 G
1 B C F
G 6
7 A
4 D
8 B
F
8 B
F
5 B

NOT USED

NOT USED
4 D
13 D
2 6 G
10 2
-0'-6" B.F.F.

FINISH GRADE
+10'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF REVEAL/CAR WASH OPENING
+12'-6" A.F.F.

TOP OF OVERHANG
+17'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET
+30'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER PARAPET
+0'-0"

FINISH FLOOR
+38'-11" A.F.F.

TOP OF TOWER
+3'-4 A.F.F."

TOP OF WAINSCOT
F C B 1
7 A
2 1
C
D
B
F
16 CAR WASH CANOPY
16 B
7 A

METAL ROOF PANELS
H EL DORADO STONE: WAISCOT SILL-GREY SKY
J EL DORADO STONE: STAKED STONE: SILVER LINING
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT DE6361- "BABY SEAL"

H J E F
1 1
9 9
13 D

COLOR LEGEND

KEY NOTES
1 2
3 4
5 STEEL COLUMN

STEEL BEAM

VACUUM PIPES ETC

VACUUM HOSE

FIXED METAL TRASH CAN

UNDERSIDE OF SOLAR PANELS
6 7
A
B
LED LIGHT FIXTURE, LOW PROFILE W/ SENSOR- SEE DETAIL 14/A107 FOR

STYLE & DETAIL
B
VACUTECH HOSE COLOR: YELLOW
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT - DEA002 - "BLACK"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT- DEA118- "GILDED"
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
A304

VACUUM CANOPY

ELEVATIONS
18 VACUUM STATION NORTH ELEVATION (FROM DRIVEWAY)
19 VACUUM STATION SOUTH ELEVATION (FROM BUILDING SIDE)
4 VACUUM STATION EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION SIMILAR SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"
3" 12'-9" 12'-7"
151'-7"
12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 20'-0" 10'-5"
3" 20'-0" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 3"
151'-7"
SOLAR PANELS, TYP.
1 A
A
2 SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" 10'-6" 8'-8"
4'-11" 12'-7"
17'-6"
C 3
A 1
4 A
2 5 B
6 20
C
C 3 C 3
5 B
C 6 C 6
5 B 5 B
C 6
12'-7"
1 A 1 A
12'-7" 12'-7"
4 7 7 7
C 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
A
2 A
2 5 B
C 6
C 3
5 B
C 6
C 3
7 12'-9"

BUILDING SIDE DRIVEWAY SIDE
12'-0"

COLOR LEGEND

KEY NOTES
1 2
3 4
5 STEEL COLUMN

STEEL BEAM

VACUUM PIPES ETC

VACUUM HOSE

FIXED METAL TRASH CAN

UNDERSIDE OF SOLAR PANELS
6 7
A
B
LED LIGHT FIXTURE, LOW PROFILE W/ SENSOR- SEE DETAIL 14/A107 FOR

STYLE & DETAIL
B
VACUTECH HOSE COLOR: YELLOW
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT - DEA002 - "BLACK"
DUNN EDWARDS PAINT- DEA118- "GILDED"
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
A305

VACUUM CANOPY

ELEVATIONS
18 VACUUM STATION NORTH ELEVATION (FROM DRIVEWAY)
19 VACUUM STATION SOUTH ELEVATION (FROM STREET SIDE)
4 VACUUM STATION EAST ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION SIMILAR SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"
3" 12'-9" 12'-7"
100'-8"
12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 10'-5"
3" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 12'-7" 3"
100'-8"
SOLAR PANELS, TYP.
1 A
A
2 SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0"
SCALE: 1/4"= 1'-0" 10'-6" 8'-8"
12'-7" 4'-11"
17'-6"
3 C
1 A
4 A
2 B 5
6 20
C
C 3 C 3 C 3
5 B
C 6 C 6
C 6
5 B 5 B
C 6
12'-7" 12'-7"
1 A 1 A
12'-7" 12'-7"
4 7 7 7
C 3
3"
4 4 4 4 4
A
2 A
2 5 B
C 6
C 3
5 B
C 6
C 3
12'-9"

STREET SIDE DRIVEWAY

CMU WALL WITH STONE

VENEER ON EACH SIDE
AND TOP CAP. 3'-4"
A401
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23

CAR WASH - SITE CROSS SECTION A-A
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
A
+17'-0" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET

CAR WASH BUILDING

SECTIONS

CAR WASH TUNNEL
+3'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF WAINSCOT VENEER PROPERTY LINE
CONC. CURB LANDSCAPE AREA

ASPHALT PAVING

PROPERTY LINE

LANDSCAPE AREA

SIDE WALK
STREET
+2'-10" A.F.F.

TOP OF CMU BLOCK WAALL ASPHALT PAVING
+20'-4" A.F.F.

TOP OF PARAPET

PAY STATION

VACUUM CANOPY

VACUUM CANOPY
SALE
+11'-9" A.F.F.

TOP OF ROOF

ORLANDO AVE

ORLANDO AVE

LOUIS LANE

AUBURN BLVD

EXISTING BUILDING

DRIVEWAY

DRIVEWAY

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~

PLANTER

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK
SHED

SIDEWALK
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
GATE
GATE
GATE

12.5' PUE PER
23-PM-64
TR#5
5' SIDEWALK ESMT PER 594-OR-301

12.5' PUE PER
23-PM-64
42' R/W
42' R/W

INGRESS/EGRESS

RESTRICTED

INGRESS/EGRESS RESTRICTED

PARKING
NO

NOT AN EXIT

FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

EV CHARGER

EV CHARGER

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY
NO

PARKING
FF=169.80
FF=170.30
FG=167.40
FG=165.85
FG=167.10
FG=169.00
FG=167.50
S
I
OFFSITE IMPROVEMENT NOTES: ONSITE IMPROVEMENT NOTES:

C
C1
C
C1
A
C1
A
C1
BC1
BC1

CROSS-SECTION A - A

CROSS-SECTION B - B

CROSS-SECTION C - C
C
C1
C
C1
D
C1
D
C1

CROSS-SECTION D - D
T:\2022\2022-009 1100 Orlando Ave Roseville CA\Dwg\Preliminary\2022-009 Preliminary Grading Plan.dwg, 3/2/2023 2:02:09 PM

PC EXHIBIT F

ORLANDO AVE

ORLANDO AVE

LOUIS LANE

AUBURN BLVD

EXISTING BUILDING

DRIVEWAY

DRIVEWAY

PLANTER

PLANTER

PLANTER
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~
~NATURAL GROUND~

PLANTER

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK
SHED

SIDEWALK
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
~AC PAVEMENT~
GATE
GATE
GATE

12.5' PUE PER
23-PM-64
TR#5
5' SIDEWALK ESMT PER 594-OR-301

12.5' PUE PER
23-PM-64
42' R/W
42' R/W

INGRESS/EGRESS

RESTRICTED

INGRESS/EGRESS RESTRICTED

PARKING
NO

NOT AN EXIT

FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

EV CHARGER

EV CHARGER

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY
NO

PARKING
FF=169.80
FF=170.30
FG=167.40
FG=165.85
FG=167.10
FG=169.00
FG=167.50
S
I
STORM DRAIN NOTES:

WATER NOTES:

SEWER NOTES:

T:\2022\2022-009 1100 Orlando Ave Roseville CA\Dwg\Preliminary\2022-009 Preliminary Grading Plan.dwg, 3/2/2023 2:02:15 PM

PARKING
NO

PARKING
NO

EV CHARGER

EV CHARGER

NOT AN EXIT

FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

ORLANDO AVE

ORLANDO

AUBURN BLVD
AVENUE
ON RAMP 50% 50% 50% TREES BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT QTY Existing Palm / Relocated Palm Transplanted 3 Geijera parviflora / Australian Willow Low Water / WUCOLS 15 gal 13 Lagerstroemia indica `Muskogee` (Stnd) / Muskogee Crape Myrtle Low Water / WUCOLS 24" Box 11 Pistacia chinensis `Keith Davey` / Keith Davey Chinese Pistache Low Water / WUCOLS 15 gal3 Pyrus calleryana 'Aristocrat' / Aristocrat Callery Pear Low Water / WUCOLS 15 gal 13 SHRUBS BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE QTY Agapanthus orientalis `BLUE` / Blue` Lily of the Nile Medium Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 24 Callistemon viminalis `Little John` / Dwarf Bottlebrush Low Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 55 Dietes bicolor / Fortnight Lily Low Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 76 Muhlenbergia capillaris `Pink Cloud` / Pink Muhly Low Water / WUCOLS 1 gal 87 Myrtus communis `Compacta` / Dwarf Myrtle Low Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 24 Nandina domestica 'Compacta' / Dwarf Heavenly Bamboo Low Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 66 Pennisetum setaceum `Rubrum` / Purple Fountain Grass Low Water / WUCOLS 1 gal 100 VINE/ESPALIER BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE QTY Ficus pumila / Creeping Fig Medium Water / WUCOLS 5 gal 5 GROUND COVERS BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT QTY Hypericum calycinum `Fiesta` / St. John`s Wort Low Water / WUCOLS Spaced at 36" o.c. 1 gal 269 Juniperus horizontalis `Blue Rug` / Blue Rug JuniperLow Water / WUCOLS Spaced at 36" o.c. 1 gal 413 Mahonia repens / Creeping MahoniaLow Water / WUCOLS Spaced at 36" o.c. 1 gal 57 Verbena peruviana 'Little Pinkie' / Little Pinkie VerbenaLow Water / WUCOLS Spaced at 18" o.c. 1 gal 107 BIOSWALE BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT QTY `Bio Filtration' Sod / By Delta Bluegrass-Phone (800-637-8873 Medium Water / WUCOLS sod 2,567 sf PLANT SCHEDULE A
E IC L
SN
DE

T TCEI HCR

ANDSCAP
L
E REN. 11-30-23 No. 3941
NW RO
B
PE
R
RY
L ORAC 08-16-22 530 823 2621 CAROL PERRY BROWN
P E R R Y D E S I G N Irrigation Design Landscape Architecture [email protected] RLA 3941 CID 002624 1100 Olando Avenue PRELIMINARY PLANTING LP-1
PLAN
BE SHINE CAR WASH NOTES: 1.2. 3. 4. 5. Landscape shall be designed per City of Roseville & Placer County landscape design requirements and California MWELO. No groundcover or shrubs are to be planted within 3' of any tree trunk. A landscape soils test shall be analyzed by a soils testing laboratory. Soils shall be amended per soil analysis report recommendations prior to Landscape Installation. This project shall be irrigated by an automatic irrigation system consisting of subsurface drip for shrubs and groundcover, and deep watering bubblers for all trees all connected to a smart controller. All planter areas shall receive a three-inch (3") mulch of red fir walk-on bark. All groundcover areas shall receive a two-inch (2") layer of bark mulch. SCALE: 1" = 20'-0"
Roseville, CA.

Total Parking Shade Provided: 1,443 Sf (54%) Total Parking Area Shade Required: 1,322 Sf (50%) PARKING SHADE CALCULATIONS (3) Pistachia chenensis 50% at 481 sf = 1,443 sf Total Parking Area: 2,645 Sf EVERGREEN SCREENING ACCENT FLOWERING TREE PARKING SHADE TREE BIO-SWALE GRASS BIO-SWALE GRASS BIO-SWALE GRASS 1" = 20'-0" August 22, 2022 Carol B. EXISTING TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELM TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING SYCAMORE TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING SYCAMORE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING PALM TREE TO RETAIN AND PROTECT BIO-SWALE GRASS EXISTING SYCAMORE TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING SYCAMORES TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELM TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELM TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELM TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELM TREE RETAIN & PROTECT EXISTING ELMS TREE RETAIN & PROTECT PC EXHIBIT G ORDINANCE NO.

ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 5428 OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

CHANGING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED

WITHIN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS:

SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Roseville has reviewed the findings of the Planning Commission regarding approval of the rezone specified herein, and make the following findings pursuant to Section 19.86.050 of the Zoning Ordinance:

1. The rezone is in conformance with the public interest, health, safety, or welfare of the City; and

2. The rezone is consistent with the objectives, policies, programs, and land use designations of the City of the Roseville General Plan.

SECTION 2. Section 19.06.020 of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Roseville, Ordinance No. 5428, is amended to change the zoning of that portion of certain real property located on Parcel 175 of the Infill area in the City of Roseville, as shown and so designated in Exhibit “A”, attached and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby rezoned from Neighborhood Commercial (NC) to Community Commercial (CC).

SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective at the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of adoption.

SECTION 4. 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

PARKING NO PARKING NO

EV CHARGER EV CHARGER
Large SUV K12
Large SUV K12 Large SUV K12
Large SUV K12

NOT AN EXIT FIRE EMERGENCY EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER

DO NOT ENTER EXIT ONLY

DO NOT ENTER
20 SITE PLAN A104

ZONING MAP
SCALE: 1" = 50'-0"

PROJECT DATA
SHEET NUMBER:

SHEET CONTENTS:

PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT DATE:

CONSULTANTS:

Sacramento, CA 95827
PH:(916) 455-6500 FAX:(916) 455-8100
3090 Fite Circle, #104
REVISIONS:
22-005 4-12-2022
K12 Architects, Inc
DEVELOPER:

CONTRACTOR:

PROJECT:

Bee Shine
Car Wash
PROFESSIONAL SEALS:
1100 ORLANDO AVE
ROSEVILLE, CA 95661

NEW CAR WASH
PLANNING COMMENTS 1/26/23
C
A
B

PROJECT SITE- ZONE NC , REZONING TO CC

ZONE CC

ZONE RI- NOT IN ROSEVILLE
NC
NC
NC
CC
R1
R1
R1

B ZONE CC
NC
CC
CC
NC to CC

CC EXHIBIT A