Roseville City Council
October 7, 2026

Ascent Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.11-15 Phase 1 would add 116 acres of impervious surfaces to the project site, which would increase runoff and could increase the potential for flooding. In addition, the area south of Pleasant Grove Creek within the project site is designated as 100-year floodplain for Pleasant Grove Creek and the northwest corner of the south parcel is designated as 500-year floodplain for Pleasant Grove Creek (Figure 3.11-1). To develop this portion of the project site, a portion of the historically flooded area would need to be removed from the FEMA flood zone and Roseville’s Regulatory Floodplain. Following City approval, grading plans and construction documents would be prepared, and the City would review and consider for approval the improvements. After the improvements have been constructed, FEMA would remove the northern portion of the proposed development area from the FEMA flood zone to reflect the added fill and raising that portion of the site.

HDR prepared a technical memorandum evaluating how the proposed fill and grading would affect flood conditions along Pleasant Grove Creek (HDR 2025). According to FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study for Placer County, the area proposed for fill lies within the floodway fringe—the outer edge of the floodplain where limited development is allowed. FEMA’s regulations permit development in this fringe area as long as it does not cause more than a one-foot increase in the height of the 100-year flood (also known as the base flood). However, the City requires a ‘no rise’ analysis for all flood plain improvements. The ‘no rise’ analysis will be performed as a part of the project design phase. Based on the shallow depth and backwater character of the proposed fill area, the analysis is expected to conclude that project implementation would have no effect on the height of a 100-year flood.

While the project would alter existing drainage patterns by adding fill, it would not be expected to result in substantial flooding on or off the site. Stormwater would be managed on-site by a series of stormwater detention basins, which are shown in Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, “Project Description.” Each on-site stormwater detention basin would be designed to accommodate on-site runoff generated at the site and manage it in a manner that is consistent with applicable regulations and historic discharge levels. The design would comply with the West Placer Stormwater Quality Manual.

Drainage facilities would be required to be designed and constructed in conformance with the City Improvement Standards, PCFCWCD’s Stormwater Management Manual, and other permit criteria applicable at the time of development. These requirements include ensuring project operations are protected from flooding up to the 100- year storm event. Consistent with NPDES requirements and City standard, the drainage system’s design (as shown in Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, “Project Description”) would be required to include sufficient capacity to accommodate stormwater flows generated from the site’s developed uses.

The project includes the construction of eight on-site stormwater basins covering approximately six acres that would capture and retain peak stormwater flows during large storm events. Nearly all stormwater runoff from the developed portion of the site would be routed into these basins. The stormwater would be gradually discharged following storm events, thus ensuring the site’s current peak stormwater discharge levels would not be exceeded following development. Additionally, the basins would be designed with sufficient capacity to retain a portion of the storm water for fire suppression uses (as shown in Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, “Project Description”).

As stated above, depending on timing of construction, the project could also utilize the planned, regional stormwater retention facility (the Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project) in place of on-site stormwater basins to achieve its stormwater capture requirements. The regional retention facility would be located within the Pleasant Grove watershed at the City’s Reason Farms site located immediately east of the project site. This regional stormwater retention facility is being designed to capture increased volumetric runoff from local developments within the watershed. The Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project is an ongoing, unapproved project in the City’s Capital Improvement Program. As of May 31, 2025, the City has spent $14.8 million purchasing land, conducting environmental work, preparing alternative designs, and preparing studies regarding expected operations and maintenance costs (Anderson, pers. comm., 2025). As of June 2025, field studies including geotechnical, biological, cultural, and land survey are 80 percent complete, and the alternative designs are approximately 30 percent complete. The Notice of Preparation (SCH #2024100114) for the retention project was filed in October 2024, and a Draft EIR is expected to be released to the public in fall 2026. The City intends to construct the Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project in the next five years (Anderson, pers. comm., 2025).

Hydrology and Water Quality Ascent
City of Roseville

3.11-16 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Given these factors, although implementation of Phase 1 would alter the drainage pattern of the project site, it would not result in substantial flooding, additional sources of polluted runoff, or the exceedance of stormwater drainage system capacities. All proposed stormwater basins and utility hookups would occur within the disturbance area of the project site and the basins would capture peak stormwater runoff and urban pollutants. If the project participates in the Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project, it similarly would not result in substantial flooding, additional sources of polluted runoff, or the exceedance of stormwater drainage system capacities. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Phase 2
Phase 2 would develop an additional 34 acres of the project site, which could increase runoff and could increase the potential for flooding. However, the retention basins proposed would be able to retain the potential runoff from construction of Phase 2. Phase 2 construction and operation would also be required to comply with City Improvement Standards, the City’s Stormwater Quality Design Manual, and PCFCWCD’s Stormwater Management Manual that require stormwater drainage facilities be designed with adequate capacity for stormwater flows from the project site. As described for Phase 1, the project would be required to obtain a Letter of Map Revision from FEMA and to remove a portion of the project site out of the flood zone before that area can be developed. Additionally, the runoff would be managed by on-site stormwater retention basins and through participation in the Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project to the east, depending on the implementation schedule for that project, which would be required to comply with West Placer Stormwater Quality Manual. With implementation of these measures, this impact would be less than significant for Phase 2.

As discussed for Phase 1, Phase 2 of the project would include an additional 34 acres to be developed on the 243- acre project site and an additional 122,000 square foot building at the RRTO Facility, which would increase runoff and could increase the potential for flooding. The above-mentioned stormwater detention basins and flood zone area removal described for Phase 1 are designed to accommodate the additional building area that would be developed as part of Phase 2 and would remain in compliance with the City Improvement Standards, PCFCWCD’s Stormwater Management Manual, grading permit criteria, and would provide flood protection up to the 100-year storm event. As described for Phase 1, the project would be required to obtain a LOMR from FEMA and to remove a portion of the project site out of the flood zone before that area can be developed.

Runoff from the potential future compost facility would be managed by on-site stormwater retention basins, as shown in Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, “Project Description.” Contact water from the compost facility would be retained, managed in accordance with regulatory requirements (e.g., WDR Order WQ-2020-0012-DWQ pertaining to composting), and reused in the composting process to the maximum extent possible. These basins for the Potential Future Organics Processing Facility would be completed during Phase 2, while the stormwater basins for the RRTO facility would likely be completed during Phase 1. As stated above, depending on timing of construction, the remainder of the project site could also utilize the planned, regional stormwater retention facility, the Pleasant Grove Stormwater Retention Basin Project, which would be located within the Pleasant Grove watershed, at the City’s Reason Farms site located immediately east of the project site and has been designed to accommodate the City’s stormwater needs, including stormwater from the project site.

For the same reasons described for Phase 1, implementation of Phase 2 would not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the project site such that substantial flooding, additional sources of polluted runoff, or exceedance of stormwater drainage system capacities would occur. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-1

3.12 NOISE
This section includes a summary of applicable regulations related to noise and vibration, a description of ambient noise conditions, and an analysis of potential short-term construction and long-term operational source impacts associated with the proposed Roseville Environmental Utilities (EU) Operations Center (project). Mitigation measures are recommended as necessary to reduce significant noise impacts. Additional data are provided in Appendix D.

Several comment letters regarding noise were received in response to the notice of preparation (see Appendix A).

Placer County requested that the City consider potential noise impacts to County properties to demonstrate that development potential and future uses on adjacent and nearby unincorporated parcels are not compromised.

Specifically, the County requested that the EIR evaluate potential noise impacts to existing and potential surrounding sensitive receptors and that noise impacts be evaluated in accordance with Placer County’s noise ordinance given the proximity to unincorporated County property. In addition, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife requested that the EIR evaluate potential indirect effects, including noise, related to project activities occurring near natural areas and consider avoidance and minimization measures to avoid impacts to nesting birds and their nests from project-related noise. Finally, the Placer Conservation Authority requested that the EIR address potential indirect effects, such as noise on nesting birds and foraging habitat that could be associated with converting the project site from semi-natural habitat into urban developed land uses. These issues are addressed in this section, Section 3.5, “Biological Resources,” and Chapter 4, “Cumulative Impacts.”

3.12.1 Regulatory Setting

COMMON NOISE DESCRIPTORS
Before discussing the regulatory and environmental setting, relevant fundamental definitions of commonly used noise terms are provided in this section for context. Various noise descriptors have been developed to describe timevarying noise levels. The following are the noise descriptors used throughout this section.

A-Weighted Decibels (dBA): Noise levels are commonly reported in decibels using the A-weighting decibel scale (dBA). The A-weighting network approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to most ordinary sounds. When people make judgments of the relative loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgment correlates well with the A-scale sound levels of those sounds. Refer below to Acoustic Fundamentals for further clarification.

Equivalent Continuous Sound Level (Leq): Leq represents an average sound energy occurring over a specified period.

Leq is the steady-state sound level containing the same acoustical energy as the time-varying sound level that occurs during the same period (Caltrans 2013: 2-48). For instance, the 1-hour equivalent sound level, also referred to as the hourly Leq, is the energy average of sound levels occurring over a 1-hour period and is the basis for noise abatement criteria used by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) (Caltrans 2013: 2-47; FTA 2018).

Maximum Sound Level (Lmax): Lmax is the highest instantaneous sound level measured during a specified period (Caltrans 2013: 2-48; FTA 2018).

Day-Night Level (Ldn): Ldn is the energy average of A-weighted sound levels occurring over 24 hours, with a 10-decibel (dB) “penalty” applied to sound levels occurring during nighttime hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (Caltrans 2013: 2-48; FTA 2018).

Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): CNEL is the energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring over 24 hours, with a 10-dB penalty applied to sound levels occurring during the nighttime hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. and a 5-dB penalty applied to the sound levels occurring during evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. (Caltrans 2013: 2-48).

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-2 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Vibration Decibels (VdB): VdB is the vibration velocity level on the decibel scale (FTA 2018: Table 5-1).

Peak Particle Velocity (PPV): PPV is the peak signal value of an oscillating vibration waveform. Usually expressed in inches/second (FTA 2018: Table 5-1).

Percentile-Exceeded Sound Level (LX): LX represents the sound level exceeded for a given percentage of a specified period (e.g., L10 is the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the time, and L90 is the sound level exceeded 90 percent of the time) (Caltrans 2013: 2-16).

FEDERAL
Federal Transit Administration
FTA has established guidelines for maximum-acceptable vibration criteria for various land use types to address the human response to ground vibration. These guidelines are presented in Table 3.12-1. FTA has also established construction vibration damage criteria, as shown in Table 3.12-2.

Table 3.12-1 Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment Land Use Category
Frequent Events1
GVB Impact Levels
(VdB, 1 microinch/second)
Occasional Events2
GVB Impact Levels
(VdB, 1 microinch/second)
Infrequent Events3
GVB Impact Levels
(VdB, 1 microinch/second)
Category 1: Buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations. 65 4 65 4 65 4 Category 2: Residences and buildings where people normally sleep. 72 75 80 Category 3: Institutional land uses with primarily daytime uses. 75 78 83 Notes: GVB = ground-borne vibration; VdB, 1 micro-inch/second = vibration decibels referenced to 1 micro-inch per second and based on the root mean square velocity amplitude.
1 “Frequent Events” is defined as more than 70 vibration events of the same source per day. 2 “Occasional Events” is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. 3 “Infrequent Events” is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same source per day. 4 This criterion is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment, such as optical microscopes. Vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research would require detailed evaluation to define acceptable vibration levels.

Source: FTA 2018.

Table 3.12-2 Federal Transit Administration Construction Vibration Damage Criteria Land Use Category PPV (in/sec)
Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5
Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3
Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2
Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Notes: PPV = peak particle velocity, in/sec = inches per second.

Source: FTA 2018: Table 7-5.

STATE
At the state level, the State of California establishes general guidance and regulatory frameworks related to noise and vibration through various codes and publications, including but not limited to the California Building Code transmission standards, the California General Plan Guidelines, and Caltrans’ Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. While these documents provide overarching guidance, the analysis in this document primarily relies on noise and vibration standards adopted at the local level, as local jurisdictions are typically responsible for establishing and enforcing specific noise ordinances and land use compatibility standards.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-3 LOCAL
City of Roseville 2035 General Plan
The Noise Element in the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan contains policies and implementation measures to achieve the City’s goals of protecting Roseville residents from the harmful and annoying effects of exposure to excessive noise. It establishes separate acceptable noise level criteria for land uses affected by fixed or transportationrelated noise sources (City of Roseville 2020).

The following policies would apply to the project:
 Policy N1.1: The City’s exterior noise compatibility standards for uses affected by transportation noise sources are included as Table IX-1 of the General Plan 2035 (Table 3.12-3 below). Exterior noise levels shall be mitigated to the extent feasible using site planning, building orientation, and/or other construction techniques or design features. Noise barriers should only be used after other feasible noise reduction strategies are exhausted, and not where they would interrupt existing or future community pedestrian or bicycle connectivity.  Policy N1.2: The City’s interior noise compatibility standards for uses affected by transportation noise sources are 45 dBA Ldn for noise-sensitive uses such as residences, lodging, hospitals, assisted living facilities, and other places where people normally sleep. For noise-sensitive uses where people do not sleep, such as offices, schools, and uses with similar noise sensitivity, noise levels should be no greater than 45 dBA Leq. Proposed projects should incorporate noise reduction strategies, if necessary, to achieve these interior noise levels.  Policy N1.3: The City’s exterior noise compatibility standards for uses affected by non-transportation-related noise are defined within the City’s Noise Ordinance and should be applied consistently with the Noise Ordinance.  Policy N1.4: The City will require new transportation improvement projects to be designed to limit noise impacts consistent with the standards contained in Table IX-1 (Table 3.12-3 below) of the General Plan 2035, to the extent feasible, using appropriate attenuation techniques.
 Policy N1.5: If existing noise levels exceed the noise compatibility standards in Table IX-1 (Table 3.12-3) or Policy N1.2 of the General Plan 2035, then feasible methods of reducing noise to levels consistent with standards should be considered, but are not required. However, if existing noise levels exceed noise compatibility standards and a project results in a significant increase in noise (as defined below), then feasible methods of reducing noise to avoid a significant noise increase should be applied. In no case should a project result in a Clearly Unacceptable noise level according to Table IX-1 of the Noise Element (Table 3.12-3 below).  Where existing exterior noise is less than 60 dBA, a ≥ 5 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is between 60 and 65 dBA, a ≥ 3 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is greater than 65 dBA, a ≥ 1.5 dB increase in noise is significant.  Policy N1.9: Construction-related noise that is consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance is exempt from the noise standards outlined in this Element.

Table 3.12-3 Exterior Noise Compatibility Standards for Uses Affected by Transportation Noise Land Use Category
Normally Acceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Conditionally
Acceptable Community
Noise Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally Unacceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Clearly Unacceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Residential 50-60 60-65 65-70 70-80
Lodging-Motels, Hotels 50-65 65-70 70-75 75-80
Schools, Libraries, Places of Worship,
Hospitals, Assisted Living 50-65 65-70 70-75 75-80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50-70 NA 70-80

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-4 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Land Use Category
Normally Acceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Conditionally
Acceptable Community
Noise Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally Unacceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Clearly Unacceptable
Community Noise
Exposure
(Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50-70 NA 70-80 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water
Recreation, Cemeteries 50-70 NA 70-75 75-80
Office Buildings 50-65 65-70 70-75 75-80
Notes: CNEL = Community Equivalent Noise Level; dBA = A-weighted decibel; Ldn = day-night average noise level.

Source: City of Roseville 2020.

City of Roseville Municipal Code
The City of Roseville has a Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.24 of the City Code) designed to prohibit unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sound levels from all sources. Key provisions of the ordinance that may apply to the project include:
 Section 9.24.030 provides exemptions for certain activities, including but not limited to: sound sources typically associated with residential uses (e.g., children at play, air conditioning and similar equipment, but not including barking dogs); property maintenance activities between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; and private construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday-Friday, and between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays, provided that all construction equipment is fitted with factory installed muffling devices and maintained in good working order (City of Roseville 2025).  Section 9.24.100 establishes specific sound level standards by which exposure of sensitive receptors to noise is regulated for area-wide sources, including fixed sources, non-transportation sources, and amplified music when measured at the property line of any affected sensitive receptor. [Noise standards are recreated in Table 3.12-4.] Table 3.12-4 Sound Level Standards (for Non-Transportation or Fixed Sound Sources) Sound Level Descriptors Daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) Nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) Hourly Leq, dBA 50 45
Maximum Level, dBA 70 65
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; Leq = Equivalent continuous sound level.

A Each of the sound level standards specified in Table 3.12-4 shall be reduced by five dB 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 three dB.

B If the intruding sound source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient sound level can be measured, the sound level measured while the source is in operation shall be compared directly to the sound level standards of Table 3.12-4.

Source: City of Roseville 2025.

3.12.2 Environmental Setting

ACOUSTIC FUNDAMENTALS
Before discussing the project's noise setting, background information about sound, noise, and vibration is provided for context.

Sound, Noise, and Acoustics
Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a liquid or gaseous medium (e.g., air) to a human ear. Noise is a loud, unexpected, annoying, or unwanted sound.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-5 In the science of acoustics, the fundamental model consists of a sound (or noise) source, a receiver, and the propagation path between the two. The loudness of the noise source and obstructions or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path to the receiver determine the sound level and characteristics of the noise the receiver perceives. The field of acoustics deals primarily with the propagation and control of sound.

Frequency
Continuous sound can be described by frequency (pitch) and amplitude (loudness). A low-frequency sound is perceived as low in pitch. Frequency is expressed in terms of cycles per second, or hertz (Hz) (e.g., a frequency of 250 cycles per second is referred to as 250 Hz). High frequencies are sometimes more conveniently expressed in kilohertz, or thousands of hertz. Humans generally have an audible frequency range between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz.

Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
The amplitude of pressure waves generated by a sound source determines the loudness of that source. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in micro-Pascals (mPa). One mPa is approximately one hundred billionth (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure amplitudes for different noise environments can range from less than 100 to 100,000,000 mPa. Because of this extensive range of values, sound is rarely expressed in terms of mPa. Instead, a logarithmic scale is used to describe sound pressure level (SPL) in decibels.

Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are logarithmic units, SPLs cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Under the decibel scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3-dB increase. In other words, when two identical sources produce sound of the same loudness simultaneously, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than if only one of the sound sources were producing sound under the same conditions. For example, if one idling truck generates an SPL of 70 dB, two trucks idling simultaneously would not produce 140 dB; instead, they would combine to produce 73 dB. Under the decibel scale, three noise sources of equal loudness together produce a sound level approximately 5 dB louder than one source.

A-Weighted Decibels
The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound substantially affect the human response to that sound. Although the intensity (energy per unit area) of the sound is a purely physical quantity, the loudness or human response is determined by the characteristics of the human ear.

Human hearing is limited in the range of audible frequencies and in how it perceives the SPL. People are generally most sensitive to the frequency range of 1,000–8,000 Hz and perceive sounds within this range better than sounds of the same amplitude with frequencies outside this range. To approximate the human ear's response, sound levels of individual frequency bands are weighted, depending on the human sensitivity to those frequencies. Then, an “Aweighted” sound level (expressed in units of A-weighted decibels) can be computed based on this information.

The A-weighting network approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to most ordinary sounds. When people make judgments of the relative loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgment correlates well with the A-scale sound levels of those sounds. Thus, noise levels are typically reported in terms of A-weighted decibels. Unless otherwise noted, all sound levels discussed in this section are expressed in A-weighted decibels. Table 3.12-5 describes typical A-weighted noise levels for various noise sources.

Table 3.12-5 Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities — 110 — Rock band
Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet — 100 —
Gas lawn mower at 3 feet — 90 —
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 miles per hour — 80 — Food blender at 3 feet, Garbage disposal at 3 feet Noisy urban area, daytime, Gas lawn mower at 100 feet — 70 — Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet, Normal speech at 3 feet

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-6 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities Commercial area, Heavy traffic at 300 feet — 60 —
Quiet urban daytime — 50 — Large business office, Dishwasher next room Quiet urban nighttime — 40 — Theater, large conference room (background) Quiet suburban nighttime — 30 — Library, Bedroom at night Quiet rural nighttime — 20 —
— 10 — Broadcast/recording studio
Lowest threshold of human hearing — 0 — Lowest threshold of human hearing Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel.

Source: Caltrans 2013: Table 2-5.

Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
The doubling of sound energy results in a 3-dB increase in the sound level. However, given a sound level change measured with precise instrumentation, the subjective human perception of a doubling of loudness will usually be different from what is measured.

Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear can discern 1-dB changes in sound levels when exposed to steady, single-frequency (“pure-tone”) signals in the mid-frequency (1,000–8,000 Hz) range. In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 and 5,000 Hz and perceives higher and lower frequency sounds of the same magnitude with less intensity (Caltrans 2013: 2-18). In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1–2 dB are generally not perceptible. However, it is widely accepted that people can begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments. Further, a 5-dB increase is generally perceived as distinctly noticeable, and a 10-dB increase is usually perceived as a doubling of loudness (Caltrans 2013).

Therefore, a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) that would result in a 3-dB increase in sound would generally be perceived as barely detectable.

Vibration
Vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object with respect to a given reference point. Vibration sources include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) and those introduced by human activity (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., operating factory machinery) or transient (e.g., explosions). Vibration levels can be depicted in terms of amplitude and frequency, relative to displacement, velocity, or acceleration.

Vibration amplitudes are commonly expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root-mean-square (RMS) vibration velocity. PPV and RMS vibration velocity are generally described in inches per second (in/sec) or millimeters per second. PPV is the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is typically used in monitoring transient and impact vibration and has been found to correlate well with the stresses experienced by buildings (FTA 2018: 110; Caltrans 2020: 6).

Although PPV is appropriate for evaluating the potential for building damage, it is not always suitable for evaluating human response. It takes some time for the human body to respond to vibration signals. In a sense, the human body responds to average vibration amplitude. The RMS of a signal is the average of the squared amplitude of the signal, typically calculated over a 1-second period. As with airborne sound, the RMS velocity is often expressed in decibel notation as VdB, which serves to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration (FTA 2018: 110, 199; Caltrans 2020: 7). This is based on a reference value of 1 micro inch per second.

The typical background vibration-velocity level in residential areas is approximately 50 VdB. Ground vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels (FTA 2018: 120; Caltrans 2020: 27).

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-7 Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the ground vibration is rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB, the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, the general threshold where minor damage can occur to fragile buildings. Construction activities can generate sufficient ground vibrations to pose a risk to nearby structures.

Constant or transient vibrations can weaken structures, crack facades, and disturb occupants (FTA 2018: 113).

Vibrations generated by construction activity can be transient, random, or continuous. Transient construction vibrations are generated by blasting, impact pile driving, and wrecking balls. Vibratory pile drivers, large pumps, and compressors generate continuous vibrations. Random vibrations can result from jackhammers, pavement breakers, and heavy construction equipment.

Table 3.12-6 summarizes the general human response to different ground vibration-velocity levels.

Table 3.12-6 Human Response to Different Levels of Ground Noise and Vibration Vibration-Velocity Level Human Reaction
65 VdB Approximate threshold of perception.
75 VdB Approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible. Many people find that transportation-related vibration at this level is unacceptable. 85 VdB Vibration acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day.

Notes: VdB = vibration decibels referenced to 1 μ inch/second and based on the root mean square velocity amplitude.

Source: FTA 2018.

Sound Propagation
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The manner in which a noise level decreases with distance depends on the following factors:

Geometric Spreading
Sound from a localized source (i.e., a point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a point source. Roads and highways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path. They can be treated as a line source, approximating the effect of several point sources, thus propagating slower than a point source. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern called cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source.

Ground Absorption
The noise propagation path from a source to a receiver is usually very close to the ground. Noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective wave canceling provides additional attenuation associated with geometric spreading.

Traditionally, this additional attenuation has also been expressed in terms of attenuation per doubling of distance. This approximation is usually sufficiently accurate for distances of less than 200 feet. For acoustically hard sites (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receiver, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed. For acoustically absorptive or soft sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receiver, such as soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees), an additional ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to the attenuation rate associated with cylindrical spreading, the additional ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance. This would hold true for point sources, resulting in an overall drop-off rate of up to 7.5 dB per doubling of distance.

Atmospheric Effects
Wind can carry noise, meaning that two receptors equidistant from a noise source can experience different levels of noise, depending on whether they are upwind or downwind (i.e., receivers downwind can be exposed to higher noise levels while receivers upwind may experience lower noise levels). Sound levels can be increased over large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) from the source because of atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also affect sound attenuation.

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-8 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features
A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receiver attenuates noise levels at the receiver. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in at least 5 dB of noise reduction (Caltrans 2013: 2-41; FTA 2018: 42). Barriers higher than the line of sight provide increased noise reduction (FTA 2018:16). Vegetation between the source and receiver is rarely effective in reducing noise because it does not create a solid barrier unless there are multiple rows of vegetation (FTA 2018: 15).

EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Existing Noise- and Vibration-Sensitive Land Uses
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those where noise exposure could result in healthrelated risks to individuals and places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels and the potential for nighttime noise to result in sleep disruption. Additional land uses such as schools, transient lodging, historic sites, cemeteries, and places of worship are also generally considered sensitive to increases in noise levels. These land use types are also considered vibration-sensitive land uses in addition to commercial and industrial buildings, where vibration could interfere with operations within the building, including levels that may be well below those associated with human annoyance. Several structures are located on the site, which are remnants from a former pheasant club, agricultural support structures, and a former residence. These structures may be demolished prior to project development or some of them may be repurposed.

The closest existing residences to the project site are directly south across Phillip Road, approximately 650 feet to the south as measured from the center of the project site to the nearest existing property line. Figure 3.12-1 shows the layout of these receptors relative to the project site.

Existing Noise Sources and Ambient Levels
To characterize the existing ambient noise environment at the project site, a noise survey consisting of four shortterm noise measurements was conducted May 12 and May 13, 2025, and two long-term measurements were conducted from May 12 to May 13, 2025. The locations of the noise monitoring sites are shown in Figure 3.12-1.

A SoftdB Piccolo II and a Larson Davis SoundExpert LxT precision integrating sound level meter were used for the ambient noise level measurement surveys. The meters were calibrated before use with Larson Davis Laboratories Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure measurement accuracy. The measurement equipment meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute. The ambient noise measurement survey results are summarized in Tables 3.12-7 and 3.12-8. Detailed summaries of the measured noise level data are in Appendix D.

Table 3.12-7 Summary of Existing Ambient Short-Term Noise Measurements Location1 Short-Term Measurements
Date and Time Duration Leq Noise Level Descriptors (dBA) Lmax Noise Level
Descriptors (dBA)
L50 Noise Level
Descriptors (dBA)
L90 Noise Level
Descriptors (dBA)
ST-1 May 13, 2025 - 12:38 p.m. 15 Minutes 48.7 61.1 46.4 44.8 ST-2 May 13, 2025 - 12:18 p.m. 15 Minutes 48.7 66.0 42.4 37.6 ST-3 May 13, 2025 - 1:52 p.m. 15 Minutes 40.6 58.5 35.6 32.9 ST-4 May 12, 2025 – 1:18 p.m. 15 Minutes 43.8 56.9 41.7 38.7 Notes: ST = short-term; Lmax = continuous maximum sound level; Leq = equivalent sound level; Lx = percentile-exceeded sound level; dBA = Aweighted decibel. 1 Refer to Figure 3.12-1 for ambient noise level measurement locations.

Source: Data collected by Ascent in 2025.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-9 Source: Adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure 3.12-1 Noise Measurement Locations

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-10 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Table 3.12-8 Summary of Existing Ambient Long-Term Noise Measurements Location1 Long-Term
Measurements Date Time of Day
Ldn Noise Level
Descriptors
(dBA)
Leq Noise Level
Descriptors
(dBA)
Lmax Noise Level
Descriptors
(dBA)
L50 Noise Level
Descriptors
(dBA)
L90 Noise Level
Descriptors
(dBA)
LT-1 May 12 to May 13, 2025 Day Average 52.7 52.6 75.6 47.3 34.8 Night Average 42.8 65.7 37.7 30.5
LT-2 May 12 to May 13, 2025 Day Average 59.2 59.9 81.8 51.8 36.0 Night Average 47.7 66.5 42.7 34.6
Notes: LT = Long-term; Ldn = day-night level; Lmax = continuous maximum sound level; Leq = equivalent sound level; Lx = percentile-exceeded sound level; dBA = A-weighted decibel.
1 Refer to Figure 3.12-1 for ambient noise level measurement locations.

Source: Data collected by Ascent in 2025.

3.12.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
Construction Noise and Vibration
To assess potential short-term (construction-related) noise and vibration impacts, sensitive receptors and their relative exposure were identified. Project-generated construction source noise and vibration levels were determined based on methodologies, reference emission levels, and usage factors from FTA’s Guide on Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment methodology (FTA 2018) and Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (FHWA 2006). Reference levels for noise and vibration emissions for specific equipment or activity types are well documented, and the usage thereof is common practice in the field of acoustics.

Construction noise can be characterized based on the type of activity and associated equipment needed. In this analysis, construction noise was modeled based on the likely combination of construction equipment required for each phase of construction and their simultaneous operation. For a conservative analysis, this analysis modeled the simultaneous operation of two pieces of construction equipment anticipated to be used during each phase of construction. The on-site construction noise analysis is based on the concept that construction equipment moves about a construction site, with some pieces operating closer to the property edge (and subsequently nearer to sensitive receptors) while others are operating on another portion of the site (further from the same receiver).

Propagating noise levels from the center of the construction site is appropriate in the field of acoustics, especially when evaluating construction noise, to account for the random pattern of noise-generating equipment moving about the site that generates different noise levels throughout the day. Construction activities have the potential to expose nearby buildings to levels of ground vibration that could result in structural damage and/or negative human response.

These types of activities were assessed based on the types of construction equipment that would be used, the levels of ground vibration typically generated by these types of equipment, and the proximity of construction activity to nearby buildings. Referenced ground vibration levels for typical construction equipment are provided by the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Manual (FTA 2018). Construction vibration levels and contour distances were calculated based on reference vibration levels for construction equipment that would be used for commercial development.

In accordance with FTA guidance, noise levels at sensitive receptors are calculated based on the distance from the center of the nearest on-site construction activities (i.e., the acoustical center) and using the calculated hourly average noise level (i.e., Leq) associated with multiple pieces of equipment operating at the same time. Similarly, vibration levels are determined using the distance from the center of the nearest anticipated operation of vibration-generating equipment (i.e. vibratory rollers).

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-11 Most project construction would occur between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekends in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code. However, nighttime concrete pours may be required. Thus, an assessment of nighttime construction noise and associated impacts is included in this analysis.

Operational Noise and Vibration
With respect to non-transportation noise sources (e.g., stationary), the assessment of long-term (operational-related) impacts was based on reference noise emission levels of activities and equipment associated with project operation (e.g., heating, ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] units, loading docks), and standard attenuation rates and modeling techniques. In addition, the analysis considers the potential range of operational noise sources and their approximate on-site locations.

To assess potential long-term (operation-related) noise impacts due to project-generated increases in traffic, noise levels were estimated using calculations consistent with FHWA's Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5 (FHWA 2004) and project-specific traffic data (Appendix E). The analysis is based on the reference noise emission levels for automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and ground attenuation factors. Truck usage and vehicle speeds on area roadways were estimated from the project-specific traffic data. Note that the modeling conducted does not account for any natural or humanmade shielding (e.g., the presence of walls or buildings) or reflection off building surfaces.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, noise policies and standards in the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan, City of Roseville Municipal Code, and Caltrans and FTA guidance documents. The project would have a significant impact related to noise or vibration if it would:

Short-Term Construction Noise
Generate a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan, noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Based on the City of Roseville General Plan Policy N1.5 and Municipal Code Section 9.24.030 and 9.24.100, the project would result in a significant noise impact if the following standards are exceeded:
 generate substantial construction noise occurring outside of the City’s daytime noise exemptions between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.

Saturday and Sunday that exceeds 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax for daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax for nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) at the property line of sensitive uses;  generate temporary construction increases in ambient noise in the vicinity of the project that may result in adverse health effects (e.g., sleep deprivation)
Operational Transportation Noise
Generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan, noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Based on the City of Roseville General Plan Policy N1.5, the project would result in a significant permanent increase in ambient noise in the vicinity of the project if the following standards are exceeded:
 Where existing exterior noise is less than 60 dBA, a ≥ 5 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is between 60 and 65 dBA, a ≥ 3 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is greater than 65 dBA, a ≥ 1.5 dB increase in noise is significant.

Operational Stationary Noise
Generate a substantial 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.

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-12 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Based on the City of Roseville Municipal Code Section 9.24.100 and General Plan Policy N1.5, the project would result in a significant noise impact if the following standards are exceeded:
 generate non-transportation noise that exceeds 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax for daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax for nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) at the property line of sensitive uses;  generate non-transportation increases in ambient noise in the vicinity of the project that exceeds the following standards:
 Where existing exterior noise is less than 60 dBA, a ≥ 5 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is between 60 and 65 dBA, a ≥ 3 dB increase in noise is significant.  Where existing exterior noise is greater than 65 dBA, a ≥ 1.5 dB increase in noise is significant.

Short-Term Construction and Long-Term Operational Vibration Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels exceeding Caltrans’s recommended standards with respect to the prevention of structural building damage (0.2 and 0.08 in/sec PPV for normal and historical buildings, respectively) or FTA’s maximum-acceptable-vibration standard with respect to human response (80 VdB for residential uses) at nearby existing vibration-sensitive land uses.

Airport Land Use Compatibility
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, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
No special vibration-intensive construction techniques, such as blasting or pile driving, would be anticipated to be required. The nearest vibration-sensitive receptor would be located approximately 150 feet as measured from where the closest vibration-generating construction activities (i.e., paving) could occur. At this distance, the use of typical construction equipment and activities would not result in potential vibration impacts. In addition, project operation would not result in new major sources of vibration such as transit, rail, or highways, and would not locate any new sensitive receptors near existing major sources of vibration. Therefore, the project would not result in excessive vibration or vibration levels such that any receptors would be adversely affected, and vibration-related impacts are not discussed further.

The project is not located within an airport land use plan, or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. In addition, the project is not located within 2 miles of a private airstrip; Lincoln Regional Airport is the closest public airport and is located approximately 8 miles northeast of the project site. Van Dyke Strip is the closest private airport and is located approximately 3 miles northwest of the project site. Thus, the project would not result in noise impacts related to the exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive aircraft-related noise levels. This issue is not discussed further.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.12-1: Construction-Generated Noise
Phase 1
The nearest noise-sensitive receptor is approximately 650 feet south of the project site from the acoustical center of typical construction activities. Daytime construction noise would comply with the City’s maximum allowable limits and would be exempt under the City’s Municipal Code. Daytime construction is exempt and not expected to result in sleep disturbance. However, nighttime construction, though infrequent and not occurring on consecutive nights, could result in sleep disturbances and temporary increases in ambient noise levels. Therefore, construction activities occurring during nighttime hours would result in a potentially significant noise impact.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-13 Phase 1 would include construction of the RRTO Facility, Corporation Yard, and Vendor Lease Area.

Construction would be expected to be consistent with the City of Roseville Municipal Code, which identifies daytime hours from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. during weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. during weekends. However, nighttime construction would likely be required for large concrete pours, on an as-needed basis, starting at night (e.g., 11:00 p.m.) and continuing through the following day. Short-term construction noise levels would fluctuate depending on the type, number, and duration of usage for the varying equipment. The effects of construction noise largely depend on the type of construction activities being performed, noise levels generated by those activities, distances to noisesensitive receptors, and the relative locations of noise attenuating features such as topography, existing structures, and existing ambient noise levels. No special construction techniques, such as blasting or pile driving, would be anticipated to be required.

Construction equipment may include, but would not be limited to, dump trucks, loaders, air compressors, concrete mixers, concrete saws, cranes, dozers, graders, pavers, rollers, and pickup trucks. Noise levels for individual equipment can range from 55 to 89 dBA Lmax at 50 feet, as indicated in Table 3.12-9.

Table 3.12-9 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Type Typical Noise Level (dBA) @ 50 feet
Dump Truck 76
Loader 80
Air Compressor 80
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Saw 82
Crane 85
Backhoe 80
Dozer 85
Grader 85
Paver 89
Roller 85
Pickup Trucks 55
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel.

Source: FHWA 2018.

Noise-generating construction activities that occur during the more noise-sensitive evening and nighttime hours are of increased concern because exterior ambient noise levels typically decrease during the late evening and nighttime hours as traffic volumes and commercial activities decrease, and typical sleep hours occur during these times. Thus, construction activities performed during these more noise-sensitive periods of the day can result in increased annoyance and potential sleep disruption for occupants of residential uses. Increased levels of annoyance may result in health impacts to sensitive receptors.

Construction generally occurs in several discrete stages, each phase requiring a specific complement of equipment with varying equipment type, quantity, and intensity. These variations in the operational characteristics of the equipment change the effect they have on the noise environment of the project site and in the surrounding area for the duration of the construction period.

According to the City of Roseville’s Municipal Code (Chapter 9.24.030 Exemptions), noise from construction (e.g., construction, alteration or repair activities) is exempt between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday provided, however, that all construction equipment is fitted with factory installed muffling devices and that all construction equipment is maintained in good working order (Ord. 3638 Section 1, 2001).

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-14 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Specific timing of each construction phase and activity was not available at the time of this analysis and, therefore, the construction-noise evaluation conservatively assumed that two of the highest noise-generating pieces (e.g., grader and paver) of equipment could operate simultaneously near each other. Applying the reference noise levels as shown in Table 3.12-7 and combining noise from these pieces of equipment, construction noise levels would result in

82.2 dBA Leq and 87.1 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during expected daytime construction activities. Applying standard attenuation rates and equipment usage factors, the proposed construction activities would generate noise levels of

52.9 dBA Leq and 58.4 dBA Lmax during daytime construction activities at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor (i.e., residence located 650 feet to the south). In addition, noise at further distances would continue to decrease. However, daytime construction activities would be exempt from the City of Roseville’s noise standards (i.e., 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax). For modeling details, refer to Appendix D.

In addition to typical daytime construction activities, it is possible that some limited nighttime work could be required, such as concrete pours. For this construction activity, a separate noise model was conducted, assuming the two loudest pieces of equipment associated with concrete pouring (i.e., concrete mixers and concrete pumps). Based on this model, the proposed nighttime construction activities would generate noise levels of 54.0 dBA Leq and 58.4 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Applying standard attenuation rates and equipment usage factors, nighttime noise levels would attenuate to 48.8 dBA Leq and 54.4 dBA Lmax at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor 650 feet south of the project site. Based on the modeling conducted, nighttime construction activities would exceed the City’s nighttime standard of 45 dBA Leq but not the 65 dBA Lmax standard.

Construction activities that would occur during less-sensitive hours of the day (i.e., daytime hours), would avoid times where people typically sleep and are more prone to adverse effects from increased noise, and would be temporary and cease once construction is complete, the temporary perception of daytime construction noise would not result in a substantial increase in noise that could lead to adverse health effects at nearby receptors. Nighttime construction activities (i.e. concrete pouring) could potentially result in sleep disturbance and would exceed applicable City nighttime standards.

As described above, daytime construction activities would be exempt from the City’s noise standards and would not be expected to result in adverse health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors, but nighttime construction activities would exceed noise limits established by the City (i.e., 45 dBA Leq) and result in a temporary increase in existing noise levels that could adversely affect nearby receptors. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.12-1: Construction Noise Reduction Methods The City or its construction contractor shall implement the following measures to reduce potential noise impacts associated with nighttime construction activities:
 All residents and property owners within 1,000 feet of the project site shall be notified in writing of anticipated nighttime construction, including hours of operation and expected noise-generating activities, at least one week prior to the start of nighttime construction activities.  Temporary noise barriers shall be installed where line-of-sight exists between noise-generating equipment and adjacent sensitive receptors for the duration of the proposed nighttime activities. These barriers shall be designed to achieve a minimum noise attenuation of 5 dBA or more.  A construction manager shall be designated to ensure compliance with noise mitigation measures and to respond to noise complaints. A phone number or other instantaneous notification method shall be posted on site for use by the public in reporting any noise concerns.

Significance after Mitigation
With the installation of temporary noise barriers, noise levels associated with nighttime construction activities would be reduced by 5 dBA. As a result, the anticipated construction noise level of 48.8 dBA Leq would be attenuated to approximately 43.8 dBA Leq and 49.4 dBA Lmax. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1—including temporary barriers and other best management practices—would reduce nighttime construction noise to levels below the City’s applicable nighttime noise standards of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1, the impact of nighttime construction noise would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-15 Phase 2
Phase 2 construction activities would occur at distances equal to or greater than those in Phase 1 and would be expected to generate equal or lower noise levels during project construction. However, nighttime construction could exceed City noise standards and result in a potentially significant impact due to the potential for sleep disturbance.

Implementation of Phase 2 of the project would include the expansion of the RRTO Facility and construction of a potential future organics processing facility. Construction activities would occur at a distance equal to or greater than what was identified for Phase 1 construction. As such, Phase 2 construction activities would generate noise levels equal to or less than noise levels identified during Phase 1. Nighttime construction activities associated with Phase 2 could exceed the City’s nighttime noise standards and result in a temporary increase in existing noise levels that could result in sleep disturbance. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure 3.12-1, described above.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 would ensure that nighttime construction noise levels remain below the City’s nighttime noise standards of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax. Therefore, with mitigation, this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Impact 3.12-2: Exposure of Existing Sensitive Receptors to Excessive Traffic Noise Levels Phase 1
Operation of Phase 1 would introduce additional vehicle trips (i.e., commuter trips, garbage trucks, and truck trips) that could increase daily traffic volumes and associated noise levels along several roadway segments, with the most notable increase of up to 0.4 dB occurring along Phillip Road. Because the City of Roseville considers a 1.5 dB increase in such noise environments where noise levels are greater than 65 dB to be significant, the project is not expected to result in a substantial permanent increase in noise at off-site sensitive receptors. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Transportation Noise at Off-Site Receptors
Phase 1 is expected to be operational as early as October 2028. Vehicle trips associated with Phase 1 of the project would result in an increase in average daily traffic volumes and associated increases in traffic noise levels along affected roadway segments within the local roadway network. Implementation of the project would allow the City of Roseville to continue early morning garbage collection for residential neighborhoods as the city continues to grow.

As such, the majority of project-generated vehicle trips would consist of employee-commuter trips, truck deliveries, and garbage collection. Garbage truck collection is a routine municipal service and is considered a standard component of the ambient noise environment in urban and suburban areas. Therefore, noise generated by garbage trucks would not substantially contribute to transportation noise levels at sensitive receptors.

Pursuant to Policy N1.5 of the City of Roseville General Plan, if existing noise levels exceed the noise compatibility standards in Table 3.12-3, then feasible methods of reducing noise to levels consistent with standards should be considered but are not required. However, if existing noise levels exceed noise compatibility standards and result in a significant increase in noise (i.e., +5 dB increase if ambient noise levels are below 60 dBA) then feasible methods of reducing noise to avoid a significant noise increase should be implemented. To analyze the impact of projectgenerated operational transportation noise sources under Phase 1, traffic noise levels under both baseline and baseline-plus-project conditions were modeled for affected roadway segments.

Long-term noise measurements were collected at location LT-1 adjacent to Phillip Road, at a similar distance as the noise sensitive receptors from Phillip Road. Therefore, this noise level data from long-term noise measurement location LT-1 represents the existing ambient noise environment of the closest receptors, located south of the project site. As shown in Table 3.12-8, existing ambient noise levels are estimated to be 52.7 dBA Ldn. Based on Phase 1 trip generation (e.g., 736

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-16 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR automobiles per day and 235 trucks per day), project-related trips would generate estimated noise levels of up 53.9 dBA Ldn at the closest noise sensitive receptor. Ambient noise levels are less than 60 dB along Phillip Road. Implementation of Phase 1 would cause an increase of 1.2 dB, whereas an increase of 5 dB or greater is the City’s threshold for a substantial change in the noise environment. Therefore, transportation-related noise at the nearest off-site receptors would comply with the City’s standards. Refer to Appendix D for detailed noise modeling input parameters.

Table 3.12-10 summarizes the modeled traffic noise levels at the nearest off-site receptors throughout the local roadway network under baseline (2028) and baseline (2028) plus project conditions, along with the overall net change in noise level as a result of project-generated traffic. As shown in Table 3.12-10, incremental increases in noise would all be below 1 dB and, considering the logarithmic nature of noise increase and perception, a more than doubling of the existing volumes would need to occur on a roadway to result in a 3+dBA increase. Thus, the slight difference in ADT averaging between 5 days and 7 days would not affect the traffic noise modeling conducted.

Summary
According to the City’s noise standards, in areas where ambient noise levels are less than 60 dB, an increase of 5 dB or greater is the City’s threshold for a substantial change in the noise environment. The project would cause a noise level increase of up to 0.4 dB to the existing noise receptors along Phillip Road, where the existing noise environment is approximately 68.7 dBA Ldn. An increase of less than 1.5 dB would not be considered significant according to the City’s noise standards. As such, implementation of the project would not result in a substantial increase in noise at off-site receptors. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Table 3.12-10 Summary of Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Under Baseline and Baseline-Plus-Project Conditions Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Baseline1
Noise Levels
(dBA Ldn)
Baseline1 +
Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to Baseline1
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
1 Westbrook Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Ongoing 61.7 61.7 3.0 0.0 No 2 Phillip Road Westbrook Blvd Project Site 68.7 69.1 1.5 0.4 No 3 Blue Oaks Blvd Westbrook Blvd Hayden Pkwy 68.4 68.6 1.5 0.2 No 4 Westbrook Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Brookstone Dr 66.8 66.9 1.5 0.1 No 5 Hayden Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Crawford Pkwy 63.4 63.4 3.0 0.0 No 6 Hayden Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Fiddyment Blvd 63.1 63.1 3.0 0.0 No 7 Blue Oaks Blvd Hayden Pkwy Fiddyment Blvd 68.9 69.1 1.5 0.2 No 8 Fiddyment Rd Blue Oaks Blvd Old Coach Dr 70.5 70.5 1.5 0.0 No 9 Fiddyment Rd Blue Oaks Blvd Hayden Pkwy 70.9 70.9 1.5 0.0 No 10 Blue Oaks Blvd Fiddyment Rd Del Webb Blvd 71.3 71.4 1.5 0.1 No 11 Diamond Creek Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 63.1 63.1 3.0 0.0 No 12 Prairie Wood Way Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 59.8 59.8 5.0 0.0 No 13 Blue Oaks Blvd D. Creek Blvd/
P. Woods Wy
Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

72.6 72.7 1.5 0.1 No
14 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 64.9 64.9 3.0 0.0 No
15 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Blue Oaks Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

68.4 68.4 1.5 0.0 No
16 Blue Oaks Blvd Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Roseville Pkwy 72.7 72.8 1.5 0.1 No

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-17 Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Baseline1
Noise Levels
(dBA Ldn)
Baseline1 +
Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to Baseline1
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
17 Roseville Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Foothill Blvd 60.7 60.7 3.0 0.0 No 18 Blue Oaks Blvd Roseville Pkwy New Meadow Dr 72.9 73.0 1.5 0.1 No 19 New Meadow Dr Blue Oaks Blvd End 63.2 63.2 3.0 0.0 No 20 Blue Oaks Blvd New Meadow Dr Foothill Blvd 73.4 73.4 1.5 0.1 No 21 Foothill Blvd Foothill Blvd City Boundary 65.7 65.7 1.5 0.0 No 22 Foothill Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Roseville Pkwy 69.7 69.7 1.5 0.0 No 23 Blue Oaks Blvd Foothill Blvd Fidelity Wy 73.8 73.8 1.5 0.0 No 24 Blue Oaks Blvd Fidelity Wy Washington Blvd 73.1 73.1 1.5 0.1 No 25 Washington Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Transition to SR
65 69.6 69.6 1.5 0.0 No
26 Washington Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

70.8 70.8 1.5 0.0 No
27 Blue Oaks Blvd Washington Blvd City Boundary 73.1 73.2 1.5 0.1 No 28 Santucci Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 46.5 46.5 5.0 0.0 No
29 Pleasant Grove Blvd Santucci Blvd Westbrook Blvd 48.2 48.2 5.0 0.0 No 30 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Brookstone Dr 66.8 66.9 1.5 0.1 No
31 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 65.1 65.2 1.5 0.1 No
32 Pleasant Grove Blvd Westbrook Blvd Village Green Dr 69.2 69.3 1.5 0.0 No 33 Market St Pleasant Grove
Blvd
City Boundary 62.4 62.4 3.0 0.0 No
34 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 65.1 65.2 1.5 0.1 No
35 Pleasant Grove Blvd Village Green Dr Fiddyment Blvd 70.6 70.6 1.5 0.0 No 36 Fiddyment Rd Del Webb Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

70.6 70.6 1.5 0.0 No
37 Fiddyment Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 73.9 73.9 1.5 0.0 No
38 Pleasant Grove Blvd Fiddyment Rd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

71.7 71.8 1.5 0.0 No
39 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 68.1 68.1 1.5 0.0 No
40 Pleasant Grove Blvd Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Country Club Dr 72.9 72.9 1.5 0.0 No
41 Country Club Dr Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 61.3 61.3 3.0 0.0 No
42 Pleasant Grove Blvd Country Club Dr Foothills Blvd 73.1 73.2 1.5 0.0 No 43 Foothill Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Main Road 72.5 72.5 1.5 0.0 No
44 Pleasant Grove Blvd Foothill Blvd Washington Blvd 74.5 74.5 1.5 0.0 No

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-18 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Baseline1
Noise Levels
(dBA Ldn)
Baseline1 +
Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to Baseline1
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
45 Washington Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Railroad 71.1 71.1 1.5 0.0 No
46 Pleasant Grove Blvd Washington Blvd Gold Coast Dr 74.0 74.0 1.5 0.0 No 47 Hallissy Dr/
Gold Coast Dr
Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Washington Blvd 58.0 58.0 5.0 0.0 No
48 Pleasant Grove Blvd Hallissy Dr Roseville Pkwy 74.2 74.2 1.5 0.0 No 49 Pleasant Grove Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Washington Blvd 73.9 73.9 1.5 0.0 No
50 Pleasant Grove Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
End 74.2 74.2 1.5 0.0 No
51 Roseville Pkwy Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Highland Pointe
Dr

71.6 71.6 1.5 0.0 No
52 Pleasant Grove Blvd Highland Pointe
Dr
SR 65 Exchange 73.7 73.7 1.5 0.0 No
53 Baseline Rd Santucci Blvd City Boundary 68.4 68.4 1.5 0.0 No 54 Baseline Rd Santucci Blvd Westbrook Blvd 70.0 70.0 1.5 0.0 No 55 Watt Ave Santucci Blvd City Boundary 64.5 64.6 3.0 0.1 No 56 Baseline Rd Westbrook Blvd Market St. 69.6 69.6 1.5 0.0 No 57 Market St/
Stargazer Dr
Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

61.1 61.1 3.0 0.0 No
58 Baseline Rd Market St Fiddyment Blvd 69.4 69.4 1.5 0.0 No 59 Fiddyment Rd Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

73.9 73.9 1.5 0.0 No
60 Fiddyment Rd Baseline Rd City Boundary 72.9 72.9 1.5 0.0 No 61 Baseline Rd Fiddyment Rd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

69.2 69.2 1.5 0.0 No
62 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd/Cook Riolo Rd
Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

64.8 64.8 3.0 0.0 No
63 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd/Cook Riolo Rd
Baseline Rd Ongoing 62.1 62.1 3.0 0.0 No
64 Baseline Rd Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Country Club Dr 69.0 69.0 1.5 0.0 No
65 Baseline Rd/Main St Foothill Blvd Country Club Dr 68.9 68.9 1.5 0.0 No 66 Baseline Rd/Main St Foothill Blvd Ongoing 63.7 63.7 3.0 0.0 No 67 Foothills Blvd Main Street Pleasant Grove
Blvd

72.5 72.5 1.5 0.0 No
68 Foothills Blvd Main Street Ongoing 73.4 73.4 1.5 0.0 No Notes: Seg. No. = Segment Number; Ldn = day-night noise level; dBA = A-weighted decibel; N/A = Non-Applicable; SR = State Route.

All modeling assumes average pavement, level roadways (less than 1.5 percent grade), constant traffic flow, and does not account for shielding of any type or finite roadway adjustments. All noise levels are reported as A-weighted noise levels. For additional details, refer to Appendix E for detailed traffic data, and traffic-noise modeling input data and output results. 1 Baseline conditions is representative of Phase 1 of the project.

Source: Data provided by Kittelson & Associates in 2025; modeled by Ascent in 2025.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-19 Phase 2
Similar to Phase 1, Phase 2 would increase average daily traffic volumes, resulting in corresponding increases in traffic-related noise along certain roadway segments. For example, along Phillip Road, where the existing ambient noise level is 68.4 dBA Ldn, the project would cause an increase of 0.3 dB, which is below the City’s 1.5 dB threshold for significance in noise environments below 60 dBA Ldn. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial permanent noise increase at off-site receptors, and this impact would be less than significant.

Phase 2 of the Roseville Environmental Utilities project is expected to be operational as early as 2040. As such, to analyze the impact of project-generated operational transportation noise sources under Phase 2, traffic noise levels under baseline and baseline-plus-project conditions were modeled for affected roadway segments. Refer to Appendix D for detailed noise modeling input parameters.

Vehicle trips associated with Phase 2 of the project would result in an increase in average daily traffic volumes and associated increases in traffic noise levels along affected roadway segments within the local roadway network.

Table 3.12-11 summarizes the modeled traffic noise levels at the nearest applicable off-site receptors throughout the local roadway network under cumulative (2040) and cumulative (2040)-plus-project conditions, along with the overall net change in noise level as a result of project-generated traffic.

As discussed above, existing vehicular volumes were obtained from project-generated vehicular volumes from the project-specific transportation study conducted (Kittelson & Associates 2025). All model inputs and outputs are provided in Appendix D.

Summary
Increases of 1.5 dB or greater would be considered substantial under the City’s threshold where the ambient noise level exceeds 65 dB. The existing noise environment within the vicinity of Phillip Road is 68 dBA Ldn. Phase 2 of the project would be expected to cause a noise level increase of up to 0.3 dB to the existing noise receptors along Philip Road. Because the increase would be below the 1.5 dBA threshold, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Table 3.12-11 Summary of Modeled Traffic Noise Levels Under Cumulative and Cumulative-Plus-Project Conditions
Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Cumulative1
(2040) Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative1 (2040)
+ Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to
Cumulative1 (2040)
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
1 Westbrook Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Ongoing 70.0 70.0 1.5 0.0 No 2 Phillip Road Westbrook Blvd Project Site 71.1 71.4 1.5 0.3 No 3 Blue Oaks Blvd Westbrook Blvd Hayden Pkwy 71.8 71.9 1.5 0.2 No 4 Westbrook Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Brookstone Dr 71.3 71.4 1.5 0.0 No 5 Hayden Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Crawford Pkwy 64.3 64.3 3.0 0.0 No 6 Hayden Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Fiddyment Blvd 63.3 63.3 3.0 0.0 No 7 Blue Oaks Blvd Hayden Pkwy Fiddyment Blvd 71.8 71.9 1.5 0.2 No 8 Fiddyment Rd Blue Oaks Blvd Old Coach Dr 72.4 72.5 1.5 0.0 No 9 Fiddyment Rd Blue Oaks Blvd Hayden Pkwy 72.8 72.8 1.5 0.0 No 10 Blue Oaks Blvd Fiddyment Rd Del Webb Blvd 72.6 72.7 1.5 0.1 No 11 Diamond Creek
Blvd
Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 65.1 65.1 1.5 0.0 No

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-20 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Cumulative1
(2040) Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative1 (2040)
+ Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to
Cumulative1 (2040)
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
12 Prairie Wood Way Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 59.3 59.3 5.0 0.0 No 13 Blue Oaks Blvd D. Creek Blvd/
P. Woods Wy
Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

74.2 74.2 1.5 0.1 No
14 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Blue Oaks Blvd City Boundary 69.5 69.5 1.5 0.0 No
15 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Blue Oaks Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

71.5 71.5 1.5 0.0 No
16 Blue Oaks Blvd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd
Roseville Pkwy 74.7 74.7 1.5 0.0 No
17 Roseville Pkwy Blue Oaks Blvd Foothill Blvd 59.7 59.7 5.0 0.0 No 18 Blue Oaks Blvd Roseville Pkwy New Meadow
Dr

74.7 74.7 1.5 0.0 No
19 New Meadow Dr Blue Oaks Blvd End 62.1 62.1 3.0 0.0 No 20 Blue Oaks Blvd New Meadow Dr Foothill Blvd 74.8 74.9 1.5 0.0 No 21 Foothill Blvd Foothill Blvd City Boundary 72.0 72.0 1.5 0.0 No 22 Foothill Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Roseville Pkwy 73.3 73.3 1.5 0.0 No 23 Blue Oaks Blvd Foothill Blvd Fidelity Wy 75.5 75.5 1.5 0.0 No 24 Blue Oaks Blvd Fidelity Wy Washington
Blvd

74.2 74.2 1.5 0.0 No
25 Washington Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Transition to
SR 65

71.1 71.1 1.5 0.0 No
26 Washington Blvd Blue Oaks Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

72.4 72.4 1.5 0.0 No
27 Blue Oaks Blvd Washington
Blvd
City Boundary 74.8 74.9 1.5 0.0 No
28 Santucci Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 70.7 70.9 1.5 0.1 No
29 Pleasant Grove Blvd Santucci Blvd Westbrook
Blvd

68.8 68.8 1.5 0.0 No
30 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Brookstone Dr 71.4 71.5 1.5 0.0 No
31 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 70.8 70.8 1.5 0.0 No
32 Pleasant Grove Blvd Westbrook Blvd Village Green
Dr

71.8 71.9 1.5 0.1 No
33 Market St Pleasant Grove
Blvd
City Boundary 64.7 64.7 3.0 0.0 No
34 Westbrook Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 70.8 70.8 1.5 0.0 No
35 Pleasant Grove Blvd Village Green Dr Fiddyment Blvd 72.2 72.3 1.5 0.1 No 36 Fiddyment Rd Del Webb Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

72.6 72.6 1.5 0.0 No

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-21 Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Cumulative1
(2040) Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative1 (2040)
+ Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to
Cumulative1 (2040)
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
37 Fiddyment Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 76.2 76.2 1.5 0.0 No
38 Pleasant Grove Blvd Fiddyment Rd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

73.8 73.9 1.5 0.0 No
39 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd
Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 70.3 70.3 1.5 0.0 No
40 Pleasant Grove Blvd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd
Country Club
Dr

74.7 74.7 1.5 0.0 No
41 Country Club Dr Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Baseline Rd 64.1 64.1 3.0 0.0 No
42 Pleasant Grove Blvd Country Club Dr Foothills Blvd 74.7 74.7 1.5 0.0 No 43 Foothill Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Main Road 73.6 73.6 1.5 0.0 No
44 Pleasant Grove Blvd Foothill Blvd Washington
Blvd

75.1 75.2 1.5 0.0 No
45 Washington Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Railroad 72.4 72.4 1.5 0.0 No
46 Pleasant Grove Blvd Washington
Blvd
Gold Coast Dr 74.7 74.8 1.5 0.0 No
47 Hallissy Dr/Gold
Coast Dr
Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Washington
Blvd

59.6 59.6 5.0 0.0 No
48 Pleasant Grove Blvd Hallissy Dr Roseville Pkwy 74.7 74.8 1.5 0.0 No 49 Pleasant Grove Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Washington
Blvd

75.0 75.0 1.5 0.0 No
50 Pleasant Grove Blvd Pleasant Grove
Blvd
End 74.8 74.8 1.5 0.0 No
51 Roseville Pkwy Pleasant Grove
Blvd
Highland
Pointe Dr

73.3 73.4 1.5 0.0 No
52 Pleasant Grove Blvd Highland Pointe
Dr
SR 65
Exchange

74.9 74.9 1.5 0.0 No
53 Baseline Rd Santucci Blvd City Boundary 73.9 73.9 1.5 0.0 No 54 Baseline Rd Santucci Blvd Westbrook
Blvd

73.5 73.6 1.5 0.0 No
55 Watt Ave Santucci Blvd City Boundary 69.5 69.6 1.5 0.1 No 56 Baseline Rd Westbrook Blvd Market St. 73.3 73.3 1.5 0.0 No 57 Market St/Stargazer
Dr
Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

62.5 62.5 3.0 0.0 No
58 Baseline Rd Market St Fiddyment Blvd 73.3 73.4 1.5 0.0 No 59 Fiddyment Rd Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

75.3 75.3 1.5 0.0 No
60 Fiddyment Rd Baseline Rd City Boundary 74.1 74.1 1.5 0.0 No

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-22 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Seg.

No. Road Segment From To
Cumulative1
(2040) Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative1 (2040)
+ Project Noise
Levels (dBA Ldn)
Applicable
Standards
Modeled Change
Relative to
Cumulative1 (2040)
Conditions (dBA)
Exceeds
Standard?
61 Baseline Rd Fiddyment Rd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd

72.3 72.3 1.5 0.0 No
62 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd/Cook Riolo Rd
Baseline Rd Pleasant Grove
Blvd

67.7 67.7 1.5 0.0 No
63 Woodcreek Oaks
Blvd/Cook Riolo Rd
Baseline Rd Ongoing 66.1 66.1 1.5 0.0 No
64 Baseline Rd Woodcreek
Oaks Blvd
Country Club
Dr

70.8 70.8 1.5 0.0 No
65 Baseline Rd/Main St Foothill Blvd Country Club
Dr

70.3 70.4 1.5 0.0 No
66 Baseline Rd/Main St Foothill Blvd Ongoing 64.8 64.9 3.0 0.1 No 67 Foothills Blvd Main Street Pleasant Grove
Blvd

73.6 73.6 1.5 0.0 No
68 Foothills Blvd Main Street Ongoing 74.5 74.5 1.5 0.0 No Notes: Seg. No. = Segment Number; Ldn = day-night noise level; dBA = A-weighted decibel; N/A = Non-Applicable; SR = State Route.

All modeling assumes average pavement, level roadways (less than 1.5 percent grade), constant traffic flow, and does not account for shielding of any type or finite roadway adjustments. All noise levels are reported as A-weighted noise levels. For additional details, refer to Appendix E for detailed traffic data, and traffic-noise modeling input data and output results. 1 Cumulative Conditions is representative of Phase 2 of the project.

Source: Data provided by Kittelson & Associates in 2025; modeled by Ascent in 2025.

Impact 3.12-3: Long-Term Non-Transportation Noise Levels Phase 1
The project would introduce new stationary noise sources during operation, including loading dock activities (e.g., truck and forklift operations), building mechanical equipment (e.g., HVAC units), equipment maintenance activities, and backup generators. Based on reference noise levels and typical equipment usage rates, these sources have the potential to generate noise levels that exceed the City of Roseville’s Municipal Code standards of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax during daytime hours and 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours, at the nearest sensitive receptors’ property line. Noise generated by activities such as the release of truck air brakes and equipment maintenance operations may result in exceedances of applicable thresholds, particularly during nighttime hours. In accordance with City Policy N1.5, increases in ambient noise levels may be considered significant depending on the existing noise environment, with smaller increases being potentially significant in areas with higher baseline noise levels. However, backup generators, equipment associated with materials recovery facility (MRF), and the equipment maintenance facility could generate noise levels that exceed the City’s absolute noise level and the noise increase standard. Therefore, this impact related to long-term non-transportation noise would be potentially significant.

Typical operational hours for Phase 1 would be 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., with the majority of service staff working from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Some facilities, however, would need to operate 24 hours per day (i.e., MRF and Corporation Yard). As such, project operation could occur during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. Facilities such as the Equipment Maintenance Facility, waste delivery, offices, and the fueling area could be expected to operate during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m., and as such would be expected to operate during both daytime and nighttime hours.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-23 Consistent with the identified significance thresholds, the noise sources associated with the project would have a significant effect if project-generated noise levels exceed the City’s noise level standards and/or cause a permanent substantial increase in noise over existing conditions. Therefore, this analysis evaluates operational stationary noise in consideration of absolute noise levels and substantial increases in the existing noise environment. Non-transportation noise impacts are subject to the limits set forth in Section 9.24.100 of the Roseville Municipal Code, which specifies maximum allowable noise levels from stationary sources: 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), and 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). As specified in the City of Roseville Policy N1.5, a noise level increase of 5.0 dB, or greater, would typically be considered to result in increased levels of annoyance where existing ambient noise levels are less than 60 dB. Within areas where the ambient noise levels range from 60 to 65 dB, increased levels of annoyance would be anticipated at increases of 3 dB, or greater.

Increases of 1.5 dB, or greater, could result in increased levels of annoyance in areas where the ambient noise level exceeds 65 dB. The City’s noise increase standards were applied to evaluate substantial increases in the existing noise environment due to project generated noise. Existing noise levels were quantified using noise level data taken from the short-term and long-term noise measurement locations (ST-1 and LT-1, as shown in Figure 3.12-1).

The RRTO facility may include loading docks or designated areas for receiving, transferring, or processing waste by commercial trucks. Substantial noise sources associated with the RRTO facility would include loading dock activities (e.g., heavy trucks and forklifts). Noise characteristics of truck activity associated with delivery areas are usually shortterm and can include activities such as vehicle idling, engines revving, and the release of air brakes on heavy trucks. In addition, forklifts used for the transfer of material could generate noise levels during typical equipment operation or from backup alarms. The proposed Corporation Yard would provide an office located at the southern portion of the corporation yard for the EU Department, an equipment maintenance facility located at the northwest portion of the corporation yard, and storage facilities, consisting of outdoor and covered material storage located on the western section of the corporation yard. The proposed Corporation Yard would introduce new stationary noise sources associated with building mechanical equipment, primarily HVAC units, repair bays, and loading dock activities.

The vendor lease area located at the northwestern portion of the project site would be used as a staging area for prospective vendors to deliver materials to the RRTO facility. As such, the RRTO facility, Corporation Yard, and Vendor Lease Area would generate heavy truck trips which could potentially generate noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptor.

Detailed locations of these facilities can be found in Figure 2-4. Table 3.12-12 summarizes the operational stationary noise sources in comparison to applicable noise standards. Table 3.12-13 summarizes the operational stationary noise sources’ effect on the noise environment.

Loading Dock Activities
The proposed loading dock would be expected to operate for 16 hours out of the day. Therefore, it could operate during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours as defined in the City of Roseville Municipal Code.

Phase 1 of the project would include the RRTO that would facilitate the loading and unloading of waste, organic waste, and recyclables. Noise sources would include typical truck activities (i.e. release of air brakes) and forklift operations. Loading dock activities would be focused at the outdoor area to the west of the RRTO, adjacent to the recyclable loadout area, approximately 780 feet from the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor as measured from the center of the recyclable loadout area.

The truck activities would last for a period ranging from a few seconds (e.g., release of air brakes) to a few minutes (e.g., idling) and could recur multiple times during a single truck visit. Typical truck operations would generate a noise level of 66-68 dBA Lmax (i.e., idling), which, assuming a 50 percent usage rate, would result in noise levels ranging from 63-65 dBA Leq at 50 feet. The loudest reference level for truck-related noise is the release of a truck’s air brakes after it comes to a stop, which generates noise levels as high as 86 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.

Typical forklift operations, which include general operation (e.g., transferring of waste) and short-term backup alarms, would generate a noise level of up to 77 dBA Lmax at 3 feet and 74 dBA Leq at 3 feet based on a 50 percent usage rate (LDN Consulting 2016). Loading dock activities associated with the proposed facilities would consist of both truck

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-24 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR activities and forklift operations. The combined noise levels of those two activities would serve as the reference noise level for loading dock activities, which calculates to 86.0 dBA Lmax and 65.1 dBA Leq at 50 feet.

Noise levels for these noise-generating activities are summarized and compared to the applicable noise standards in Tables 3.12-12 and 3.12-13.

Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical equipment associated with the project would include HVAC units associated with the new office spaces as well as equipment related to refuse collection and sorting (e.g., conveyors, sorters) located within the MRF. HVAC and MRF equipment are discussed separately, below.

The proposed office space would introduce new stationary noise sources associated with building mechanical equipment, primarily HVAC units. HVAC units would operate during the hours in which the offices are in use. As stated above, offices would be primarily used during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., which would be during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours as defined in the City of Roseville Municipal Code. Detailed information regarding the stationary equipment to be installed is not available at this time.

However, noise levels associated with air conditioning systems typically found in office spaces can reach levels of up to 78 dBA Lmax at 3 feet (Lennox 2019). Applying this reference noise level as an hourly average (Leq) and assuming a 50 percent usage rate would result in a 75 dBA Leq at 3 feet from the source. Commonly installed building equipment, such as HVAC systems, can be located in the interior of the structure, on rooftops, or in direct line-of-sight to adjacent land uses. Proposed HVAC systems are assumed to be located near the exterior of the proposed office buildings within direct line-of-sight of adjacent land uses.

The proposed MRF would introduce new stationary noise sources associated with the processing of recyclable materials. Stationary mechanical equipment would be expected to operate during the hours at which the MRF is in use. As stated above, the MRF would be expected to operate 24 hours per day, which would be during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours as defined in the City of Roseville Municipal Code.

Detailed information regarding the specific stationary equipment to be installed is not available at this time. However, based on a noise survey conducted at a comparable multi-purpose recycling facility in Islip, New York, noise levels associated with recyclable material processing were measured at up to 76 dBA Lmax (EPA 1995). Noise measurements, in this study, were conducted at the fence line in line of sight of the entrance of the tipping floor approximately 140 feet from the open entrance of the facility’s tipping floor.

For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the loudest noise levels, up to 76 dBA Lmax, could occur for up to 30 minutes during any given hour. Applying this reference noise level as an hourly average (Leq) and assuming a 50 percent usage rate results in an estimated noise level of approximately 73 dBA Leq at a distance of 140 feet from the source. While MRF equipment is anticipated to be located within the building, which would reduce noise levels, because specific building materials, design, and orientation are not at the design level adequate to calculate potential noise reduction from the building façade, this analysis conservatively applies the reference noise levels without any building-related or equipment-specific noise reduction. Noise levels for these noise-generating activities are summarized and compared to the applicable noise standards in Tables 3.12-12 and 3.12-13.

Equipment Maintenance Facilities
The proposed Corporation Yard would introduce new stationary noise sources associated with the equipment maintenance facilities. The proposed equipment maintenance facilities would be expected to operate during the hours from 6:00 a.m. to 10:30 p.m., which would be during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours as defined in the City of Roseville Municipal Code. Detailed information regarding the potential equipment to be used is not available at this time. However, equipment maintenance facilities would generally use general automotive repair equipment, such as air compressors, impact wrenches, and a tire bead removal machine. While the equipment maintenance facility is anticipated to be located within the building, which would reduce noise levels, because specific building materials, design, and orientation are not at the design level adequate to calculate potential noise reduction from the building façade, this analysis applies the reference noise levels without any building-related or directionality-based noise reduction. Noise levels associated with the potential repair equipment typically found in maintenance facilities (e.g., air compressors, impact wrenches, and a tire bead removal machine) can reach combined

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-25 noise levels of up to 100 dBA Lmax at 3 feet (Navigator V1.5 2010). Applying this reference noise level as an hourly average (Leq) and assuming a 50 percent usage rate would result in 97 dBA Leq at 3 feet from the source. Therefore, activities associated with the equipment maintenance facilities could generate noise levels of 97 dBA Leq and 100 dBA Lmax at 3 feet. Noise levels for these noise-generating activities are summarized and compared to the applicable noise standards in Tables 3.12-12 and 3.12-13.

Backup Generators
Backup diesel generators would be used to supply necessary power requirements to vital systems within the proposed buildings and would generally only be used on a temporary basis during emergency power outages or during routine maintenance. Generator sizes and locations would be determined during detailed design. Average reference noise levels for a generator would typically be 82 dBA Lmax at 50 feet and considering that when a generator is in use to provide backup power it would be operating continuously, this level is also be applied as an Leq (FTA 2018). Therefore, backup diesel generators could generate noise levels of 82 dBA Leq and 82 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Noise levels for these noisegenerating activities are summarized and compared to the applicable noise standards in Tables 3.12-12 and 3.12-13.

Peak Parking Lot Activity
The project includes the construction of three separate parking lots to accommodate the employees required to operate the facilities. Each could be expected to operate for 24 hours out of any given day, which would be during daytime and nighttime hours as defined in the City of Roseville Municipal Code.

Phase 1 of the project is expected to generate a typical peak parking lot activity of 109 employee trips during a typical weekday a.m. hour and 24 heavy truck trips during a typical weekday a.m. peak hour, for a total of 133 trips during a weekday p.m. peak hour (Kittelson & Associates 2025). The closest location where employee trips would primarily occur would be the RRTO Employee/Visitor parking lot, located approximately 620 feet as measured from the center of the parking lot to the property line boundary. In addition, truck trips would be focused on the Corporation Yard parking lot and Vendor Lease Area, the closest of which is located approximately 890 feet as measured from the center of the parking lot to the property line boundary. Based on the FTA’s guidance for assessing stationary noise sources, Phase 1 parking activities would generate noise levels of 62.8 dBA Leq at 50 feet. As seen in Figure 3.12-1, the nearest sensitive receptor would be the single-family residential homes located as close as 520 feet south of the closest proposed parking lot. Noise levels for these noise-generating activities are summarized and compared to the applicable noise standards in Tables 3.12-12 and 3.12-13.

Summary
Table 3.12-12 summarizes the distances where the project could exceed the City of Roseville’s noise level standards.

Table 3.12-12 Projected Operational Noise Levels Exceedance at Nearest Noise Sensitive Receptor Noise Scenario
Average (Leq)
Threshold
Applied (dBA)
Maximum
(Lmax)
Threshold
Applied (dBA)
Approximate
Distance to
Nearest
Receptors (feet)
Average (Leq)
Attenuated Noise
Level at Closest
Receptor (dBA)
Maximum (Lmax)
Attenuated Noise
Level at Closest
Receptor (dBA)
Exceeds
Thresholds
(Leq/Lmax)?
Loading Dock Activities Daytime 50 70 780 41.2 62.1 No/No Nighttime 45 65 41.2 62.1 No/No
HVAC Daytime 50 70 600 29.0 32.0 No/No
Nighttime 45 65 29.0 32.0 No/No
MRF Mechanical Equipment Daytime 50 70 7351 58.6 61.6 Yes/No Nighttime 45 65 58.6 61.6 Yes/No
Equipment Maintenance
Facilities
Daytime 50 70 900 47.5 50.5 No/No
Nighttime 45 65 47.5 50.5 Yes/No
Backup Generators
(Average Noise Levels Leq)
Daytime 50 N/A 1,9912 50.0 N/A Yes/Yes
Nighttime 45 N/A 3,5402 45.0 N/A Yes/Yes

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-26 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Noise Scenario
Average (Leq)
Threshold
Applied (dBA)
Approximate
Distance to
Nearest
Receptors (feet)
Average (Leq)
Attenuated Noise
Level at Closest
Receptor (dBA)
Maximum (Lmax)
Attenuated Noise
Level at Closest
Receptor (dBA)
Exceeds
Thresholds
(Leq/Lmax)?
Backup Generators
(Maximum Noise Levels Lmax)
Daytime N/A 70 1462 N/A 70.0 Yes/Yes
Nighttime N/A 65 2282 N/A 65.0 Yes/Yes
Peak RRTO Employee
Parking Activities
Daytime 50 70 620 30.9 33.9 No/No
Nighttime 45 65 No/No
Peak Corporation Yard
Parking Activities
Daytime 50 70 890 40.4 43.4 No/No
Nighttime 45 65 No/No
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq= continuous equivalent sound level; Lmax= maximum sound level; N/A = Not Applicable 1 As measured from the closest façade of the initial Phase 1 MRF to nearest sensitive receptor property line. 2 Locations of backup generators are not determined at this time; therefore, the distance to the nearest receptor is representative of the minimum distance in which an exceedance of local standards would occur.

Source: Data modeled by Ascent in 2025.

Table 3.12-13 summarizes the modeled noise levels of the noise sources and their effect on the ambient noise environment.

Table 3.12-13 Substantial Noise Level Increases at Nearest Noise Sensitive Receptor Noise Scenario1 Existing Noise
Levels (dBA, Leq)
Project Noise
Levels (dBA, Leq)
Existing + Project
Noise Levels (dBA, Leq) Change Applicable Threshold2
Exceeds
Thresholds?
Loading Dock Activities Daytime 48.7 41.2 49.4 0.7 +5.0 dB No Nighttime 42.8 41.2 45.1 2.3 No
Mechanical Equipment Daytime 48.7 29.0 48.7 0.0 +5.0 dB No Nighttime 42.8 29.0 42.8 0.0 No
MRF Mechanical Equipment Daytime 48.7 58.6 55.4 6.7 +5.0 dB Yes Nighttime 42.8 58.6 54.7 11.9 Yes
Equipment Maintenance
Facilities
Daytime 48.7 47.5 48.8 0.1 +5.0 dB No
Nighttime 42.8 47.5 43.2 0.4 No
Backup Generators Daytime 48.7 52.03 53.7 5.0 +5.0 dB Yes Nighttime 42.8 46.14 47.8 5.0 Yes
Peak RRTO Employee
Parking Activities
Daytime 48.7 30.9 48.8 0.1 +5.0 dB No
Nighttime 42.8 30.9 43.1 0.3 No
Peak Corporation Yard
Parking Activities
Daytime 48.7 44.3 50.0 1.3 +5.0 dB No
Nighttime 42.8 44.3 45.6 3.8 No
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq= continuous equivalent sound level; Lmax= maximum sound level; HVAC = heating, ventilation, and air conditioning.
1 Daytime scenario is defined as average (Leq) daytime noise level from ST-1; Nighttime scenario is defined as average (Leq) nighttime noise level from LT-1.
2 Based on Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)’s criteria for the impact of increases in ambient noise levels. 3 Location of the backup generators are not yet determined, minimum distance where a substantial increase over ambient could occur is 1,991 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor property line. 4 Location of the backup generators are not yet determined, minimum distance where a substantial increase over ambient could occur 3,101 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor property line.

Source: Data modeled by Ascent in 2025.

Maximum
(Lmax)
Threshold
Applied (dBA)

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-27 As discussed above, a majority of noise sources associated with the project would attenuate below the City’s noise standards at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor. However, equipment associated with the MRF facility would generate noise levels of up to 58.6 dBA Leq and 61.6 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours, which would exceed the daytime standard of 50 dBA Leq and the nighttime standard of 45 dBA Leq. In addition, equipment associated with the equipment maintenance facility would generate noise levels of 47.5 dBA Leq exceeding the City’s nighttime noise standard of 45 dBA Leq. Further, the exact locations of the backup generators are not currently known and could be located as close as 146 feet from the property line of sensitive receptors, which could potentially exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime standards and could result in a substantial permanent increase in noise. As such, noise generated by the MRF facility, the equipment maintenance facility, and the backup generators could exceed the City’s daytime standards of 50 dBA Leq and nighttime standards of 45 dBA Leq, and the backup generators could also exceed the City’s daytime standards of 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime standards of 65 dBA Lmax. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.12-3: Stationary Noise Reduction Methods The City shall implement one of the following measures to reduce potential noise impacts from mechanical equipment associated with the MRF:
 Building façades of the MRF that are in the direct line-of-sight of sensitive receptors shall incorporate acoustical upgrades (e.g., acoustical upgraded wall assemblies) to provide a minimum noise attenuation where attenuated noise levels would comply with the City of Roseville’s City’s daytime thresholds of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime thresholds of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor property line; or  Implement alternative noise reduction measures (e.g., quieter equipment, noise/vibration dampening mounts, and distance setbacks) that are demonstrated, by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be equally effective in reducing noise levels to below the City’s daytime thresholds of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime thresholds of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor property line.

The City shall implement one of the following measures to reduce potential noise impacts associated with the operation of backup generators:
 Locate the proposed backup generators as far as possible from the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor; or
 Incorporate shielding with on-site structures, acoustical enclosures, or other design measures, such that 45 dBA Leq is not exceed at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor; or  Implement alternative noise reduction measures that are demonstrated, by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be equally effective in reducing noise levels to below applicable daytime thresholds of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime thresholds of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor property line.

The City shall implement one of the following measures to reduce potential noise impacts associated with the operation of equipment maintenance facility:
 Limit noise generating activities associated with the operation of the equipment maintenance facility to daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours only; or
 The project shall orient main facility entrance to break direct line-of-sight to the nearest sensitive receptor at the property line. If such orientation is not feasible, doors shall remain closed during noise-generating activities that occur during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours; or  Implement alternative noise reduction measures that are demonstrated, by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be equally effective in reducing noise levels to below applicable daytime thresholds of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime thresholds of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor property line.

Measures shall be incorporated into the project design and identified on the site plan. The City shall verify that these measures are included in the site plan before approval of the final site plan.

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-28 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of the methods identified in Mitigation Measure 3.12-3 would reduce the noise levels of the proposed stationary equipment associated with the MRF and backup generators to below the City’s noise level daytime standards of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime standards of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax as well as ensure that the proposed equipment maintenance facility would not generate noise levels exceeding the City’s nighttime standards of 45 dBA Leq and resulting in a substantial increase in noise. Thus, implementing Mitigation Measure 3.12-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Phase 2
Phase 2 of the project would expand the RRTO facility and add a potential future organics processing facility, but would not introduce any new or unique noise sources that would generate greater noise levels than those identified in Phase 1. However, backup generators and equipment associated with the MRF and the equipment maintenance facility could generate noise levels that exceed the City’s absolute noise level and the noise increase standard.

Because noise generated during Phase 2 operations could exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime noise standards, this impact would be potentially significant.

Phase 2 of the project would include expansion of the RRTO and construction of a potential future organics processing facility. Phase 2 would expand hours of operation, operating for 24 hours per day throughout the year.

Although not all facilities would be expected to operate during the entirety of a 24 hour period (e.g., offices and equipment maintenance facilities), it is feasible that any such facilities could be used during any given hour. As such, project operation could occur during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. In addition, no additional backup generators are proposed with the implementation of Phase 2 of the project.

Buildout of the RRTO Facility would include construction of two additional buildings, closer to the nearest sensitive receptors. Noise sources associated with the expanded RRTO facilities would not introduce new or unique noise sources beyond those identified during Phase 1; rather, Phase 2 activities would involve similar types of operational noise already evaluated. Although Phase 2 would result in an increase in overall facility activity, this increase would not occur uniformly across the site and, as such, Phase 2 is not expected to result in a doubling of any individual noise source. However, the expansion of the RRTO would situate an additional MRF building closer to sensitive receptors than distances identified in Phase 1, which could generate noise levels that exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime standards.

The potential future organics processing facility (consisting of a potential compost facility and/or a potential biomass facility) would be designed to receive and process the estimated quantities of organic materials generated within the City and may include materials delivered by prospective vendors. As such, substantial noise sources would generally include typical truck activities, forklift operations, grinders, fans, and compost turners. These activities are similar in type and operational characteristics (i.e., steady-state and continuous sound levels) to those evaluated under Phase 1.

Because source types and equipment usage would be comparable, and because the Phase 2 facility would be located at a greater distance from the nearest sensitive receptor than in Phase 1, noise levels would be expected to be similar to or lower than those identified in Phase 1.

Implementation of Phase 2 is expected to cause an overall increase in peak parking lot activity to 340 employee trips during a typical weekday a.m. hour and 59 heavy truck trips during a typical weekday a.m. peak hour, for a total of 108 trips during a weekday p.m. peak hour (Kittelson & Associates 2025). The closest location where employee trips would primarily occur would be at the RRTO Employee/Visitor parking lot, located approximately 620 feet as measured from the center of the parking lot to the property line boundary. In addition, the closest location where truck trips would primarily occur would be at the Corporation Yard parking lot, located approximately 890 feet as measured from the center of the parking lot to the property line boundary. Based on the FTA’s guidance for assessing stationary noise sources, Phase 2 parking activities would generate noise levels up to 57.7 dBA Leq at 50 feet. The nearest single-family residential home is located as close as 620 feet south of the closest proposed parking lot. At this distance, noise levels would attenuate up to

44.3 dBA Leq and 47.3 dBA Lmax. Therefore, peak parking lot activities associated with Phase 2 would comply with the City’s daytime standards of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime standard of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax.

Ascent Noise
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.12-29 As discussed above, the noise sources proposed as part of Phase 1 would be installed and operational by the time Phase 2 is developed. Noise sources associated with Phase 2 of the project would attenuate below the City’s noise standard, with the exception of the proposed backup generators and equipment associated with the MRF, which would generate noise levels at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor that exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime noise standards of 50 dBA Leq and 45 dBA Leq, respectively. In addition, activities associated with equipment maintenance facilities would exceed the City’s nighttime noise standard of 45 dBA Leq at the property line of the nearest sensitive receptor.

Because noise generated during Phase 2 operations could exceed the City’s daytime and nighttime noise standards, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure 3.12-3, described above.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of the methods identified in Mitigation Measure 3.12-3 would reduce the noise levels of the proposed stationary equipment associated with the MRF and backup generators to below the City’s noise level daytime standards of 50 dBA Leq and 70 dBA Lmax and nighttime standards of 45 dBA Leq and 65 dBA Lmax as well as ensure that the proposed equipment maintenance facility would not generate noise levels exceeding the City’s nighttime standards of 45 dBA Leq and resulting in a substantial increase in noise. Thus, implementing Mitigation Measure 3.12-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.

Noise Ascent
City of Roseville

3.12-30 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR This page is intentionally left blank.

Ascent Population, Employment, and Housing
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.13-1

3.13 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING
This section addresses the potential impacts of the proposed Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project with respect to population, employment, and housing in the City of Roseville. Additional analysis of potential growth inducement caused by the project is presented in Section 5.1, “Growth Inducement,” of this Draft EIR.

No comment letters regarding population, employment, and housing were received in response to the notice of preparation (see Appendix A).

3.13.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to population, employment, and housing are applicable to the project.

STATE
State law requires each local government in California to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of its city or county, and the housing element is one of seven mandated elements of the general plan. Housing elements address the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community.

State law sets out a process for determining each local jurisdiction’s fair share of regional housing needs (e.g., California Government Code section 65584). As a first step in the process, the California Department of Housing and Community Development assigns each regional council of governments a required number of new housing units for that region, including affordable housing. The council of governments (the Sacramento Area Council of Governments [SACOG] in the project area), in turn, allocates the region’s share to cities and counties in the region. SACOG is discussed further below as a local agency.

LOCAL
City of Roseville 2035 General Plan
The City of Roseville 2035 General Plan (General Plan) establishes long-range development policies, provides a basis for judging whether private development proposals and public projects are in harmony with the policies, and guides public agencies and private developers in designing projects that are consistent with City policies.

The pace of development within Roseville is influenced by policies and implementing actions of the General Plan. In addition, outside factors influence development and growth within the City including global, national, state, and regional economic conditions; federal budget and regulatory actions; state budget allocations, relevant policy direction, and regulatory actions; perceptions about the quality of life in the region; and housing costs, demographic trends, and community character. While it is difficult to accurately predict the amount and pace of long-term development given the influence of outside factors, the City provides estimates for future development to guide goals and policies within the General Plan, which are shown in Table 3.13-1.

With buildout of the General Plan in 2035, Roseville is estimated to have a total population of approximately 198,000, with approximately 75,200 dwelling units, 60 million square feet of non-residential building square footage, and between 120,000 and 150,000 local jobs (City of Roseville 2020).

Population, Employment, and Housing Ascent
City of Roseville

3.13-2 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Table 3.13-1 Existing (2016) and Future Development in the City of Roseville Development Factor 2016 2035
Dwelling Units 52,900 75,200
Population 135,800 198,000
Non-Residential Square Footage 33,000,000 60,000,000
Jobs 82,000 120,000 to 150,000
Jobs to Dwelling Units 1.55 1.6 to 2
Source: City of Roseville 2020.

The City of Roseville General Plan sets guidelines for managing land use change within Roseville (City of Roseville 2020). The Land Use Element contains policies that are intended to promote a beneficial jobs/housing balance. This balance is based on the number of residents that commute, the transportation mode used for that commute, and the commute distance and time required. The relationship between jobs and housing is affected by local employment opportunities, household incomes, housing prices, and non-residential lease rates and land costs. The following policies are applicable to the project:

Community Form: Jobs/Housing and Economic Development
 Policy LU5.1 Implement a land use mix and pattern of development that provides linkages between residents’ jobs and local employment-generating uses, facilitates a match between the number and type of local jobs and the local labor force, and maintains the fiscal viability of the City.  Policy LU5.6 Maintain land use patterns, intensities, and densities that ensure an adequate supply of land for office, commercial, industrial, and other employment-generating development.  Policy LU5.7 Support activities that attract employment uses to the City, as identified in the Economic Development Strategy.

Growth Management – General
 Policy LU8.4 The City shall accommodate projected population and employment growth in areas where the appropriate level of public infrastructure and services are planned or will be made available concurrent with development.
 Policy LU8.6 The City shall oppose urban density residential, commercial, or industrial development in unincorporated areas unless adequate public facilities and services can be provided and mechanisms to ensure their availability and provision are secured during the land use entitlement process. It is the City’s preference that urban development occur within incorporated areas.

City of Roseville 2021 Housing Element
The City of Roseville 2021 General Plan Housing Element (Housing Element) identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs within Roseville to preserve, improve, and develop housing for all economic segments of the community (City of Roseville 2021). The Housing Element also includes goals for long-term development of housing in Roseville. There are no housing policies that are applicable to the project.

Regional Housing Needs
As stated above, SACOG prepares the Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) for the Sacramento region to determine potential locations for future housing stock based on projected population growth, employment trends, and development suitability. The RHNP allocates to SACOG cities and counties their “fair share” of the region’s projected housing needs. The City of Roseville’s published Regional Housing Needs Allocations (RHNA) for the planning period (2021 through 2029) projected a need for the construction of an additional 12,066 housing units, allocated as follows:
3,855 very low-income units, 2,323 low-income units, 1,746 moderate income units, and 4,142 above moderateincome units (SACOG 2020: 4-11).

Ascent Population, Employment, and Housing
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.13-3 City of Roseville Economic Development Strategy
The City of Roseville Economic Development Strategy (Economic Development Strategy) outlines a framework for economic growth within Roseville (City of Roseville 2022). The Economic Development Strategy establishes goals, actions, and measurements for capturing and expanding business investment and focuses on partnerships, sharing resources, and building on competitive advantages. Specifically, goals and actions provided in the Development Environment strategic area aims to “increase or maintain resources dedicated to infrastructure that contributes to economic development and neighborhood quality,” and to “explore utility-specific economic development programs and solutions to support development and investment.”

3.13.2 Environmental Setting

POPULATION
Population and Population Growth
The project is located in the City of Roseville, which is the largest city within Placer County. The California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the City’s current population to be 158,494 (DOF 2025). Table 3.13-2 illustrates the City’s increase in population over the past 20 years using data from the US Census. Between 2000 and 2010, the City’s population increased significantly (49 percent). Population growth continued to increase at a slower pace between 2010 and 2019, following the 2008 housing crisis during which Roseville experienced a substantial slowdown in residential development. Between 2010 and 2019, the population continued to grow, but at a slower rate (19 percent).

There continues to be a similar upward trend in population growth between 2019 and 2023 (12 percent).

While growth was slower between 2010 and 2023, Roseville has experienced a generally steady population growth in the past two decades, which can be attributed to a strong economy and development in the City’s specific plan areas (City of Roseville 2020). While the project site is not within a specific plan, three City specific plan areas (the Creekview Specific Plan, the West Roseville Specific Plan, and the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan) are each located near or within a two-mile radius. The Regional University Specific Plan, in unincorporated Placer County, is located less than two miles from the project site. It is approved, but has not yet resulted in the development of any residences.

Table 3.13-2 City of Roseville Population Growth (2000-2023) Year Population
2000 80,092
2010 119,335
2019 141,492
2023 159,126
Population Growth
Year Population change (%)
2000 - 2010 49
2010 - 2019 19
2019 - 2023 12
Sources: US Census 2000, 2010, 2019, 2023.

Planned Population Density
Development in accordance with the General Plan would result in a population density that is expected to be distributed in a relatively even manner throughout the City’s planning area. With buildout of the General Plan, the population is estimated to notably rise, an increase of approximately 46 percent from previous pre-buildout estimates (City of Roseville 2020: II-23).

Population, Employment, and Housing Ascent
City of Roseville

3.13-4 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

HOUSING
Housing Occupancy
Housing occupancy generally increased within Roseville from 2010 to 2023. As shown in Table 3.2-3, the number and percentage of occupied housing units increased in 2023 compared to 2010. As of 2023, the City had 1,939 vacant housing units.

Table 3.13-3 Housing Occupancy in the City of Roseville (2010-2023) Household size 2010 2019 2023
Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage
Occupied housing units 44,079 91.2 53,093 94.0 61,142 96.8 Vacant housing units 4,253 8.8 3,401 6.0 1,939 3.2
Homeowner vacancy rate 3.7 — 0.0 — 0.7 —
Rental vacancy rate 9.4 — 6.7 — 5.5 —
Sources: US Census 2010, 2019, 2023.

Jobs/Housing Balance
The jobs/housing balance is defined as the ratio of the number of jobs to the number of housing units in an area. Jobs and housing are balanced when there are an equal number of employed residents and jobs in an area, with a ratio of approximately 1.0. The relationship between jobs and housing is affected by local employment opportunities, household incomes, housing prices, and non-residential lease rates and land costs. The Land Use Element of the General Plan also contains policies to guide the jobs/housing balance within the City, as described above. The jobs to dwelling units ratio is 1.55, which means there are 1.55 jobs for every housing unit, and is estimated to increase to 1.6 to 2.0 with buildout of the General Plan in 2035 (City of Roseville 2020).

EMPLOYMENT
Unemployment Rate
As shown in Table 3.13-4, the unemployment rate within Roseville decreased from 11.3 percent to 3.7 percent between 2010 and 2025. This unemployment pattern closely mirrored the state’s unemployment rate drop from 12.8 percent to 5.3 percent.

Table 3.13-4 Unemployment Rates in the City of Roseville and California (2010-2025) Year California City of Roseville
2010 2019 2025 2010 2019 2025
Unemployment Rate (%) 12.8 5.1 5.3 11.3 3.4 3.7
Sources: US Census 2010, 2019; Bureau of Labor Statistics 2025; EDD 2025.

Employment by Industry
As shown in Table 3.13-5, the educational services, health care, and social assistance industry employed the most individuals (24.6 percent) within Roseville in 2023. The other main industries in the City include public administration (7.8 percent); retail trade (11.1 percent); finance and insurance, real estate, and rental and leasing (8.9 percent); and professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services (11.9 percent).

Between 2010 and 2023, employment ratios remained fairly similar across industries even though the total workforce increased by 22,026 individuals. Professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services jobs increased the most (6.1 percent) between 2010 and 2023; followed by public administration jobs (2.4 percent); and educational services, health care, and social assistance jobs (1 percent).

Ascent Population, Employment, and Housing
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.13-5 Table 3.13-5 Employment by Industry in the City of Roseville (2010-2023) Industry 2010 2019 2023
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 0 0.0 148 0.2 310 0.4 Construction 2,716 5.1 2,288 3.2 4,345 5.7
Manufacturing 3,690 6.9 4,333 6.1 4,935 6.5
Wholesale trade 1,131 2.1 2,459 3.5 1,654 2.2
Retail trade 7,109 13.2 8,570 12.1 8,385 11.1
Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 3,106 5.8 3,137 4.4 4,285 5.7 Information 1,589 3.0 1,286 1.8 2,323 3.1
Finance and insurance, real estate, and rental and leasing 5,932 11.0 7,986 11.2 6,778 8.9 Professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services
6,180 5.8 9,246 13.0 9,027 11.9
Educational services, health care, and social assistance 12,702 23.6 16,617 23.4 18,674 24.6 Arts, entertainment, recreation, and accommodation and food services 3,938 7.3 4,974 7.0 5,427 7.2 Other services, except public administration 2,730 5.1 4,056 5.7 3,675 4.9 Public administration 2,914 5.4 5,950 8.4 5,945 7.8
Total workforce 1 53,737 100 71,050 100 75,763 100
1 The total workforce is composed of the civilian employed population 16 years and over.

Sources: US Census 2010, 2019, and 2023.

3.13.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
The population, employment, and housing analysis relies on technical data from the 2000-2019 and 2023 Census, 2010–2019 American Community Survey (e.g., population, housing, growth rates, and income levels), 2025 Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025 Employment Development Department, and the General Demographic Data Characteristics, as well as applicable elements and policies from the City of Roseville General Plan.

The analysis focuses on the population growth expected from buildout (Phase 1 and 2) of the proposed project. As described in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” Phase 1 would employ 439 new employees and Phase 2 would employ 92 new employees, for a total of 531 new employees. It is estimated that 165 existing employees would be relocated to staff Phase 1 project components, resulting in a total of 696 employees at full operational buildout. Additionally, 40-60 temporary construction workers would be onsite throughout the construction of both Phase 1 and 2.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The project would cause a significant impact related to population, employment, and housing if it would:
 induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or  displace substantial numbers of existing people or homes, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Population, Employment, and Housing Ascent
City of Roseville

3.13-6 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
The project would not remove any existing housing and would not displace any people or housing. The project would be located on 243 acres of undeveloped agricultural land owned by the City. Several structures are located on the site, including a former residence. These structures may be demolished prior to project development or some of them may be repurposed. For example, the former residence may be used as a temporary office or could be used by a vendor as the vendor lease office. Therefore, the project would not displace existing people or homes, requiring the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. This issue is not discussed further.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.13-1: Potential to Induce Substantial Unplanned Population Growth Phase 1
The proposed project would improve the City’s waste management operations by allowing City services to increase as a result of increased projected demands for solid waste and recycling services. Construction and operation of Phase 1 of the project would generate temporary jobs (up to 60 construction workers) and 439 new permanent jobs that could induce population growth. Although the City’s population is growing, current and projected growth has been anticipated and planned for in the City of Roseville’s General Plan. Thus, this increase in population or housing demand from new or existing workers relocating to the area because of the project would be within the scope of growth projections of the City of Roseville General Plan. The project would require the extension of existing infrastructure and development of new infrastructure, which could induce unplanned population growth or increase housing demand in the area, this impact would be significant.

The project has been developed to address the City’s current and projected demands for municipal services. As described in Section 2.2.4, “Projected Increases in Demand for Materials Handling,” once the City reaches buildout of the General Plan (estimated in 2038), growth in the waste stream from within the City could plateau. However, SACOG growth projections indicate that areas immediately around the City will continue to grow at a 1 percent rate.

The project has been sized to accommodate this planned regional growth, combined with the assumption that population growth within and surrounding the city will continue beyond General Plan buildout. The project would serve the City’s existing and future demands, based on reasonable growth forecasts.

Phase 1 of the project involves the development of a Resource Recovery and Transfer Operations (RRTO) facility, a corporation yard, which would consist of an environmental utilities’ services facility and equipment maintenance facility, and a vendor lease area. It is estimated that 165 existing employees would be relocated from the current Hilltop Circle Corporation Yard to staff the project. Additionally, project construction and operation of Phase 1 of the project would generate temporary (up to 60 construction workers) and 439 new permanent jobs that could directly induce unplanned population growth in the area if the local workforce could not support the employment needs of the project.

As shown in Table 3.13-5, Roseville had 4,345 people employed in the construction industry as of 2023. This would be sufficient to meet the demand for temporary construction workers (between 40-60 workers) that would be generated by the project. Therefore, construction of the project would not contribute to substantial unplanned population growth.

The project would create additional permanent employment opportunities for residents of Roseville and surrounding areas, which would aid in improving the City’s job market. As of 2025, the unemployment rate in the City was 3.7 percent, which is significantly lower when compared to the unemployment rate of 11.3 percent in 2010 (Table 3.13-4).

Within the City, there are approximately 9,027 workers employed in the professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services industry, which is the fastest growing and second largest industry in the City (Table 3.13-5). Phase 1 of the project would employ 439 new workers, which is approximately 4.9 percent of the total professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management services workers employed in Roseville, as of 2023. It is anticipated that the project would likely draw largely from the local employment pool, including the unemployed.

Ascent Population, Employment, and Housing
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.13-7 As of 2023, the City had 1,939 vacant housing units (Table 3.13-3). Three specific plan areas (the Creekview Specific Plan, the West Roseville Specific Plan, and the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan) are each located near or within a two-mile radius of the project site. The Creekview Specific Plan area is planned to accommodate 2,011 new residential units at buildout; the West Roseville Specific Plan area will include 9,496 residential units, and the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan area will include 2,827 new residential units. It is not possible at this time to predict the residential location of future employees of the project; however, it is possible that the jobs generated by the project could draw employees from outside of Roseville. Although, given the existing number of workers within Roseville and the future buildout of the various specific plan areas within the city, the project would not contribute to substantial unplanned population growth.

The project would require the extension of existing infrastructure and development of new infrastructure, including improvements to Phillip Road to provide access to the project site. The current condition of Phillip Road would be improved along the frontage of the project site and east to the westerly terminus of Blue Oaks Boulevard. The improvements to Phillip Road would meet the City’s standard, 48-foot right of way Collector/Commercial Street requirements, excluding sidewalks. Water, wastewater, stormwater, data, and electrical infrastructure would also be extended to support operation of the project. As described in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” other developments in the region may improve portions of Phillip Road and/or extend utility infrastructure ahead of this project. The off-site infrastructure improvements would be sized to serve the project’s transportation, circulation, and utility requirements, and would also be sized to serve the proposed Philip Road project (not yet approved, but is under consideration by the City) and the approved Regional University project (approved, but not started). The off-site water, wastewater, stormwater, data, and electrical infrastructure improvements would be sized to meet only the demands of the proposed project.

However, by meeting City improvement standards for roadways, the improvement of Phillip Road would remove a constraint to growth, which could indirectly induce unplanned population growth, particularly in the areas located west and south of the project site. These areas are located within unincorporated Placer County and, as such, development activity in these areas cannot be controlled by the City. It is worth noting that the future Placer Parkway would be located just south of the project site; thus, the areas located in close proximity to the project site and future regional roadway facility are not likely to be developed with housing, but it cannot be ruled out as a possibility.

As described above, population growth by itself is not considered a significant environmental impact and direct impacts associated with development needed to accommodate increased population are evaluated in appropriate sections in this EIR (e.g., Section 3.5, "Biological Resources"; Section 3.14, "Public Services"; Section 3.15, "Utilities and Service Systems”; Section 3.16, "Traffic and Transportation"). Given the existing number of workers within Roseville and adjacent communities, the future buildout of adjacent specific plan areas, and current unemployment rates, construction and operation of Phase 1 of the project would not contribute to direct unplanned population growth. However, improvements to Phillip Road, combined with potential for development in unincorporated Placer County, could potentially result in indirect unplanned population growth, which would be a significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
There are no available mitigation measures to reduce this impact.

Significance after Mitigation
By meeting City improvement standards for roadways, the improvement of Phillip Road would remove a constraint to growth, which could indirectly induce unplanned population growth, particularly in the areas located west and south of the project site. These areas are located within unincorporated Placer County and, as such, development activity in these areas cannot be controlled by the City. There are no available mitigation measures to reduce the potential for unplanned growth resulting from the project’s improvement of Phillip Road. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Population, Employment, and Housing Ascent
City of Roseville

3.13-8 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Phase 2
Phase 2 of the project would involve the construction and operation of additional square footage at the RRTO Facility and the construction and operation of a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility. Construction and operation of Phase 2 of the project would generate temporary (up to 60 construction workers) and 62 new permanent jobs that could induce population growth. Although the population in the City of Roseville is growing, current and projected growth has been anticipated and planned for the City of Roseville’s General Plan. Thus, and similar to Phase 1, any increase in population or housing demand from new or existing workers relocating to the area because of the project would be within the scope of the growth projections of the City of Roseville General Plan. Additionally, Phase 2 would require the installation of a new electrical substation on the project site to serve the project; however, unlike Phase 1, there would be no new potentially growth-inducing infrastructure needed, as the substation would serve only the project’s electricity requirements, and would not create opportunities for other development in a way that could induce substantial population growth. Because the project does not propose new housing, businesses, or other land use changes that would induce direct or indirect unplanned population growth or increase housing demand in the area, this impact would be less than significant.

Phase 2 of the project would involve the construction and operation of additional square footage at the RRTO facility and the construction and operation of a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility. Construction and operation of Phase 2 of the project would generate temporary jobs (up to 60 construction workers) and 62 new permanent jobs that could directly induce unplanned population growth in the area if the local workforce could not support the employment need of the project.

Similar to Phase 1, it is anticipated that the project would likely draw largely from the local employment pool, including the unemployed, for both construction and permanent workers. As a result, the employment opportunities provided by the project would not result in a large number of employees relocating from areas outside of the region.

Additionally, given the City’s 3.7 percent unemployment rate (Table 3.13-2) and the 1,939 vacant housing units (Table

3.13-3), it is anticipated that Phase 2 of the project would likely draw entirely from the local employment pool, including the unemployed. Further, the project site is located within a two-mile radius of three specific plan areas (the Creekview Specific Plan, the West Roseville Specific Plan, and the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan), which would provide a total of over 14,000 residential units at buildout.

Improvements to Phillip Road and extension of utility infrastructure would be completed as part of Phase 1; however, Phase 2 would require the installation of a new substation on the project site to serve the project’s electricity requirements. The substation would not be sized to support future development beyond the project. Therefore, the project would not create opportunities for other development in a way that could induce substantial population growth.

Given the existing number of workers within Roseville, the future buildout of nearby specific plan areas, and current unemployment rates, construction and operation of Phase 2 of the project would not contribute to unplanned population growth. For these reasons, Phase 2 of the project would have a less-than-significant impact related to unplanned population growth.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Ascent Public Services
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.14-1

3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
This section provides an overview of existing public services in the City of Roseville and evaluates the potential for implementation of the proposed Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project to affect availability, service level, and/or capacity of public services, including fire protection services, police protection services, public schools, parks, and libraries, and, if such an effect is determined to occur, whether new or expanded facilities would be required that could result in a potentially significant impact to the environment. Other publicly provided utility services, such as water and wastewater treatment, stormwater management, electricity, and natural gas services, are addressed in Section 3.15, “Public Utilities.”
One comment letter regarding public services was received in response to the notice of preparation (see Appendix A). Placer County expressed concern regarding whether the project site is in close enough proximity for public service providers to respond to emergency calls and whether these public service facilities have sufficient capacity to respond in a timely manner. This issue is addressed in this section.

3.14.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to public services are applicable to the project.

STATE
California Fire Code
The California Fire Code, which incorporates by adoption the International Fire Code, contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.

The California Fire Code contains specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety.

California Health and Safety Code
State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code. This includes regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high‐rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

California Occupational Safety and Health Administration In accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 8 Sections 1270 “Fire Prevention” and 6773 “Fire Protection and Fire Equipment,” the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.

State School Funding
California Education Code Section 17620 authorizes school districts to levy a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement against any development project for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities, provided that the district can show justification for levying of fees. California Government Code Section 65995 limits the fee to be

Public Services Ascent
City of Roseville

3.14-2 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR collected to the statutory fee unless a school district conducts a School Facility Needs Assessment (California Government Code Section 65995.6) and meets certain conditions.

Senate Bill (SB) 50 (Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998) instituted a school facility program by which school districts can apply for state construction and modernization funds. This legislation imposed limitations on the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities impacts as a condition of approving new development.

LOCAL
City of Roseville General Plan
The City of Roseville General Plan (2020a) contains the following policies that may be applicable to the project:

Fire Protection
 Policy SAFE4.2: Continue to follow service level response times, as listed in the City’s Standards of Cover document.
 Policy SAFE4.4: Provide a comprehensive emergency medical services program to deliver basic and advanced life support services.
 Policy SAFE4.5: Provide highly trained personnel to ensure effective suppression of fires and safety for firefighters.
 Policy SAFE4.7: Phase the timing of the construction of fire stations to be available to serve the surrounding service area.

Police Services
 Policy SAFE3.1: Provide a high level of visible patrol services within the City.  Policy SAFE3.2: Respond to both emergency and routine calls for service in a timely manner consistent with department policy.
 Policy SAFE3.8: Work with other city departments to review public and private development plans, ensuring that crime prevention is addressed.
 Policy SAFE3.9: Coordinate with patrol officers in patrolling parks, open space and trails, and continue coordination with other law enforcement agencies.

Schools
 Policy PF3.2: Financing for new school facilities should be identified and secured before new development is approved, where feasible.
 Policy PF3.4: The City and the school districts will work together to develop criteria for the designation of school sites, consider the opportunities for reducing the cost of land for school facilities, and work to minimize vehicular traffic by ensuring opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian connections. The City shall encourage the school districts to comply with City standards in the design and landscaping of school facilities.  Policy PF3.6: Designate public/quasi-public land uses in clusters so that the use of schools, parks, open space, libraries, child care, and community activity and service centers create a community or activity focus.

Parks and Recreation
 Policy PR1.11: Plan for safe and secure parks and recreation areas.  Policy PR1.14: Ensure that adequate funding is provided for initial development and ongoing maintenance and operation of new public parks, recreation facilities, open space, paseos, and greenways.

Ascent Public Services
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.14-3 City of Roseville 2025 Design and Construction Standards Section 8 of the Roseville design standards require a minimum flow of water for fire protection in accordance with the California Fire Code, as adopted by the Roseville Fire Department. For single-family detached houses, water mains must provide a flow of 1,500 gallons per minute. The required fire flow for multi-family, commercial, business, industrial, and school areas is determined on a case-by-case basis by the Roseville Fire Department, but may not exceed 4,000 gallons per minute, provided the buildings are fully sprinklered. For buildings that are not sprinklered, project applicants must contact the Roseville Fire Department.

Fire hydrants shall be placed at street intersections wherever possible. Fire hydrants and blow-offs not located at intersections shall be installed on property lines between lots. Fire hydrants and blow-offs shall have a maximum spacing of 500 feet measured along the street frontage in residential areas and a maximum spacing of 350 feet in all other areas. Hydrants shall be required within a cul-de-sac or dead-end street measuring more than 250 feet as measured from the curb return of the intersecting street and the end of the bulb or street.

Sections 5, 6, and 7 of the Roseville design standards contain requirements that are intended to provide safe access to property and on streets throughout the City for motorists and emergency vehicles, including driveways, turn lanes, streets, and traffic lights.

City of Roseville Municipal Code
Chapter 4.52, “Public Facilities Fee,” of Municipal Code Title 4 is intended to provide funds for capital projects, necessary to maintain service required by the general plan within existing service areas and existing portions of the city which are developed or for which land use has already been granted, and to ensure compliance with the applicable zoning ordinance and general plan requirements for the facilities funding. Fees are imposed on new residential development, commercial, industrial, and business/professional development in accordance with Sections

4.52.050 to 4.52.090 of Chapter 4.52.

Roseville Fire Department Standards of Cover
The Roseville Fire Department’s Standards of Cover report establishes both baseline emergency response and benchmark performance measures (Roseville Fire Department 2020). Baseline measures reflect historical performance, and benchmarks are Total Response Time (TRT) goals. TRT is measured in two ways: first-arriving unit and effective response force (ERF) (i.e., total number of personnel necessary to address the emergency situation). TRT is composed of call processing time, turnout time, and travel time. The Roseville Fire Department observes the 90th percentile of performance as opposed to the average response time (i.e., 50th percentile in a normally distributed set of data). This depicts more efficiently what is done the majority of the time as opposed to what is done approximately half the time.

Based on the City of Roseville’s adopted General Plan, comprehensive risk assessment that included historical data sets, fiscal resources, and input from community stakeholders, the Standards of Cover report establishes the following three primary benchmark performance measures in terms of deployment and emergency response:
 First Unit –Total Response Time – EMS Calls for Service = 7 Minutes at 90th Percentile  First Unit –Total Response Time – Fire, Hazardous Material and Technical Rescue Calls for Service = 8 Minutes at 90th Percentile
 Effective Response Force – Fire Calls for Service = 11 Minutes and 30 Seconds at 90th Percentile Emergency medical services (EMS) 90th percentile performance benchmarks are 7 minutes for the first-arriving unit and 10 minutes and 30 seconds for the ERF. Fire suppression, hazardous materials, and technical rescue benchmarks have been set at 8 minutes for the first-arriving unit and 11 minutes and 30 seconds for the ERF. Baseline performance measures for EMS are 8 minutes and 12 seconds for the first-arriving unit, and there were not enough ERF incidents requiring a complete ERF to determine an accurate total response time. Baseline performance measures for fire suppression are 9 minutes and 36 seconds for the first-arriving unit, 14 minutes and 6 seconds for an initial moderate fire ERF, and 22 minutes and 30 seconds for a high ERF. Baseline performance measures for hazardous materials firstarriving unit are 9 minutes and 30 seconds, and ERF is 16 minutes and 48 seconds. Baseline performance measures for technical rescue are 9 minutes and 48 seconds for the first-arriving unit and ERF is 19 minutes and 30 seconds (Roseville Fire Department 2020).

Public Services Ascent
City of Roseville

3.14-4 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

3.14.2 Environmental Setting
Public services are currently provided to the project site primarily by the City of Roseville, as noted in Table 3.14-1.

Table 3.14-1 Public Services Providers in the City of Roseville Service Providers
Fire and Police Protection City of Roseville
Schools Roseville City School District, Roseville Joint Union High School District, Eureka Union School District, Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District, and Center Joint Unified School District Parks and Recreation City of Roseville
Source: City of Roseville 2020a.

FIRE PROTECTION
The Roseville Fire Department provides fire protection, fire suppression, emergency medical services, and hazardous materials management within the City. The Roseville Fire Department employs approximately 119 personnel and operates eight fire stations within the city limits (City of Roseville 2020a: VIII-21). The Roseville Fire Department also provides fire code enforcement, fire safety inspections, plan review, hazardous materials enforcement and inspections, hazard abatement, public information, and public education activities, emergency preparedness, and other services.

Additionally, the City maintains mutual and automatic aid agreements with the Placer County Fire Department, the South Placer Fire Protection District, the Rocklin Fire Department, and the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District.

The project site is located within District 9, which is served by Fire Station #9 (2451 Hayden Parkway). Future Fire Station #11 would be located to the northeast of the project site (in the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan area).

Each of Roseville’s eight fire stations houses a fire engine, a Captain that supervises the assigned personnel, an Engineer that drives the truck and operates the fire pump, and a Firefighter-paramedic that performs firefighting and life-saving skills. Additionally, two of the fire stations also house a fire truck, containing a variety of specialized tools and ladders. Several of the fire stations also have smaller wildland fire engines, which are designed to operate offroad to fight wildland fires (Roseville Fire Department 2025).

The Roseville Fire Department’s benchmark response time is 8 minutes, 90 percent of the time (Roseville Fire Department 2020). As shown in Table 3.14-2, most response times were under 10 minutes for an emergency call in 2023. In 2023, the Roseville Fire Department responded to over 19,647 calls for service with 90 percent of responses within 9 minutes and 33 seconds (City of Roseville 2024a: D-62).

Table 3.14-2 Roseville Fire Department Response Times
Response Time Goal 2022 Actuals 2023 Actuals 2024 Estimate 2025 Estimate Total response time (call to arrival) for 90% of the total emergency technical rescue incidents
10:31 10:45 09:50 08:00
Total response time (call to arrival) for 90% of the total emergency fire incidents
09:22 08:35 09:59 08:00
Total response time (call to arrival) for 90% of the total emergency medical incidents
09:08 09:20 09:14 07:00
Source: City of Roseville 2024a: D-60.

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has established a fire hazard severity classification system to assess the potential for wildland fires. The City’s Planning Area is designated by CAL FIRE as a Local Responsibility Area, and there are no Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. For a discussion of the project’s potential effects on wildfire and wildfire-related risks, see Section 3.17, “Wildfire.” Nevertheless, the Roseville Fire Department reviews proposed development that includes open space or is located adjacent to open spaces to ensure appropriate fire safety provisions are included.

Ascent Public Services
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.14-5 An important requirement for fire suppression is adequate fire flow, which is the amount of water, expressed in gallons per minute, available to control a given fire and the length of time this flow is available. The total fire flow needed to extinguish a structural fire is based on a variety of factors, including building design, internal square footage, construction materials, dominant use, height, number of floors, and distance to adjacent buildings. Minimum requirements for available fire flow at a given building are dependent on standards set in the California Fire Code. According to the City of Roseville General Plan, Roseville’s supply and availability of water for firefighting needs is sufficient to serve the demands of buildout of the General Plan, which includes the project site (City of Roseville 2020a: VIII-21).

POLICE PROTECTION
The Roseville Police Department provides primary law and traffic enforcement services within Roseville. From police headquarters at 1051 Junction Boulevard, Roseville Police Department is responsible for patrol duty within the city limits, including parks and open space areas, responding to and investigating crimes and other calls for service, providing animal control services, and ensuring traffic safety (City of Roseville 2020a: VIII-19). Also within 1051 Junction Boulevard, the Roseville Police Department staffs and houses its own communications center, which is the 911 public safety answering point for the City (City of Roseville 2020a: VIII-19). The communications center dispatches for Roseville Police and Fire.

The Roseville Police Department supports 226 full time equivalent positions, including 155 sworn officers and 71 professional personnel (Roseville Police Department 2024). In 2024, the City employed 226 full time equivalent positions and has an estimated population of 154,329 (California Department of Finance 2024), providing a police-topopulation ratio of 1.46 officers per 1,000 residents. The Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2024/2025 budget totals $63.8 million and provides funding to support current and future staff members (City of Roseville 2024a: D-54).

Funding for law enforcement services primarily comes from the City’s General Fund.

The City has not adopted a police-to-population ratio; rather, the Roseville Police Department sets a response goal of 3 minutes or less for 90 percent of emergency calls (City of Roseville 2020b).

SCHOOLS
School services in Roseville are provided by the Roseville City School District, Roseville Joint Union High School District, Eureka Union School District, Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District, and Center Joint Unified School District.

The Roseville City School District consists of 16 elementary schools (grades K–5) and four middle schools (grades 6–8).

Enrollment for the 2023–2024 school year for the Roseville City School District was 12,004 students (California Department of Education 2024).

The Roseville Joint Union High School District currently operates six comprehensive high schools, a continuation school, an adult school, and an independent study school. Enrollment for the 2023–2024 school year for the entire Roseville Joint Union High School District was 12,626 students and enrollment for district high schools serving the City was 6,726 (California Department of Education 2024).

The Eureka Union School District operates three elementary schools that serve grades K-3, two schools that serve grades 4-6, and two schools that serve grades 7-8. Excelsior Elementary School, Maidu Elementary School, Olympus Junior High School are within the city limits. Enrollment for the 2023-2024 school year for the entire Eureka Union School District was 3,315 students and enrollment for district schools serving the City was 1,338 (California Department of Education 2024).

The Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District operates six elementary schools (grades K-5), one K-8 school, and two middle schools (grades 6-8). Coyote Ridge Elementary School, Heritage Oak Elementary School, Quail Glen Elementary School, and Silverado Middle School are within the city limits. Enrollment for the 2023-2024 school year for the entire Dry Creek Joint Union School District was 6,725 students and enrollment for district schools serving the City was 2,969 (California Department of Education 2024).

Public Services Ascent
City of Roseville

3.14-6 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR The Center Joint Unified School District consists of five elementary schools, one middle school (grades 7–8), and two high schools in unincorporated Sacramento County. Enrollment for the 2023-2024 school year for the entire Center Joint Unified School District was 4,439 students and enrollment for district schools serving the City was 2,876 (California Department of Education 2024).

The project site is located within the boundaries of the Roseville City School District and the Roseville Joint Union High School District. According to the City of Roseville General Plan EIR, multiple new schools are planned in the above school districts—including Roseville City School District and Roseville Joint Union High School District—several of which are currently under construction or will be constructed in the next few years (City of Roseville 2020b: 4.11-9).

PARKS AND RECREATION
Roseville’s park and recreation facilities are operated by the City of Roseville Parks, Recreation & Libraries Department. In 2016, the City had 1,043 acres of parkland (City of Roseville 2020b: 4.11-10). The City has an adopted standard of nine acres of parkland per 1,000 residents and defines “parkland” to include public developed parks, recreational open space, and joint-use park-school facilities. The nine-acre standard is further divided into six acres of developed parks per 1,000 residents and three acres of open space per 1,000 residents.

Recreational facilities in the vicinity of the project site include Audrey Huisking Park (6485 Garland Way) and Sierra Crossing Park (4251 Brookstone Drive) (City of Roseville 2024b). In addition to traditional parklands, the City also provides open space lands, other green space, multi-use paths, and other recreational facilities such as golf courses and swimming pools.

The Reason Farms Preserve is located to the northeast of the site. This nature preserve was previously used for agriculture and consists of leveled agricultural fields separated by earthen berms, many of which are also used as access roads. An entryway to the nature preserve is marked with a rock sign, and a main trail guides recreationalists through fields with scattered trees to Pleasant Grove Creek.

A series of multi-use paths for cyclists, pedestrians, and non-motorized vehicles are provided throughout Roseville. Multiuse paths are located to the southeast of the project site within the West Roseville Specific Plan area and are currently under construction to the east of the project site within the Creekview Specific Plan area (City of Roseville 2024b).

LIBRARIES
The City’s library system provides facilities and services for people within the city as well as Placer, Sacramento, and Sutter Counties. The Downtown Library is located at 225 Taylor Street in downtown Roseville adjacent to the Civic Center. The Maidu Library is located in Maidu Regional Park in southeast Roseville. The Martha Riley Community Library is located at 1501 Pleasant Grove Boulevard within Mahany Park.

3.14.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
Evaluation of potential public service impacts was based on a review of documents pertaining to the project, including the City of Roseville General Plan (2020a), City of Roseville 2035 General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report (2020b), and consultation with appropriate public service providers. Impacts on public services that would result from the project were identified by comparing existing service capacity and facilities against future demand associated with project implementation.

Ascent Public Services
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.14-7

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The project would cause a significant impact related to public services if it would:
 result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
 fire protection,
 police protection,
 schools,
 parks, and
 other public facilities.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
The project is not expected to result in substantial, direct population growth, and indirect impacts related to population growth are addressed in Section 5.1, “Growth Inducement.” The project includes the development of an environmental utilities operations center on undeveloped agricultural land in the northwest corner of Roseville. At full buildout, the project would provide up to 531 new permanent jobs. It is anticipated that the majority of these employees would be hired from the local population base. For further information on the project’s impact on population, employment, and housing, see Section 3.3, “Population, Employment, and Housing.” Therefore, the project is not expected to increase long-term demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities (e.g., libraries) necessitating the expansion of existing facilities or construction of new facilities. Further and as stated in the City’s General Plan EIR (City of Roseville 2020b), existing and future school facilities and services within the City, as well as parks and recreational facilities, are considered adequate to serve the existing and future City residents. Based on the limited growth associated with the project and the conclusions of the General Plan EIR, the project would not increase long-term demand for schools, parks, or other public facilities such that new facilities would be required, and as such, these issues are not discussed further. The project’s potential to increase the use of existing recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of these facilities would occur or be accelerated is addressed in Chapter 1, “Introduction” under “Effects Not Found to Be Significant.”

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.14-1: Result in the Need for New or Expanded Fire Service Facilities Phase 1
Development of Phase 1 of the project would generate 439 new permanent jobs and could result in an increased demand for fire services. Because Phase 1 of the project would be required to adhere to all applicable standards and fire codes and would not adversely affect existing fire response and performance, implementation of the project would not necessitate the construction of new or expanded fire service facilities within the City of Roseville. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

The project site is located within the Roseville Fire Department’s service area. The project would be required to be designed and operated according to applicable federal, state, and local requirements, which include provisions for smoke detectors, sprinklers, building and emergency access, and hydrant sizing, pressure, and siting.

Development of the project has the potential to adversely affect the ability of the Roseville Fire Department to adequately respond to fire emergencies. The project would include a new RRTO Facility, Corporation Yard, and Vendor

Public Services Ascent
City of Roseville

3.14-8 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Lease Area, and would provide up to 439 new permanent jobs. Solid waste material contains combustible components and the operation of solid waste facilities can result in fire risks. The introduction of new structures and solid waste operations at the site could increase this risk. The City contacted CAL FIRE, which provides fire protection services to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill in Lincoln, California. According to CAL FIRE staff, there are approximately two to five calls per year for CAL FIRE assistance to the landfill and most of these service calls are medical calls (Bradley, pers. comm., 2025b). Therefore, the Roseville Fire Department expects that the number and type of calls for service for the project would be similar and that the Roseville Fire Department could accommodate the small increase in calls for service without the need for additional facilities or infrastructure (Bradley, pers. comm., 2025b).

As a result, implementation of the project would not create a substantial demand on fire protection resources and would not interfere with existing services. As part of the City’s development review process, the City will ensure that existing fire protection services and facilities are adequate to serve the project once construction is complete. Fire services are a general fund department funded primarily by sales tax and property tax revenue. According to the City of Roseville General Plan EIR, future Fire Station #11 is planned to be located in the Amoruso Ranch Specific Plan area, northeast of the project site (City of Roseville 2020b: 4.11-3). While the new fire station is planned to better serve the west Roseville area, according to the Roseville Fire Department, implementation of the project would not require construction of new or expanded fire protection services or facilities (Bradley, pers. comm., 2025a). The project would be required to adhere to all applicable requirements related to fire protection, is within the Fire Department’s existing service area, and, most importantly, would not require the need for new or expanded facilities. Therefore, impacts related to fire protection would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Phase 2
Development of Phase 2 of the project would generate 92 new permanent jobs and could result in an increased demand for fire services. Because Phase 2 of the project would adhere to all applicable standards and fire codes and would not adversely affect existing fire response and performance, implementation of the project would not necessitate the construction of new or expanded fire service facilities within the City of Roseville. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

As discussed for Phase 1, Phase 2 of the project would be designed and operated according to applicable federal, state, and local requirements, which include provisions for smoke detectors, sprinklers, building and emergency access, and hydrant sizing, pressure, and siting.

Phase 2 would expand the RRTO Facility and would include a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility, providing up to 92 new permanent jobs. As described for Phase 1, solid waste material contains combustible components and the operation of solid waste facilities, including the addition of a potential future compost and/or biomass facility as part of Phase 2, could result in fire risks. The introduction of new and expanded structures and operations at the site could increase this risk. However, the Roseville Fire Department expects that the number and type of calls for service for the project would be similar to those received for the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill in Lincoln, California, and that the Roseville Fire Department could accommodate the small increase in calls for service without the need for additional facilities or infrastructure (Bradley, pers. comm., 2025b).

Similar to Phase 1, implementation of Phase 2 of the project would not create a substantial demand on fire protection resources and would not interfere with existing services. As part of the City’s development review process, the City will ensure that existing fire protection services and facilities are adequate to serve the project once construction is complete. According to the Roseville Fire Department, implementation of Phase 2 would not require construction of new or expanded fire protection services or facilities (Bradley, pers. comm., 2025a). Similar to Phase 1, Phase 2 of the project would be required to adhere to all applicable requirements related to fire protection, is within the Fire Department’s existing service area, and, most importantly, would not require the need for new or expanded facilities.

Therefore, impacts related to fire protection would be less than significant.

Ascent Public Services
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.14-9 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.14-2: Result in the Need for New or Expanded Police Facilities Phase 1
Although it is anticipated that there would be increased calls for service and requests for police due to the development of Phase 1, the project would not result in an increased need for new or expanded police services or facilities. Therefore, impacts related to police protection would be less than significant.

As described above, the project is located within the city limits of Roseville and is served by the City of Roseville Police Department. Phase 1 of the project includes development of an RRTO Facility, Corporation Yard, and Vendor Lease Area on undeveloped, agricultural land in the northwest corner of Roseville. Phase 1 of the project would provide up to 439 new permanent jobs. Furthermore, the project would not add new residential units.

Similar to fire protection, project development would not adversely affect the ability of the Roseville Police Department to adequately respond to emergencies. The City will be beginning a police station expansion in 2026 that will allow the Roseville Police Department to continue to meet and improve current levels of service and increase staffing as needed to serve growth contemplated in the General Plan, which includes the project.

Police services are funded primarily by sales tax and property tax revenue. The Roseville Police Department currently supports 226 full time equivalent positions, including 155 sworn officers and 71 professional personnel (Roseville Police Department 2024). The Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2024/2025 budget totals $63.8 million and provides funding to support current and future staff members (City of Roseville 2024a: D-54). The funding for future positions would expand the Police Department’s current staffing to better serve the City, including the project, but would not result in the construction of new or expanded facilities that could generate significant environmental impacts. The Roseville Police Department has reviewed the project application and did not indicate that the revenue generated by the project would be insufficient to meet its needs or prevent the Roseville Police Department from maintaining current levels of service. Because the project would not result in an increased need for new or expanded police services or facilities, impacts related to police protection would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Phase 2
Although it is anticipated that there would be increased calls for service and requests for police due to the development of Phase 2, the project would not result in an increased need for new or expanded police services or facilities. Therefore, impacts related to police protection would be less than significant.

As described for Phase 1, the project is located within the city limits of Roseville and is served by the City of Roseville Police Department. Phase 2 of the project would expand the RRTO Facility and would include a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility, providing up to 79 new permanent jobs.

Similar to Phase 1, development of Phase 2 would not adversely affect the ability of the Roseville Police Department to adequately respond to emergencies. The City will be beginning a police station expansion in 2026 that will allow the Roseville Police Department to continue to meet and improve current levels of service and increase staffing as needed to serve growth contemplated in the General Plan, which includes the project.

As described for Phase 1, the Roseville Police Department has reviewed the project application and did not indicate that the revenue generated by the project would be insufficient to meet its needs or prevent the Roseville Police Department from maintaining current levels of service. Because the project would not result in an increased need for new or expanded police services or facilities, impacts related to police protection would be less than significant.

Public Services Ascent
City of Roseville

3.14-10 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-1

3.15 PUBLIC UTILITIES
This section evaluates the availability of existing utility and infrastructure systems (i.e., water, wastewater, recycled water, and solid waste) to serve the proposed project and the impact of the project on these systems. The project’s demand for these public utilities and available supplies are also evaluated. Potential effects related to stormwater and drainage are addressed in Section 3.11, “Hydrology and Water Quality,” and potential effects related to increased demand for electricity and natural gas are addressed in Section 3.8, “Energy.” Comments regarding the regulatory context that would apply to the project and the potential for water quality degradation of Pleasant Grove Creek from project development during construction and operations near the creek were received in response to the notice of preparation (see Appendix A); these comments are addressed in Section

3.11, “Hydrology and Water Quality.” Additional comments were received from the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Placer County Conservation Program, and Western Placer Waste Management Authority (WPWMA) about regulatory responsibility of implementing the proposed project and associated services, the need for a solid waste processing facility when a similar facility exists nearby, and the potential for solid waste processed at the project site contaminating nearby Pleasant Grove Creek. These issues are addressed in this section.

3.15.1 Regulatory Setting

DOMESTIC WATER
Federal
Safe Drinking Water Act
As mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law 93‐523), passed in 1974, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates contaminants of concern to domestic water supply. Such contaminants are defined as those that pose a public health threat or that alter the aesthetic acceptability of the water. These types of contaminants are regulated by EPA primary and secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). MCLs and the process for setting these standards are reviewed every 3 years. Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act enacted in 1986 established an accelerated schedule for setting drinking water MCLs. EPA has delegated responsibility for California’s drinking water program to the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (SWRCB-DDW). SWRCB-DDW is accountable to EPA for program implementation and for adoption of standards and regulations that are at least as stringent as those developed by EPA.

State
Urban Water Management Plan
In 1983, the California Legislature enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) (California Water Code Sections 10610–10656). The UWMPA states that every urban water supplier that provides water to 3,000 or more customers, or that provides more than 3,000 acre-feet (af) of water annually, should make every effort to ensure the appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its various categories of customers during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. This effort includes the adoption of an urban water management plan (UWMP) by every urban-water supplier and an update of the plan every 5 years on or before December 31, of every year ending in a five or zero. The UWMPA has been amended several times since 1983 with the most recent amendment occurring with Senate Bill (SB) 318 in 2004.

The City of Roseville 2020 UWMP, adopted in June 2021, is based on the City’s 2035 General Plan and is described in more detail below (City of Roseville 2022).

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-2 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR California Safe Drinking Water Act
The SWRCB-DDW is responsible for implementing the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and its updates, as well as California statutes and regulations related to drinking water. State primary and secondary drinking-water standards are promulgated in California Code of Regulations Title 22, Sections 64431–64501.

The California Safe Drinking Water Act (CA SDWA) was passed in 1976 to build on and strengthen the federal SDWA.

The CA SDWA authorizes SWRCB-DDW to protect the public from contaminants in drinking water by establishing MCLs that are at least as stringent as those developed by EPA, as required by the federal SDWA.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) became law on January 1, 2015 and applies to all groundwater basins in the state (California Water Code [CWC] Section 10720.3). (The SGMA comprises three separate bills: SB 1168, SB 1319, and Assembly Bill [AB] 1739. All three were signed into law by the governor on September 16, 2014.) By enacting the SGMA, the legislature intended to provide local agencies with the authority and the technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater within their jurisdiction (CWC Section 10720.1).

Pursuant to the SGMA, any local agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within a groundwater basin may elect to be a “groundwater sustainability agency” for that basin (CWC Section 10723). West Placer Groundwater Sustainability Agency (WPGSA) consists of the cities of Roseville and Lincoln, Placer County Water Agency (PCWA), Nevada Irrigation District, and Placer County. The WPGSA is one of a group of five GSAs formed within the North American Subbasin that consist of the West Placer, Sacramento, South Sutter Water District, Sutter County, and Reclamation District 1001 GSAs.

The SGMA also requires DWR to categorize each groundwater basin in the state as high, medium, low, or very low priority (CWC Sections 10720.7, 10722.4). On December 15, 2014, DWR announced its official “initial prioritization” of the state’s groundwater basins for purposes of complying with the SGMA, and this priority list became effective on January 1, 2015 (DWR 2022). Per that list, DWR ranked the North American Subbasin as “high priority.” The Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the North American Subbasin was published in 2021 (DWR 2021).

Local
City of Roseville General Plan
The Public Facilities Element of the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan (2020a) contains the following water policies that may be applicable to the project:

Water System
 Policy PF6.1: Secure and maintain sufficient and diverse sources of water to meet the needs of the existing community and planned growth.
 Policy PF6.2: Provide sufficient water treatment capacity and infrastructure to meet projected water demand through buildout of the General Plan.
 Policy PF6.5: New development shall pay a fair share of the cost for adequate water supply, treatment and distribution, including extension of water mains, easement acquisitions, treatment plant expansions, water storage, groundwater wells, pumping expansions, and dry year reliability.  Policy PF6.6: Design the City's water system to maintain a minimum water pressure of 50 pounds per square inch, while providing adequate water to meet fire demands in the system.  Policy PF6.10: Develop and implement water efficiency standards and measures as necessary elements of the water system.
 Policy PF6.11: Continue the management and expansion of the groundwater and aquifer storage and recovery program to increase resiliency and reliability of water supply during all supply conditions.

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-3 City of Roseville Urban Water Management Plan
The City prepared and adopted a 2020 UWMP. This plan was prepared to comply with the UWMPA of the California Water Code (described above). UWMPs must be developed by urban water providers supplying more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 af of water annually and submitted to DWR every 5 years. The UWMP describes the availability of water and discusses water use, recycled water use, and water conservation (City of Roseville 2022).

City of Roseville Municipal Code
Section 14 of the City's Municipal Code contains regulations associated with water rates, conservation, and water waste prohibitions.

City of Roseville Improvement Standards
Section 8 of the City's Improvement Standards (Water System Design) provides criteria for the design of domestic water systems. Compliance with these standards ensures water delivery facilities are properly sized to distribute water to any new customers that would be created as a result of implementing the proposed project.

City of Roseville Water Conservation Ordinance
In 1991, the City developed and adopted the Roseville Water Conservation and Drought Mitigation Ordinance as documented in the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 14.09. Under this ordinance, the City has authority to declare water shortage conditions and implement drought-related mitigation measures. In February 2008, the City of Roseville adopted Ordinance 4629, which added Sections 14.09.200 through 14.09-220 and amended Sections 14.09-020 through 14.09.090 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding water conservation. The purpose of this ordinance is to ensure compliance with all federal, state, and local requirements relating to water conservation and drought mitigation. Ordinance 4629 provides an approach to conservation that reflects there are now more water customers billed on metered rates, which creates additional tools to achieve conservation.

City of Roseville Landscape Ordinance
In 2006, the State enacted legislation requiring DWR to update the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

The updated model ordinance contains several new landscape and irrigation design requirements aimed at reducing water waste in landscape irrigation. All local land use agencies are required to adopt the model ordinance or develop an ordinance that is at least as effective by January 2010. The City of Roseville adopted an Ordinance tailored to meet the City’s needs that is based on, and is at least as effective as, the model ordinance. The new Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance has been incorporated into the City’s Zoning Ordinance as Chapter 19.67 and supersedes the City’s 1993 Water Efficient Landscape Requirements document.

WASTEWATER
Federal
Clean Water Act
The CWA employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. Those portions of the CWA that relate to wastewater discharges are discussed below.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was established under the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States. NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges including point source waste discharges and nonpoint sources (nonpoint source discharges are further discussed in Section 3.11, “Hydrology and Water Quality”). Each NPDES permit identifies limits on allowable concentrations and mass loadings of pollutants contained in the discharge.

Sections 401 and 402 of the CWA contain general requirements regarding NPDES permits. Section 307 of the CWA describes the factors that EPA must consider in setting effluent limits for priority pollutants.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-4 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR NPDES permits cover various industrial and municipal discharges, including discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, stormwater generated by industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than 1 acre, and mining operations. Point source dischargers must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority (usually a state, sometimes EPA, a tribe, or a territory). So-called “indirect” point source dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. “Indirect” dischargers send their wastewater into a public sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering any surface water. Examples of “indirect” dischargers include septic systems, agricultural drainage systems, groundwater injection wells, leaking underground storage tanks, stormwater infiltration basins, and land application of wastewater or sludge.

Industrial Pretreatment
40 CFR 403 requires control authorities (e.g., City of Roseville) to implement an industrial pretreatment program to control discharges of pollutants at industrial facilities prior to discharge into the sanitary sewer system. It is a required program identified within the City's NPDES permit issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The goal of this program is to protect sewer treatment and conveyance infrastructure, public health, and the environment.

State
NPDES Permit for the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant In June 2019, the Central Valley RWQCB issued WDR Municipal General Order No. R5-2017-0085-005 (NDPES No.

CAG585001). Based on the Notice of Intent the Executive Officer determined the Facility’s discharge is eligible for coverage under the Municipal General Order and issued a Notice of Applicability (R5-2017-0085-005) on 28 June 2019. The Notice of Applicability includes effluent limitations with which the Discharger, the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant (PGWWTP), is expected to comply. PGWWTP treats wastewater from its service area before discharging it to Pleasant Grove Creek. This is an NPDES self-monitoring permit that contains performance standards for the effluent discharged into Pleasant Grove Creek. The water quality objectives established in the Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan are protected, in part, by NPDES Permit No. CAG585001.

The quality of the effluent that can be discharged to waterways is established by the Central Valley RWQCB through Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) that implement the NPDES permit. WDRs are updated at least every 5 years.

A new permit must be issued in the event of a major change or expansion of the facility.

Local
City of Roseville General Plan
The Public Facilities Element of the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan (2020a) contains the following wastewater policies that may be applicable to the project:
 Policy PF7.3: Ensure that wastewater treatment capacity is available for planned development and intensification and that wastewater generation is minimized.

City of Roseville Municipal Code
Section 14 of the City's Municipal Code contains requirements associated with sewer use, sewer rates and charges, and industrial wastewater. Chapters 14.12 and 14.26 prohibit discharge to a sanitary sewer of any pollutant or wastewater that would interfere with the operation or performance of the City's wastewater collection or treatment facilities.

City of Roseville Improvement Standards
Section 9 of the City's Improvement Standards (Sanitary Sewer Design) contains criteria for design of sewer systems.

Compliance with these standards is intended to reduce environmental impacts related to wastewater conveyance by ensuring that wastewater collection and conveyance facilities are properly sized to convey generated flows.

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-5 City of Roseville Industrial Pretreatment Program
The City of Roseville’s Industrial Pretreatment Program requires industrial dischargers to obtain wastewater discharge permits due to the potential to disrupt publicly owned treatment works operations from the discharge of industrial wastewater to the sanitary sewer system. These permits are designed to protect City wastewater infrastructure, public health, and the environment and do so by specifying permissible pollutant concentrations and volumes that may be discharged.

SOLID WASTE
Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was enacted in 1976, codified under Title 42 of the US Code Section 6901 et seq. RCRA is overseen by the EPA and serves as the primary federal law governing disposal, storage, and transportation of solid and hazardous waste in the United States.

State
California Building Standards Code (Title 24)
Where a local jurisdiction has not adopted a more stringent construction and demolition (C&D) ordinance, construction activities are required to implement Section 5.408 of the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code).

Under Section 5.408, and in accordance with amendments to SB 1374 (2002), effective January 1, 2017, a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous C&D waste must be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Applicable projects are required to prepare and implement a construction waste management plan, which is submitted to the local jurisdiction before building permits are issued. Applicable projects include all newly constructed residential buildings or structures, existing residential buildings or structures with additions/alterations, all newly constructed nonresidential buildings or structures, existing nonresidential buildings with additions of 1,000 or more square feet, and existing nonresidential alterations when permit valuation or estimated construction cost of alteration is $200,000 or more.

California Integrated Waste Management Act (1989)
To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of in landfills, the State Legislature passed the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties were required to divert 25 percent of all solid waste from landfill facilities by January 1, 1995 and 50 percent by January 1, 2000. Solid waste plans are required to explain how each city’s AB 939 plan will be integrated with the county plan. In order of priority, the plans must promote source reduction, recycling and composting, environmentally safe transformation and land disposal.

In 2011, AB 341 modified the California Integrated Waste Management Act, established a statewide recycling goal of 75 percent, and directed CalRecycle to develop and adopt regulations for mandatory commercial recycling. The resulting Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulation requires that on and after July 1, 2012, certain businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week shall arrange for recycling services. To comply with this requirement, businesses may either separate recyclables and self-haul them or subscribe to a recycling service that includes mixed waste processing.

AB 1826 (Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014; Mandatory Commercial Organics Recycling) requires businesses that generate a specified amount of organic waste per week to arrange for recycling services for that waste, requires jurisdictions to implement recycling programs to divert organic waste from businesses subject to the law, and requires periodic reporting to CalRecycle by jurisdictions on their progress in implementing the program. Organic waste includes food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food-soiled paper waste. Effective April 1, 2016, businesses that generate 8 cubic yards of organic waste per week shall arrange for organic waste recycling services. Effective January 1, 2017, businesses that generate 4 cubic yards of organic waste per week shall arrange for organic waste recycling services.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-6 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR In September 2016, the Governor signed into law SB 1383, establishing methane emissions reduction targets in a statewide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants in various sectors of California's economy. The new law codifies the California Air Resources Board's Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy, established pursuant to SB 605. As it pertains to CalRecycle, SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025.

Local
City of Roseville General Plan
The Public Facilities Element of the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan (2020a) contains the following solid waste policies that may be applicable to the project:
 Policy PF8.1: Ensure existing and future recycling sites and operations remain viable through application of land use compatibility standards.
 Policy PF8.2: Comply with the source reduction and recycling standards by reducing the projected quantity of solid waste disposed at the regional landfill.
 Policy PF8.3: Require a waste characterization profile for proposed large-scale commercial and industrial development projects.

3.15.2 Environmental Setting
Public utilities for the project site are provided by the City of Roseville, as discussed in detail below.

WATER SUPPLY
The City of Roseville Environmental Utilities is responsible for water services within the city limits, including the project site, with the exception of a few small areas of the city that are served by PCWA, San Juan Water District (SJWD), and Citrus Heights Water District. The City provides drinking water from surface water and groundwater resources and diverts water from the American River and from Folsom reservoir (DWR 2021). Surface water is provided through contracts with PCWA, SJWD, and the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Surface water from the American River is collected and diverted at the Folsom Lake Pumping Plant located at Folsom Dam. The City has a diversion capacity of 150 cubic feet per second (cfs) or 96 million gallons per day (mgd) at Folsom Dam. Untreated water supplies received at Folsom Lake Pumping Plant are conveyed by gravity or pumped by USBR depending on lake level through two parallel pipelines (84-inch and 72-inch). The common facilities split and thereafter raw water is conveyed through parallel pipelines—a 60-inch diameter pipeline and a 48-inch diameter pipeline—to the City’s Barton Road Water Treatment Plant (WTP), which has a treatment capacity of 100 mgd (City of Roseville 2022). Additionally, the City has 19 inter-tie facilities with neighboring agencies through which water supplies may be transferred under normal water year conditions as well as emergency or drought conditions (City of Roseville 2022).

Water supplies for the City also include groundwater from the North American Subbasin of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin (City of Roseville 2022). The City currently owns and maintains six groundwater wells. Four of the six wells are capable of aquifer storage and recovery whereby treated water is injected into the underlying aquifer for later extraction and use. Surface water and groundwater resources are also described in detail in Section 3.11, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”
Normal Years
The City has relied on river water for its primary source of water supply since 1971 and diverts water under four contracts for untreated surface water. The four untreated surface water contract entitlements for American River supply a total of

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-7 66,000 acre-feet per year (afy). The City’s purchased surface water supply is subject to reductions pursuant to the Water Forum Agreement (WFA), which provides the framework for how water resources, including surface water and groundwater supplies, would be used in the region through the year 2030. The City along with several other Sacramento-area water suppliers are signatory to the January 2000 WFA. The WFA includes limitations on City surface water diversions from the American River under various hydrologic conditions (Table 3.15-1) (City of Roseville 2022).

In addition, groundwater is available in all year types and recycled water is used within the city for non-potable uses.

Table 3.15-1 shows the City’s schedule of authorized water supply over the next approximately 20 years.

Table 3.15-1 Normal Year Available Water Supplies in Acre-Feet per Year Water Source 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
US Bureau of Reclamation 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 32,000 Placer County Water Agency 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 San Juan Water District 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
Water Forum Limitation1 -7,100 -7,100 -7,100 -7,100 -7,100 Placer County Water Agency (Future)2 0 0 3,360 3,360 3,360 Recycled Water 4,022 4,435 4,933 4,933 4,933
Groundwater 1,560 2,720 3,350 3,350 3,350
Total 64,482 66,055 70,543 70,543 70,543
Note:
1 The Water Forum Agreement limits the City’s maximum surface water diversion to 58,900 acre-feet per year (afy) in normal/wet years, even if there are no curtailments on the City’s total contract amounts of 66,000 afy. 2 An additional 3,360 AF of supply from the PCWA Ophir WTP is assumed to become available in all year types as of 2035.

Source: City of Roseville 2022: 7-8.

Dry Years
The City’s purchased surface water supply is subject to reductions during dry years (seasonal and climatic shortages) pursuant to the WFA, the USBR Operations Criteria and Plan, and the Central Valley Project Municipal and Industrial Water Shortage Policy. The City’s USBR contracted amount is assumed to be reduced by 75 percent in single dry years and the 5th year of a 5-year drought. Available water supplies during a single drought year and in year 5 of a 5- year drought would be the same and are presented in Table 3.15-2.

Table 3.15-2 Single Dry Year and Year 5 of Multiple Dry Years Water Supplies in Acre-Feet per Year Water Source 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
US Bureau of Reclamation 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000
Placer County Water Agency 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 San Juan Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Water Forum Limitation 0 0 0 0 0
Placer County Water Agency (Future) 0 0 3,360 3,360 3,360 Recycled Water 4,036 4,464 4,976 4,976 4,976
Groundwater 7,920 12,570 14,431 14,431 14,431
Total 49,956 55,034 60,767 60,767 60,767
Source: City of Roseville 2022.

It is important to note that during the drier and driest years, the City has agreed to the WFA, which causes Roseville to receive less water from Folsom Reservoir. Although Roseville’s water contract entitlements total 66,000 afy, the City’s diversions from the American River are limited by the WFA in normal/wet years, drier, and driest years. In normal/wet years, the City has agreed to limit surface water diversions from the American River to 58,900 afy. In

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-8 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR driest or critically dry years, the maximum diversion from the American River is limited to 43,800 afy. In drier years, the City may divert an amount between 43,800 and 58,900 afy from the American River, calculated linearly depending on the unimpaired flow into Folsom Reservoir (City of Roseville 2022: 7-3). However, the City has an agreement with PCWA to release an additional 20,000 afy of water down the American River on the City’s behalf through re-operation of PCWA’s American River Middle Fork Project. This 20,000 afy of water is not part of the City’s contracted supply of 66,000 afy. Additionally, because the WFA limitations are calculated linearly (meaning the demand is assumed to increase at a constant rate over time), the limitations are excluded from Table 3.15-2 (City of Roseville 2022: 7-4). This is because real-world water demand often behaves non-linearly due to factors like conservation measures, seasonal variations, and economic changes.

Groundwater Supply
The project site consists of rice farming, a former residence and associated structures, and private groundwater wells.

There are no public or municipal water sources on the project site. The site has two types of groundwater wells (irrigation and domestic). Typically, domestic groundwater wells are drilled to the shallow aquifer due to lower construction costs.

Groundwater is available for use as part of the City’s water supply portfolio in all year types including normal, single dry, or multiple dry year scenarios (Tables 3.15-1 and 3.15-2). Importantly, groundwater will be a critical resource in future drought years as it supplements increasingly vulnerable surface water supplies. Beginning in 2018, the City began to regularly operate existing groundwater infrastructure. In 2019 and 2020, the City was able to store excess surface water using the aquifer storage and recovery production wells to inject water into the aquifer. As the City continues to develop this program and looks to the future of sustainable supply, groundwater pumping patterns will continue to evolve (City of Roseville 2022).

Water Supply Reliability
In the City’s 2020 UWMP, projected water demands were calculated by applying the City’s current land-used based unit water demand factors to land uses in the City’s various specific plans at buildout. As shown in Table 3.15-3, buildout of all specific plans is assumed to occur in 2035 with a total potable and recycled water demand of 62,546 afy and remains constant through 2045. In normal years, water supplies exceed projected water demand through 2045. In single and multiple dry years, projected water demand exceeds water supplies between 1,647 afy in 2025 and 1,985 afy in 2030 (City of Roseville 2022). However, projected demands shown in dry years are conservative and do not assume any water conservation or include the additional 20,000 afy that PCWA would release in drier and driest years identified above. Because the additional 20,000 afy release from PCWA is not part of the contracted water supply, it is not included in the UWMP calculations (shown in the tables), but it would make up the deficit in water supply.

Additionally, the City currently has a water shortage contingency plan (WSCP) in place, as described in Appendix K of the City’s 2020 UWMP. The City assumed in its 2020 UWMP that water demand in single dry or multiple dry years would be equal to normal year water demand. This is a conservative assumption as additional water conservation would likely occur in the event of a drought or another water supply shortage or emergency due to the implementation of additional water conservation measures outlined in the City’s WSCP and Chapter 14.09 of the City’s Municipal Code. The City’s WSCP and Municipal Code include a five-stage plan describing specific actions to reduce water demand by greater than 50 percent in the event of a water supply shortage or emergency (City of Roseville 2022). Currently, the State of California is calling for a voluntary 15 percent conservation. The City was in a Stage 3 drought in 2015 and achieved a 33 percent conservation compared with a normal year. In 2016, the City achieved approximately 25 percent conservation compared with a normal year.

Table 3.15-3 City of Roseville Planned Annual Water Supply and Demand in Acre-Feet per Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Surface water supply 58,900 58,900 62,260 62,260 62,260 Recycled water supply 4,022 4,435 4,933 4,933 4,933
Groundwater supply 1,560 2,720 3,350 3,350 3,350
Total water supply (normal years) 64,482 66,055 70,543 70,543 70,543

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-9 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Water demand1 51,589 56,990 62,547 62,547 62,547
Surplus (+)/Deficit (-) (normal years) +12,893 +9,065 +7,996 +7,996 +7,996 Total water supply (single dry year or multiple dry years)1 49,942 55,005 60,723 60,723 60,723 Water demand2 51,589 56,990 62,547 62,547 62,547
Surplus (+)/Deficit (-) (single dry year or multiple dry years) -1,6472 -1,985 -1,824 -1,824 -1,824 Notes:
1 The 20,000 afy that PCWA would supply in drier and driest years is not part of the contracted supply of 66,000 afy and, therefore, not included in the table.
2 Includes existing and planned residential, commercial and industrial, institutional/governmental, landscaping, groundwater recharge, and system losses. Does not include projected water demand associated with the proposed project.

Source: City of Roseville 2022.

WASTEWATER
The City of Roseville, the South Placer Municipal Utility District, and Placer County are regional participants in the South Placer Wastewater Authority (SPWA). The SPWA was created in 2000 to oversee policy for funding regional wastewater infrastructure. The City owns and operates two regional wastewater treatment facilities on behalf of the regional partners. These treatment facilities are the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant and the PGWWTP.

Wastewater from the project site would be treated at the PGWWTP. The City’s wastewater collection system includes both gravity wastewater pipelines and lift stations with associated force mains.

Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant
The PGWWTP provides tertiary-level treatment through the process of screening, grit removal, extended aeration, secondary clarification, filtration, and ultraviolet disinfection. The plant provides a biological process that achieves full nitrification and de-nitrification and produces recycled water that meets Title 22 regulations for full, unrestricted use.

The PGWWTP was designed to treat 12 mgd average dry weather flow, an expansion was completed in 2023 to expand PGWWTP to treat the originally proposed 12 mgd (Chancey 2023). The City is currently conducting a PGWWTP capacity study.

ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS
Roseville Electric provides electrical service to customers within the City limits. The City’s utility obtains power from a variety of sources. In 2023, Roseville Electric consisted of 29 percent renewable energy, which consisted of solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, and biomass (Roseville Electric 2023). The nearest point of connection to the project site is an existing 12 kilovolt (kV) line located near Blue Oaks Boulevard. The Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is the natural gas service provider for the City. PG&E’s underground transmission pipelines are located throughout City rights-of-way to serve existing development. Expansion of electrical facilities would be required to serve the proposed project. The project would not require the installation of new or expansion of existing natural gas infrastructure; however, compressed natural gas (CNG) would be consumed by on-road trucks as part of the project.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Telecommunication (e.g., phone and internet) facilities are provided through aboveground and underground infrastructure facilities along roads throughout the City. Telecommunications service in the City is provided by a variety of service providers, including by AT&T, Xfinity (Comcast), T-Mobile Home Internet, and Verizon.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-10 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

SOLID WASTE
Solid waste generated in the city of Roseville is collected and hauled by the City and delivered to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill, operated by WPWMA for processing and disposal. The WPWMA is a Joint Powers Authority comprised of the cities of Roseville, Rocklin, and Lincoln and Placer County. The Western Regional Sanitary Landfill is a Class II/III municipal solid waste (non-hazardous) landfill and is permitted to accept 1,900 tons of solid waste per day and 624 vehicles per day. The facility, which opened in 1995, receives, separates, processes, and markets recyclable materials removed from delivered solid waste. In addition to the landfill, the facility includes a public waste and recyclables drop-off area, a compost area, a C&D processing area, the Material Recovery Facility (MRF), and a household hazardous waste collection area. Most solid waste collected from the city of Roseville is delivered to the MRF for processing. The landfill has a total capacity of 36.4 million cubic yards. Projected waste disposal assumes a 2 percent average annual increase in municipal solid waste and based on the landfill’s remaining capacity and projected Waste Disposal trends, the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill is estimated to reach its currently permitted landfill capacity in 2058 (WPWMA 2022). Expansion of the landfill to extend its operational life an additional 43 to 52 years was approved in 2022. This expansion would expand the permitted capacity of the landfill to between 45.1 and 50.2 million cubic yards (WPWMA 2022).

Solid waste is collected through waste collection trucks from City residences and businesses. Recycling and organic waste is collected through the current WPWMA’s One-Big-Bin program but is assumed to be recovered as separate recyclables and organics in the City’s new 3-cart collection system. Using a combination of CalRecycle annual reporting data and City records, it is estimated that the City of Roseville currently delivers materials to the WPWMA facility as shown in Table 3.15-4.

Table 3.15-4 City of Roseville Waste Deliveries to WPWMA per Year by Waste Type Waste Type Amount of Materials (tons per year)
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 84,000
Recyclable Material1 33,000
Organic Waste2 33,000
Notes: WPWMA = Western Placer Waste Management Authority. 1 Recyclable waste is currently collected comingled with MSW per WPWMA’s One-Big-Bin program but is assumed to be recovered as recyclables in the City’s new 3-cart collection system.
2 Organic waste is currently either collected using a dedicated green can for residents or comingled with MSW per WPWMA’s One-Big-Bin program but is assumed to be recovered as organics in the City’s new 3-cart collection system.

Source: Estimates provided by the City of Roseville in 2025.

Under current agreements with WPWMA, the City will continue to send a portion of its waste to WPWMA through June 2043. The annual waste throughputs committed by the City to WPWMA are 9,000 tons per year (tpy) of organic waste, and 38,000 tpy of municipal solid waste (MSW), as described in Chapter 2, “Project Description.”

3.15.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The analysis of water supply in this EIR is based on information included in Roseville Utilities Operations Facility Water Utility Strategy and Evaluation Report (HDR 2024a) and the City of Roseville 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (City of Roseville 2022). Analysis of wastewater treatment, wastewater conveyance, and potable water conveyance is based on information also included in the Roseville Utilities Operation Facility Water Utility Strategy and Evaluation Report (HDR 2024a) and the Technical Memorandum Sanitary Sewer System Recommendations (Jacobs Engineering Group Inc 2025).

Impacts associated with electricity and natural gas could occur if the project would require or result in the construction of new or expanded electricity and natural gas facilities, the construction of which could cause significant

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-11 environmental effects. Impacts on electrical infrastructure and natural gas infrastructure were addressed by evaluating connection points near the project site and examining updates to nearby infrastructure required to adequately serve the project site. Telecommunications facilities are typically co-located with electrical infrastructure; thus, potential effects related to the relocation of construction of electrical (or telecommunications) infrastructure are evaluated together. Additionally, see Section 3.8, “Energy,” for analysis of the project impacts related to energy.

Solid waste disposal demands that would result from the project are based on solid waste generation rates in the 2035 General Plan EIR (City of Roseville 2020b). When possible, a quantitative comparison was used to determine impacts of the project on future demands.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The project would have a significant impact related to public utilities if it would:
 require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, or wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects;
 have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years;
 result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;  generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure;  negatively impact the provision of solid waste services or impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals; or  comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
As noted above, project effects related to increased demand for electricity and natural gas for construction and operations are also evaluated in Section 3.8, “Energy.” Potential effects related to stormwater and drainage are addressed in Section 3.11, “Hydrology and Water Quality.”

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.15-1: New or Expanded Utility Infrastructure Capacity Phase 1
The project would require extending the surrounding utility infrastructure onto the project site. All utility infrastructure extensions and hookups would occur within the disturbance area of the project site or within existing roadways (i.e., Phillip Road), the environmental effects of which have been analyzed in this EIR for which mitigation measures have been identified, where necessary, that would reduce or avoid most impacts to a less-than-significant level. The existing and proposed utility infrastructure would be sufficient to meet the project’s estimated water supply, wastewater, and electrical needs. For these reasons, the impact would be less than significant.

The project site does not include any municipal water facilities on-site and is served by both domestic and irrigation wells. The domestic and irrigation wells would be used to serve the proposed project, as detailed below (HDR 2024a).

Additionally, existing utility infrastructure would be extended onto the project site from existing, nearby connections to serve the project. The project also includes the development of a new electrical substation on the project site.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-12 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Water Supply
Water supply would be provided to the project site by the City of Roseville Environmental Utilities. As detailed above in Section 3.15.2, “Environmental Setting,” the City manages a water distribution system comprised of distribution and transmission mains, groundwater wells, and the Barton Road WTP. The City’s water is sourced from surface water and groundwater from the North American Subbasin. The City has a diversion capacity of 150 cfs or 96 mgd at Folsom Dam. From the pump station, raw water is conveyed through parallel pipelines to the Barton Road WTP (City of Roseville 2022). Barton Road WTP has a treatment capacity of up to 100 mgd.

The total projected potable water demand for Phase 1 is 21,000 gallons per day (gpd). The total projected nonpotable water demand for Phase 1 is 24,000 gpd. The non-potable fire water storage water demand was determined to be 960,000 gallons based on the California Fire Code, with City of Roseville amendments, to meet the potential maximum fire flow demand for the project.

To meet the water demands and redundancy requirements of the project, utility infrastructure extensions including a new water pipe would be extended to the project site along Phillip Road to meet both the potable and non-potable water requirements (HDR 2024a). A new 16-inch diameter water supply line would be extended approximately 3 miles along the alignment of Phillip Road, from the existing water supply line located in Blue Oaks Boulevard (HDR 2024a).

Water for fire suppression would be provided through either extending the public water supply system from Blue Oaks Boulevard to the project site or using existing non-potable water wells to fill an approximately 1 million gallon fire suppression water tank with a diesel-powered fire suppression water pumping system that would supply the fire sprinkler system and onsite hydrants. The extension of the public water from Blue Oaks to the project site is approximately 2.3 miles to the point of connection. The fire water supply for the EU Operations Center as a whole would be sized to meet the fire department requirement of 4,000 gallons per minute.

The project is not expected to exceed the capacity of the existing and future water system infrastructure such that it would require the construction of additional new or expanded infrastructure, beyond what is described above.

Wastewater
Sanitary sewer service would be required for the project for a variety of wastewater discharge needs. The primary sources of wastewater discharge would include industrial discharges from the fire protection pond; runoff from fleet vehicles washed at the site, MSW Transfer Station, and MRF floor washdown; and wastewater from the materials received at the RRTO building. Additional sources of wastewater discharge would include sewer discharges (e.g., toilets and sinks) from restrooms and kitchens within on-site structures. Installation of pretreatment equipment would be required to appropriately treat all industrial wastewater sources to the industrial standards outlined in Roseville Municipal Code Chapters 14.12 and 14.26; such pretreatment equipment could include but is not limited to screening, baffled trench drains, and sand-oil interceptors.

Sanitary sewer and wastewater flows would drain, or be pumped from each building area to a single, central duplex lift station, where the combined flow would be conveyed by a force main offsite to the PGWWTP. The project site is located west and lower in elevation than the PGWWTP. Consequently, the project site would be equipped with a pumping/lift station to pump sewerage from the site to a point in the City’s sewer main with adequate capacity, as agreed to by the City Wastewater Utility (Jacobs Engineering Group 2025). A number of proposed developments are anticipated to need connection to the City sewer system, including City and County developments, and there is limited space in the potential Phillip Road and Blue Oaks Boulevard sewer alignment to the WWTP approximately 4 miles east of the site. There is potential for collaboration between these developments to share development of one or more sewer pipelines in this corridor to serve all needs with fewer impacts. Collaboration with these other projects could result in the construction of an approximately 2-mile force main for the project and sharing construction efforts on the remaining 2-mile distance. For purposes of this EIR analysis, however, the project is assumed to require construction of a force main from the project site directly to the WWTP, the entire 4-mile distance. All of the wastewater infrastructure would be within the disturbance area of the project site or within existing roadways. Impacts associated with construction of new or extended utility infrastructure are analyzed throughout this EIR.

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-13 The estimated average daily domestic flows for future development is based on 20 gpd per employee using the total number of employees estimated for each facility (Jacobs Engineering Group 2025). Table 3.15-5 summarizes the projected daily wastewater flow by year of project operation.

Table 3.15-5 Projected Wastewater Output by Year
Project Phase Employees Gallons per day (gpd)
Phase 1 439 8,780
Phase 2 531 10,620
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group 2025; adapted by Ascent in 2025.

PGWWTP has an average flow capacity of 12 mgd and currently treats 6.04 mgd (City of Roseville 2022). Therefore, current remaining capacity is 31 percent of average flow capacity. Phase 1 of the project is projected to generate up to 8,780 gpd or less than 0.01 mgd average dry weather flow of wastewater. Wastewater output for Phase 1 would be approximately 0.08 percent of the remaining capacity of the PGWWTP. This additional flow would be negligible.

Therefore, the project is not anticipated to exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment system such that it would require the construction of new or expanded wastewater infrastructure, beyond what is described above.

Fire protection pond discharge is expected to be very infrequent and therefore is not included in any of the discharge estimates provided above. If the fire protection system is needed and used, the fire water flow of one million gallons would be contained in a retention pond and discharged over a two-month timeframe (Jacobs Engineering Group 2025).

Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
The project would require the construction of new or expanded electrical infrastructure. Natural gas infrastructure is not proposed to be installed or expanded as part of the project; however, CNG would be consumed by on-road trucks as part of the project until the change of fleet mix. As detailed in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” the project would require an initial demand of approximately 5 megawatts (MW), and then increase to the larger, 20 MW demand when the City implements the electrical charging program for its truck fleet. The initial extension of power to the site for the 5 MW requirements would be provided via above grade power poles or below-ground conduits and conductors.

Prior to developing the EV charging system, electrical demands would likely require development of a new substation with Roseville Electric to serve the project. To accomplish this, Roseville Electric is expected to extend an existing 60 kV aerial power line from the existing 60 kV power supply system located near the City power production site on Phillip Road east of Westbrook Boulevard and build a new substation on the project site (shown in Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2, “Project Description”). Roseville Electric estimates approximately 1 acre of land would be needed for its substation. Physical environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the new electrical substation, 60 kV line extension, and other associated infrastructure are evaluated throughout this EIR and mitigation measures are identified, where necessary, that would avoid or reduce most impacts to a less-than-significant level.

Thus, implementation of Phase 1 would not result in significant environmental effects associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical infrastructure.

Summary
The anticipated water demand and wastewater output for Phase 1 would be within the capacity of the existing utility infrastructure. All proposed utility hookups to existing infrastructure would occur within the disturbance area of the project site or adjacent roadways. In addition, given the small amount of wastewater that would be produced by the project compared to available capacity, the existing wastewater treatment facilities would have capacity to serve the project. The project would require the construction of new or expanded electrical infrastructure––including an electrical substation, 60 kV line extension, and other associated infrastructure––to serve the project’s electrical needs.

The environmental effects of installing these facilities have been analyzed in this EIR and mitigation measures have been identified, where necessary, that would reduce or avoid most impacts to a less-than-significant level. The project would therefore have a less-than-significant impact because it would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new utility infrastructure beyond what has been evaluated in this EIR.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-14 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Phase 2
Phase 2 would rely on the water, wastewater, and electrical infrastructure that is proposed for Phase 1. Utility infrastructure would remain within roadways and disturbed areas at the project site. Like Phase 1, Phase 2 would add water demand, wastewater output, and electrical demand to the regional utility providers. This proposed utility use would be within the existing and future capacity of the utility providers that would serve the project site. Additionally, the electrical substation installed during Phase 1 would be sized to meet the electrical needs of Phase 2. For these reasons, the impact would be less than significant.

Phase 2 would include expansion of the RRTO and development of the Potential Future Organics Processing Facility, both of which would increase water demand, wastewater output, and electrical demand.

Water Supply
Phase 2 would require additional water supply. The total projected potable and non-potable water demand for Phase 2 is 29,000 and 32,000 gpd, respectively. However, as stated above, the project’s water supply infrastructure would be sized to include all project phases, including Phase 2 (HDR 2024a). Therefore, the new 16-inch diameter water supply line that would be extended approximately 3 miles along the alignment of Phillip Road, from the existing water supply line located in Blue Oaks Boulevard as part of Phase 1 would be sized to accommodate Phase 2 water demands. The project is not expected to exceed the capacity of the existing and future water system infrastructure such that it would require the construction of additional new or expanded infrastructure.

Wastewater
As described for Phase 1, sanitary sewer service is required for the project for a variety of wastewater discharge needs. Phase 2 would include discharges from sources such as wet trash, dust suppression, vehicle wash areas, and potential excess water in the compost yard, but these are expected to be minimal. Further, monitoring and pretreatment systems installed during Phase 1 of the project would be designed to accommodate increased discharge volumes that would be generated during Phase 2.

The Technical Memorandum for the project assumes there would be no wastewater output associated with the Potential Future Organics Processing Facility (Jacobs Engineering Group 2025). As stated above, the project’s wastewater supply infrastructure would be sized to include all project phases, including Phase 2. Therefore, the new force main that would be extended approximately 4 miles from the project site directly to the WWTP as part of Phase 1 would be sized to accommodate Phase 2 wastewater demands. As shown in Table 3.15-5, there would be approximately 10,620 gpd of wastewater output once Phase 2 is completed. This increase from Phase 2 would still be approximately 0.09 percent of the remaining capacity of the PGWWTP. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment system such that it would require the construction of new or expanded wastewater infrastructure.

Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
The new electrical substation, 60 kV line extension, and other associated infrastructure installed during Phase 1 would be sized to meet the electrical needs of Phase 2. Thus, no additional or expanded electrical infrastructure would be developed as part of Phase 2. As described for Phase 1, natural gas infrastructure is not proposed to be installed or expanded as part of the project; however, CNG would be consumed by on-road trucks as part of the project. The CNG consumed by on-road trucks would increase during Phase 2 and full operation (2058) because the amount of solid waste and the truck trips hauling it would increase between 2040 and 2058.

Summary
The anticipated water demand, wastewater output, and electrical demand for Phase 2 would be within the capacity of the existing utility infrastructure. The project would therefore have a less-than-significant impact because it would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new utility infrastructure beyond what has been evaluated in this EIR.

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-15 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.15-2: Adequacy of Water Supplies
Phase 1
The projected water supplies in normal years would exceed water demands for the city, including Phase 1 of the proposed project. In single dry and multiple dry years, there would be a deficit in projected water supplies. However, projected water demands do not assume any water conservation. With the implementation of water conservation measures, the City is expected to have adequate water supplies to serve the project in all water year types. In addition, in the drier and driest years, the City has an agreement with PCWA to release an additional 20,000 afy of water down the American River, which could be withdrawn from the river by the City to further increase their water supplies. The impact would be less than significant.

As described above in Section, 3.15.2, “Environmental Setting,” the 2020 UWMP is a long-term water resource planning document used by the City to ensure there is enough water to meet both existing and future demands in normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The City’s 2020 UWMP projects potable water demand through 2035 by applying the city’s current land-used based unit water demand factors to land uses in the city’s various specific plans at buildout. At the time the 2020 UWMP was prepared, the proposed project was not considered in the city’s water demand projections. Water demand associated with the project is expected to begin in 2025 and linearly increase until buildout in 2040. Projected water demand for the City in 2040 is anticipated to be 62,547 afy (Tables 3.15-3) (City of Roseville 2022).

The project would utilize both potable and non-potable water. Estimated potable water demands are based on the estimated staffing of the facilities by phase. A 1.5 safety factor (i.e., 1.5 times more water is identified than is estimated to be required) was included to account for visitors and additional miscellaneous demands. Additional non-potable water demands were estimated based on the anticipated building areas, with a 1.5 safety factor applied. The nonpotable fire water storage water demand was determined to be 960,000 gallons based on the California Fire Code, with City of Roseville amendments, to meet the potential maximum fire flow demand for the project. Table 3.15-6 includes the required potable and non-potable demands per day for the project.

Table 3.15-6 Water Supply Demand for the Project
Project Phase Potable (gallons per day) Potable (acre-feet per year) Nonpotable (gallons per day) Non-potable (acre-feet per year) Phase 1 21,000 23.54 24,000 26.90
Phase 2 50,000 56.04 56,000 62.77
Source: HDR 2024a; adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Available normal year water supply projected for 2040 for the City of Roseville is 70,543 afy, which would exceed the City’s projected demand of 62,547 afy plus the project’s projected demand of 118.81 afy. In dry years and multiple dry years, the City’s projected water supply in 2040 would be 60,767 afy, which would not be adequate to serve the projected demands for the city or the combined demands of the city and the project (Tables 3.11-2 and 3.11-6)(City of Roseville 2022; HDR 2024a).

However, the City’s projected water supply does not assume any water conservation. Currently, the State of California is calling for a voluntary 15 percent conservation. The City was in a Stage 3 drought in 2015 and achieved a 33 percent conservation compared with a normal year. In 2016, the City achieved approximately 25 percent conservation compared with a normal year. Considering that the City has been able to achieve up to a 33 percent conservation rate, it is reasonable to assume that the City could conserve water that would allow for the project to remain in operation. It is expected that the City would implement the provisions of its WSCP described above in Section 3.15.2, “Environmental Setting,” to reduce demand in single and multiple dry years, which would include replacing turf with low water plants and using smart irrigation controllers. Implementation of these measures would reduce water

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-16 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR demands from the project. The project, if approved, would be subject to the same water use restrictions as other City water customers when the WSCP is implemented. With implementation of water conservation measures, the City is expected to have adequate water supplies to serve the project in all water year types (HDR 2024a). In addition, in the drier and driest years, the City has an agreement with PCWA to release an additional 20,000 afy of water down the American River on the City’s behalf that is not part of the City’s contracted supply of 66,000 afy, which would further increase the City’s water supplies. The impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Phase 2
Phase 2 would rely on the water supply that is proposed for Phase 1 plus additional water to operate the project at buildout. Water supply would be subject to the UWMP, the City of Roseville water conservation measures, and additional agreements the City has entered with PCWA to allocate more water in the driest years to supplement the City’s water supply. Like Phase 1, Phase 2 would add water demand to the regional water supply. This proposed water demand use would be within the existing and future capacity of the City of Roseville water supply that would serve the project site. For these reasons, the impact would be less than significant.

Phase 2 would require additional water supply (see Table 3.15-6); however, as stated above, the water supply infrastructure that would be developed as part of Phase 1 would be sized to include all project phases, including Phase 2 (HDR 2024a). Phase 2 is required to comply with the UWMP and City of Roseville water conservation measures which would allow for the water demand from Phase 2 to be accommodated and remain in operation during the driest years. In addition, in the drier and driest years, the City has an agreement with PCWA to release an additional 20,000 afy of water down the American River on the City’s behalf that is not part of the City’s contracted supply of 66,000 afy, and which would further increase the City’s water supplies. The project is not expected to exceed the capacity of the existing and future water supply such that it would require the City to obtain new water sources. The impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.15-3: Landfill Capacity and Compliance with Solid Waste Regulations Phase 1
Phase 1 is projected to include 469 new employees. The waste from construction and operations on-site would be managed on-site or sent to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill for the remainder of the contract with the City of Roseville through 2043. Given the project’s small contribution to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill’s remaining capacity, it is not anticipated that the project would generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Additionally, Phase 1 would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes related to solid waste, including the state Integrated Waste Management Act and the solid waste policies of the City of Roseville General Plan. The project would have a less-than-significant impact because it would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the landfill capacity, and it would not otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Phase 1 is projected to support 469 new employees at the project site. Assuming a solid waste generation rate of 8.2 pounds per day (ppd) per employee consistent with the 2035 General Plan EIR (City of Roseville 2020b), the project would generate approximately 3,840 ppd or 1.9 tons per day of solid waste. Solid waste collection at the project site would be provided by the City, which provides both solid waste and recycling services within the City limits. As described above in Section 3.15.2, “Environmental Setting,” the closest landfill to the project site is the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill, which has a remaining capacity of 24.5 million cubic yards and a maximum permitted

Ascent Public Utilities
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.15-17 throughput of 1,900 tons per day (City of Roseville 2020b). As reported in the WPWMA ‘s Waste Action Plan of 2022, the average daily tonnage at the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill was 1,900 tons per day of solid waste, 822 tons per day of recycled materials, 193 ton per day of organic waste, and 160 tons per day of construction and demolition materials (WPWMA 2022). Therefore, the project’s anticipated solid waste production of 1.9 tons per day would comprise less than 0.1 percent of the remaining daily capacity for the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill. Given the project’s small contribution to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill’s remaining daily capacity, it is not anticipated that the project would generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure.

In addition, as stated above, the project would increase the capacity for the City of Roseville to manage solid waste in the city limits. The anticipated estimated range of annual material quantities that the RRTO facility would process once it is operational is listed in Table 3.15-7.

Table 3.15-7 RRTO Facility Estimated Range of Annual Material Quantities Year Recyclable (tons) Organics (tons) MSW Transfer (tones) Total Throughput (tons) 2028 80,000 – 100,000 49,000 – 64,000 82,000 – 102,000 211,000 – 266,000 2044 110,000 – 148,000 82,000 – 111,000 200,000 – 248,000 392,000 – 507,000 2058 146,000 – 210,000 108,000 – 156,000 265,000 – 350,000 519,000 – 716,000 Source: HDR 2024b.

Additionally, the project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes related to solid waste, including the state Integrated Waste Management Act and the solid waste policies of the City of Roseville General Plan. As detailed in Section 3.15.1, “Regulatory Setting,” the Integrated Waste Management Act requires businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week to arrange for recycling services and businesses that generate more than 8 cubic yards of organic waste per week arrange for organic waste recycling services. Recycling services would be provided by the City with the materials being transferred to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill, which is a mixed waste processing facility. The project is not anticipated to generate more than 8 yards of organic waste per week; however, the City provides organic waste services that the project could use during operation. Given that the City provides both organic waste and recycling services and these services would be provided to the project site, the project would comply with the Integrated Waste Management Act. Additionally, the City’s General Plan has a policy of ensuring compliance with state law (Policy PF8.2). Policy PF8.1 in the City of Roseville General Plan also states that the City would ensure existing and future recycling sites and operations remain viable through application of land use compatibility standards. This project is in compliance with Policy PF8.1.

Further, the project would increase local infrastructure and support the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Specifically, the project would provide a waste and recycling facility that will enable the City to manage its waste and recyclable materials locally while maintaining compliance with state requirements such as, but not limited to, SB 1383, AB 939, and AB 1826. The project would also create the infrastructure for the City to accommodate the option to implement a citywide waste/recycling services three-cart set out, which would create a system to allow the City to meet the organics and recycling diversion requirements established by SB 1383.

Solid waste generated by the project would be a small percentage of the remaining daily capacity of the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill. In addition, the project would be in compliance with applicable state solid waste regulations and would therefore also comply with General Plan Policy PF8.2 and PF8.1. Further, the project would increase local infrastructure and support the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. The project would have a lessthan-significant impact because it would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Public Utilities Ascent
City of Roseville

3.15-18 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR Phase 2
Phase 2 would involve expansion of the RRTO and the construction and operation of a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility. Phase 2 would add an additional 62 new employees at build-out to operate the expanded facilities. Phase 2 would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes related to solid waste, including the state Integrated Waste Management Act and the solid waste policies of the City of Roseville General Plan. The project would have a less-than-significant impact because it would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Phase 2 would include an additional 62 new employees. Similar to Phase 1, construction of Phase 2 would involve expanded waste processing facilities to be able to manage more waste within the city limits of Roseville and additional employees that would generate solid waste comprising less than 0.1 percent of the remaining daily capacity for the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill. Given the project’s small contribution to the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill’s remaining daily capacity, it is not anticipated that the project would generate solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Operation of Phase 2 would include a Potential Future Organics Processing Facility, which may involve a composting facility and/or biomass facility. The potential future compost facility would involve the composting of green waste, wood, and food wastes which would continue to increase the capacity of the City of Roseville to process waste within city limits to comply with state law.

Phase 2 would also be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes related to solid waste consistent with the City of Roseville General Plan Policy PF8.2. The project would have a less-than-significant impact because it would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, and would not otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-1

3.16 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This section describes the applicable federal, state, and local transportation regulations and policies; discusses the existing roadway network and transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project; and analyzes the potential impacts from implementation of the project on transportation. Mitigation measures that would reduce impacts, where applicable, are also discussed. Information contained within this section is found primarily in the Roseville EU Operations Center Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the project (Kittelson & Associates 2025), which is included as Appendix E of this EIR and incorporated herein.

Comments on the Notice of Preparation (NOP) related to transportation included a request for the number of trips generated during project construction with a traffic control plan and a total number of trips generated during project operation. Additional comments included requests to evaluate the project’s potential impacts on the approved Placer Parkway plan line and County roadways. See Appendix A for all NOP comments received.

3.16.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an agency of the US Department of Transportation, provides stewardship over the construction and preservation of the nation’s highways, bridges, and tunnels. FHWA also conducts research and provides technical assistance to state and local agencies to improve safety, mobility, and livability and to encourage innovation in these areas. Further, FHWA provides regulation and guidance related to work zone safety, mobility, and temporary traffic control device implementation.

STATE
California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the state agency responsible for the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of the California State Highway System, as well as the segments of the Interstate Highway System that lie within California. Caltrans District 3 is responsible for the operation and maintenance of Interstate (I) 5, I-80, State Route (SR) 70, SR 99, and SR 65 in the project area. Caltrans requires a transportation permit for any transport of heavy construction equipment or materials that necessitates the use of oversized vehicles on state highways.

California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD), Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control provides principles and guidance for the implementation of temporary traffic control to ensure the provision of reasonably safe and effective movement of all roadway users (e.g., motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians) through or around temporary traffic control zones while reasonably protecting road users, workers, responders to traffic incidents, and equipment. In addition, this document notes that temporary traffic control plans and devices shall be the responsibility of the public body or official that have jurisdiction to guide road users (Caltrans 2024: 1029).

California Transportation Impact Study Guide
The Caltrans Transportation Impact Study Guide provides guidance to Caltrans districts, lead agencies, tribal governments, developers, and consultants regarding Caltrans review of a land use project or plan’s transportation analysis using a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) metric. The Transportation Impact Study Guide is intended to be a reference and informational document and its guidance is not binding on public agencies (Caltrans 2020: 3).

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Roseville

3.16-2 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR California Code of Regulations Section 15064.3
On December 28, 2018, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 was introduced to address the determination of significance for transportation impacts. This amendment mandates that transportation analyses be based on VMT rather than congestion metrics, such as level of service. The shift in focus was a direct response to legislation, notably Senate Bill (SB) 743, passed in 2013, that required the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) (formerly the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research [OPR]) to develop new State CEQA Guidelines that address traffic metrics under CEQA. As stated in the legislation, upon adoption of the new guidelines, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” Following approval by the Office of Administrative Law, the updated State CEQA Guidelines took effect statewide on July 1, 2020, implementing the provisions outlined in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. As a result, VMT analysis has become a crucial component of project evaluations under CEQA. Therefore, VMT is considered in the analysis of this project.

In December 2018, LCI published the most recent version of the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory), which provides guidance for VMT analysis. The Technical Advisory provides guidance related to screening thresholds for small projects to indicate when detailed analysis is needed or if a project can be presumed to result in a less-than-significant VMT impact.

REGIONAL
Sacramento Area Council of Governments
The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) is the metropolitan planning organization governing the sixcounty Sacramento region consisting of El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties as well as 22 cities, including the City of Roseville. As a metropolitan transportation organization, SACOG is required to prepare a long-range transportation plan (the metropolitan transportation plan) for all modes of transportation, including public transit, automobile, trucks and other vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, every four years for the six-county area. SACOG also assists in planning for transit, bicycle networks, clean air, and airport land uses.

Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SACOG is responsible for preparing and updating the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) and the corresponding Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) for the sixcounty Sacramento region. The purpose of the MTP/SCS is to establish regional access and identify mobility goals; identify present and future transportation needs, deficiencies, and constraints within the transportation system; analyze potential solutions; estimate available funding; and propose investments.

The most recent MTP/SCS update, known as the “2025 Blueprint Plan,” was adopted by the SACOG Board in November 2025 (SACOG 2025). The 2025 Blueprint reflects the region’s values and priorities in developing a comprehensive approach to planning for the future. It focuses on sustainability, equity, and economic opportunity and provides a transportation vision through the Year 2050. It includes a list of planned transportation projects, categorized either as “programmed” (i.e., have at least some committed funding and are actively in design, environmental, right-of-way, or construction phases) or “planned” (i.e., projects with no funding listed in the four years covered by the MTIP (2025-2028) and are generally longer lead projects).

Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program
SACOG prepares and adopts the MTIP approximately every 2 years. The MTIP is a short-term listing of surface transportation projects that receive federal funds, are subject to federally required action, or are regionally significant.

SACOG adopted the 2023-2026 MTIP in September 2022. The 2023-2026 MTIP covers four years of programming:
federal fiscal years 2023-2026. The project listing in the MTIP provides a detailed description for each individual project in the 2023-2026 MTIP, including those in Placer County.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-3 Placer County Transportation Planning Agency
The Placer County Transportation Planning Agency (PCTPA) is one of two regional transportation planning agencies within the SACOG area. PCTPA serves as the Placer County Congestion Management Agency and the Airport Land Use Commission for three local airports. Under an agreement with SACOG, PCTPA represents Placer jurisdictions in federal planning and programming issues (CALCOG 2025). Each city and town within Placer County as well as the County of Placer are members of PCTPA. PCTPA is responsible for all transportation planning activities in Placer County (excluding the Tahoe basin) and transportation revenue allocation. 2044 Regional Transportation Plan
In June 2024, the PCTPA adopted the 2044 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a long-range (20-year minimum) transportation funding plan that identifies the County’s priorities in addressing traffic congestion, mobility needs, and the maintenance of existing transportation infrastructure (PCTPA 2024: 1-1). The RTP contains a financially constrained list of projects that PCTPA anticipates can be funded over the 20-year horizon of the plan. The RTP includes the following goal that is relevant to the project (PCTPA 2024):
 GOAL 1: Maintain and upgrade a safe, efficient, and convenient countywide roadway system that meets the travel needs of people and the movement of goods through and within the region.

Short-Range Transit Plan
The PCTPA Short-Range Transit Plan (SRTP) is the regional plan to create an integrated transit network for Auburn Transit, Placer County Transit, and Roseville Transit. The SRTP recommends operational changes, capital improvements, and interagency coordination strategies to be implemented over the next five years (PCTPA 2025).

Placer County Regional Bikeway Plan
The Placer County Regional Bikeway Plan establishes a vision and goals for improving bicycling in the unincorporated county, identifies a network of bikeways to connect the county, and recommends supportive programs and practices to encourage bicycling (Placer County 2018). The following policies are applicable to the project (Placer County 2018):
 Policy S.1: Ensure safe conditions on Placer County roadways and crossings for cyclists through signage, traffic controls, engineering, education, and law enforcement efforts.  Policy P.2: Maintain bikeways and related facilities in a condition favorable to safe and efficient uses by cyclists.

LOCAL
City of Roseville 2035 General Plan
The General Plan serves as a blueprint for development and associated improvements in the city. The following policies from the City of Roseville 2035 General Plan are applicable to the project (City of Roseville 2020):
 Policy CIRC1.4: Maintain a system of truck routes to provide for the safe and efficient movement of goods and to avoid impacting residential neighborhoods.
 Policy CIRC1.5: Design intersections and public rights-of-ways in accordance with state and federal accessibility requirements.
 Policy CIRC4.3: Specific Plan Amendments and land use development projects not included in a Specific Plan shall be evaluated for consistency with the City’s VMT Impact Standards.  Policy CIRC4.4: If the evaluation required by CIRC4.3 finds a Specific Plan Amendment or land use development project not included in an adopted Specific Plan is inconsistent with thresholds established within the City’s VMT Impact Standards, on-site land use, transportation, and urban design-related VMT-reducing features should be prioritized to demonstrate consistency. If feasible on-site features cannot achieve the VMT threshold, Specific Plan Amendments and land use development projects outside Specific Plan Areas may demonstrate equivalent consistency through off-site actions or fair-share fee contributions, or if consistency cannot be achieved, shall implement all feasible measures.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Roseville

3.16-4 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR  Policy CIRC6.5: In reviewing proposed development projects and implementing public projects, the City will incorporate standards designed to protect the security of pedestrians and minimize the potential for collisions involving pedestrians.

City of Roseville Active Transportation Plan
The City of Roseville Active Transportation Plan (Active Transportation Plan) is part of a City visioning initiative (Transportation 360) that is intended to help increase human-powered mobility, improve connectivity, better serve transit users, and help the City secure grant funding (City of Roseville 2025a: 2). The Active Transportation Plan serves as an update to the City of Roseville Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans (City of Roseville 2025a: 17). The City Council adopted the Active Transportation Plan in June 2025. In addition to establishing objectives and actions to achieve the plan’s vision, the Active Transportation Plan also includes recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian improvements that aim to create a safer, more comfortable, and better-connected network.

City of Roseville Communitywide Sustainability Action Plan The City Communitywide Sustainability Action Plan (SAP) outlines key objectives aimed at implementing transportation measures that reduce VMT and associated greenhouse gas (GHG), nitrous oxides (NOX), and respirable particulate matter (PM) with aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometers or less (PM10). The objectives of the SAP aim to reduce the overall environmental footprint of the transportation system and serve as guidelines in setting VMT reduction strategies for projects.

City of Roseville Community Design Guidelines
The City of Roseville Community Design Guidelines establishes design and technical guidelines including a list of specific recommendations and requirements for land use categories (e.g., commercial, office and industrial, multifamily and compact residential) to include in project design. The following design guidelines for office and industrial development would be applicable to the project (City of Roseville 2008):
 OI-20: Vehicular access to the site, internal circulation, and parking lot designs should consider the following:
 Conflicts between truck traffic and employee and visitor parking should be minimized.  OI-23: Site circulation should allow for and facilitate emergency access to the site and all buildings.  OI-25: Street and drive aisle widths, throat depths, stacking distances, and parking shall comply with current City standards.
 All pedestrian circulation walks shall be designed to provide access to the disabled in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), California Title 24, and the City’s Improvement Standards.  Bicycle racks or lockers shall be provided in the quantity required by the Zoning Ordinance and should be located in highly visible and convenient areas at residential units and common areas.  Projects that are required to prepare and gain approval of a Transportation Management Plan shall provide the required and optional elements as stipulated in the TSM Ordinance.

City of Roseville Design and Construction Standards
The City Design and Construction Standards are intended to provide direction in the application of improvements which are to be dedicated to the public and accepted by the City for maintenance or operation including certain private works and improvements to be installed within existing City right-of-way (City of Roseville 2023a). The Design and Construction Standards include requirements for street and sidewalk design, requirements for site access and driveway locations, and minimum requirements for sight distance. The following guidance and recommendations related to traffic control and VMT analysis are also applicable to the project (City of Roseville 2025b, 2023a):

Section 6-2: Design Standards
 U. Traffic Control: Construction area traffic control shall be installed in accordance with the City accepted projects specific traffic control plan, the approved improvement plans and specifications, the Construction Standards, the

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-5 City Design Standards, the current California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), The State of California Standard Plans, and the latest edition of The State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications hereinafter referred to as the Cal Trans Standard Specs and as follows:
 Construction that inhibits free flow traffic shall not occur between the hours of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday without prior written approval of the Engineer. Traffic control lasting more than one hour will be subject to additional time restrictions set by the City’s Traffic Section in order to minimize the impact to the public.
 At least one lane in each direction shall remain open to traffic unless otherwise approved by the Engineer.  Turning movement restrictions require approval of the City. A changeable message sign (CMS) shall be posted in the direction of travel affected by the restriction a minimum of three days prior to the implementation of the traffic control at the contractor’s expense. Wording and placement of the CMS shall be “ACCEPTED” by the City’s Traffic Section prior to installation.  Traffic control hours are subject to limitation by the City.  Lane closures that affect traffic flow may require night work, changeable message signs, and/or certified flaggers at the contractor's expense. The contractor should consider traffic control included in their cost of work and may contact the City’s Traffic Section for requirements prior to bidding a job.  Approved road closures require 72 hour advance notification to the City, the public and emergency services.

Changeable message signs (CMS’s) shall be posted in the directions of travel affected by the closure a minimum of 1 week prior to the implementation of the traffic control at the contractor’s expense. Wording and placement of the CMS’s shall be “ACCEPTED” by the City’s Traffic Section prior to installation.  A Red Flash Request form must be submitted 48 hours prior to the time the red flash is needed. Allowable hours of flashing operation will be set by the City’s Traffic Section and will require early morning, evening, or night work unless otherwise approved in writing by the City’s Traffic Section. The Red Flash Request form is on Detail TS-21.  Traffic Control Plans
• All traffic control plans (including signage) shall be per the current CAMUTCD. The City’s Construction Inspector or Engineer shall determine the necessity of a formal traffic control plan (TCP) submittal based upon the following guidelines:
− A TCP submittal will be required if the TCP is any one of the following:
o Complicated (to be determined by the City’s Construction Inspector) o Involves a signalized intersection
o Longer than 12 hours
o Not detailed in the CA-MUTCD
o Involves road closure or detours
• If significant detours, lane closures, and/or signal modifications (including but not limited to loop disruption, the need for a temporary signal, etc.) are needed, a separate Traffic Handling Plan from that of the Traffic Control Plan may be required. The Traffic Handling Plan will require review and approval by Traffic Engineering and will require additional review time for submittals. • Traffic Control Plans require responsible party contact information, hours of operation (which may be restricted by the City), and duration of work.
• The traffic control plan submittal process is as follows:

1. Three copies of the TCP must be submitted to the inspector.

2. The TCP is reviewed by the City Traffic Section and corrections/modifications are made by the contractor as necessary.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Roseville

3.16-6 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

3. The City Traffic Section will stamp the TCP as “ACCEPTED” once the plans are to the City’s satisfaction.

4. Two copies of the “ACCEPTED” TCP are returned to the inspector – one copy each for the inspector and contractor.

5. The contractor must have a copy of the “ACCEPTED” TCP on site during the entire time the TCP is in place.
• Any deviation from the “ACCEPTED” TCP shall be approved by the inspector and may require resubmittal of the TCP for City review. Failure to maintain the TCP may result in shutdown of the project, suspension of inspection services, correction by the City at the contractors expense, or any combination of the before mentioned.

Section 4-9: VMT Impact Studies
The Design and Construction Standards establish that VMT impacts may be determined by reviewing if a project meets any of the screening criteria discussed below or by performing a full VMT analysis with comparison to the appropriate threshold if no screening criteria are met.  Screening: A project may be screened from additional VMT analysis if it meets any of the nine distinct screening criteria. Given the project’s size, location, and use type, the screening criterion listed below is potentially applicable to the project:
 Small Projects – Absent any information to the contrary, projects that generate 110 trips per day or less may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.  VMT Analysis: VMT analysis is required if the project does not meet any of the conditions for screening. For nonresidential projects, analysis should be based on VMT per service population, where service population consists of the total number of residents and employees. The service population methodology includes home-based product VMT and VMT from all other sources, including trips attracted from homes outside the area into the area for work, shopping, or other purposes and trips with neither ending at the home. VMT is based on the full length of each trip, including distance outside of the city. VMT estimates are to be produced using the City of Roseville travel demand model. An alternative metric (e.g., VMT/employee) may be used if it relies on the data and analysis of the current citywide VMT analysis and is reviewed and approved by the City. The following factor was used to convert Roseville travel forecasting model inputs (i.e., square footage) to employment (as used in development of the General Plan):
 Industrial: One employee per thousand square feet (KSF) Section 4-10: VMT Thresholds
A project would have a significant impact if it exceeded a threshold of 15 percent below VMT per service population for non-residential projects. Alternatively, if a proposed project can be shown to result in a net overall decrease in total City VMT when compared to baseline VMT, the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact. Table 3.16-1 shows the City’s current VMT thresholds (City of Roseville 2023a: Table VMT-2). The thresholds are based on analysis with the Roseville travel forecasting model.

Table 3.16-1 City of Roseville Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds Non-Residential Projects: Service Population Methodology VMT Produced (A) 5,459,700
Number of Residents (B) 120,812
Number of Employees (C) 67,530
Service Population (residents + employees) (B+C = D) 188,342 Baseline VMT Metric (A/D = E) 29 VMT/service population VMT Threshold (15% below VMT/service population) (E*.85 = F) 24.5 VMT/service population Notes: VMT = vehicle miles traveled.

Source: City of Roseville 2023a: Table VMT-2.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-7 Section 12: Construction Area Traffic Control Devices
Construction area traffic control shall be installed in accordance with the City accepted project specific traffic control plan, the approved improvement plans and specifications, these Construction Standards, the City Improvement Standards, the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), the State of California Standard Plans, and the latest edition of the State of California Department of Transportation Standard Specifications as follows:

8. Traffic Control (whether on private property or in the public right of way) that impacts traffic within the public right-of-way (including pedestrian and bicyclist pathways) shall require an encroachment permit.

Traffic control shall not impact traffic flow and/or operations in the public right-of-way unless traffic control is setup per approved traffic control plan [underline appears in the original source].

Traffic Control Plans
All traffic control plans (including signage) to be per the most current CMUTCD.

Traffic Impact Fee Programs
In 1988, the City adopted a nexus-based Traffic Mitigation Fee (TMF) Program, requiring new development within the city to pay traffic impact fees (City of Roseville 2025c). Within the City, traffic impact fees are used to fund improvements contained in the City’s roadway CIP. Subsequent to adoption of the City TMF program, similar nexusbased fee programs were formed between the City and local agency partners to fund and construct regional CIP improvements to mitigate new development cross-border traffic impacts. These regional fee programs include the City-County fee program, the “Bizz Johnson” Highway Interchange Joint Powers Authority (Hwy 65 JPA) fee program, and the South Placer Regional Transportation Authority Tier I fee program. The traffic mitigation fees are collected by the participating agencies at building permit issuance.

City of Roseville Municipal Code
Section 11.33.020 of the City of Roseville Municipal Code establishes the requirements for the City Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program, the purposes and intent of which include reducing VMT in the City by expanding mobility options and encouraging viable nonautomotive means of transportation in and through the city. Requirements include bicycle parking, end-of-trip facilities (e.g., showers and lockers) and the designation of a TSM coordinator. The TSM program applies to common and major work locations (such as office building/complex, commercial/retail center, or industrial building/park) with 50 or more employees. Major common work locations having 50 or more employees are required to submit a TSM plan to the city during the development review stage of the planning process. Chapter 16 of the Municipal Code includes provisions related to maintaining emergency access during construction (e.g., access requirements for firefighting as detailed in Section 16.16.130) and operations (e.g., fire apparatus access roads as detailed in Section 16.16.090). In addition, Section 16.16.020 of the Municipal Code adopts the 2022 California Fire Code by reference. See Impact 3.13-4 for additional details related to emergency access requirements.

Roseville Fire Department Fire & Life Safety Standards
The Roseville Fire Department Fire & Life Safety Standards are intended to prevent hazardous situations in the community. The Emergency Vehicle Access Standard details design requirements (e.g., minimum roadway width, vertical clearance, grade) for fire access roads and requires that access plans be submitted as part of the civil improvement package and prohibits site work until the plans have been reviewed and approved (City of Roseville 2023b). This standard applies to any facility where emergency response may be necessary (City of Roseville 2023b).

3.16.2 Environmental Setting
This section describes the existing environmental setting, which is the baseline scenario upon which project-specific impacts are evaluated. The environmental setting for transportation includes descriptions for roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Roseville

3.16-8 Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR

PROJECT STUDY AREA
The project site is located along Phillip Road near its western terminus at South Brewer Road, at the northwest limit line of the city (Figure 3.16-1). The following describes the roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities in the project vicinity.

ROADWAY SYSTEM
Access to the project is provided by a network of state, county, and city roadways. The FHWA classifies urban and rural roadways by roadway function. The functional classification of roadways defines the role of a roadway in the transportation network and is an important consideration in measuring outcomes for preservation, mobility, and safety (FHWA 2023). FHWA defines each roadway classification as follows:
 Freeways and Expressways: Roadways in this functional classification category look very similar to interstates.

While there can be regional differences in the use of the terms 'freeway' and 'expressway,' for the purpose of functional classification the roads in this classification have directional travel lanes, are usually separated by some type of physical barrier, and their access and egress points are limited to on- and off-ramp locations or a very limited number of at-grade intersections. Like interstates, these roadways are designed and constructed to maximize their mobility function, and abutting land uses are not directly served by them.  Principal Arterials: These roadways serve major centers of metropolitan areas, provide a high degree of mobility, and can also provide mobility through rural areas. Unlike their access-controlled counterparts, abutting land uses can be served directly. There are usually multiple arterial routes serving a particular urban area, radiating out from the urban center to serve the surrounding region, whereas a rural area of equal size would be served by a single arterial.  Minor Arterials: Minor arterials provide service for trips of moderate length, serve geographic areas that are smaller than their higher arterial counterparts, and offer connectivity to the higher arterial system. In an urban context, they interconnect and augment the higher arterial system, provide intra-community continuity, and may carry local bus routes. Arterials in rural areas are typically designed to provide relatively high overall travel speeds with minimum interference to through movement.
 Major and Minor Collectors: Collectors serve a critical role in the roadway network by gathering traffic from local roads and funneling them to the arterial network. All collectors, regardless of whether they are within a rural area or an urban area, may be sub-stratified into major and minor categories. Generally, major collector routes are longer in length, have higher speed limits, are spaced at greater intervals, and have higher annual average traffic volumes than their minor collector counterparts.
 Local Roads: Locally classified roads account for the largest percentage of all roadways in terms of mileage. They are not intended for use in long distance travel, except at the origin or destination end of the trip, due to their provision of direct access to abutting land (FHWA 2023: 14–18).

The primary state highways and roadways in the vicinity of the project site are described as follows:
 SR 65 is a north-south highway that passes through multiple counties, including Placer County, where it runs through the City of Roseville. In Roseville, SR 65 serves as a crucial transportation corridor, linking the city to I-80, Lincoln County, and Yuba County. This roadway plays a key role in regional traffic flow and development by providing access to commercial centers, residential areas, and shopping destinations such as the Westfield Galleria at Roseville. Within the city, SR 65 is typically a four-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour (mph). There are no bicycle or pedestrian facilities along this roadway.

Phillip Road is an east-west two-lane roadway that would provide direct access to the project site. While most of the roadway is paved, approximately 1 mile of it just east of the project site is not. The roadway is approximately 20 feet wide without any pavement markings.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-9 Source: Image produced and provided by Kittleson & Associates in 2025, adapted by Ascent in 2025.

Figure 3.16-1 Project Study Area

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Roseville
Roseville Environmental Utilities Operations Center Project Draft EIR 3.16-11  Blue Oaks Boulevard serves as a major east-west arterial connecting the cities of Roseville and Rocklin. It begins at Westbrook Boulevard in western Roseville and extends approximately 6.5 miles, terminating at Sunset Boulevard in Rocklin. Between Westbrook Boulevard and Fiddyment Road, the roadway comprises one lane in each direction, separated by a two-way turn lane, with posted speed limits ranging from 45 to 50 mph. East of Fiddyment Road, Blue Oaks Boulevard transitions into a six-lane, median-divided arterial with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The SR 65/Blue Oaks Boulevard interchange is located approximately 8 miles east of the project site, providing access to I-80, a major east-west freeway that stretches from the Bay Area into Nevada, just 3 miles south. There are Class II bicycle lanes along segments of Blue Oaks Boulevard.  Westbrook Boulevard is a north-south arterial that begins slightly north of Blue Oaks Boulevard and extends approximately 1.8 miles to Pleasant Grove Boulevard. In the future, the roadway will connect from Baseline Road in the south to Sunset Boulevard in the north, within unincorporated Placer County. The completed section of this roadway features two lanes in each direction, separated by a landscaped median with a posted speed limit of 40 mph. There are Class II bicycle facilities and sidewalks along segments of both sides of Westbrook Boulevard.  Fiddyment Road is a north-south arterial roadway that begins at Baseline Road and extends north through Roseville into unincorporated Placer County and the City of Lincoln. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and the northern city limits (i.e., 1.5 miles north of Blue Oaks Boulevard), Fiddyment Road consists of two lanes in each direction with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Beyond the city limits, Fiddyment Road transitions into a two-lane, undivided rural roadway. There are Class II bicycle facilities and sidewalks along both sides of Fiddyment Road.  Pleasant Grove Boulevard is an east-west arterial roadway that traverses through the city. The roadway begins at Santucci Boulevard in the west and extends approximately 9 miles to the city limit where it becomes Park Drive.

West of Wood Creek Oaks Boulevard, the roadway typically features two lanes in each direction, separated by a landscaped median. East of Wood Creek Oaks Boulevard, it transitions into a six-lane roadway with a raised median. The posted speed limit of the entire corridor is 45 mph. Pleasant Grove Boulevard intersects with SR 65 approximately 5 miles east of Fiddyment Road, offering direct access to regional destinations and connecting to I-80 further south. There are Class II bicycle facilities and sidewalks along both sides of Pleasant Grove Boulevard between Santucci Boulevard and Quartet Avenue as well as east of Westbrook Boulevard.  Baseline Road is a major east-west arterial serving Roseville and the surrounding areas of Placer County. It starts from Lincoln Street in the east and becomes Riego Road passing the western limit of Placer County. The roadway functions as a primary connector between rural, suburban, and urban areas, providing access to residential neighborhoods, agricultural lands, and commercial developments. In Roseville, Baseline Road typically consists of one lane in the eastbound direction and two lanes in the westbound direction with a center two-way turn lane. However, the segment between Santucci Boulevard and Market Street is being widened to two lanes in each direction with a center two-way left-turn lane and the segment between Market Street and Fiddyment Road is anticipated to be widened to four lanes (two in each direction) by October 2026. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. This roadway plays a crucial role in facilitating east-west travel and supporting regional mobility across multiple jurisdictions. There are Class II bicycle lanes along the northern portion of Baseline Road between Santucci Boulevard and Market Street. There are also sidewalks present along segments of the northern portion of Baseline Road.  Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard is a north-south arterial in Roseville that serves as a key corridor for residential and local traffic. It begins in a single-family area north of Blue Oaks Boulevard and extends south to Baseline Road.

The roadway typically features two lanes in each direction, separated by a landscaped median with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard provides access to several residential neighborhoods, parks, and schools. It serves as an important alternative route to more heavily traveled north-south roadways like Foothills Boulevard and Fiddyment Road, enhancing connectivity between suburban areas and major east-west corridors. There are Class II bicycle facilities and sidewalks present along both sides of Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard between Diamond Woods Circle and Baseline Road.  Foothills Boulevard is a major north-south arterial that connects residential, commercial, and industrial areas within Roseville. The roadway begins at Pleasant Grove Boulevard in the north and extends southward, passing through commercial centers, industrial zones, and business parks before connecting Baseline Boulevard/Main