Sacramento City Council
June 21, 2022

City Council Report
915 I Street, 1st Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org

File ID: 2022-00608 June 21, 2022

Title: (Pass for Publication) Grower’s District (P21-024)

Location: 200, 211, and 215 North 16
th Street; APNs 001-0151-001, -002, -005, 001-0153-001, 001-0152-001, -002, -003; District 4

Recommendation: 1) Review: a) a Resolution determining Environmental Exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) section 21155.4; b) an Ordinance amending Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code to rezone three sites totaling ±5.23- acres from the Heavy Commercial (C-4-SPD) zone to the General Commercial (C -2-SPD) zone within the River District Special Planning District (SPD); c) a Resolution adopting Site Plan and Design Review for demolition of one building and alterations to two buildings, the construction of four mixed- use buildings with 525 dwelling units and ±70,887 square feet of commercial space with deviations to building height and multi -unit open space standards within the C -2-SPD zone and an increased floor area ratio based on significant community benefit consistent with the General Plan, River District SPD, and North 16
th Street Historic District; and d) a Resolution for a Tree Permit to remove three City trees; and 2) Pass for publication the ordinance titles per City Charter section 32(c) to be considered June 28, 2022.

Contact: Angel Anguiano, Assistant Planner, (916) 808- 5519, [email protected]
; Karlo Felix, Senior Planner, (916) 808- 7183,
[email protected], Community Development Department

Applicant/Property Owner: Rachel Royer, Growers District LLC, 15466 Los Gatos Blvd, Suite 109-133, Los Gatos, CA, 95302, [email protected], (215) 868-6561 (LLC Members:

Bauen Capital Opportunity Fund 2020, LP and Bauen Capital, LLC)

Attachments:
01-Description/Analysis
02-Background
03-Ordinance – Rezone
04-Exhibit A: Rezone Exhibit
05-Resolution – Entitlements
06-Exhibit A: Project Plans – Overview
07-Exhibit B: Project Plans – Site 200
08-Exhibit C: Project Plans – Site 211
09-Exhibit D: Project Plans – Site 215
10-Exhibit E: SACOG MTP/SCS Consistency Letter
11-Exhibit F: Resolution No. 2011- 077 – Certifying the Environmental Impact Report and Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the River District Specific Plan Project 12-Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis – Site 200 13-Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis – Site 211 14-Historic Resources Evaluation – Site 200
15-Historic Resources Evaluation – Site 211
16-Preservation Director’s Independent Analysis
17-Public Comments
18-Response to Comments and Proposal Modifications

Description/Analysis

Issue Detail: The applicant is requesting entitlements to allow for the construction of a mixed- use development on three separate sites (Sites 200, 211, and 215) on approximately 5.24 acres within the River District area. The proposal includes approximately 525 dwelling units and 70,887 square feet of commercial space. Site 200 includes the adaptive reuse of the former Old Produce Terminal through its conversion into 66,000 square feet of commercial space and the construction of two buildings with 350 multi-unit dwellings. Site 211 includes the adaptive reuse of the former Ruland’s Office Furniture building through its conversion into 3,000 square feet of commercial space and 105 multi-unit dwellings. Site 215 includes the demolition of an accessory structure and construction of 1,887 square feet of commercial space and 70 multi-unit dwellings.

Development of the site also requires removal of three City trees.

Policy Considerations:

General Plan

The 2035 General Plan was adopted by City Council on March 3, 2015. The 2035 General Plan’s goals, policies, and implementation programs define a roadmap to achieving Sacramento’s vision to be the most livable city in America. All three sites (Sites 200, 211, and 215) are designated as Employment Center Low Rise (ECLR). The ECLR designation provides for residential and commercial flex -space (i.e. industrial structures converting to residential or commercial uses) in areas expected to transition to urban development. The ECLR designation envisions retail service use that provide support to employees., and compatible public, quasi - public, and special uses.

The proposed project is consistent with the ECLR designation as it contributes to a more a compact and dense development pattern, that emphasizes the structures by placing parking within the structures or behind the buildings. Street level frontages are lined with retail and other pedestrian oriented uses. The streetscape is designed with pedestrian ameniti es that support an urban and walkable district.

In addition to the project’s consistency with the ECLR designation, the project is consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:

Goal LU 1.1 Growth and Change. Support sustainable growth and change through orderly and well-planned development that provides for the needs of existing and future residents and businesses, ensures the effective and equitable provision of public services, and make efficient use of land and infrastructure.

Policy LU 1.1.5 Infill Development. The City shall promote and provide incentives (e.g., focused infill planning, zoning/rezoning, revised regulations, provision of infrastructure) for infill development, reuse, and growth in exis ting urbanized areas to enhance community character, optimize City investments in infrastructure and community facilities, support increased transit use, promote pedestrian- and bicycle friendly neighborhoods, increase housing diversity, ensure integrity of historic districts, and enhance retail viability.

The mixed-use project promotes efficient infill development in an industrial area expected to transition into an urban district by developing vacant properties and converting industrial uses into residential and commercial. In addition, the project will add to the housing diversity of the region, while promoting a walkable, bike-friendly neighborhood.

Goal LU 2.1 City of Neighborhoods. Maintain a city of diverse, distinct, and well- structured neighborhoods that meet the community’s needs for complete, sustainable, and high- quality living environments, from the historic downtown core to well-integrated new growth areas.

Policy LU 2.1.8 Neighborhood Enhancement. The City shall pr omote infill development, reuse, rehabilitation, and reuse efforts that contribute positively (e.g., architectural design) to existing neighborhoods and surrounding areas.

The mixed- use project will preserve and repurpose underutilized properties with residential housing near transit. The new units will contribute positively to the existing neighborhood and surrounding area by providing buildings along the street frontages and will promote a walkable, bikeable area.

Goal LU 2.4 City of Distinctive and Memorable Places. Promote community design that produces a distinctive, high- quality built environment whose forms and character reflect Sacramento’s unique historic, environmental, and architectural context, and create memorable places that enrich community life.

Policy LU 2.4.2 Responsiveness to Context. The City shall require building design that respects and responds to the local context, including use of local materials where feasible, responsiveness to Sacramento’s climate, and consideration of cultural and historic context of Sacramento’s neighborhoods and centers.

The development builds on the existing building massing presence within the River District by constructing a multi-story building with an urban character and providing active spaces at the ground floor to compliment the existing commercial spaces across the street. The building provides high levels of building articulation and materiality at all areas where the building interacts with the public street, consistent with what is found elsewhere within the Central City.

Goal LU 2.6 City Sustained and Renewed. Promote sustainable development and land use practices in both new development, reuse, and reinvestment that provide for the transformation of Sacramento into a sustainable urban city while preserving choices (e.g. where to live, work, and recreate) for future generations.

Policy LU 2.6.5 Existing Structure Reuse. The City shall encourage the retention of existing structures and promote their adaptive reuse and renovation with green building technologies to retain the structures’ embodied energy, increase energy efficiency, make it more energy efficient, and limit the generation of waste.

The project supports these policies related to historic preservation because it is designed in a style that does not replicate the historic contributing structure, so as not to create false historicism, but still complements the surrounding historic district. While the design is more modern, it is comprised of reinterpreted historic features found within the district such as grid patterning, storefront windows, symmetrical facades, and the use of materials commonly found in the district. The project is setback from the contributing structures to allow the contributing historic structure to sit proudly along North 16th Street.

Staff has reviewed the proposed building design and concluded it is compatible with the historic context where it is located and consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as discussed in greater detail below.

Goal H-1 Increasing Overall Housing Production. Facilitate the construction of 45,580 new housing units by 2029.

Policy H- 1.4 Facilitate Infill Housing Development. The City shall facilitate infill housing along commercial corridors, near employment centers, near high- frequency transit areas, and in all zones that allow residential development as a way to revitalize commercial corridors, promote walkability and increased transit ridership, and provide increased housing options.

This infill project contributes to the variety of land uses within the area and the neighborhood fabric of the North 16
th Street corridor. The project supports existing public transit, and nearby commercial uses with additional density.

General Plan – Floor Area Ratio

The floor area ratio (FAR) is the ratio of gross building area on a site, excluding structured parking, to the net developable area of the site. The net developable area is the total area of a site excluding portions that cannot be developed (e.g., right -of-way, public parks, etc.). The ECLR designation establishes a FAR range between 0.3 and 1.0. The project proposes a FAR of 1.99; 0.99 or approximately 205,872 square feet above the standard for this designation.

The General Plan has a policy that allows an increase in FAR above that which is permitted for the land use designation if a significant community benefit is provided by the project. The policy is stated below:

Policy LU 1.1.10 Exceeding Floor-Area-Ratio. The City may allow new development to exceed the maximum allowed FAR or density if it is determined that the project provides a significant community benefit.

The policy allows that there may be a circumstance where the City determines that the benefit the community would derive from the project outweighs strict adherence to the General Plan’s maximum FAR. A “significant community benefit” is not defined in the General Plan. Instead, the significant benefit is evaluated during the entitlement review of the project. The evaluation considers the unique offerings of a development, the context of that development, and the cumulative value of the benefit.

General Plan Policy LU 1.1.10 was specifically intended to allow the City to take advantage of unique opportunities such as the Grower’s District proposal. The project proposes to retain the existing contributing resources on Site 200 and restore and repurpose for commercial/retail use as well as to retain significant elements of the contributing resource located on Site 211. The retention, restoration, and adaptive re- use of these facilities serves as significant community benefit that justifies the proposed FAR of the project above the established range of the ECLR designation. This mixed- use project has strong design and sustainability features that are consistent with a number of City goals and policies and the project site is an appropriate location for the additional height and FAR, which results in an additional significant community benefit.

In addition, the proposed infill development is located in an area with a variety of land uses that are supportive of residential development, is serviced by multiple forms of public transportation, and is located within a Specific Plan area that sets up a vision to transition away from a predominantly industrial and government warehouse district to a mixed- use jobs and housing center. Based upon the aforementioned community benefits, staff has concluded that the proposed FAR is appropriate and is consistent with the General Plan.

General Plan – Central City Community Plan

The subject property is located within the Central City Community Plan Area of the General Plan.

The General Plan identifies the Community Plan Area as the core of the city with an urban downtown that holds State government buildings, corporate offices and businesses, high- rise condominiums, historic neighborhoods, parks and recreational areas, nightlife, restaurant and shops, schools, and industrial and manufacturing complexes all within a treelined street grid.

The proposed use is consistent with the Community Plan Area and supports the following highlighted implementing policies.

Policy CC.LU 1.2 Interrelated Land Uses. The City shall provide for organized development of the Central City whereby the many interrelated land use components of the area support and reinforce each other and the vitality of the community.

The proposed use contributes to the variety of uses within the Central City and maintains a diversity of businesses and housing options within the River District. The mixed- use nature of the development is appropriately located within a commercial and industrial corridor. Customers and residents of the business will also utilize and patronize nearby businesses and will support the economic vitality of the surrounding area.

River District Specific Plan

The River District Specific Plan was adopted on February 15, 2011, which can be accessed here: River District Specific Plan
. The Specific Plan is intended to direct the development of the River District as mixed use community that is home to higher density residential and job- generating uses. The Plan envisions a vibrant, mixed- use community connected to the surrounding neighborhoods by a network or local streets, light rail transit, and bicycle and pedestrian connections. The Specific Plan includes several goals including establishing a greater mix of land uses and intensities to attract private investment, the adaptive reuse and rehabilitation of underutilized buildings and sites and to take advantage of the light rail facilities in the area and providing the creation of a significant residential population.

The project is consistent with the Specific Plan and supports the following highlighted goals and implementation policies:

Goal LU1. Encourage a compatible mix of uses that provide goods and services to meet the daily needs of residents and employees.

Policy LU 1a. Encourage neighborhood- serving retail and commercial uses within residential neighborhoods.

Goal LU3. Encourage areas to grow as distinct neighborhoods with unique characteristics and atmosphere.

Policy LU3c. Encourage retail at major intersections, pedestrian streets and transit stations to activate the streets, as shown in Figure 3.7

Policy LU3d. Design and develop North 16 th and North 12 th Streets to reflect their important roles as major corridors within the Central City.

Policy LU3e. Support a mix of residential and commercial uses within the North 12th and North 16th Street Area in order to create a lively and eclectic district.

Goal H2. Provide a range of housing choices attractive to families and individuals at all income levels.

Policy H2d. Encourage a diversity of multi -family housing types and a mix of rental housing and ownership housing

Goal HR1. Preserve and protect the River District’s historic resources and properties.

Policy HR1a. Ensure that historic properties help to enhance and provide a valuable special sense of place in the River District.

The proposed project meets the goals and policies of the Specific Plan by introducing 525 multi-family residential units, 70,887 square- feet of commercial space, and providing improvements to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure consistent with the North 16 th Street Streetscape Project. The project improves vacant and underutilized properties within the North 16 th Historic District, which includes a significant concentration of industrial and commercial buildings. The applicant is proposing to create a mixed-u se community that is home to higher density residential and job- generating uses while preserving and incorporate visual characteristics consistent with the industrial and commercial corridor. The applicant also proposes to make the area into a more walkable and bike friendly community that’s located within a transit priority area. The project is within one-half mile from multiple light rail stations on Sacramento Regional Transits Blue Line and two blocks away from the future Dos Rios light rail station. The project capitalizes on its location by placing transit supportive land uses within close proximity to public transportation.

200-Year Flood Protection

State Law (SB 5) and Planning and Development Code chapter 17.810 require that the City must make specific findings prior to approving certain entitlements for projects within a flood hazard zone. The purpose is to ensure that new development will have protection from a 200-year flood event or will achieve that protection by 2025. The project site is within a flood hazard zone and is an area covered by SAFCA’s Improvements to the State Plan of Flood Control System, and specific findings related to the level of protection have been incorporated as part of this project.

Even though the project site is within a flood hazard zone, the local flood management agency, SAFCA, has made adequate progress on the construction of a flood protection system that will ensure protection from a 200- year flood event or will achieve that protection by 2025. This is based on the SAFCA Urban level of flood protection plan, adequate progress baseline report, and adequate progress toward an urban level of flood protection engineer’s report that were accepted by City Council Resolution No. 2016- 0226 on June 21, 2016 and the SAFCA 2021 Adequate Progress Annual Report accepted by City Council Resolution No. 2021- 0328 on November 9, 2021.

Economic Impacts: The proposed mixed- use development promotes efficient infill development in an Historic District area by further redeveloping underutilized warehouses near transit. The project will create retail viability and provide new housing opportunities in the area.

Environmental Considerations: The proposed development is a “project” as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City, as lead agency, is required to proceed in accordance with CEQA requirements prior to considering any approval.

Staff has determined that the project qualifies for a statutory exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) section 21155. 4, which was added to the PRC by SB 743. The legislature included the following that applies to section 21155.4:

With the adoption of…the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, the Legislature signaled its commitment to encouraging land use and transportation planning decisions and investments that reduce vehicle miles traveled and contribute to the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions required in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006…Similarly, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008…requires local governments to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads and highways for safe and convenient travel.

Section 21155.4 is thus part of a comprehensive legis lative approach to reducing VMT and supporting the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Section 21155.4 provides as follows:

(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a residential, employment center, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21099, or mixed-use development project, including any subdivision, or any zoning, change that meets all of the following criteria is exempt from the requirements of this division:

(1) The project is proposed within a transit priority area, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 21099.

(2) The project is undertaken to implement and is consistent with a specific plan for which an environmental impact report has been certified.

(3) The project is consistent with the general use designation, d ensity, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy for which the State Air Resources Board, pursuant to subparagraph (H) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 65080 of the Government Code, has accepted a metropolitan planning organization’s determination that the sustainable communities strategy or the alternative planning strategy would, if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

(b) Further environmental review shall be conducted only if any of the events specified in Section 21166 have occurred.

The requirements of the section are set forth below, followed by text that identifies the manner in which the proposed project complies in italicized text.

• The project must be a residential, employment center or mixed-use development project.

The Grower’s District project proposes a residential mixed- use development on three sites totaling 0.53 acres located at 200, 211, and 215 North 16th Street in the River District Special Planning District in the (C-4 SPD) zone of the City of Sacramento. The Grower’s District Project proposes to construct four mixed- use buildings that will consist of 525 residential units and +70,887 square feet of retail space has a FAR of 1.99.

“Mixed-use development combines two or more types of land use into a building or set of buildings that are physically and functionally integrated and mutually supporting. This can be some combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses.” (San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Planners Toolkit, online access 9/24/2018)

The proposed project qualifies as a mixed-use development project.

• The project must be located a transit priority area, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 21099.

Section 20199 defines “transit priority area” as including an area within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop. Pursuant to PRC section 21064.3, a major transit stop is “a site containing an existing rail transit station or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” Pursuant to PRC section 21155(b), a high- quality transit corridor is defined as a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.

The City prepared an EIR for the River District Specific Plan (RDSP), which was certified on February 15, 2011 (Resolution No. 2011- 077). The RDSP EIR showed the portion of the RDSP area that would meet the criteria for proximity to transit in the legislation. The map identified areas one-half mile from RT’s existing light rail stations and one- half mile from high quality transit corridors with service intervals of 15 minutes or less. The project site is located in the area identified as a transit priority area. More specifically, the Grower’s District project site is less than 1/2 mile from the Sacramento Regional Transit’s (Sac RT) Blue Line (light rail transit or LRT), with a line for light rail along 12 th Street.

Additionally, Sac RT also has several bus stops within a few blocks of the project site.

The proposed project is located in a transit priority area.

• The project is undertaken to implement and is consistent with a specific plan for which an environmental impact report has been certified.

The proposed project’s land use is consistent with the RDSP as set forth above. The City prepared and certified an EIR for the RDSP.

The proposed project is consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR was certified.

• The project is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in a sustainable communities strategy for which the State Air Resources Board (ARB) has accepted a metropolitan planning organization’s determination that the sustainable communities CEQA review strategy or the alternative planning strategy would, if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

The proposed project is consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) adopted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) which can be accessed here: 2020 MTP/SCS Plan.

The ARB
has accepted SACOG’s determination that the plan would achieve GHG reduction targets. The written concurrence from SACOG regarding the City’s determination of consistency with the MTP/SCS is included as Attachment 10.

The proposed project is consistent with the MTP/SCS because it’s an infill mixed- use development that would create a community that would include homes, jobs, services, amenities, within an area where transportation infrastructure already exists. The project capitalizes on its location by placing transit supportive land uses within close proximity to public transportation.

• Further environmental review shall be conducted only if any of the events specified in Section 21166 (and corresponding CEQA Guideline section 15162) have occurred.

This requirement confirms that the requirement of consistency with a specific plan for which an EIR was prepared would be sufficient unless substantial changes have been proposed in the specific plan that would require major changes in the EIR, or changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the EIR was prepared or new information becomes available. The RDSP EIR was certified, and the RDSP adopted, on February 15, 2011. There have been no substantial changes in the RDSP or in the circumstances in the specific plan area that would affect the EIR analysis and conclusions.

None of the events identified in PRC 21166 have occurred.

PRC section 21155.4 provides that a project that meets the section requirements is exempt from CEQA review, unless one or more of the events identified in subsection (b) have occurred. As noted, none of those circumstances have occurred. The proposed project is, therefore, exempt from CEQA review.

Sustainability: The proposed mixed- use development will ensure energy consumption is minimized and use of renewable energy sources is encouraged in that staff recommends that the project, to the extent possible, incorporates green building methods in the construction of the mixed-use development. In addition, the proposed project is development of an infill site, near public transit. The project will add to the housing diversity of the region, while promoting a walkable, bike-friendly neighborhood.

Commission/Committee Action: On May 18, 2022, the Preservation Commission considered the project and recommended the Planning and Design Commission recommend approval of the project to City Council, consistent with staff’s recommendation.

On June 9, 2022, the Planning and Design Commission considered the project and recommended the City Council approve the project, consistent with staff’s recommendation.

Public/Neighborhood Outreach and Comments: The project was routed to surrounding neighborhood groups including the River District (PBID), Dreher Tract Neighborhood Association, Marshall-New Era Neighborhood Association, Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates (SABA), Sacramento Housing Alliance, Civic Thread, Preservati on Sacramento, Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT), and Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), and Blue Diamond Growers.

The site has been posted and all property owners and neighbors within a 500-foot radius of the subject site were notified of the hearing.

Staff received comments from SACOG, SacRT, SMAQMD, Civic Thread, and Blue Diamond Growers. Many of the comments from the initial project routing have been incorporated into final revision of the project, were verified for consistency purposes, and or supported by other reviewing agencies. Blue Diamond Growers remains concerned about the project. A detailed analysis of these comments can be found in the Background section of this report.

Rationale for Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council approve the project, based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions of approval listed in the attachments.

The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the 2035 General Plan and provides a mix of residential housing options near public transit while also encouraging walking and biking.

Staff finds the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the 2035 General Plan, River District Specific Plan, and North 16
th Street Historic District Plan related to the development of infill sites, preservation of contributing historic buildings, and is consistent with the vision of intensifying the diversity of land uses with the River District in a manner which compliments and enhances the surrounding area.

Financial Considerations: Not applicable.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.

Figure 1: Vicinity Map

Background Information

The project site is comprised of three separate sites (Site 200, 211, and 215) and are generally located along the North 16th Street corridor, directly north of North B Street, east of Ahern Street (private road), west of North 18th Street, and south of North C Street. The site is surrounded by light industrial and heavy commercial land uses, with the exception of a rock-climbing gym and brewery south of Site 200, and a cardroom north of Site 215.

All of the sites are located within the C -4-SPD zone within the River District SPD. Sites 200 and 211 are located within the North 16th Street Historic District and are both identified as contributors to the district.

Figure 2: Zoning Map

Site 200 is located on the west side of North 16th Street and is currently developed with a collection of vacant buildings that previously functioned as a produce distribution facility in the 1920s and was previously occupied by General Produce. Site 200 is the largest of the three sites and is surrounded by C-4-SPD zoning on all sides.

Site 211 is located across the street on the east side of North 16th Street and is developed with a building that was previously occupied by Ruland’s Office Furniture. The site is

surrounded by C-4-SPD zoning to the north, east, and west; and Heavy Industrial (M -2- SPD) zoning to the south.

Site 215 is located on the east side of North 16 th Street and is vacant. It is not located within the North 16 th Historic District; however, it is adjac ent to a contributing resource within that district. The site is surrounded by C-4-SPD zoning on all sides.

Table 1: Project Information
General Plan Designation: Employment Center Low Rise (ECLR) Community Plan: Central City
Housing Element Inventory: No
Specific Plan: River District
Zoning: Existing: Heavy Commercial (C-4-SPD)
Proposed: General Commercial (C-2-SPD)
Special Planning District: River District
Planned Unit Development: No
Design Review District: River District
Parking District: Traditional
Historic Landmark: No
Historic District: North 16 th Street (only Sites 200 and 211 are within district and are both contributors)
Property Area: 5.24 ac / 223,221 sq ft
Gross Square Footage:

Total: 445,472
Residential: 376,472
Commercial: 70,887
Dwelling Units: 525
Density: 100.19 du/ac
FAR: 1.99

Proposal Summary

The applicant is requesting entitlements to allow for the development of a mixed -use development on three separate sites (Sites 200, 211, and 215) on approximately 5.24 acres within the River District. The proposal includes 525 dwelling units and 70,887 square feet of commercial space.

Site 200 includes the adaptive reuse of the former Sacramento Produce Terminal through its conversion into 66,000 square feet of commercial space and the construction of two buildings with 350 multi-unit dwellings. A five-story building addition will be located on the north wing of the existing building, and an eight-story building will be located towards the center of the site.

Site 211 includes the adaptive reuse of the former Ruland’s Office Furniture through its conversion into 3,000 square feet of commercial space and 105 multi-unit dwellings .

Character-defining features of the building retained, while portions will be demolished .

The conversion will result in a five-story building.

Site 215 includes the construction of 1,887 square feet of commercial space and 70 multi- unit dwellings within a new five-story building.

Entitlement Review

The proposed project requests three entitlements: rezone, site plan and design review, and a tree permit. Pursuant to Sacramento City Code (SCC) section 17.604.100.C.1, the Preservation Commission considers and makes a recommendation to the City Council for site plan and design review and the tree permit. Pursuant to SCC section

17.808.230.B.2, the Planning and Design Commission considers and makes a recommendation to the City Council for the rezone. The recommendations of the Preservation Commission and the Planning and Design Commission will be forwarded to the City Council for final action.

Rezone

The project site is currently within the C-4-SPD zone. The C-4-SPD zone allows for all the proposed uses, including multi -unit residential. The C -4-SPD zone establishes a maximum density and references the applicable General Plan designation for floor area ration (FAR) standards.

The applicant is requesting a rezone to the C-2-SPD. Unlike the C-4-SPD zone, the C-2- SPD zone does not establish a density and FAR standard, rather it references the applicable General Plan designation, in this case the ECLR designation. Additionally, because the C-2-SPD zone references only FAR and density established by the General Plan, it allows development to exceed the maximum FAR if a significant community benefit, pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 1.1.10.

The purpose of the C-2-SPD zone is to provide for the sale of goods; the performance of services, including repair facilities; office uses; dwellings; small wholesale stores or distributors; and limited processing and packaging (see SCC section 17.216.700).

The project supports the following River District SPD goals:
(1) Establish a greater mix of land uses and intensities to attract private investment;
(2) Provide the opportunity for reuse and rehabilitation of heavy commercial and industrial uses; to take advantage of the light rail facilities in the area; and to reduce the number of obsolete and underutilized buildings and sites; (3) Allow for the retention and continued operation of industrial and service - oriented uses;
(4) Provide for improved circulation, infrastructure, and community facilities that will serve existing and future needs within the area;
(5) Provide for the future creation of a significant residential population within the River District area as industrial uses relocate or are replaced; achieve the housing objectives of the general plan and Central City Community Plan; and provide a jobs-housing balance for future office growth; (6) Provide for the intensification of commercial and office uses within close proximity to the planned and existing light rail stations and Interstate 5; (7) Discourage uses that contribute to visual or economic blight; (8) Encourage the preservation of historic structures; and (9) Promote aesthetic improvements to the area by implementing development standards and design guidelines.

The 525 dwelling units on the ±5.24-acre project site results in a den sity of 100.19 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac), exceeding the maximum density of 60 du/ac established by the C -4-SPD zone. The ±445,472-square-foot development on the ±223,221 square foot project site results in a FAR of 1.99, above the maximum FAR of

1.00 established by the ECLR designation. As described under the Policy Considerations section of this report , the proposed project is providing a significant community benefit (pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 1.1.10) and is therefore consistent with th e ECLR designation.

SCC section 17.808.230.C.1.D requires the following findings be met in order to approve a rezone: (1) the rezoning is consistent with the applicable general plan designation, use, and development standards; the goals, policies, or other provisions of the general plan; and any applicable specific plan ; and (2) t he amendment promotes the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the City.

The rezone meets these findings as the proposed infill development will allow for the preservation and repurposing of two buildings that are contributing historic resources to a historic district from vacant nonresidential uses to a higher density residential use and further activates the area by allowing a flexibility of permitted uses that are complimentary to the surrounding neighborhood. The C-2-SPD zone will allow for a multi -story, mixed- use development that will support a strong commercial presence along the North 16 th Street corridor by placing buildings along street frontages, allowing for an inviting pedestrian experience. Further, the proposed residential density located near light rail will promote walkability, use of alternative transportation and active transportation modes , and reinforces the vitality of the River District which is transitioning to include a mix of residential and commercial infill land uses.

Site Plan and Design Review

SCC chapter 17.808 requires site plan and design review for demolition of historic resources and new mixed-use developments. In addition to the applicable development standards established in SCC Title 17, the project site is subject to the River District Design Guidelines and the North 16th Street Historic District Plan (HDP).

Site 200

The development occupies a ±4.29-acre site east of Ahern Street, west of North 16 th Street, north of North B Street, and south of North C Street.

Table 3: Site 200 – Parking
Required Provided
Vehicle Commercial 0 157 Residential 0
Bicycle
Long-Term Commercial 7 66
Residential 175 175
Short-Term Commercial 33 33
Residential 35 35

Table 2: Site 200 – Information
Site Area: 4.29 ac / 186,872 sq ft
Dwelling Units: 350
Commercial (sq ft): 66,000
Open Space (sq ft): 52,640
Height (ft): Building 1: 88.5
Building 2: 76.5
Density (du/ac): 81.58
FAR: 1.58
Figure 3: Site 200 – Site Plan

Figure 4: Site 200 – Elevation – Eastern

Site and Architectural Design

The majority of the improvements for the building interior are yet to be determined, however, the first floor of the north wing will be repurposed to include a ground -floor market concept, leasing office and lobby access for building two, and a bike room with

enough spac e to fit 75 long -term bicycle parking spaces specifically to serve the tenants in building two.

The applicant will rehab and add to the existing contributing resources by preserving and enhancing the historic street facing orientation of the primary building façade and entries on all elevations, p reserving and repairing surviving steel windows, awnings, brick walls, brick elements, preserving and reusing of the existing historic loading docks and platforms around the site, and restoring window bays and do or openings along the loading docks. Any new forms and materials will be chosen to be compatible with the existing character of the district.

Building 1 is strategically placed in the center of the site behind an existing historic brick “tower” (East Elevation) which will be preserved and repurposed as the east main entry lobby with a leasing office. Building 1 will attach and step back from the brick “tower.” At a maximum height of ±88.5 feet, it will include a below grade garage with a capacity of 45-vehicle parking spaces. Building floors one through eight will feature a total of 250 dwelling units with a typical studio unit size of 540 square feet. The north, south, and west elevations of the building will feature an eclectic architect ural style using materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies.

Building 2 is a proposed six-story building with a height of 76.5 feet. The first floor will maintain the existing brick building and loading dock for a commercial use. Building floors two through six will step back from the existing building and floor two through six will feature 100 dwelling units including 80 studios, 10 one-bedroom units, and 10 two-bedroom units, with a typical studio unit size of 540 square feet. The north, south, and west elevations of the building will also feature a similarly eclectic architectural style and complement the other structures by using materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies.

Development Standards

Setbacks. Within the C -2-SPD zone, there are no minimum front -yard, interior side - yard, or rear -yard setbacks that apply (SCC sections 17.216.730 and 17.436.040) .

However, the building provides varying setbacks created by the existing buildings.

Height. The River District SPD identifies height limitations based on location and establishes a maximum height of 45 feet (SCC section 17.436.040.B.1). Building 1 is proposed to be a h eight of ±88.5 feet and Building 2 is proposed to be a height of ±76.5 feet. The applicant is requesting deviations. The deviation is further discussed in the following subsection of this report.

Open Space. Multi-unit dwellings are required to provide open space at a ratio of 100 square feet per dwelling unit (SCC section 17.600.135). The 350 dwellings units results in a requirement of 35,000 square feet. The applicant proposes a total of 52,640 square feet of open space in the form of balconies, the historic plaza (corner of Ahern Street and North C Street), patios, and common and private decks inside Building 1 and Building 2. Site 200 meets the minimum open space requirements and does not deviate from the development standard.

Parking – Vehicle. The project site is located within the Traditional parking district and is located within 0.25 miles of a planned light rail station. Pursuant to SCC section

17.608.020.F, there are no minimum off-street vehicle parking requirements for any of the proposed uses. There are 157 parking spaces proposed for the 350 onsite units. As shown in Table 3, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Parking – Bicycle. Bicycle parking standards for commercial uses require one long - term bicycle parking space per 10,000 square feet and one short-term bicycle parking space per 2,000 square feet. Bicycle parking standards for multi-unit dwellings without private garages or dedicated storage space require one long -term bicycle parking space for every two dwelling units, and a minimum of one short -term bicycle parking space per 10 dwelling units. The project provides 175 long-term bike storage spaces, above the minimum required. A total of 35 short -term rack spaces will be located on the sidewalk fronting the building and within the site. As shown in Tabl e 3, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Site 211

The project site sits on a 0.59-acre parcel east of North 16th Street, north of North B Street, and south of Thornton Avenue.

Table 4: Site 211 – Information
Site Area: 0.59 ac / 25,600 sq ft
Dwelling Units: 105
Commercial (sq ft): 3,000
Open Space (sq ft): 8,338 (10,500 required)
Height (ft): 72
Density (du/ac): 177.96

Table 5: Site 211 – Parking
Required Provided
Vehicle Commercial 3 56 Residential 35
Bicycle
Long-Term Commercial 2 2
Residential 55 55
Short-Term Commercial 2 2
Residential 11 11

Figure 5: Site 211 – Demo Plan

FAR: 3.64
Figure 6: Site 211 – Site Plan & Floor Plan

Site and Architectural Design

The existing building is a contributing historic building that is proposed to be preserved by retaining key elements such as the saw tooth roof forms at the north and south elevations, brick storefronts and warehouse windows. The southern section of the building contains newer brick wall and roof that will be removed.

The applicant seeks to preserve and incorporate to the contributing building elements such as the brick walls, columns, and steel sash windows at west and north elevations, the brick gable, ridge line, and tile roof. The southern section of the building is newer brick which will be removed. The mixed-use building will attach and step back from the preserved brick gables and ridgeline tile roof. At a maximum height of 72-feet the building will include ±3,000 square feet of retail space and 105 dwelling units.

The North 16th Street frontage will be activated by featuring ground -floor commercial tenant spaces, entry lobby to the office, and long -term bike parking. Directly behind these commercial tenant spaces is the vehicle parking garage with 56 vehicle parking spaces for tenants of Site 211. Primary access to the parking garage will be through Thorton Avenue.

Similar to the design across the street for Building 1 and Building 2 (Site 200), the proposed exterior materials for Site 211 will include an eclectic design comprised of brick veneer, corrugated metal siding, cement plaster, and steel balconies. The addition along the north and south elevations have been designed to include a sawtooth roof redesign, and the restoration of the existing gable and tile roof. The existing Rulands sign is planned to be saved and reused onsite. Building floors two through six will step back from the existing building and floor s two through six will feature 105 residential units including 86 studios, 10 one -bedroom units, and 9 two - bedroom units, with a typical studio unit size of 540 square feet.

Development Standards

Setbacks. The building is proposed to be located along property lines and is consistent with the requirements of the C-2-SPD zone.

Height. The proposed building height i s 72 feet and the applicant is requesting a deviation. The deviation is further discussed in the following subsection of this report.

Open Space. The 105 dwelling units require 10,500 square feet of open space and 8,338 square feet is provided. The applicant is requesting a deviation. The deviation is further discussed in the following subsection of this report.

Parking – Vehicle. The project site is located within the Traditional parking district and is located between 0.25 and 0.50 miles of a planned light rail station. Pursuant to SCC section 17.608.020.F, a 50% reduction of vehicle parking requirements for any of the proposed us es is reduced. As shown in Table 5, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Parking – Bicycle. The project provides 56 long-term bike storage spaces, consistent the minimum required. A total of 12 short -term rack spaces will be located on the sidewalk fronting the building and within the site . As shown in Table 5, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Site 215

The project site sits on a 0.36 -acre parcel east of North 16 th Street, north of Thornton Avenue, and south of North C Street.

Table 7: Site 215 – Parking
Required Provided
Vehicle Commercial 0 39 Residential 0
Bicycle
Long-Term Commercial 2 2
Residential 35 35
Short-Term Commercial 2 2
Residential 7 7

Site and Architectural Design

The applicant seeks to demolish the existing site including an accessory structure and develop a five-story mixed-use building, including 70 dwelling units and ±1,887 square feet of ground floor commercial. The North 16 th Street frontage will be activated by featuring ground-floor commercial tenant spaces and entry lobby to the office. Directly behind these commercial tenant spaces is the vehicle parking garage with 39 vehicle parking spaces for tenants of Site 215. Primary access to the parking garage will be through North C Street.

Similar to the design for Sites 200 and 211, the proposed exterior materials for Site 215 will include an eclectic design comprised of brick veneer, corrugated metal siding, cement plaster, and steel balconies. Building floors two through six will step back from the existing building. Floors two through six will feature 70 dwelling units including 60 studios, eight one-bedroom units, and two two-bedroom units, with a typical studio unit size of 540 square feet.

Development Standards

Setbacks. With the exception of a five -foot setback on the east, the building is proposed to be located along the property line and is consistent with the requirements Table 6: Site 215 – Information
Site Area: 0.36 ac / 15,600 sq ft
Dwelling Units: 70
Commercial (sq ft): 1,887
Open Space (sq ft): 5,615 (7,000 required)
Height (ft): 72
Density (du/ac): 194.4
FAR: 3.99
of the C-2-SPD zone.

Height. The proposed building height i s 72 feet and the applicant is requesting a deviation. The deviation is further discussed in the following subsection of this report.

Open Space. The 70 dwelling units require 7,500 square feet of open space and 6,615 square feet is provided. The applicant is requesting a deviation. The deviation is further discussed in the following subsection of this report.

Parking – Vehicle. The project site is located within the Traditional parking district and is located within 0.25 miles of a planned light rail station. As shown in Table 7, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Parking – Bicycle. The project provides 37 long-term bike storage spaces, above the minimum required. A total of 9 short-term rack spaces will be located on the sidewalk fronting the building. As shown in Table 7, both the nonresidential and residential components of the project comply with the established standards.

Deviations

Height

The River District SPD identifies height limitations based on location and establishes a maximum height of 45 feet (SCC section 17.436.040.B.1). On Site 200, Building 1 is 76.5 feet in height, exceeding the standard by 43.5 feet; and Building 2 is 76.6 feet, exceeding the standard by 31.5 feet. On Sites 211 and 215 the buildings are 72 feet, exceeding the standard by 27 feet.

The proposed height is required to achieve the desired residential density to allow for the preservation of the historic structures. Staff supports the deviation as the façade design elements reduce the apparent height and mass of the building and it meets the purposes and intent of the standard to reduce potential negativ e impacts associated with excessively tall structures.

Open Space

Multi-unit dwellings are required to provide open space at a ratio of 100 square feet per dwelling unit (SCC section 17.600.135). The 525 dwellings units results in a requirement of 52,500 square feet and a total of 66,593 square feet is provided. Site 200 provides the bulk of that area with 52,640 square feet. Site 211 provides 8,338 square feet, 2,162 square feet below the standard; and Site 215 provides 6,615 square feet, 385 square feet below the standard.

While the River District is the northern extension of the Central City, unlike the Central City SPD, the River District SPD does not establish a context -based multi-unit open space requirement (SCC section 17.444.050) . The project site would have an equivalent open space designation of Traditional which would have a n open space requirement of 50 square feet per dwelling unit were it to be within the Central City SPD.

Sites 211 and 215 provide common areas; while these areas do not contribute to the open space calculation because they are not open to the sky, they are nonetheless areas that are available for use by tenants outside of their individual units.

Furthermore, these tenants will also have access to open space on Site 200, w hich exceeds the open space requirement.

For the above-noted reasons, staff supports the deviation as the proposal still meets the purpose and intent of the standard to provide recreational spaces.

Historic District Plans

The North 16 th Street Historic District was designated for listing on the Sacramento Register of Historic and Cultural Resources by the Preservation Commission in 2011 (Ordinance No. 2011-011). The North 16 th Street Historic District Plan (HDP) contains a significant concentration of i ndustrial and commercial buildings related to Sacramento’s railroad and agricultural history that has the potential to become a vibrant mixed -use neighborhood like the R Street Historic District. While the buildings are generally large in scale and share similar utilitarian materials and design features, they also exhibit a variety of floorplan shapes, roof forms, and façade treatments that create a visual richness from which future development in the area could draw inspiration. Underutilized buildings, vacant parcels, and parking lots in the historic district present opportunity sites for future development. Sites 200 and 211 are located within the boundaries of the Historic District.

The Historic District includes a list of District -Specific Standards and Criteria in order to “Preserve the defining visual characteristics of this historic industrial and commercial corridor while encouraging a diverse range of businesses and mixed -use development that increases use and improve safety and walkability” (see HDP page 278).

The scope of this project includes an addition to a historic building, construction of a new structure, and repairs to contributing resources which would fall under the category of maintaining the historic features of the building. The HDP contains design standards and criteria based on consistency with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (Standards). Therefore, a finding that the project is consistent with the HDP, would typically result in a project that is consistent with the Standards as required by SCC section 17.808.180. A complete Standards analysis is included as Attachment s 12 and 13, to demonstrate consistency with the Standards for the purposes of City Code Section

17.808.180.

The HDP contains several design principals that relates to Rehabilitation of Contributing Resources, New (infill) Construction and Alternations to Non -Contributing Resources, and Site Features Related to Streetscape and Landscaping. The proposed project is consistent with the following criteria:

Goal 1. Rehabilitation of Contributing Resources

Policy 1.1. Preserve and enhance the historic street -facing orientation of primary building facades and entrances.

Policy 1.2. Preserve, repair, and maintain any surviving steel frame windows, which significantly contribute to the industrial character of the district. Reinstate multi -lite steel or wood frame windows, where they have been removed, if there is adequate documentation and if feasible. Replace missing historic street-facing windows where feasible, if there is adequate documentation to inform design.

Policy 1.4 Restore window and door openings that have been covered or filled in, where appropriate

Policy 1.5 Preserve and reuse h istoric loading platforms. Encourage reuse of these platforms as part of streetscape improvements to enhance the pedestrian experience.

Recreate historic loading platforms using concrete or other compatible material.

Policy 1.6 Retain existing historic awnings, where possible.

Goal 3. New (Infill) Construction & Alterations to Non-Contributing Resources

Policy 3.1 Orient taller building masses and primary facades of new constru ction toward North 16th Street. Use step backs to maintain the existing street façade height of adjacent contributing resources.

Policy 3.2 Maintain the visibility of varying building profiles, shapes, and forms in the historic district. Avoid designs that result in rows of identical facades or buildings Policy 3.4 Use materials that are compatible with the industrial or commercial character of adjacent contributing buildings. The use of brick, corrugated metal, steel casement windows and other utilitarian materials that are visible on adjacent contributing buildings is encouraged.

Policy 3.7 Design roofs to maintain the visual variety of roof lines exhibited by contributing buildings, including medium- or low-pitched gabled, flat, or rounded roofs, and square, stepped, or rounded parapets.

Policy 3.8 Follow pattern of large garage door openings that open out onto raised platforms (historically loading bays).

Goal 4. Site Features, Streetscape, & Landscaping

Policy 4.6 Remove chain link fences and barbed wire where consistent with the property's use.

Site 200

The most relevant design principle in the HDP that pertain to Site 200 relates to Goal 3 New (Infill) Construction and Alternations to Non-Contributing Resources. The goal sets a number of policies which state: “ [o]rient taller building masses and primary facades of new construction toward North 16th Street. Use step backs to maintain the existing street façade height of adjacent contributing resources” ( HDP Policy 3.1).

Other relevant policies include: “[u]se materials that are compatible with the industrial or commercial character of adjacent contributing buildings. The use of brick, corrugated metal, steel casement windows and other utilitarian materials that are visible on adjacent contributing buildings is encouraged” (HDP Policy 3.4).

The proposed additions will contrast and complement the existing structures in a manner that is consistent with the Design Guidelines and HDP. This was done by preserving and enhancing the historic street-facing orientation of the building entrance and reinstating steel windows, including a variety of materials and colors, and stepping back the additions from the existing historic contributing buildings, consistent with the goals and policies within the HDP. Moreover, as noted in th e HDP: “ [p]reserve and enhance the historic street -facing orientation of primary building facades and entrances” (HDP Policy 1.1), and “[o]rient taller building masses and primary facades of new construction toward North 16th Street. Use step backs to maintain the existing street façade height of adjacent” (HDP Policy 3.1).

Building 1 will attach and step back from the brick “tower. At a maximum height of 88.5 feet, it will include a below grade garage with the capacity of 4 5-vehicle parking spaces. The north, south, and west elevations of the building will feature an eclectic architectural style by using materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies. As noted in the HDP: “ [u]se materials that are compatible with the industrial or commercial character of adjacent contributing buildings. The use of brick, corrugated metal, steel casement windows and other utilitarian materials that are visible on adjacent contributing buildings is e ncouraged” (HDP Policy 3.4).

Building 2 is a proposed six story building with a height of 76.5 feet. The first floor will maintain the brick building and loading dock for a commercial use. Building floors two through six will step back from the existing building. The north, south, and west elevations of the building will also feature a similar eclec tic architectural style and complement the other structures by using materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies.

Site 211

Site 211 will also step back from the contributing elements of the existing building while also preserving and restoring the key elements known to have significance to the structure. Similar to the proposed structures at Site 200, the project will include a variety of materials that will complement the other structures in the district.

Site 215

Although Site 215 is located outside the HDP boundaries, the applicant has elected to also use similar materials, from those proposed for Sites 200 and 211 to fur ther establish the character and history of the HDP.

Tree Permit

Pursuant to SCC chapter 12.56, the removal of city trees requires a tree permit. This project proposes to remove three City trees, due to their poor conditions. The applicant has provided a replacement plan that is consistent with the replacement requirement described in SCC chapter 12.56 that includes the planting of a combined total of 17 inches diameter at standard height (DSH).

ORDINANCE NO.

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
Date Adopted

AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 5.23 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY FROM THE HEAVY COMMERCIAL (C-4-SPD) ZONE
TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2-SPD) ZONE WITHIN

THE RIVER DISTRICT SPECIAL PLANNING DISTRICT
(001-0151-001, -002, -005, 001-0153-001, 001-0152-001, -002, -003) (P21-024)

BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO:

SECTION 1.

The City Council finds the following:

A. The rezoning of the properties accomplished by this ordinance is consistent with the applicable general plan land use designation, use, and development standards; the goals, policies, and other provisions of the general plan; and any applicable specific plan or transit village plan , in that, the project will be designed to be compatible with adjacent structures through the use of differentiating building setbacks, stepping back buildings from the front and street side setbacks to allow historic buildings to stand alone, and the use of materials commonly found within the North 16th Street Historic District . Further, the project has significant community benefits in that it retains and restores historic resources, helps address the city h ousing needs, and proposes a mixed -use community that will be walkable, bike friendly, and transit supportive.

B. The amendment in this ordinance promotes the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the city.

SECTION 2.

Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code (the Planning and Development Code) is hereby amended to rezone ±5.23 acres from the Heavy Commercial (C -4-SPD) zone to the General Commercial (C-2-SPD) zone within the River District Special Planning District , as depicted in Exhibit A.

SECTION 3.

The City Clerk of the City of Sacramento is hereby d irected to amend the official zoning maps to conform to the provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 4.

Exhibit A is part of this ordinance.

Table of Contents:

Exhibit A – Rezone Exhibit
APN:001-0151-005,001-0151-002,001-0151-001APN:001-0151-005,001-0151-002,001-0151-001Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200Davis, CA 95618(530) 758-20262120 20th Street, Suite ThreeSacramento, CA 95818(916) 455-2026 CECWEST.COMSacramento OfficeDavis Office11 REZONE EXHIBIT200 N 16TH STREET

EXISTING ZONINGPROPOSED ZONING
C-4-SPDC-2-SPD
0SCALE: 1" =200'100200
APN: 001-0153-001Book 18500908Page 90180APN: 001-0153-001Book 18500908Page 90180 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200Davis, CA 95618(530) 758-20262120 20th Street, Suite ThreeSacramento, CA 95818(916) 455-2026 CECWEST.COMSacramento OfficeDavis Office11 REZONE EXHIBIT211 N 16TH STREET

EXISTING ZONINGPROPOSED ZONING
C-4-SPDC-2-SPD
0SCALE: 1" =100'50100
APN: 001-0152-001,001-0152-002, 001-0152-003,001-0152-004, 001-0152-005,001-0152-006, 001-0152,007APN: 001-0152-001,001-0152-002, 001-0152-003,001-0152-004, 001-0152-005,001-0152-006, 001-0152,007 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200Davis, CA 95618(530) 758-20262120 20th Street, Suite ThreeSacramento, CA 95818(916) 455-2026 CECWEST.COMSacramento OfficeDavis Office11 REZONE EXHIBIT1610 & 1616 N C STREET

EXISTING ZONINGPROPOSED ZONING
C-4-SPDC-2-SPD
RESOLUTION NO.

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
Date Adopted

ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING
THE GROWER’S DISTRICT PROJECT
(001-0151-001, -002, -005, 001-0153-001, 001-0152-001, -002, -003) (P21-024)

BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO:

BACKGROUND

A. On May 18, 2022 , the Preservation Commission conducted a public hearing, for which notice was given pursuant to Sacramento City Code chapter 17.812, received and considered evidence concerning the Grower’s District project (“Project”), and forwarded to the Planning and D esign Commission and City Council a recommendation to approve the Project.

B. On June 9, 2022 , the Planning and Design Commission conducted a public hearing, for which notice was given pursuant to Sacramento City Code chapter

17.812, received and considered evidence concerning the Project, and forwarded to City Council a recommendation to approve the Project.

C. On _____, the City Council conducted a public hearing, for which notice was given pursuant to Sacramento City Code chapter 17.812, received and considered evidence concerning the Project.

BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, THE CI TY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Based on the verbal and documentary evidence received at the hearing on the Project, the City Council approves the Project entitlements based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions of approval as set forth below

Section 2. The City Council approves the Project entitlements based on the following Findings of Fact:

A. Environmental Determination: Based on the determination and recommendation of the City’s Environmental Planning Services Manager and the oral and documentary evidence received at the hearing on the Project, the City Council finds that the Project is exempt pursuant to Public Resource s Code (“PRC”) section 21155.4 and CEQA Guidelines section 15182(b).

i. On February 15, 2011, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (PRC §21000 et seq. (“CEQA”)), the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §15000 et seq.), and the City of Sacramento environmental guidelines, the City Council approved an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) and adopted Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and approved the River District Specific Plan (“RDSP”).

ii. The Project is a mixed-use development project within the meaning of PRC Section 21155.4(a).

iii. The project is located in a transit priority area within the meaning of PRC Section 21155.4(a)(1).

iv. The project is consistent with the RDSP as required by PRC section 21155.4(a)(2).

v. The project is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area as set forth in the Sacramento Area Organization of Governments (“SACOG”) Metropolitan Transit Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, which has been accepted by the California Air Resources Board as applicable achieving greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

vi. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166, no substantial changes are proposed to the specific plan or presented by the project that will require major revisions of the previously certified RDSP EIR; no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the EIR; and no new information has become available since the certification of the EIR. Likewise, none of the events described in CEQA Guidelines s ection 15162 have occurred. There have been no substantial changes in the RDSP or in the circumstances in the specific plan area that would affect the EIR analysis or conclusions.

vii. Upon approval of the Project , the Planning Director shall file or cause to be filed a Notice of Exempt ion with the Sacramento County Clerk and, if the Project requires a discretionary approval from any state agency, with the State Office of Planning and Research, pursuant to PRC Section 21152(a) and the State EIR Guidelines adopted pursuant thereto.

viii. Pursuant to Guidelines Section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from, the Office of the City Clerk at 915 I Street, Sacram ento, California. The City Clerk is the custodian of records for all matters before the City Council.

B. Rezone: The amendment of Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code (“SCC”) by rezoning ±5.23 acres from the Heavy Commercial (“C-4-SPD”) zone to the General Commercial (“C-2-SPD”) zone within the River District Special Planning District (“River District SPD”) has been approved by Ordinance No. ___.

C. Site Plan and Design Review : For demolition of one building and alterations to two buildings, the construction of four mixed-use buildings with 525 dwelling units and ±70,887 square feet of commercial space with deviations to building height and multi-unit open space standards within the C -2-SPD zone and an increased floor area ratio (for total floor area ratio of 1.99) based on significant community benefit, including the restoration and adaptive reuse of two historic buildings, consistent with the General Plan, River District SPD, and North 16th Street Historic District is approved based on the following Findings of Fact:

i. The project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards and the goals and policies of SCC chapter 17.808 , in that, Site 200 will maintain character defining features such as the loading docks, warehouse space along the first and second floors, fenestration, brick cladding, and other distinctive materials and Site 211 will preserve key elements such as rehabilitating the primary face of the building, roof gable, red clay tile and corrugated metal roofing, warehouse windows at ground level, and brick piers and wall. The new mixed- use buildings will strive to stand on their own architectural merits of their time while not creating a false sense of historic development.

ii. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan or transit village plan; in that, the project will be designed to be compatible with adjacent structures through the use of differentiating building setbacks, stepping back buildings from the front and street side setbacks to allow historic buildings to stand alone, and the use of materials commonly found within the North 16th Street Historic District such has corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies . Further, the project has significant community benefits in that it retains and restores historic resources, helps address the city housing needs and provides commercial services within a transit priority area. To the extent possible the applicant will utilize sustainable features that are consistent with City goals and policies related to building electrification, supporting alternative modes of transportation by incorporating short - and long-term bike parking , and improving the area with landscaping consistent with the North 16th Street Streetscape Plan and landscaping requirements in Sacramento City Code 17.612.

iii. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of proposed development are consistent with all applicable design guidelines and with all applicable development standards or, if deviations from design guidelines or development standards are approved, the proposed development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable design guidelines and development standards; in that the purpose and intent of height restriction is to ensure new buildings fit within the range of building found on the block, on Site 200, Building 1 is 76.5 feet in height, exceeding the stan dard by 43.5 feet; and Building 2 is 76.6 feet, exceeding the standard by 31.5 feet. On Sites 211 and 215 the buildings are 72 feet, exceeding the standard by 27 feet. The proposed height is required to achieve the desired residential density to allow for the preservation of the historic resources. Also, multi-unit dwellings are required to provide open space at a ratio of 100 square feet per dwelling unit.

Site 211 provides 8,338 square feet, 2,162 square feet below the standard; and Site 215 provides 6,615 square feet, 385 square feet below the standard.

While Sites 211 and 215 don’t meet the multi-unit open space requirements, they provide common area accessible to tenants outside of their individual units including access to the open space on Site 200, which exceeds the open space requirement. The deviation is justified by the design of the building and meets the purpose and intent of the development standard and is therefore consistent.

iv. All streets and other public access ways and facilities, parking facilities, and utility infrastructure are adequate to serve the proposed development and comply with all applicable design guidelines and development standards; in that the proposed project provides onsite and offsite improvement to sufficiently serve the project and its users through improved circulation along North 16th Street.

v. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are visually and functionally compat ible with the surrounding neighborhood; in that the proposed project has been designed with the community in mind through consideration, rehabilitation, and restoration of the critical elements of the historic building resources onsite. The proposed mixed-use building will contract and complement the existing structure in manner that is consistent with the Design Guidelines and HDP. This is accomplished through the preserving and enhancement of the historic street -facing orientation of the building entrances, and reinstating and restoring of windows, brick, and other contributing building material elements.

vi. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development ensure energy consumption is minimized and use of renewable energy sources is encouraged; in that the mixed-use development makes for efficient use of underutilized spaces within existing developed properties. The new building are directly accessed from the street, with parking located at the rear or inside the structures to encourage an active street frontage for walking and biking. The existing buildings will be repurposed to pro vide commercial support in the area. The project will incorporate EV Ready parking spaces throughout the development and encourage walking and bicycling through a well-design network of walkways and direct connections to the surrounding street. Staff recommend that the project, to the extent possible, incorporate green building methods in the construction of structure.

vii. The design, layout, and physical characteristics of the proposed development are not detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare of persons residing, working, visiting, or recreating in the surrounding neighborhood and will not result in the creation of a nuisance , in that the mixed-use development will efficiently use an underutilized space within an existing urbanized area. The construction of the new buildings support public transportation by adding housing in close proximity to a transit priority area.

The project will include the restoration of entrances adjacent to the street allowing for a greater stree t presence. The applicant will provide a sign in a visible area displaying a 24 -hour emergency phone number and contact person for the business. The sign shall be kept current and posted on the building storefront as a “Good Neighbor” condition.

D. Tree Permit : To remove three City trees is approved based on the following Findings of Fact:

C1. The removal and replacement of these trees will result in an improvement over the existing condition.

C2. The replacement plan is consistent with the standards set forth in Sacramento City Code section 12.56.060.

E. 200-Year Flood Protection: The project site is within an area for which the local flood-management agency has made adequate progress (as defined in California Government Code section 65007) on the construction of a flood-protection system that, for the area intended to be protected by the system, will result in flood protection equal to or greater than the urban level of flood protection in urban areas for property located within a flood -hazard zone, as demonstrated by the SAFCA Urban Level of Flood Protection Plan and Adequate Progress Baseline Report and the SAFCA Adequate Progress Toward an Urban Level of Flood Protection Engineer’s Report, each accepted by the City Council on June 21, 2016 (Resolution No. 2016 -0226), and the SAFCA 2021 Adequate Progress Annual Report accepted by the City Council on November 9, 2021 (Resolution No. 2021 - 0328).

Section 3. The City Council approves the Project entitlements subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

C. Site Plan and Design Review: For demolition of one building and alterations to two buildings, the construction of four mixed-use buildings with 525 dwelling units and ±70,887 square feet of commercial space with deviations to building height and multi-unit open space standards within the C-2-SPD zone, River District SPD, and North 16th Street Historic District is approved subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

Planning

C1. It is in the City’s interest to prevent blight by maintaining existing development on a site until such time as new construction is undertaken as evidenced by issuance of building permits for new development.

Therefore, the applicant shall not commence demolition on Site 200 (APN:
001-0151-005) and Site 211 (APN: 001 -0153-001) until a building permit has been issued for the new structure.

C2. Site 211 (APN 001-0153-001) is located within 80 feet of an existing major industrial employer (as defined in Sacramento City Code (“SCC”) section

17.444.130.D) that operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The following con ditions of approval are imposed to specifically minimize potential existing and on -going noise, odor, and visual impacts that may be associated with the operations of the major industrial employer.

a. The application submitted for building permit shall include:

i. A noise assessment that quantifies existing ambient noise levels and identifies measures to ensure an interior noise level of 45 dBA Ldn within each dwelling unit, consistent with General Plan Policy EC 3.1.3.

ii. A lighting assessment that analyzes current nighttime lighting of the major industrial employer and how that
lighting may affect tenants/occupants, and identifies
architectural measures that may reduce any identified
negative impacts.

b. The plans submitted for building permit shall:

i. Include sufficient detail and information to allow Planning Division staff to verify consistency with the measures
identified in the noise assessment.

ii. Include a layout of the studio dwelling units on the south side of the building facing North B Street that provides for living areas on the north side of the dwelling unit.

iii. Include additional landscaping on the eastern-facing of the podium deck open space to reduce light and noise.

iv. Identify curtains, or other similar devices that reduces light and noise, on exterior facing doors and/or windows within each dwelling unit that are operable and under the control of the tenant/occupant.

c. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the operator of the development shall:

i. Provide Planning Division staff for review and approval, language that will be included in agreements executed
between the operator and tenants/occupants that provides a written notice of the existing industrial use and potential impacts associated with the continued use and operations of the major industrial employer.

ii. Schedule an inspection with Planning Division staff to verify installation of the aforementioned landscaping and curtains and any other measures identified in the noise assessment.

d. The operator shall ensure that following ite ms, and any other measures identified in the noise assessment, are maintained in a functional and operable manner:

i. Exterior facing door and/or window assemblies (e.g.
insulation and seals).

ii. Forced-air mechanical ventilation systems.

iii. Aforementioned landscaping.

iv. Aforementioned curtains.

C3. The applicant shall obtain all necessary building permits and encroachments permit prior to commencing construction. Building permits shall not be issued unless Planning staff has been approved.

C4. The plans submitted for building permit shall demonstrate compliance with the standards for mixed -use developments pursuant to SCC section

17.600.150.

C5. The plans submitted for building permit shall demonstrate compliance with the standards for mechanical equipment screening pursuant to SCC section 17.600.165.

a. All mechanical equipment shall be screened to prevent visibility from all City Street frontages.

C6. The plans submitted for building permit shall include a photometric exhibit.

The type and location of the outdoor and e xterior lighting (buildings, parking areas, etc.) shall be approved by Planning during building plan check.

a. Lighting shall be provided at the ground level on all sides of the building, at each building entry, and within the parking field.

b. Pursuant to S CC section 17.612.030.B, exterior lighting shall reflect away from residential areas and public streets. Fixtures shall be unobtrusive and complementary to the architectural design of the building. Lighting shall be designed so as not to produce hazardous and annoying glare to motorists and building occupants, adjacent residents, or the general public. Standard ceiling pack light fixtures visible from the pedestrian sidewalk shall be avoided.

C7. Provide the following minimum bicycle storages spaces for the project. A long-term bicycle storage room shall be provided for the multi-unit portion of the building as shown on the final approved plans. Final location and design of both short and long -term spaces shall be reviewed and approved by Planning staff at time of building permit plan check.

a. Site 200: 68 short-term and 241 long-term

b. Site 211: 13 short-term and 57 long-term

c. Site 215: 9 short-term and 37 long-term

C8. Provide provisions or designated areas for trash and recycling waste sized to accommodate the proposed project. A dedicated trash and recycling waste room shall be located within the building as shown on the final approved plans and comply with provisions of SCC chapter 17.616 including required volumes for the proposed uses. No trash containers/dumpsters are allowed in the parking area or right-of-way.

C9. A sign indicating a 24-hour emergency phone number and contact person shall be kept current and posted on the building in a place clearly visible from the exterior.

C10. The operator shall comply with the maintenance, repair, and operation standards for multi-unit dwellings pursuant to SCC section 17.228.117.

a. The operator shall have an on -site manager that resides on -site pursuant to SCC section 17.228.117. B.1. If multiple sites are managed by the same operator, the manager may reside in any one of the three sites (Sites 200, 211, or 215).

C11. Tenants of Sites 211 and 215 shall have access to the common open space areas of Site 200.

C12. Landscaping shall be installed consistent with the attached exhibits.

C13. The owner or operator shall maintain landscaping and irrigation in a healthy and serviceable condition.

C14. The owner or operator shall indicate and maintain all locations of parking stalls for disabled access and strictly enforce applicable rules.

C15. The building exterior elevations shall have a consistency of detail and quality as indicated on the approved plans and attached exhibits.

C16. Each building elevation shall incorporate exterior siding materials and architectural features as shown on the approved plans.

C17. The color palette shall be consistent with the approved plans.

C18. Window design and fenestration shall be in substantial performance with the approved plans. Any changes to the fenestration shall be subject to review and approval by planning staff.

C19. The project shall be constructed per approved plans and shall be consistent with the attached exhibits.

C20. Any change in the design, materials, or colors shall be submitted to Planning staff for review and approval and may re quire additional entitlements.

C21. Signage has not been reviewed as a part of this project approval. The applicant shall obtain a sign permit before the fabrication or installation of any non-exempt signage for the development.

C22. Final occupancy shall be subje ct to approval and involve an on -site inspection by Planning staff.

C23. The agreements executed between the operator and tenants shall include a notification that parking is not included as a part of the lease.

Furthermore, the agreement shall state that ther e is limited parking available in the neighborhood adjacent to the facility.

C24. The project entitlements shall be valid for a period of three years unless an application to extend the entitlement s is submitted to the City prior to the expiration date and approved by the City.

C25. A sign displaying a 24-hour emergency phone number and contact person for the business shall be kept current and posted on the southern perimeter fence as a “Good Neighbor” condition.

Historic Restoration Conditions Requirements for Sites 200 (APN: 001-0151-005 and 211 (APN: 001-0151-001)

C26. On-site pre-construction meeting/walk through with the Owner, General Contractor, Abatement/Demolition Contractor, and city staff is required prior to commencing demolition work.

C27. All windows and doors shall be retained and preserved unless otherwise noted on approved plans. New windows and doors shall be subject to review and approval by preservation staff prior to procurement.

C28. Metal windows shall be repaired rather than replace d. If replacement is necessary, new windows shall be rolled steel windows that match the existing steel windows in kind subject to review and approval by preservation staff.

C29. All new exterior wood, including but not limited to, trim, doors, windows, and fascia, shall have a smooth finish with no rough sawn or raised grain pattern visible upon final inspection.

C30. All new exterior glass on the existing historic building shall be clear with no tint unless required for energy conservation purposes and approved by preservation staff. Samples of any tinted glass shall be submitted to planning staff for review and approval prior to procurement.

C31. All existing decorative sheet metal fla shing shall be retained and preserved unless otherwise noted on approved plans. If replacement is necessary, new decorative sheet metal shall be installed that replaces the damaged material in kind.

C32. Existing brick shall be retained and preserved unless otherwise noted on approved plans. Additional selective demolition is subject to review and approval by preservation staff prior to scheduling work.

C33. Any cleaning of existing exterior masonry or metal materials shall be subject to protocols agreed to by the City and applicant prior to the Certificate of Occupancy . Sandblasting or other inappropriate cleaning methods that would harm the historic materials shall not be allowed.

C34. Existing masonry shall be monitored for cracks or other damage throughout demolition and constriction activities.

C35. All new penetrations through the existing brick shall be made through the grout joints.

C36. Upon completion of project all brick cladding shall be repaired using patching method that matches the color and texture o f the existing brick finish. A mockup repair reviewed and approved by preservation staff is required prior to proceeding with repairs.

C37. New exterior light fixtures attached to the historic building shall be submitted to preservation staff prior to procurement.

C38. Historic roof tile shall be retained and preserved. If removal is approved by preservation staff a sample of new tile shall be submitted to preservation staff for review and approval prior to procurement.

C39. All restoration work shall be conducted consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Any conflict between the approved plans and the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation shall be brought to the attention of preservation staff for review and approval prior to proceeding.

C40. Any conflicts between the architectural plans and the structural plans that result in demolition or alterations that affect the buildings exterior shall be brought to the attention of preservation staff for review and approval prior to proceeding.

Environmental

C41. The project shall comply with each mitigation measured adopted for the project, as identified in the envi ronmental document prepared pursuant to the CEQA and/or Mitigation Monitoring Plan (in this case the River District Specific Plan EIR). If there is an error or omission in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan, the mitigation measure as set forth in the environmental document shall control.

Public Works

C42. Construct standard public improvemen ts as noted in these conditions pursuant to Title 17 of the City Code. Improvements shall be designed to City Standards and assured as set forth in Section 17.502.130 of the City Code. All improvements shall be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Any public improvement not specifically noted in these conditions shall be designed and constructed to City Standards. This shall include the repair or replacement/reconstruction of any existing deteriorated curb, gutter, sidewalk, and existing loading docks adjacent to the subject property per City standards to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C43. Dedicate sufficient right -of-way and construct , to the extent physically feasible, North B Street as an 80 -ft street section (40 -ft to centerline) consistent with the River District Specific Plan and to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The construction of North B Street shall include, to the extent physically feasible, the existing loading dock, 7-ft sidewalk, 6 -ft bike lane, 12 -ft travel lane, and 11 -ft center turn lane.

Proper sidewalk transitions shall be provided for the bus turnout within the project’s frontage to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. No on-street parking will be available along this segment of North B Street along the project’s frontage. The City acknowledges that the dimensions between the existing historic buildings on the north and south sides of north B Street and including the historic dock on the north an d south sides of North B Street may not provide for sufficient space to fit improvements as described. The City will work with the applicant to design alternative means that meet the needs of the project and public.

C44. Dedicate sufficient right-of-way and construct North C Street as an 80 -ft street section (40 -ft to centerline) consistent with the River District Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C45. Dedicate sufficient right -of-way (if necessary) and construct North 16th Street as an 80 -ft street section (40 -ft to centerline) consistent with the River District Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C46. The applicant shall participate in the Finance Plan of the River District Specific Plan and pay all appropriate fees to the satisfaction of the Department of Finance.

C47. All right -of-way and street improvement transitions that result from changing the right -of-way of any street shall be located, designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Departme nt of Public Works. The center lines of such streets shall be aligned.

C48. The applicant shall merge the existing parcels that cover the project site which creates the parcel boundary shown on the proposed site plan prior to obtaining any Building Permits.

C49. Construct traffic signals at the following intersections when warranted, or when required by the Department of Public Works (if not already in place):

a. South leg of N C Street & N 16 th Street (Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon)

NOTE: The Department of Public Works shall determine the need for signals, based on CalTrans signal warrants and known pending development projects prior to the Issuance of any building permit. If required, signals shall be constructed as part of the public improvements for the Special Permit. Signal design and construction shall be to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. The applicant shall provide all on-site easements for signal facilities and related appurtenances.

C50. The applicant shall submit a signal design concept report to the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to the submittal of any improvement plans involving traffic signal work.

C51. All new and existing driveways shall be designed and constructed to City Standards to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C52. The applicant shall provide sufficient signage, markings, and pavement legends to indicate one-way directional traffic onsite and at the driveways for Site 200 to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C53. The applicant shall provide for an audio/visual pedestrian warning device at the proposed garage driveways on Site 211 & 215 to improve visibility between motorists exiting the driveway and pedestrians along the North C St & Thornton Ave sidewal k to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. This shall also include mirrors affixed to the building on either side of the driveway to improve visibility.

C54. The applicant shall design any proposed gates so that no portion of the gate will intrud e into the public right -of-way. All gates shall be automatically opened and equipped with an automatic gate opener/remote control. Any commercial gates shall be required to remain open during business hours to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C55. Reciprocal access easements are required for shared use of the driveways w/ the adjacent parcel, if not already in place.

C56. Prior to obtaining any building permits, the applicant shall have successfully abandoned any easements for 15th Street and alley within the proposed project to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C57. The site plan shall conform to A.D.A. requirements in all respects. This shall include the replacement of any curb ramp that does not meet current A.D.A. standards. A ll curb ramps shall be constructed as shown in the site plan. The curb ramp at the southeast corner of Ahern Street and North C Street shall be a dual pan curb ramp to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C58. The applicant shall record the Fin al Map, which creates the lot pattern shown on the proposed site plan prior to obtaining any Building Permits.

C59. This project will require the installation of streetlights on all public streets fronting this property to the satisfaction of Public Works. The number and locations of these lights will be determined when development plans are submitted for review. The City acknowledges that the project involves the adaptive reuse of historic warehouse within the North 16th Street Historic District. Street lighti ng may not conform to the standard streetlight standards. Non -standard element may include, but are not limited to, lighting along loading docks and other historical elements that is affixed to buildings.

C60. The site plan shall conform to the parking requir ements set forth in City Code 17.608.040.

C61. The applicant shall provide a signing and striping improvement plan if new signage or striping is proposed; or if existing signing and/or striping is removed or relocated. The plans shall be to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works standards.

C62. The applicant shall install high visibility crosswalks and advanced warning signs for the east, south, and north legs of the intersection of Ahern Street & North B Street to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C63. The applicant shall remove the existing crosswalks and install high visibility crosswalks at the west, east, and south legs of the intersection of North B Street & North 16th Street. Additionally, install sufficient signage to discourage crossing at the north leg to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C64. The applicant shall install a pedestrian hybrid beacon, high visibility crosswalks, and advanced warning signs for the north leg of the intersection of North C Street & North 16 th Street to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C65. The applicant shall make provisions for the existing bus stop turnout, to the satisfaction of Regional Transit.

C66. The applicant shall dedicate (if necessary) and construct bus turnouts for all bus stops adjacent to the subject site to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

C67. The design of walls fences and signage near intersections and driveways shall allow stopping sight distance per Caltrans standards and comply with City Code Se ction 12.28.010 (25' sight triangle). Walls shall be set back 3' behind the sight line needed for stopping sight distance to allow sufficient room for pilasters. Landscaping in the area required for adequate stopping sight distance shall be limited 3.5' in height at maturity. The area of exclusion shall be determined by the Department of Public Works.

Utilities

C68. Applicant shall participate in the River District Planning Area Finance Plan and pay all required fees. Improvement plans shall be consistent with the River District Infrastructure and Utilities Plan.

C69. Per City Code Section, 13.04.070, multiple water services to a single lot or parcel may be allowed if approved by DOU Development Review and Operations and Maintenance staff. Any new water services (o ther than fire) shall be metered. Excess services shall be abandoned to the satisfaction of the DOU. (Note: Tapping to the 36 -inch City water transmission Main in N B Street is not allowed. If the applicant plans to apply for a water development fee waiver or is in the designated Water Development Fee Waiver Area, the retail/commercial area will be required to have a separate metered domestic water service from the proposed residential use.)

C70. Common area landscaping shall have a separate street tap for a metered irrigation service.

C71. Prior to or concurrent with the submittal of improvement plans, prepare a project specific water study for review and approval by the DOU. The water distribution system shall be designed to satisfy the more critical of the two following conditions: (1) at maximum day peak hour demand, the operating or "residual" pressure at all water service connections shall be at least 30 pounds per square inch, (2) at average maximum day demand plus fire flow, the operating or "residual" pressu re in the area of the fire shall not be less than 20 pounds per square inch. The water study shall determine if the existing and proposed water distribution system is adequate to supply fire flow demands for the project. A water supply test may be required for this project. The applicant is advised to contact the City of Sacramento Utilities Department Development Review Section (916-808-7890) at the early planning stages to address any water related requirements. Failure to submit the water study may delay review and approval.

C72. This project is served by the Combined Sewer System (CSS). Therefore, the developer/property owner will be required to pay the Combined Sewer System Development Fee prior to the issuance of building permit.

The fee will be used for i mprovements to the CSS. The applicant is recommended to contact the Department of Utilities Development Services at 916-808-7890 for a CSS fee estimate. (Note: The entire River District Financing Plan area was granted 25 ESD’s at the lower fee rate.

The lo wer fee rate has been exhausted; therefore, this project will be charged at the higher rate).

C73. All increases in sewer flow shall be mitigated. The proposed project is contributing increased sewer flows to the CSS and shall evaluate the available capacity o f existing CSS mains from the project’s point of service to the nearest 18-inch main. If any portion of the City mains to the nearest 18 -inch main is determined to have insufficient capacity to accommodate the increased sewer flow, the development shall be required to improve the undersized mains to the nearest 18 -inch main.

The applicant is advised to contact the City of Sacramento Utilities Department Sewer Planning Section (916 -808-7890) at the early planning stages to address any sewer related requirements.

C74. Concurrent to the first submittal of the building permit, the applicant shall prepare a project specific drainage study meeting the criteria specified in the current Design and Procedures Manual, for review and approval by the DOU. The applicant is a dvised to contact the City of Sacramento Utilities Department Development Review Section (916-808-7890) at the early planning stages to address any drainage related requirements.

Failure to submit the drainage study may delay review and approval (Note: A maintenance agreement may be required for detention and Low Impact Development (LID) features).

C75. The onsite water, sewer, and storm drain systems shall be private systems maintained by the owner or other approved entity.

C76. Finished floor elevations shall be a minimum of 6-inches above the 100- year HGL or 1-foot above the overland flow release elevation, whichever is higher or as approved by the DOU.

C77. Per City Code, the applicant may not develop the project in any way that obstructs, impedes, or interferes with the natural flow of existing off -site drainage that crosses the property. The project shall construct the required public and/or private infrastructure to handle off-site runoff to the satisfaction of the DOU. If private infrastructure is constructed to handle off-site runoff, the applicant shall dedicate the required private easements, and/or, at the discretion of the DOU, the applicant shall enter into and record an Agreement for Maintenance of Drainage with the City, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.

C78. No more than 6,000 square feet is allowed to sheet drain over a public sidewalk. If the area is larger than 6,000 square feet, then an on -site surface drainage system is required and shall be connected to the street drainage system by means of a storm drain service tap. All on -site systems shall be designed to the standard specified in the DOU onsite manual.

C79. A grading plan showing existing and proposed elevations is required.

Adjacent off-site topography shall also be shown to the extent necessary to determine impacts to existing surface drainage paths. No grading shall occur until the grading plan has been reviewed and approved by the DOU.

C80. The applicant must comply with the City of Sacramento's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance. This ordinance requires the applicant to show erosion and sediment control methods on the construction drawings. These plans shall also show the methods to control urban runoff pollution from the project site during construction.

SMUD

C81. SMUD has existing o verhead 21kV facilities along the entire south side of Site 200 and 211 (north side of North B Street), along the east side Site 200 (west side of N 16th St) and directly south of Site 215 that will need to remain. The Applicant shall be responsible for ma intaining all CalOSHA and State of California Public Utilities Commission General Order No. 95 safety clearances during construction and upon building completion. If the required clearances cannot be maintained, the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of relocation.

C82. SMUD has existing underground 21kV facilities along the north side of Site 200 (south side of North C St) that will need to remain. The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all CalOSHA and State of California Public Utilities Commission General Order No. 128 safety clearances during construction and upon building completion. If the required clearances cannot be maintained, the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of relocation.

C83. Structural setbacks less than 14 -feet shal l require the Applicant to conduct a pre -engineering meeting with all utilities to ensure property clearances are maintained.

C84. Any necessary future SMUD facilities located on the Applicant’s property shall require a dedicated SMUD easement. This will be determined prior to SMUD performing work on the Applicant’s property.

C85. In the event the Applicant requires the relocation or removal of existing SMUD facilities on or adjacent to the subject property, the Applicant shall coordinate with SMUD. The Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of relocation or removal.

C86. SMUD reserves the right to use any portion of its easements on or adjacent to the subject property that it reasonably needs and shall not be responsible for any damages to the developed property w ithin said easement that unreasonably interferes with those needs.

C87. The Applicant shall not place any building foundations within 5-feet of any SMUD trench to maintain adequate trench integrity. The Applicant shall verify specific clearance requirements for other utilities (e.g., Gas, Telephone, etc.).

C88. The Applicant shall comply with SMUD siting requirements (e.g., panel size/location, clearances from SMUD equipment, transformer location, service conductors). Information regarding SMUD siting requirement s can be found at: https://www.smud.org/en/Business-Solutions-and- Rebates/Design-and-Construction-Services.

C89. Transformer and switch space for each site may be required. This additional space will vary and the amount will depend on specific service requirements, including service size, voltage and other requirements.

Furthermore, the location of this space will be site -dependent and could include subsurface (vaulted) or in -building space if pad -mounted and/or alcove space is unavailable or insufficient. Please reference “Electric Service in Downtown Sacramento”, https://www.smud.org/- /media/Documents/Business-Solutions-and-Rebates/dcs/dcs-Electric- Service-in-Downtown-Sacramento, for a dditional information on equipment spacing requirements.

Fire

C90. Roads used for Fire Department access that are less than 28 feet in width shall be marked "No Parking Fire Lane" on both sides; roads less than 36 feet in width shall be marked on one side.

C91. Fire Apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. CFC 503.2.3

C92. Provide a water flow test. (Make arrangements at the Permit Center walk- in counter: 300 Richards Blvd, Sacramento, CA

C93. Provide appropriate Knox access for site. CFC Section 506

C94. Locate and identify Fire Department Connections (FDCs) on address side of building no further than 50 feet and no closer than 15 feet from a fire hydrant and not more than 30 feet from a paved roadway. Hydrants shall be located so as not to cross high traffic roads or fire access ways that would obstruct fire department operations when connecting the FDC to the fire hydrant.

C95. An approved fire control room shall be provided for all buildings protected by an automatic fire extinguishing system. The room shall contain all system control valves, fire alarm control panels and other fire equipment required by the Fire Code Official. Fire Control rooms shall be located within the building at a location approved by the Fire Code Official, and shall be provided with a means to access the room directly from the exterior. Durable signage shall be provided on the exterior side of the access door to identify the fire control room. Fire Control rooms shall not be less than 50 square feet for rooms without a fire pump and 200 square feet when a fire pump is present. CFC Amendments 901.4.7

C96. Emergency Responder Radio Coverage may be required. Testing shall be conducted by an authorized technician to verify compliance with section 510, CFC. This test shall verify that building will support the Sacramento City Fire Department Radio Communication System. This test shall be performed once all computers, electroni cs and/ or wireless systems, etc. have been installed.

Police

C97. Exterior lighting shall be white light using LED lamps with full cutoff fixtures to limit glare and light trespass. Color temperature shall be between 2700K and 4100K with a color rendering index of 80 or higher and a light loss factor of 0.95 or better. W hen choosing lamps, the applicant shall look for efficiency of 110 lumens per watt or better. All existing exterior fixtures shall be replaced with fixtures that meet this requirement.

C98. Light poles, if applicable, shall be no higher than 16’-feet.

C99. Broken or damaged exterior lighting shall be repaired or replaced in a timely manner.

C100. Entry drives, drive aisles, parking and bicycle parking shall be illuminated to a maintained minimum of 1.5 -foot candles per square foot of parking area at a 6:1 average to minimum ratio.

C101. Exterior walkways, alcoves and passageways shall be illuminated to a maintained minimum of 1/3-foot candles per square foot of surface area at a 6:1 average to minimum ratio.

C102. Exterior lighting distribution and fixtures shall meet City stand ards and reviewed by Sacramento Police Department CPTED Sergeant (or designee) prior to issuance of a building permit.

C103. Exterior lighting shall be designed in coordination with the landscaping plan to minimize interference between the light standards and r equired illumination and the landscape trees and required shading. Exterior lighting shall be shielded or otherwise designed to avoid spill -over illumination to adjacent streets and properties.

Landscaping

C104. All mature landscaping shall follow the two -foot, six -foot rule. All landscaping shall be ground cover, two feet or less and lower tree canopies of mature trees shall be above six feet. This increases natural surveillance, eliminates hiding areas within the landscape, and provides for tenants and users a safer environment.

C105. Tree canopies shall not interfere with or block lighting. This creates shadows and areas of concealment. The landscaping plan shall allow for proper illumination and visibility regarding lighting and surveillance cameras through the maturity of trees and shrubs.

Security

C106. Fencing shall be of decorative tubular steel, no climb type and a minimum of 7’ in height.

C107. A Video Assessment and Surveillance System (VASS) shall be installed at the site and maintained by a property management company, security company, or designee.

C108. Manager with access to VASS storage shall be able to respond to any activation within two-hours.

C109. Cameras shall be day/night capable with a resolution of no less than two (2) megapixels and a minimum frame rate of 15 frames per second.

C110. Each driveway entrance and each building entrance shall be covered by a camera set at 100 pixels per foot or higher.

C111. VASS shall be capable of exporting footage to common media in a standard viewing format and shall not require propriet ary software for third party viewing.

C112. VASS shall be capable of storing no less than 30 days’ worth of activity.

C113. VASS shall provide comprehensive coverage of:

a. areas of ingress and egress

b. parking lot

c. coverage of all four (4) exterior sides of the property

d. adjacent public rights of way

e. entrance lobbies

f. hallways

C114. No more than 10 percent of the square footage of windows and clear doors for retail purposes shall be blocked by advertising, signs, shelves or anything else. All advertising, signs, and shelving shall be placed and maintained in a manner that ensures that law enforcement personnel have a clear and unobstructed view of the interior of the premises from the exterior public sidewalk or entrance to the premises. All signs shall comply with the City Code.

C115. All dumpsters shall be kept locked or in locked enclos ures. Gating for dumpster enclosures shall be slatted to allow visual surveillance of the interior.

C116. Exterior trash receptacles shall be of a design to prevent unauthorized removal of articles from the trash bin.

C117. Any graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent area under the control of the applicant shall be removed or painted over with matching paint within one week of being applied.

C118. Exterior benches shall be constructed so as to deter skateboarding (e.g., center armrest partitions).

C119. Each parking lot shall be equipped with a security phone, allowing users to contact security and police communications.

C120. Parking shall be assigned. Residents will be required to register vehicles associated with their unit with management.

C121. Laundry machines, if applicable, shall not operate with cash or credit cards. An electronic card system or pin code system shall be maintained by management for resident’s use of the laundry machines.

C122. Applicant shall install a law enforcement “Knox Box” for police access to common areas on the premises, including, but not limited to the entrance gate, primary entrance to each mixed -use building, community rooms, etc. If elevators can only be operated via electronic access card a fter hours, management shall ensure a card is placed in the exterior knox box.

C123. Applicant shall employ on -site uniformed security at the premises 24/7.

The contracted security company shall be registered and in good standing with the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (BSIS).

Applicant may request a modification of this condition at any time. Any request for modification shall be in writing and submitted to the Sergeant of the Sacramento Police Department’s CPTED unit, or designee, and specify the desired modification(s). The Sacramento Police Department will evaluate the modification request and will respond within 30 days of receipt of the request.

C124. Applicant shall place a security/police phone in each parking lot. The phone pole shall be equipped with a blue light.

C125. A final security plan for the premises shall be submitted for review and approval by the Sacramento Police Department CPTED Sergeant (or designee) prior to the issuance of a building permit. The security plan MUST be prepared by a qu alified professional (Qualified Manager of a licensed PPO or Certified Professional Designation from ASIS International). Applicant is required to follow the recommendations of the security plan.

During Construction

C126. The applicant shall enclose the entire perimeter of the project with a chain link fence with necessary construction gates to be locked after normal construction hours.

C127. The location shall be monitored by security after normal construction hours during all phases of construction. This can be do ne via remote camera monitoring.

C128. Adequate security lighting shall be provided to illuminate vulnerable equipment and materials. Lighting shall be white light with full cut off fixtures.

Park Planning and Development Services

C129. Maintenance District: Prior to issuance of permits, the applicant shall initiate and complete the formation of a park’s maintenance district (assessment or Mello -Roos special tax district) or submit Waiver and Unanimous Approval form to annex the project into an existing Community Facilities District 2002-02, Neighborhood Park Maintenance CFD. The applicant shall pay all city fees for formation of or annexation to a park’s maintenance district. (Contact Infrastructure Finance, Jessica Steinhauer, (916) 808-8243).

Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District

C130. Prior to the issuance of a building permit: The owner must contact the Regional San Permit Services Unit at [email protected] or by phone at (916) 876 -6100 to determine if sewer impact fees are du e.

Fees are to be paid prior to the issuance of building permits.

Advisory Comments

ADV 1. ALL ELECTRIC NEW BUILDINGS REQUIREMENT. Pursuant to Chapter 15.30 of Sacramento City Code, new buildings of 1-3 stories will be required to be all-electric beginning on January 1, 2023, and new buildings 4 stories or more will be required to be all-electric beginning on January 1, 2026. An all-electric building is a building that does not have gas appliances, gas infrastructure, or gas equipment.

Complete building permit applications (including payment of all required fees) filed with and accepted by the City’s Building Division prior to the effective dates will not be subject to all-electric requirements.

Applicants are advised to plan for all-electric compliance beginning with initial early design. Solutions include but are not limited to:

Designing projects to create space for electric infrastructure and equipment; utilizing energy efficiency to reduce electrical loads; and consulting with SMUD to address electric infrastructure issues. Limited exemptions may apply. For more information, please visit the City’s website: http://www.cityofsacramento.org/SacElectrificationOrdinance

ADV 2. UTILITIES. The proposed project is located in a Zone X on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Accordingly, the project site lies in an area with no requirements to elevate or flood proof.

ADV 3. FIRE. The project site is located within the River District Impact Fee boundaries and will be subject to the applicable impact fees with future development and/or change of land use of the site, during the building permit process. Contact Infrastructure Finance (916-808-1440) with any questions on the River District Impact Fee.

ADV 4. SACRAMENTO REGIONAL COUNTY SANITATION DISTRI CT. The City of Sacramento (City) is responsible for providing local sewer service to the proposed project site via their local sanitary sewer collection system. Regional San is responsible for the conveyance of wastewater from the City collection system to the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP).

ADV 5. POLICE. City of Sacramento permits must be obtained for private patrol, alarms, and camera systems.

ADV 6. PARKS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. As per City Code, the applicant will be responsible to meet his/her obligations regarding:

a. Title 18, 18.56 Park Development Impact Fee, due at the time of issuance of building permit. The Park Development Impact Fee is estimated at $712,289 for the development of 540 multi- unit dwellings. The Park Development Impact Fee due for this project is based on 1) the Central City Incentive Zone Rate of $1.86 per square foot for residential projects, with a minimum rate of $1,389 for units under 750 square feet and a maximum of $3,705 for units over 2,000 square feet and 2) the Central City Incentive Zone Rate of $0.17 per square foot for
commercial projects. Any change in these factors will change the amount of the PIF due . The fee is calculated using factors at the time that the project is submitted for building permit.

b. Community Facilities District 2002 -02, Neighborhood Park Maintenance CFD Annexation.

D. Tree Permit: To remove three City trees is approved subject to the following Conditions of Approval:

D1. The applicant shall provide for the planting and irrigation of 34 15 -gallon Nyssa sylvatica at Site 200, Site 211, Site 215 according to the landscape plan.

D2. The application shall pay in -lieu fees of $9,750.00 upon receipt of the invoice.

D3. There shall be only decomposable material in the right-of-way planter, no concrete, decomposed granite, rocks, cobles, pavers or the like.

D4. The applicant shall retain all trees permitted for removal until after all fees associated with the application for a building permit have been paid.

Section 4. Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, and F are a part of this resolution.

Table of Contents:

Exhibit A – Project Plans – Overview
Exhibit B – Project Plans – Site 200
Exhibit C – Project Plans – Site 211
Exhibit D – Project Plans – Site 215
Exhibit E – SACOG MTP/SCS Consistency Letter
Exhibit F – Resolution No. 2011 -077 – Certifying the Environmental Impact Report and Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the River District Specific Plan Project

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
Feb. 09, 2022
Sacramento’s 16th St. Historic District
February 9, 2022
the Grower’s District, LLC
the Grower’s District
PROJECT ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 3
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
Feb. 09, 2022

PROJECT DATA
Address 1: 200 N. 16th st.

Sacramento, CA
Address 2: 211 N. 16th st.

Sacramento, CA

Address 3: 215 N. 16th st. (1610 N. C st.)
Sacramento, CA

OVERALL PROJECT NUMBERS

OPEN SPACE
PROVIDED / REQ’D:
52,640 SF / 35,000 SF

8,338 SF / 10,500 SF
5,615 SF / 7,000 SF

66,593 SF / 52,500 SF
12th st
PipeWorks
Planned
Park & Preserve

PROJECT SITES
Township 9
(+900 units)
Marisol
(500 units)
Railyards
Future Lightrail
Bike Trail
Soccer
Stadium
Vicinity Map
Area Map
State Offices
T9 Lightrail
N. 7th St.

N. 12th St.

N. 16th St.N. 12th St.

N. 16th St.

Richards Blvd
American River
N. 12th St.

Blue Diamond
N. 16th St.

N. C St.

N. B St.

Thornton Ave
Dreyer St.

SITE 200
SITE 211
SITE 215
Ahern St.

N. B St.

N. C St.

N. 16th St.

Richards Blvd.

Blue Diamond
Casino
Cottage
Housing
Rail LineRail Line
APN: See Individual Site Plans
General Plan: ELCR Employment Center Low Rise (FAR 1.0) Zoning: C4 - SPD (SPD River District)
Request for C2 Zoning
Parking: Traditional
Historic Resource: Contributing Existing Buildings as part of the N. 16th Historic District Plan (HDP)
Design Review: River District
TOD: Sites are within .25 miles to .50 miles
Project Totals:

TOTAL UNITS: +/- 525 units
TOTAL STALLS: +/- 292 stalls
TOTAL SF: +/- 445,472 sf

APARTMENTS PARKING COM. SF RES. SF TOTAL SF SITE 200: +/- 350 units 197 stalls 66,000 sf B1: 154,520 sf +/- 289,270 SF B2: 68,750 sf
SITE 211: +/- 105 units 56 stalls 3,000 sf 90,375 sf +/- 93,375 SF SITE 215: +/- 70 units 39 stalls 1,887 sf 60,940 sf +/- 62,827 SF

TOTALS: 525 units 292 stalls 70,887 sf 376,472 sf 445,472 SF

PROJECT OVERVIEW
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
Feb. 09, 2022
N. C street
200 N. 16th st. Site
215 N. 16 st. Site
N. C street
N. B street
16th st
16th st
200 Site
215 Site
211 Site
Lot Size: 4.29 ac = 182,021 sf
(527.5’ x 308.5’ approx.)
(E) Contributing Bldgs
Lot Size: .59 ac = 25,600 sf
(160’ x 160’ approx.)
(E) Contributing Bldgs
Lot Size: .36 ac = 15,600 sf
(150’ x 104’ approx.)
No (E) Contributing Bldgs
211 N. 16 st. Site

PROJECT OVERVIEW
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
Feb. 09, 2022
N. C street
Site 215 N. C st. Site
N. C street
N. B street
16th st
TOTAL UNITS: 70 units (18’x30’)
+/-14 units / floor
TOTAL STALLS: 39 stalls (surface)
MAX. HEIGHT: 85ft
5 stories o/ Podium
Type IIIA
Site 211 N. 16 st. Site
TOTAL UNITS: 105 units (18’x30’)
+/-20 units / floor
TOTAL STALLS: 56 stalls (surface)
MAX. HEIGHT: 85ft
5 stories o/ Podium
Type IIIA
BLDG - 1
250 units
BLDG - 2
100 units
16th st
110 units
70 units
TOTAL UNITS: 350 units (18’x30’)
TOTAL STALLS: 197 stalls
4 4 b e l o w g r a d e
113 at loading dock
40 around site ext.

MAX. HEIGHT: 88ft
75’ max to top floor
10’ floor to floor

Project Totals:

Site 200 N. 16 st. Site

YELLOW DENOTES NEW MIXED USE HOUSING PROPOSED
FOR EACH SITE.

BLUE DENOTES (E) HISTORIC CONTRIBUTING
COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES TO REMAIN. REFER ALSO TO
THE NORTH 16TH STREET HISTORICAL DISTRICT PLAN

PROJECT OVERVIEW
TOTAL UNITS: +/- 525 units
TOTAL STALLS: +/- 292 stalls
TOTAL SF: +/- 445,472 sf

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
April 26, 2022
N. 16th St.

N. B street
N. C street
Ahern St.

N. B street

THORNTON
N. C street

RT BUS STOP TBD
Overall Site Plan Exhibit
SITE 200

TRASH RM NORTH

UTILITY RM
FIRE; FINAL LOC.

TBD.
211

BIKE ROOM
56 STALLS
215

BIKE ROOM
56 STALLS
SITE 211

TRASH ROOM

W/ STREET ACCESS
SITE 200

TRANSFORMER
LOCATION 1
T.

BLDG 2

BIKE ROOM
75 STALLS

RAMPRAMP

RAMP RAMP

RAMPRAMP
SITE 200

TRASH RM SOUTH

UTILITY RM
FIRE; FINAL LOC. TBD
BLDG 1
BIKE ROOM 1
75 STALLS
RAMP
RAMP
BLDG 1
BIKE ROOM 2
75 STALLS
SITE 200

TRANSFORMER
LOCATION 2
RAMP @ LOBBY

INTERIOR, OR
EXTERIOR TBD.

BLDG 1
TRASH 2
BLDG 1
TRASH 2

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

HISTORICAL

INTERPRETATION
AREA
SITE 215

TRASH ROOM

W/ STREET ACCESS
SITE 211

TRANSFORMER

MECH / ELEC / FIRE
SITE 215

TRANSFORMER
ELEC. RM (FINAL TBD)

PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN
CIRCULATION TO SOUTH.

FINAL LOCATION TBD.

SITE 215

LOADING
SITE 211

LOADING
SITE 200

LOADING

IDEAL PEDESTRIAN

CIRCULATION ROUTES
ACROSS 16TH ST.
(FINAL TBD)

TENANT TI OPPORTUNITY FOR

DIRECT CONNECTION TO (E)

BLDG - FINAL PER TENANT

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

AT (E) RAISED LOADING DOC

W/ LANDSCAPE PLANTERS,
SEATING, ETC.

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

AT NEW RAISED LOADING

DOC W/ LANDSCAPE
PLANTERS, SEATING, ETC.

OPTION FOR PEDESTRIAN

CIRCULATION TO WEST
(STAIRS, RAMP, DOORS)
FINAL LOCATION TBD.

PED CROSSING

PAVEMENT
CHANGE, TYP.

GATED
DRIVE
ENTRY
GATED
DRIVE
EXIT
GARGE
ENTRY
GARGE
ENTRY

ONE WAY

ONE WAY

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
RAMP

RT BUS STOP TO REMAIN

AND BE IMPROVED
BIKE
RACKS
BIKE
RACKS

POSSIBLE PUBLIC

CONNECTION
THROUGH BLDG.

TBD BY TI
BIKE
RACKS
BIKE
RACKS
BIKE
RACKS
BIKE
RACKS
BIKE
RACKS

PROJECT OVERVIEW
0 4020 FT 80 FT
N

ANTICIPATED PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION ROUTES
LEGEND

TRASH ROOM LOCATIONS W/ FINAL BIN SIZES TO
BE DETERMINED. TRASH / RECYCLE / ORGANICS

LONG TERM BIKE STORAGE ROOM LOCATIONS

WITH NUMBER FOR BIKE CAPACITY
BIKE
RACKS

SHORT TERM BIKE RACK LOCATIONS TO BE

LOCATED IN STREET AREAS OR PLANTERS AS
SHOWN
ANTICIPATED SITE TRANSFORMER LOCATIONS.

FINAL LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED IN DESIGN

RAMP ANTICIPATED LOCATION OF ACCESSIBLE RAMPS

AND STAIRS TO (E) RAISED LOADING DOCKS

PROPOSED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND
LANDSCAPE AREAS.

PROPOSED BUILDING LOADING ZONE AREAS

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
NOTE:

SEE ALSO CIVIL PLANS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON
STREET SIGNAGE, CROSSINGS, SIGNALS, ETC.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
April 26, 2022
N. 16th St.

N. C street
Ahern St.

N. B street

THORNTON
N. C street
Open Space Exhibit
T.

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

AT NEW RAISED LOADING

DOC W/ LANDSCAPE
PLANTERS, SEATING, ETC.
5,760 SF
GARGE
ENTRY

ONE WAY

ONE WAY

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC

PROJECT OVERVIEW
0 4020 FT 80 FT
N

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE

HISTORICAL

INTERPRETATION AREA
9,100 SF
OPEN SPACE REQ’D: 7,000 sf
70 units x 100sf
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 5,615 sf (80%)
20% to be on Lot 200
SHARED PODIUM = 3,900 sf
PRIVATE BALCONIES = 1,715 sf
70 units @ 24.5 sf
(3.5’ x 7’ type balcony)
LOT 215 OPEN SPACE CALC.

OPEN SPACE REQ’D: 10,500 sf
105 units x 100sf
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 8,445 sf (80%)
20% to be on Lot 200
SHARED PODIUM = 4,200 sf
2ND FLR N. DECK = 425 sf
2ND FLR W. DECK = 550 sf
3RD FLR W. DECK = 525 sf
5TH FLR. S. DECK = 540 sf
PRIVATE BALCONIES = 2,205 sf
90 units @ 24.5 sf
(3.5’ x 7’ type balcony)
LOT 211 OPEN SPACE CALC.
2nd FLR PODIUM
4,200 SF
3rd FLR

WEST DECK
525 SF
2ND FLR APT

NORTH DECKS
425 SF
2nd FLR APT

WEST DECKS
550 SF
5th FLR

SOUTH DECK
540 SF
2nd FLR PODIUM
3,900 SF
2ND FLR APT

NORTH DECK
2700 SF
OPEN SPACE REQ’D: 35,000 sf
350 units x 100sf
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 52,640 sf (150%)
20% to be on Lot 200
SHARED
I N T E R I O R G R E E N = 3 , 2 8 6 s f
HISTORIY PLAZA = 9,100 sf
AHERN ST. LANDCAPE = 4,620 sf

LOADING DOCK WALKS
DOCK AT C ST. = 5,760 sf
DOCK AT B ST. = 2,500 sf
INTERIOR N. DOCK = 7,152 sf
INTERIOR W. DOCK = 2,688 sf
INTERIOR S. DOCK = 4,500 sf
BLDG 1 - COMMON
7th FLR DECK WEST = 504 sf
7th FLR DECK MIDDLE = 504 sf
BLDG 1 - PRIVATE
FLR 1 PATIOS N. = 490 sf
FLR 1 PATIOS S. = 490 sf
BALCONIES (207 x 21sf) = 4,347 sf
BLDG 2 - COMMON
6th FLR DECK EAST = 425 sf
2nd FLR DECK NORTH = 2,700 sf
BLDG 2 - PRIVATE
2nd FLR DECK SOUTH = 1,400 sf
BALCONIES (72 x 21sf) = 1,512 sf
LOT 200 OPEN SPACE CALC.

INTERIOR GREEN
3,286 SF
8TH FLR

ROOF DECKS
504 SF EA.

N. Bst PUBLIC WALK

LOADING DOCK
2,500 SF
6th FLR ROOF
DECK
425 SF
2ND FLR APT

SOUTH DECK
1400 SF

INTERIOR LOADING

DOCK PUBLIC
WALKS
14,340 SF
N. 7,152 + W. 2,688
+ S. 4,500

AHERN GREEN SPACE
W/ SEATING, ETC.
4,620 SF
BLDG 1 FLR 1 PATIOS
NORTH 490 SF
SOUTH 490 SF
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
View Looking North on 16th Street
View Looking to Corner Site 200
(E) View Looking North on 16th Street
(E) View Looking to Corner Site 200
NOTE: VIEWS ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY

SEE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR FULL UPDATES

PROJECT VIEWS
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
View Looking East on N. C Street
View Looking South on 16th to Corner Site 200
(E) View Looking East on N. C Street
(E) View Looking South on 16th to Corner Site 200
NOTE: VIEWS ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY

SEE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR FULL UPDATES

PROJECT VIEWS
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
N. 16th Street Overall Streetscape Elevation - View Facing West N. 16th Street Overall Streetscape Elevation - View Facing East SITE 200 - NEW & (E) BLDGSN. B StreetPIPEWORKS N. C Street (E) INDUSTRIAL BLDGS (E) SELF STORAGE
N. C Street
LOT 215 - NEW BLDG (E) INDUSTRIAL BLDGS

THORNTON
Ave. LOT 211 - NEW BLDG & (E) BLDG N. B Street
BLUE

DIAMOND

PROJECT STREETSCAPE ELEVATIONS
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
Feb. 09, 2022
URBAN GREEN SPACES - SITE 200 SAWTOOTH FORM, BRICK, SMOOTH PLASTER,

METAL SIDING,

INDUSTRIAL FORMS AND MASSINGINDUSTRIAL FORMS / PODIUM DECK SPACE / ETC LOADING DOCK W/ STEEL AWNINGS &

RAILING DETAIL

CONCRETE, BRICK & STEEL BALCONY DETAILS

PROJECT MATERIALS & PRECEDENT IMAGES

MODERN BRICK DETAILING

INDUSTRIAL METAL SIDING

SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER

CONCRETE, GLASS & STEEL

CHARACTER PRECEDENTS

E
E
E
C
C
EEE
C
E
E
C
C
E
C
E E
E
E
E
E E
E
C
E
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
BIKE
ROOM
ACCESS

LOADING

LOADING ZONELOADING ZONE
N C ST
N BST

THORNTON AVENUE
N 16TH ST

AHERN ST
(PRIVATE STREET)
N BST
N C ST
SITE 200
SITE 215
SITE 211
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
STREET PLAN LINEC 1
LEGEND
D
0 SCALE: 1" =40'
4040 2080
A
C2
B
C2
C
C2
E
C3
F
C3 G
C3
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
STREET SECTIONSC 2
N 16TH ST - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS
N 16TH ST - PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS

N C ST - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS

N C ST - PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS

N B ST - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS

N B ST - PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS
A
C1
A
C1
B
C1
B
C1
C
C1
C
C1
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA

N B ST - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS

N B ST - PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS

THORNTON AVE - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS

THORNTON- PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS

N C ST - EXISTING CONDITION
NTS

N C ST - PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
NTS
C 3 STREET SECTIONS
E
C1
E
C1
G
C1
G
C1
F
C1
F
C1
W W
WW
W
C
EEE
W
W
W
E
E
C
C
W
E
C
E E
E
E
E
E E
E
E
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N C ST
N B ST
N 16TH ST

AHERN ST
(PRIVATE STREET)
SITE 200
BIKE
ROOM
ACCESS

LOADING

LOADING ZONE

EX FF=30.0±EX FF=28.9±

EX FF=29.0±EX FF=28.1±
FF=30.0
FF=27.5
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 200 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =30'
3030 1560
C 4
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W
WW
E
E
C
C
W
E
C
E E
W
W E
C
D
D
D

THORNTON AVENUE
N 16TH ST
N B ST
SITE 211

LOADING ZONE
FF=26.7
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 211 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =20'
2020 1040
C5
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W
E
E
W
E
E
W
C
C
C
D
D
D
N C ST
N 16TH ST
N C ST
SITE 215
LOADING ZONEFF=27.9
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 215 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =20'
2020 1040
C6
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
+/- 40’-0” +/- 230’-0”
348'-10"
62'-0"
N. C street
N. B street
16th st
16th st
Site Key Map
SITE 200
SITE 211
SITE 215

BUILDING SUMMARY
TOTAL BLDG SF: +/-289,270 sf
TOTAL COMMERCIAL SF: 66,000 sf (existing bldg) TOTAL APARTMENT SF: 223,270 sf
Building 1: 154,520 total sf Apt
Building 2: 68,750 total sf Apt
TOTAL APARTMENTS: +/- 350 units
Building 1: 250 units
Building 2: 100 units
Original Building: none
TOTAL BLDG HEIGHT: 88 ft
TOTAL BICYLCE PARKING: 241 long term / 68 short term TOTAL PARKING STALLS: +/- 197 stalls
Building 1 Partial Below Grade: 44 stalls
Interior Site Parking: 113 stalls
Site Perimeter: 40 (tbd)
Standard Dimensions: 8.5’ x 18’
Compact Dimensions: 8’ x 15’
Drive Aisle Width: 24’
200 - Site Plan / Roof Plan
SITE 211
PipeWorks
N. 16th St.

N. B street
N. C street
SITE 215
SITE 211
Ahern St.
(E) Commercial
Wood Bros.

Flooring
25'-4"
Blue
Diamond
N. 16th St.

REQ’D OPEN SPACE LOT 200: 350 units @ 100sf / unit = 35,000sf Common
Roof Decks Bldg 1 =
Roof Decks Bldg 2 = 4100 sf podium deck
Site Green =
Historic Plaza =
Private
2nd flr Deck = 1100 sf (530 along west + 580 along north) Balconies = 2100 sf

PROJECT DATA
Address: 200 N. 16th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
APN: 001 0151 005 / 001 / 002
General Plan: ECLR Employment Center Low Rise
Specific Plan: River District
(E) Zoning: C4 - SPD (SPD River District)
Proposed Zoning: C2 - SPD
Parking: Traditional
Historic Resource: (E) Contributing - not landmark
TOD: With .25 miles to .50 miles
Lot Size: 4.29 ac = 182,021 sf
Building Use: Residential / Mixed Use
Occupancy: R-2 / B Mixed Use
Allowable Height: 45ft per general C4
Proposed Height: 88ft (deviation req’d)
Allowable SF: 187,021 sf (1.0 FAR x site area)
Proposed SF: 289,270 sf
Allowable Units: 257 units (60 units / acre)
Proposed Units: 350 units
Parking: Traditional within .25 miles Lightrail (allows zero stalls) Project is Majority Residential
Allowable Parking: 0 req'd w/in .25 miles of light rail Proposed Parking: 197 stalls (157 stalls w/in site; +/- 40 perimeter) Required Bike Parking: Long Term Bldg 1 Bldg 2 Short Term (1/2) Bldg 1 Bldg 2 Apartments: (1/ 2 units) 125 50 (1/10 units) 25 10 Commercial: 66 (1 per 1000sf) 33 (1 per 2000sf)

SITE 200
0 4020 FT 80 FT
N

ONE WAY NORTH AUTO

ENTRY DRIVE TO REMAIN
GATE AT +30FT BACK
(E) CONTRIBUTING

COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO
REMAIN FOR REUSE, TYP.

NEW BLDG 2 LOBBY

WITHIN (E) BUILDING

NEW INFILL AT (E) BURNED OUT
BLDG AREA; MAINTAIN (E)
BRICK WALL AT SOUTH ELEV.

ONE WAY

ONE WAY
Harvest
Mission
(E) BLDG W/ INTERIOR
IMPROVEMENTS;
TBD.
40 STALLS
25’-0”88’-0“
(E) LOADING DOCK TO REMAIN, ALL SIDES

ONE WAY
(E) LOADING DOCK TO REMAIN, ALL SIDES
BLDG 2
6 STORIES / 100 UNITS
BLDG 1
7&8 STORIES / 250 UNITS

ONE WAY
(N) WALKS W/ PERIMETER

PARKING, SEE CIVIL &
LANDSCAPE SHTS.
(E) BLDG W/

INTERIOR
IMPROVEMENTS;
TBD.
(E) BLDG W/ INTERIOR
IMPROVEMENTS;
TBD.
(E) BLDG W/ INTERIOR
IMPROVEMENTS;
TBD
24’-0”24’-0”
R.O.W = 308.5’

NEW BLDG SET W/IN (E)

ONE WAY SOUTH AUTO

EXIT DRIVE TO REMAIN
GATE AT +30FT BACK(E) OFF SITE RAISED CONC.

LOADING DOCK TO REMAIN;

NEW ACCESSIBLE RAMPS AND

ACCESS TO BE PROVIDED

IMPROVED (E) BLDG

FRONTAGE FOR
COMMERCIAL USE, TYP.

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
(N) STREET TREES &

SIDEWALK, SEE CIVIL PLANS

SITE HISTORY
PLAZA

NEW ENTRY
(E) BRICK ‘TOWER’ TO BE

ENCLOSED IN NEW BLDG
LOBBY
SITE 200 - PRESERVATION NOTES: (per N. 16th St. HDP)
This project seeks to Rehab. & Add to Contributing Resources By:
(1.1) Preserve and enhance the historic street facing orientation of the primary building facade and entries on all elevations.
(1.2 ) Preserve and repair the surviving steel windows, awnings, brick walls, docks, and brick elements at the existing building.
(1.5) Preserve and reuse (e) historic loading docks & platforms around the site. (1.4) Restore window bays and door openings along loading docks (2.1& 3.1) Step back new bldgs & additions from existing building walls (3.4) Use forms and mtrls that are compatible with existing character of the district
+16FT SETBACK TO NEW 2

STORY BRICK ENTRY LOBBY
R.O.W. S 19º 30’ 00”E 308.50’
R.O.W. N70º 30’ 00”W 527.52’
30'-11"15' +/- 86’-0”+/- 50’-0” 18’ 70'-7"18’-0”
R.O.W. N70º 30’ 00”W 527.52’

RAISED LOADING DOCK, TO

BE ACCESSIBLE W/ RAMPS
AND STAIRS, TYP.
(E) BLDG W/ INTERIOR
IMPROVEMENTS;
TBD.
0 4020 FT 80 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 40’
37 COMPACT STALLS
32 STANDARD PARKING STALLS, TYP.
32 STANDARD PARKING STALLS, TYP.
12 STANDARD PARKING STALLS, TYP.

HISTORIC INTERPRETATION

PLAZA W/ PHOTO KIOSKS,
PLAQUES, ETC., TBD

SEE ALSO LANDSCAPE
PLAN
LOBBY
LOBBY
NOTE: SEE ALSO CIVIL PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN AS PART OF THIS ENTITLEMENT PACKET

STREET TREES TBD W/
CITY ARBORIST, TYP.

BUS STOP TO REMAIN
Allowable Height: 45ft per general C4
Proposed Height: 72ft (deviation req’d)
Allowable SF: 25,600 sf (1.0 FAR x site area)
Proposed SF: 93,375 sf
Allowable Units: 35 units (60 units / acre)
Proposed Units: 110 units
Parking: Traditional within .25 to .50 miles Lightrail (50%) Project is Majority Residential

Allowable Parking: 56 stalls (1 stall / DU = 110 stalls x 50%) Proposed Parking: 56 stalls on site under podium
Required Bike Parking: Long Term Short Term (1/2) Apartments: 55 (1 per 2 units) 11 (1 per 10 units) Commercial: 1 (1 per 1000sf) 1 (1 per 2000sf)

OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: PRIVATE PUBLIC TOTAL / REQ’D SITE 200* 8,239 SF 44,401 SF 52,640 SF / 35,000 SF SITE 211B 5,645 SF 2,693 SF 8,338 SF / 10,500 SF SITE 215 1,715 SF 3,900 SF 5,615 SF / 7,000 SF OVERALL TOTALS: 15,599 SF 50,994 SF 66,593 SF / 52,500 SF *note that total overall provided open space exceeds required open space 16'-0"

SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR

ALL STREET WORK AND
CROSSINGS. TYP.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
180'-0" 18'-0" 108'-0"
+/- 66’ 15’-0”
18’
7’-0”
Lot 200 - Concept Floor Plans
Bldg 1_Garage Level
Bldg 1_Ground Level
Bldg 1_ Floors 2 - 8
Bldg 2_Ground Level Concept Lobby & Market Space
+7ft below grade
+3ft above grade
Bldg 2_ Floors 2 - 6
BLDG 1
7&8 STORIES / 250 UNITS
ONE WAY RAMP DN 6FT

TO GARAGE LEVEL
NEW 2 STORY LOBBY /

LEASING & TENANT
AMENITY SPACE. TO

INCLUDE (E) HISTORIC
BRICK ENTRY “TOWER”
WITHIN NEW 2 STORY
LOBBY
3FT RAISED CONC. FOR
PRIVATE UNIT PATIOS;
TYP. AT GROUND LEVEL

ONE WAY

ONE WAY

ONE WAY
18FT ONE WAY RAMP DN
7FT TO GARAGE LEVEL

TENANT GREEN

SPACE & PLAZA AT

GROUND LEVEL
+/- 66’-0”
SITE 200
0 4020 FT 80 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 40’

TENANT SPACE
5000 SF

GROUND FLR MARKET CONCEPT
(final tenant layout tbd)

PUBLIC WALK
(E) LOADING DOCK

PUBLIC WALK

POTENTIAL ACCESS TO

INTERIOR PUBLIC WALK

AND PUBLIC RESTROOM
(PER FUTURE TI)
BLDG 2 TENANT

LOBBY W/ ACCESS

THROUGH TO
STREET
BLDG 2
LOBBY
BLDG 2
BIKE RM. -
75 stalls

LEASING /

OFFICES
BLDG 2 TENANT

ENTRY TO LOBBY

W/ ACCESS

THROUGH TO

INTERIOR
BLDG 2 TRASH ROOM &

COMMERCIAL TRASH ROOM W/

BLDG UTILITIES, FIRE CONTROL,
MECH. ELEC. ETC.

TRASH PICK LOCATION

DURING EARLY MORNING
HOURS; RAMP TO NEW

RAISED LOADING WALK

POTENTIAL ACCESS TO

INTERIOR PUBLIC WALK

AND PUBLIC RESTROOM
(PER FUTURE TI)

RAMP TO
LODING
DOCK, TYP.
(N) LOADING DOCK

RAMP TO
LODING
DOCK, TYP.

HISTORIC INTERPRETATION PLAZA

W/ PHOTO KIOSKS, PLAQUES,
ETC., TBD SEE ALSO LANDSCAPE
PLAN

RAMP TO
LODING
DOCK, TYP.
2ND FLR
PODIUM

ROOF DECK
BIKE ROOM 2
BLDG 1
25’
25’
18'-0"
BIKE ROOM 1
BLDG 1
16’
MECH

UTILITY

STORAGE
24’ 18’
18'-0" 18'-0"
44 STALLS
TRASH
ROOM 2

GLASS STOREFRONT AT

EACH FLOOR W/ VIEWS

TO THE RIVER

ROOF DECK AT
8TH STORY
7 FLRS THIS SIDE8 FLRS THIS SIDE

ROOF DECK AT
8TH STORY
ENCLOSED “GLASS”

STAIR W/ VIEWS WEST

AND DOWNTOWN

ROOF DECK
AT 6TH FLOOR

ROOF AT

LOBBY BELOW

ROOF AT
TENANT
BELOW
18'-0"
225’

TYPICAL UNIT SIZE
OF 18’ X 30’

TYPICAL UNIT SIZE
OF 18’ X 30’
28'-0"
2ND FLR APT.

PATIOS
Sacramento, CA

05.21.21 the Grower’s District
18’-0”
10’10’10’10’10’10’10’11’3’
74’-0”
South Elevation Massing Study
TOTAL UNITS: 254 Units Unit Counts studio (540sf)
Floor 1 32 less 2 for trash & utility
Floor 2 34
Floor 3 34
Floor 4 34
Floor 5 34
Floor 6 34
Floor 7 34
Floor 8 18 less 1 for West roof deck amenity space
Totals: 254 units
Note: Total number of units will depend on unit mix and final unit size. 200 Growers Market
318 N. 16th Site
Typical Unit Bay

PT CONC FLOORS
10’ FLR TO FLR

ONE PANEL OF INFILL

WALL W/ INDUSTRIAL
METAL SIDING;
LOCATION VARIES.

PT SLAB & COLUMNS SYSTEM
EXTEND PT SLAB +5 FT PAST
COLUMNS; PROVIDES
SOUTH SHADE, TYP.
16ft WIDE x 9ft HIGH GLAZING
& WALL PANEL SYSTEM,

TYPICAL

STEEL BALCONY RAILING

W/ METAL INFILL PANELS
TBD.

PT CONC FLOORS, TYP.

BREAK UP OF GIANT MASS
THROUGH HEIGHT; COLOR
APPLICATION; AND VARIED
WINDOW & SIDING LAYOUTS.
+/- 345’-0”
104 UNITS
+88’-0”
150 UNITS
SITE 200 -
Typical Studio Unit
540sf
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
East Elevation - N. 16th Street
South Elevation - N. B Street
+88’-6”

BLDG HGT
+76’-6”

BLDG HGT
N. C ST
16th ST.

PROPOSED NEW / (E)

OPENINGS W/

STOREFRONT INFILL FOR
COMMERCIAL USE - TBD.

PROPOSED NEW PAINT

AT (E) BRICK IN KEY

LOCATIONS TO BREAK
UP THE COLOR.

PROPOSED SIGN GRAPHIC

AT CORNER W/ NEW

STOREFRONT OPENING

ALONG LOADING DOCK

PROPOSED NEW PAINT

AT (E) BRICK IN KEY

LOCATIONS TO BREAK
UP THE COLOR.

RESTORATION OF

GLAZING IN (E) SOUTH
BRICK “TOWER”
AHERN

TO WEST
(E) BRICK BUILDINGS TO BE

RESTORED FOR COMMERCIAL
USE; TYPICAL AT PERIMETER
BLDGS.

BLDG 1:
8 STORY, TYPE 1A CONC.

PT SLAB CONSTRUCTION
BLDG. 2:
5 STORY TYPE IIIA WOOD FRAME

CONSTRUCTION O/ CONCRETE

PODIUM WITHIN (E) WALLS OF
HISTORIC CONTRIBUTING BLDG.

N. B ST

MAIN MATERIAL PALETTE
BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR DARK RED BLEND; MODERN
BR-2 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR LIGHT GREY BLEND; MODERN
P-1 PAINT COLOR; WHITE/LIGHT GREY/ OR NATURAL CONC. STRUCTURE P-2 PAINT COLOR; DARK GREY ON CONC. STRUCTURE
CP-1 : SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - COLOR: LIGHT, GREY/WHITE CP-2: SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - ACCENT COLOR: MED. GREY OR TERRA COTTA RED

SF-1 SITE FENCE 7FT PREFINISHED STEEL PICKET FENCING SYSTEM & SECURITY GATES W/ BRICK OR CMU COLUMNS AT KEY ENTRIES - TBD;
STEEL BALCONIES: PERFORATED PANELS (GREY OR WHITE) ON LIGHT STEEL FRAME, OR STEEL VERTICALS. SEE ELEV.

STEEL ACCENTS: PAINTED STEEL - BRONZE / DARK GREY.

S-1 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - LT GREY; PROFILE TBD
S-2 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - RUST RED; PROFILE TBD
S-3 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - DARK GREY; PROFILE TBD

APT. WINDOWS: BRUSHED ALUM. / STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM
STOREFRONT: BRUSHED ALUMINUM, OR BRONZE W/ CLEAR GLASS, TYP.

SITE 200
0 168 FT 32 FT
SCALE: 1” = 16’
P-1
P-2
MECH SCREEN @
HVAC UNITS, TYP.

PROJECT GRAPHIC

PAINTED ON WALL

ENTRY GATES TO BE

OPEN DURING

NORMAL BUSINESS
HOURS

NEW GLAZING IN

ARCH WINDOW
AREAS
CP-1
S-2
(E) BRICK BUILDING
TO BE

EAST MAIN ENTRY

LOBBY W/ TENANT

LOUNGE, LEASING,
OFFICES, ETC.
(E) BRICK ENTRY
‘TOWER’ WITHIN LOBBY
(E) BRICK BUILDINGS TO BE

RESTORED FOR COMMERCIAL
USE; TYPICAL AT PERIMETER
BLDGS.
(N) AWNING OVERHANG

AT RAISED LOADING

DOCK RESTORE (E) LOADING DOCK &

PROVIDE STEEL RAILING / RAMPS /

STAIRS FOR ACCESSIBILITY

TRASH ROOM OPTION W/

ROLLUP DOOR AND RAMP

ACCESS DOWN TO SIDEWALK
OUTLINE OF (N) BLDG 1

SHOWN BEYOND
NOTE: ALL WORK NOTED TO OCCUR ON THE EXISTING BUILDINGS IN THESE

DRAWINGS, IS MEANT TO BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION AS LISTED ABOVE, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
West Elevation - Ahern Street
West Elevation - Bldg 1
+88’-6”

BLDG HGT
N. B STREET

PARKING & LANDSCAPE

ALONG STREET FRONTAGE,
TYP., SEE CIVIL PLAN

PROPOSED NEW / (E)

OPENINGS W/

STOREFRONT INFILL FOR
COMMERCIAL USE - TBD.

N. C STREET

LANDSCAPE & HISTORICAL

INTERPRETATION PUBLIC
AREA

ROOF TERRACE

FACING SOUTH
WEST
STAIR AND ELEV.

TOWER.
+76’-6”

BLDG HGT

PROPOSED NEW PAINT AT (E)

BRICK IN KEY LOCATIONS TO
BREAK UP THE COLORS.
(E) BLDG TO BE RESTORED

FOR COMMERCIAL USE(E) BLDG TO BE RESTORED

FOR COMMERCIAL USE
TENANT DECK AT 2ND
FLOOR PODIUM, TYP.
+20’
PODIUM HGT.

N. B STREET

ENTRY GATES BEYOND

OPEN HOURS TBD BASED

ON COMMERCIAL

TENANTS

TENANT GREEN

SPACE AT

GROUND LEVEL
+88’-6”

BLDG HGT
(E) RAISED LOADING

DOCK TO BE RESTORED W/

NEW OVERHANGS,
RAMPS, STAIRS, ETC.

MAIN MATERIAL PALETTE
BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR DARK RED BLEND; MODERN
BR-2 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR LIGHT GREY BLEND; MODERN
P-1 PAINT COLOR; WHITE/LIGHT GREY/ OR NATURAL CONC. STRUCTURE P-2 PAINT COLOR; DARK GREY ON CONC. STRUCTURE
CP-1 : SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - COLOR: LIGHT, GREY/WHITE CP-2: SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - ACCENT COLOR: MED. GREY OR TERRA COTTA RED

SF-1 SITE FENCE 7FT PREFINISHED STEEL PICKET FENCING SYSTEM & SECURITY GATES W/ BRICK OR CMU COLUMNS AT KEY ENTRIES - TBD;
STEEL BALCONIES: PERFORATED PANELS (GREY OR WHITE) ON LIGHT STEEL FRAME, OR STEEL VERTICALS. SEE ELEV.

STEEL ACCENTS: PAINTED STEEL - BRONZE / DARK GREY.

S-1 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - LT GREY; PROFILE TBD
S-2 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - RUST RED; PROFILE TBD
S-3 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - DARK GREY; PROFILE TBD

APT. WINDOWS: BRUSHED ALUM. / STOREFRONT WINDOW SYSTEM
STOREFRONT: BRUSHED ALUMINUM, OR BRONZE W/ CLEAR GLASS, TYP.

S-2
CP-1
P-2
SITE 200
0 168 FT 32 FT
SCALE: 1” = 16’
P-1
P-2
P-1
S-2
CP-1
S-2
BLDG 1:
8 STORY, TYPE 1A CONC.

PT SLAB CONSTRUCTION
BLDG. 2:
5 STORY TYPE IIIA WOOD FRAME

CONSTRUCTION O/ CONCRETE

PODIUM WITHIN (E) WALLS OF
HISTORIC CONTRIBUTING BLDG.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
South Elevation - Bldg. 1
North Elevation - Bldg. 1
18'-0"

CENTRAL ROOF DECK W/

SOUTH VIEWS TO CITY AND

NORTH VIEWS TO RIVER

WEST ROOF DECK W/ TENANT

AMENITY - SOUTH VIEWS TO CITY

AND WEST VIEWS TO RIVER

3FT RAISED “LOADING DOCK”

FOR GROUND FLOOR UNIT
PRIVATE PATIOS; W/ PLANTERS

EAST MAIN ENTRY LOBBY

W/ TENANT LOUNGE,
LEASING, OFFICES, ETC.
(E) BRICK ENTRY ‘TOWER’

WITHIN LOBBY

WEST ENTRY LOBBY

STAIR TOWER AND

ELEVATOR

PARKING ALONG
SOUTH DRIVE, TYP.

GREEN SPACE W/

TREES & SEATING AT
WEST ELEV./ STAIR
+88’-6”

BLDG HGT
74’-0”
MAX. FLR HGT

PROJECT NAME

PAINTED ON WALL

SHADE CANOPY O/ GROUND
LEVEL “LOADING DOCK” AT
SOUTH ELEV.

TYP.

UNIT

UNIT STOREFRONT
W/ SIDING PANEL;
SEE UNIT PLAN SHT.

STEEL/METAL

SURROUND AT UNIT
BALCONIES, TYP.
18'-0"
3FT RAISED “LOADING DOCK”

FOR GROUND FLOOR UNIT
PRIVATE PATIOS; W/ PLANTERS

EAST MAIN ENTRY LOBBY

W/ TENANT LOUNGE,
LEASING, OFFICES, ETC.
(E) BRICK ENTRY ‘TOWER’
WITHIN LOBBY;

MECHANICAL SCREEN AT
ROOF TOP HVAC, TYP.

ENTRY TO

UNDERGROUND

PARKING LEVEL
+88’-6”

BLDG HGT
74’-0”
MAX. FLR HGT

STAIR TOWER
BEYONDTYP.

UNIT

UNIT STOREFRONT W/ METAL
SIDING PANEL; SEE UNIT PLANS

STEEL/METAL

SURROUND AT UNIT
BALCONIES, TYP.

EXIT FROM TO

UNDERGROUND

PARKING LEVEL
TRASH
RM 1
TRASH RM 2

MAIN MATERIAL PALETTE
BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR DARK RED BLEND; MODERN
BR-2 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR LIGHT GREY BLEND; MODERN
P-1 PAINT COLOR; WHITE/LIGHT GREY/ OR NATURAL CONC. STRUCTURE P-2 PAINT COLOR; DARK GREY ON CONC. STRUCTURE
CP-1 : SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - COLOR: LIGHT, GREY/WHITE CP-2: SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - ACCENT COLOR: MED. GREY OR TERRA COTTA RED

SF-1 SITE FENCE 7FT PREFINISHED STEEL PICKET FENCING SYSTEM & SECURITY GATES W/ BRICK OR CMU COLUMNS AT KEY ENTRIES - TBD;
STEEL BALCONIES: PERFORATED PANELS (GREY OR WHITE) ON LIGHT STEEL FRAME, OR STEEL VERTICALS. SEE ELEV.

STEEL ACCENTS: PAINTED STEEL - BRONZE / DARK GREY.

S-1 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - LT GREY; PROFILE TBD
S-2 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - RUST RED; PROFILE TBD
S-3 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - DARK GREY; PROFILE TBD

WINDOWS: VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM AT APARTMENTS - COLOR WHITE STOREFRONT: BRUSHED ALUMINUM, OR BRONZE W/ CLEAR GLASS, TYP.

P-2P-1
S-2
BR-1
P-1
P-2
SITE 200
0 168 FT 32 FT
SCALE: 1” = 16’
P-2 P-1
S-2
BR-1
P-1
P-2
S-1
S-1
P-1
MECH SCREEN @
HVAC UNITS, TYP.

MECH SCREEN @
HVAC UNITS, TYP.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
South Elevation - Bldg. 2
North Elevation - N. C ST.
18'-0"
+76’-6”

BLDG HGT
(E) BRICK BUILDINGS & LOADING

DOCK TO BE RESTORED FOR
COMMERCIAL USE; TYPICAL AT
PERIMETER BLDGS.
(E) BRICK BUILDINGS TO BE

RESTORED FOR COMMERCIAL
USE; TYPICAL AT PERIMETER
BLDGS.
+24-0”
(E) BRICK BLDG,
TYP.

ENTRY TO APARTMENT LOBBY AND ELEVATOR /
STAIR CORE. LOBBY EXTENDS THROUGH TO N. B
STREET. PAINT (E) BRICK AT EXTENT OF LOBBY

NEW STORE FRONT IN (E) ROLL
UP DOOR LOCATIONS, TBD.

PER TI DRAWINGS.
(E) RAISED LOADING DOCK &

OVERHANG TO BE RESTORED,

NEW STAIR & RAMP ACCESS SEE NEW

SITE DIAGRAM SHT FOR LOCATIONS
(E) BRICK BLDG W/ NEW/

MODIFIED STOREFRONT

OPENINGS FOR
COMMERCIAL USE - TBD.

NEW OPENING IN (E) BRICK WALL (PAINTED)
FOR LOBBY ENTRY TO APARTMENTS ABOVE;

ACCESSIBLE RAMP/ROUTE TO BE PROVIDED
AT ENTRY.

NEW STORE FRONT OPENINGS IN FORMER ROLL

UP DOOR OPENINGS AT (E) BRICK WALL FOR
NEW COMMERCIAL TENANT USE. TBD.

OPTIONAL GRAPHIC FOR LOADING BAY

PAINT (E) BRICK FOR NEW COMMERCIAL
TENANT; PROVIDE NEW STOREFRONT
OPENINGS W/ ACCESSIBLE APPROACH, TBD.
“GROWER’S
DISTRICT”

GRAPHIC ON
(E) BRICK
TYP.

UNIT

UNIT STOREFRONT W/
SIDING PANEL; SEE UNIT
PLAN

VERTICAL STEEL/METAL

RAILS AT UNIT
BALCONIES, TYP.

NEW RAISED CONCRETE PUBLIC
WALK “LOADING DOCK” W/
STEPS, RAILS, AND RAMPS. SEE
PLAN
TRASH RM ROLL UP DOOR.

PROVIDE ACCESS RAMP TO
SIDEWALK LOADING AREA.

PAINTED GRAPHIC W/ LIGHTING FOR

APARTMENTS AND SHOPPING ACCESS

PROPOSE ROOF
DECK

PROPOSED

ROOF DECK
2ND FLR

APARTMENTS TO

HAVE DECK

SPACE O/ NEW
PODIUM

MAIN MATERIAL PALETTE
BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR DARK RED BLEND; MODERN
BR-2 FULL BRICK VENEER; COLOR LIGHT GREY BLEND; MODERN
P-1 PAINT COLOR; WHITE/LIGHT GREY/ OR NATURAL CONC. STRUCTURE P-2 PAINT COLOR; DARK GREY ON CONC. STRUCTURE
CP-1 : SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - COLOR: LIGHT, GREY/WHITE CP-2: SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER - ACCENT COLOR: MED. GREY OR TERRA COTTA RED

S-2
S-3
SF-1 SITE FENCE 7FT PREFINISHED STEEL PICKET FENCING SYSTEM & SECURITY GATES W/ BRICK OR CMU COLUMNS AT KEY ENTRIES - TBD;
STEEL BALCONIES: PERFORATED PANELS (GREY OR WHITE) ON LIGHT STEEL FRAME, OR STEEL VERTICALS. SEE ELEV.

STEEL ACCENTS: PAINTED STEEL - BRONZE / DARK GREY.

S-1 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - LT GREY; PROFILE TBD
S-2 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - RUST RED; PROFILE TBD
S-3 CORRUG. METAL SIDING - DARK GREY; PROFILE TBD

WINDOWS: VINYL WINDOW SYSTEM AT APARTMENTS - COLOR WHITE STOREFRONT: BRUSHED ALUMINUM, OR BRONZE W/ CLEAR GLASS, TYP.

SITE 200
0 168 FT 32 FT
SCALE: 1” = 16’
CONSTRUCTION TYPE:
5 STORY TYPE IIIA WOOD FRAME CONSTRUCTION

O/ CONCRETE PODIUM WITHIN (E) WALLS OF
HISTORIC CONTRIBUTING BLDG.

S-3 CP-1
CP-1
S-2
CP-1 CP-1
S-2
Grower’s
Live / Shop
S-3
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
January 10, 2022
View Looking North on 16th Street
View Looking to Corner Site 200
(E) View Looking North on 16th Street
(E) View Looking to Corner Site 200
NOTE: VIEWS ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY

SEE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR FULL UPDATES

PROJECT VIEWS
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
View Looking East on N. C Street
View Looking South on 16th to Corner Site 200
(E) View Looking East on N. C Street
(E) View Looking South on 16th to Corner Site 200

PROJECT VIEWS
Sacramento, CA

05.21.21 the Grower’s District
(E) Site Map

PROJECT SITE
01_ View of Site looking North from N. 16th & N. B st.

Lot 200 -
02_ View of Site looking West from N. 16th
03_ View of Site looking West from N. 16th 04_ View of Site looking South from N. 16th & N. C st. 06_ View of Site looking East from Ahern & N. B st.
05_ View looking West from N. C st. 06_ View looking East from N. C st. & Ahern St.

PROJECT SITE
Historic Photo looking West from N. 16th St.

W W
WW
W
C
EEE
W
W
W
E
E
C
C
W
E
C
E E
E
E
E
E E
E
E
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N C ST
N B ST
N 16TH ST

AHERN ST
(PRIVATE STREET)
SITE 200
BIKE
ROOM
ACCESS

LOADING

LOADING ZONE

EX FF=30.0±EX FF=28.9±

EX FF=29.0±EX FF=28.1±
FF=30.0
FF=27.5
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 200 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =30'
3030 1560
C 4
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W
BIKE
ROOM
ACCESS

LOADING
EEE
W
E
C
C
W
E E
E
E
E
E E
E
D
D
DD
D
D
N C ST
N B ST
N 16TH ST

AHERN ST
SITE 200
35 F35 F35 F
35 F 35 F 35 F 35 F 35 F
35 F35 F
35 F
35 F
35 F35 F35 F35 F35 F35 F 35 TQ
35 H
35 Q
35 Q
35 H
35 H
35 Q
LARGE SHADE TREES - 15 GALLON SIZE
LARGE STATEMENT TREES THAT PROVIDE SHADE PER CITY STANDARDS. TREES SHALL BE ABOUT 35` IN WIDTH AT MATURITY.

FRAXINUS PENNSYLVANICA 'PATMORE' / PATMORE GREEN ASH

QUERCUS COCCINEA / SCARLET OAK

QUERCUS ILEX / HOLLY OAK

QUERCUS RUBRA / RED OAK

QUERCUS SUBER / CORK OAK

QUERCUS VIRGINIANA / SOUTHERN LIVE OAK
ORNAMENTAL TREES - 15 GALLON SIZE
COMPACT TREES VALUED FOR THEIR FLOWER AND/OR FOLIAGE COLOR. TREES SHALL BE ABOUT 25` IN HEIGHT AND WIDTH AT MATURITY.

CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS / WESTERN REDBUD MULTI-TRUNK

CHIONANTHUS RETUSUS / CHINESE FRINGE TREE
LAGERSTROEMIA X `NATCHEZ` / CRAPE MYRTLE

PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA / DATE PALM

WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA / MEXICAN FAN PALM

SITE SHADE TREES
TREES USED THROUGHOUT THE SITE TO PROVIDE SHADE AND INTEREST. TREES SHALL BE ABOUT 30` IN WIDTH AT MATURITY.

ACER RUBRUM 'OCTOBER GLORY' / OCTOBER GLORY RED MAPLE

ACER X FREEMANII 'ARMSTRONG' / ARMSTRONG FREEMAN MAPLE

PISTACIA CHINENSIS / CHINESE PISTACHE

PYRUS CALLERYANA 'CHANTICLEER' / CHANTICLEER CALLERY PEAR CITY STREET TREE - 15 GALLON
PLACED 30` ON CENTER ALONG N. 16TH STREET.

NYSSA SYLVATICA / TUPELO

ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
LOW WATER USE ORNAMENTAL GRASS TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE TEXTURE AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

FESTUCA GLAUCA / BLUE FESCUE
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA `BREEZE` TM / BREEZE MAT RUSH

MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS / PINK MUHLY GRASS
PENNISETUM ALOPECUROIDES `LITTLE BUNNY` / LITTLE BUNNY FOUNTAIN GRASS

PENNISETUM ORIENTALE / ORIENTAL FOUNTAIN GRASS

SMALL SHRUBS
LOW WATER USE SHRUB TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE COLOR AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

CEANOTHUS MARITIMUS 'VALLEY VIOLET' / VALLEY VIOLET MARITIME CEANOTHUS DIANELLA REVOLUTA 'DR5000' TM / LITTLE REV FLAX LILY

DIETES VEGETA / AFRICAN IRIS

HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 'BRAKELIGHTS' / BRAKELIGHTS RED YUCCA

LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA 'SHARON ROBERTS' / SHARON ROBERTS ENGLISH LAVENDER

LAVANDULA STOECHAS 'OTTO QUAST' / OTTO QUAST SPANISH LAVENDER PENSTEMON HETEROPHYLLUS `MARGARITA BOP` / MARGARITA BOP PENSTEMON

SALVIA X 'DARA'S CHOICE' / DARA'S CHOICE SAGE
VINES
LOW WATER USE TO COVER WALLS.

TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM / ASIATIC JASMINE

TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES / CHINESE STAR JASMINE

WISTERIA FRUTESCENS / AMERICAN WISTERIA
TURF

SOD TO BE PLACED IN CENTRAL GATHERING SPACE

SOD TURF

GROUNDCOVER
LOW WATER USE PLANT TO BE 1` TALL AND 4`-6` WIDE TO PROVIDE GROUNDCOVER ACROSS THE SITE.

ARCTOSTAPHYLOS X 'EMERALD CARPET' / EMERALD CARPET MANZANITA

CISTUS SALVIIFOLIUS / ROCKROSE SAGELEAF

LOROPETALUM CHINENSE RUBRUM 'PEACK' TM / PURPLE PIXIE FRINGE FLOWER

MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM 'PUTAH CREEK' / PUTAH CREEK MYOPORUM

VERBENA CANADENSIS 'HOMESTEAD PURPLE' / HOMESTEAD PURPLE VERBENA CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE SITE 200

SYMBOLDESCRIPTION
ON PARKING LOT AREA FOR CITY SHADE CALCULATION.

HISTORIC PLAZA WITH DECORATIVE CONCRETE, INTERPERATATIVE KIOSK, AND SEATING NODES.

CENTRAL GATHERING SPACE WITH LAWN AND PICNIC AREA.

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE SITE 200

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN

AND SHADE CALCULATIONS
FOR SITE 200
0 SCALE: 1" =30'
3030 1560
L 1 - the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
April 26, 2022
6’
N. C street
N. B street
16th st
16th st
Site Key Map
SITE 200
SITE 211
SITE 215

BUILDING SUMMARY
TOTAL BLDG SF: 93,375 sf
TOTAL COMMERCIAL FLR 1: 3,000 sf
TOTAL APARTMENTS SF: 90,375 sf
Leasable Apt. Floors 2-6: 73,000 sf
Non Leasable Apt. SF: 17,375 sf

TOTAL APARTMENTS: 105 units TOTAL BLDG HEIGHT: +/- 72 ft TOTAL BICYLCE PARKING: 56 long term / 12 short term
211 - Site Plan / Roof Plan
SITE 211
N. 16th street
N. B street
Thornton Ave
SITE 200
PipeWorks Blue Diamond
Wood Bros. Flooring
(E) Vacant Lot
44'-6"88'-6"
TOTAL PARKING STALLS: (under podium) 56 stalls Standard Dimensions: 8.5’ x 18’
Compact Dimensions: 8’ x 15’
Drive Aisle Width: 24’

Address: 211 N. 16th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
APN: 001 0153 001
General Plan: ECLR Employment Center Low Rise
Current Zoning: C4 - SPD (SPD River District)
Proposed Zoning: C2-SPD
Parking: Traditional
Historic Resource: (E) Contributing - not landmark
Design Review: River District
TOD: With .25 miles to .50 miles

PROJECT DATA
Lot Size (specific): .59 ac = 25,600 sf (approx 160’ x 160’) Building Use: Residential / Mixed Use
Occupancy: R-2 / B Mixed Use
Allowable Height: 45ft per general C4
Proposed Height: 72ft (deviation req’d)
Allowable SF: 25,600 sf (1.0 FAR x site area)
Proposed SF: 93,375 sf
Allowable Units: 35 units (60 units / acre)
Proposed Units: 105 units
Parking: Traditional within .25 to .50 miles Lightrail (50%) Project is Majority Residential

Allowable Parking: 53 stalls (1 stall / DU = 105 stalls x 50%) Proposed Parking: 56 stalls on site under podium
Required Bike Parking: Long Term Short Term (1/2) Apartments: 55 (1 per 2 units) 11 (1 per 10 units) Commercial: 1 (1 per 1000sf) 1 (1 per 2000sf)

CONST. TYPE 3A, 5 STORIES, O/ TYPE 1A PODIUM
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
R.O.W. S 19º 30’ 00”E 160.1’

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
R.O.W. N70º 30’ 00”W 158.4’
24’-0”

ENTRY DRIVE TO GRADE
PARKING; ROLL UP GATE

PROVIDED
(E) CONTRIBUTING

BUILDING ELEMENTS -

EXTERIOR WALLS AT WEST,

NORTH, AND EAST

ELEVATIONS TO REMAIN
FOR REUSE, TYP.
(E) CONTRIBUTING BUILDING

ELEMENTS - EXTERIOR WALLS AT

WEST, NORTH, AND EAST

ELEVATIONS TO REMAIN FOR
REUSE, TYP.

MAIN TENANT ENTRY

LOBBY IN (E) BLDG
LOBBY
ENTRY
(N) GROUND FLOOR RETAIL

SPACE AT SOUTHWEST CORNER

OF NEW BLDG - ROOF DECK AT
3RD FLR ABOVE.
2ND FLR TENANT PATIOS

AND SHARED AMENITY

SPACE AT PODIUM LEVEL
SITE 211 - PRESERVATION NOTES: (per N. 16th St. HDP)
This project seeks to Rehab. & Add to Contributing Resources By:
(1.1) Preserve and enhance the historic street facing orientation of the primary building facade and entries.
(1.2 ) Preserve and repair the surviving steel windows & brick walls on North and East elevation
(1.4) Restore window bay and door openings at 16th St. (2.1& 3.1) Step back new bldg addition from main 16th street elevation by +12ft.
(3.4) Use forms and mtrls that are compatible with existing character of the district
(3.6) Draw inspiration from U Shaped footprint in the area. 12’
+12’ SETBACK OF NEW

BLDG TO HISTORIC AT
16TH ST. FRONTAGE
6ft SETBACK OF NEW BLDG

TO GROUND FLOOR BRICK

WALL AND WINDOWS
0FT TO 1FT SETBACK OF

NEW BLDG TO PROP LINE
SITE 211
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 30’
NOTE: SEE ALSO CIVIL PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN AS PART OF THIS ENTITLEMENT PACKET

DELIVERY ZONE
(N) SIDEWALKS W/ TREE

GRATES / PLANTER AREAS

SEE ALSO CIVIL &
LANDSCAPE SHTS.

STREET TREES TBD W/
CITY ARBORIST, TYP.

MINI SPLIT HVAC AT ROOF;
PROVIDE 5FT MECH.

SCREEN; SEE SECTION
OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: PRIVATE PUBLIC TOTAL / REQ’D SITE 200* 8,239 SF 44,401 SF 52,640 SF / 35,000 SF SITE 211B 5,645 SF 2,693 SF 8,338 SF / 10,500 SF SITE 215 1,715 SF 3,900 SF 5,615 SF / 7,000 SF OVERALL TOTALS: 15,599 SF 50,994 SF 66,593 SF / 52,500 SF *note that total overall provided open space exceeds required open space

ROOF DECK AT
6th FLOOR

LANDSCAPE SCREEN AT

EAST END OF PODIUM
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
April 26, 2022
(E) Site Demo Plan Ground Floor Plan
2nd Floor Plan5 Floors over Podium
NEW BLDG STEPS BACK 12FT FROM 16th ST.

TOTAL UNITS: 105 units
(E) BRICK WALLS & WINDOWS TO REMAIN AT 16th, AT THORTON AVE, & AT EAST ELEV.(E) BRICK WALLS & WINDOWS TO REMAIN AT 16th, AT THORTON AVE, & AT EAST ELEV.

Studio 1BD 2BD
Flr 1 0 0 0
Flr 2 18 2 1
Flr 3 17 2 2
Flr 4 17 2 2
Flr 5 17 2 2
Flr 6 17 2 2
86 10 9
12’

UNIT COUNTS
(E) TO REMAIN:
1 STORY BRICK
WALLS,

COLUMNS, &

STEEL SASH

WINDOWS TO

REMAIN AT WEST
& NORTH

ELEVATION
REMOVE
(E) TO BE REMOVED: METAL

SHED BLDGS, METAL

ROOFS, AND EAST BRICK

WALL, IN ENTIRETY

NORTH BRICK WALL &

WINDOW FRAMES TO
REMAIN
2ND FLR APARTMENTS TO
BE SET BACK +12’ FROM

FACE OF (E) BRICK
BLDGS

ENTRY LOBBY

MAIL / OFFICE
Leasable
1680sf

WEST BRICK WALL,

STOREFRONT, TILE

ROOF, TO REMAIN
Leasable
1300sf

PARKING
GARAGE
ENTRY - 24’

PARKING UNDER

PODIUM DECK
56 STALLS
N. B ST.

THORTON AVE.

N. 16th ST.

N. B ST.

THORTON AVE.

N. 16th ST.

N. B ST.

N. 16th ST.

N. B ST.

N. 16th ST.

REMOVE:

SECTION OF

NEWER BRICK

WALL AND ROOF

TO BE REMOVED
MECH
ELEC
FIRE

NORTH BRICK WALL &

WINDOW FRAMES TO BE
REMAIN
TENANT

COMMONS
12FT BLDG STEP
BACK AT 2ND FLR
Trash / Stair
Stair
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
(E) TO REMAIN:
1 STORY BRICK

WALLS, COLUMNS, &

STEEL SASH

WINDOWS TO

REMAIN AT EAST

ELEVATION

EXIT STAIR

AND TRASH
CHUTES

ELEVATOR
LOBBY

ELEVATOR
LOBBY
156’-0”
TYP. STUDIO UNIT: 18’ x 30’
SEE UNIT PLAN SHT. THIS SET
SITE 211SCALE: 1” = 30’

NEW BRICK WALL &

WINDOW FRAMES
ALONG SOUTH ELEV.
9 TENANT BIKE ROOM
56 STALLS

PODIUM DECK W/ TREE

PLANTERS, LANDSCAPE , &

FURNITURE TO BE FURTHER

ENHANCED IN DESIGN

DEVELOPMENT

SITE TRANSFORMER

SENT IN LANDSCAPE

CORNER ROOF
DECK AT 3RD FLR.
6TH FLOOR ROOF

DECK / TENANT

AMENITY
12’

PODIUM PLANTER WITH

TREES AND STEEL TRELLIS

FOR GREEN SCREEN TO
EAST.

SPECIAL NOTE FOR BLOCK 211:

UNITS AT SOUTH AND EAST FACING ELEVATIONS TO

PROVIDE INCREASE IN STC RATING AND VISUAL

SCREENING PER CODE REQUIREMENTS AND AS
ESTABLISHED IN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
April 26, 2022
Section Study

BLDG HGT
+/- 71ft
PODIUM HGT.
+14ft

TENANT PODIUM DECK

W/ LANDSCAPE

MATERIAL CHANGE
+/- 56ft
PODIUM
+/- 14ft
North Elevation Study - Thorton Ave

UNIT BALCONIES
BOLT ON, TYP.

BLDG HGT
+/- 71ft

MATERIAL CHANGE
+/- 56ft

TOP OF PODIUM
+/- 14ft
West Elevation Study - 16th Street
+/- 28 ft
South Elevation Study - N. B Street
+/- 28 ft

MAINTAIN (E) BRICK

GABLE, RIDGE LINE, AND
TILE ROOF AS SHOWN.

NEW BRICK COLUMN AND

CEMENT PLASTER WALL W/ STEEL

SCREEN WINDOWS AT SOUTH

PARKING GARAGE
BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER DARK BLEND
MTL-1 CORR. METAL SIDING GALV
MTL-2 CORR. METAL SIDING GREY
CP-1 CEMENT PLASTER LIGHT GREY
CP-2 CEMENT PLASTER TERRA COTTA
CP-3 CEMENT PLASTER DARK GREY

WINDOWS VINYL, VPI

TOP OF PODIUM
+/- 14ft
BR-1
MTL-2MTL-1CP-2MTL-1MTL-2 CP-1 MTL-1
MTL-2CP-2MTL-2 MTL-1
East Elevation Study
MTL-2 CP-3CP-1 CP-2
CP-1

RESTORE (E)

STOREFRONT INFILL

AT (E) OPENINGS
BR-1

TRANSFORMER

LOCATION SET BACK

IN PLANTER

RULANDS SIGN TO BE
REUSED

RULANDS SIGN TO BE
REUSED

MECHANCIAL SCREENS AT ALL ROOF TOP
EQUIPMENT, TYP. SEE ALSO ROOF PLAN
ON SITE.

CP-3

WINDOWS ONLY AT SOUTH

ELEVATION (NO BALCONIES)

NEW BRICK COLUMN AND

CEMENT PLASTER WALL W/ STEEL

SCREEN WINDOWS AT SOUTH

PARKING GARAGE

EXTERIOR MATERIALS LIST

RULANDS SIGN TO BE
REUSED
(E) 1 STORY BRICK WALLS, COLUMNS, & STEEL SASH

WINDOWS TO REMAIN AT NORTH ELEVATION
N. 16 STREET
9’2” CLR

CEILINGS
10'-6"
ENTRY
160'-0" V.I.F.

N. 16 STREET
PARKING 56 STALLSLEASABLE / LOBBY
12’-0”
(E) 1 STORY BRICK WALLS, COLUMNS, & STEEL SASH

WINDOWS TO REMAIN AT WEST ELEVATION

MAINTAIN HISTORIC

BRICK AND

WAREHOUSE

WINDOWS AT

GROUND FLOOR
NORTH
95’-0” V.I.F.

SITE 211
0 3015 FT 60 FT
SCALE: 1” = 30’
(E) 1 STORY BRICK WALLS, COLUMNS, & STEEL SASH

WINDOWS TO REMAIN AT EAST ELEVATION

REPAIR PER PRESERVATIONS STANDARDS
160’-0” V.I.F.

PODIUM LVL

TRASH ROOM ROLL UP

DOOR AND PARKING
ENTRY ROLL UP GATE.

WINDOWS AT EACH

FLOOR IN BOTH

STAIRWELLS - FACING

NORTH & SOUTH DUE

TO RATING
MTL-1

ROOF DECK

PODIUM PLANTER

WITH TREES AND STEEL

TRELLIS FOR GREEN
SCREEN TO EAST.

PODIUM PLANTER

WITH TREES AND STEEL

TRELLIS FOR GREEN
SCREEN TO EAST.

SPECIAL NOTE FOR BLOCK 211:

UNITS AT SOUTH AND EAST FACING ELEVATIONS TO

PROVIDE INCREASE IN STC RATING AND VISUAL

SCREENING PER CODE REQUIREMENTS AND AS
ESTABLISHED IN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA

05.21.21 the Grower’s District
total bldg SF: 122,960 sf
construction: 5 story / no podium
units: 104 apartments
parking: 44 stalls
Scheme B.2_Quick
Summary
(E) Site Demo Plan
South Elev.

West Elev.

North Elev.East Elev.

RESTORE BRICK WALL TO EXTENT SHOWN
Lot 211 -
REMOVE:

SECTION OF NEWER BRICK WALL AND ROOF

TO BE REMOVED TO EXTENTS SHOWN
REMOVE:
(E) TO BE REMOVED: METAL SHED BLDGS, METAL

ROOFS, AND EAST BRICK WALL, IN ENTIRETY
REMOVE:

SECTION OF NEWER BRICK WALL AND ROOF

TO BE REMOVED TO EXTENTS SHOWN
REMOVE:

REMOVE( E) RULANDS SIGN FOR

FUTURE USE
REMOVE:
(E) TO BE REMOVED: METAL SHED BLDGS, METAL

ROOFS, AND EAST BRICK WALL IN ENTIRETY
REMOVE / REPLACE:

REMOVE UPPER BRICK GABLE AND ROOF &

BUILD NEW SQUARE CORNER W/ (E) BRICK, SEE

ELEVATIONS
RESTORE:

SECTION OF WEST BRICK WALL AND NORTH

BRICK WALL TO EXTENTS SHOWN
RESTORE:

SECTION OF WEST BRICK WALL AND NORTH

BRICK WALL TO EXTENTS SHOWN
RESTORE:

SECTION OF WEST BRICK WALL AND NORTH

BRICK WALL W/ WAREHOUSE WINDOWS TO

EXTENTS SHOWN
N
REMOVE:
(E) TO BE REMOVED: METAL

SHED BLDGS, METAL ROOFS,

AND EAST BRICK WALL, IN

ENTIRETY
REMOVE:

REMOVE( E) RULANDS SIGN FOR

FUTURE USE
Lot 211 -
RESTORE :

NORTH AND EAST BRICK WALLS

AND STEEL WINDOW FRAMES,
TYP.

RESTORE :

SECTION OF NORTH AND EAST BRICK WALL W/

WAREHOUSE WINDOWS AND STEEL WINDOW
FRAMES, TYP.

Sacramento, CA

05.21.21 the Grower’s District
Map 01_View North 02_(E) Building on Site
03_(E) Building Across Street to North 04_(E) Building View South 05_(E) Building on Looking West 05_(E) Building on Site East Elev.

Lot 211 -
WW
E
E
C
C
W
E
C
E E
W
W E
C
D
D
D

THORNTON AVENUE
N 16TH ST
N B ST
SITE 211

LOADING ZONE
FF=26.7
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 211 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =20'
2020 1040
C5
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W

LOADING ZONE
E
E
W
C
D
D

THORNTON AVENUE
N 16TH ST
N B ST
SITE 211
LARGE SHADE TREES - 15 GALLON SIZE
LARGE STATEMENT TREES THAT PROVIDE SHADE PER CITY STANDARDS. TREES SHALL BE ABOUT 35` IN WIDTH AT MATURITY.

FRAXINUS PENNSYLVANICA 'PATMORE' / PATMORE GREEN ASH

QUERCUS COCCINEA / SCARLET OAK

QUERCUS ILEX / HOLLY OAK

QUERCUS RUBRA / RED OAK

QUERCUS SUBER / CORK OAK

QUERCUS VIRGINIANA / SOUTHERN LIVE OAK
CITY STREET TREE - 15 GALLON
PLACED 30` ON CENTER ALONG N. 16TH STREET.

NYSSA SYLVATICA / TUPELO

ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
LOW WATER USE ORNAMENTAL GRASS TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE TEXTURE AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

FESTUCA GLAUCA / BLUE FESCUE
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA `BREEZE` TM / BREEZE MAT RUSH

MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS / PINK MUHLY GRASS
PENNISETUM ALOPECUROIDES `LITTLE BUNNY` / LITTLE BUNNY FOUNTAIN GRASS

PENNISETUM ORIENTALE / ORIENTAL FOUNTAIN GRASS

SMALL SHRUBS
LOW WATER USE SHRUB TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE COLOR AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

CEANOTHUS MARITIMUS 'VALLEY VIOLET' / VALLEY VIOLET MARITIME CEANOTHUS DIANELLA REVOLUTA 'DR5000' TM / LITTLE REV FLAX LILY

DIETES VEGETA / AFRICAN IRIS

HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 'BRAKELIGHTS' / BRAKELIGHTS RED YUCCA

LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA 'SHARON ROBERTS' / SHARON ROBERTS ENGLISH LAVENDER

LAVANDULA STOECHAS 'OTTO QUAST' / OTTO QUAST SPANISH LAVENDER PENSTEMON HETEROPHYLLUS `MARGARITA BOP` / MARGARITA BOP PENSTEMON

SALVIA X 'DARA'S CHOICE' / DARA'S CHOICE SAGE

GROUNDCOVER
LOW WATER USE PLANT TO BE 1` TALL AND 4`-6` WIDE TO PROVIDE GROUNDCOVER ACROSS THE SITE.

ARCTOSTAPHYLOS X 'EMERALD CARPET' / EMERALD CARPET MANZANITA

CISTUS SALVIIFOLIUS / ROCKROSE SAGELEAF

LOROPETALUM CHINENSE RUBRUM 'PEACK' TM / PURPLE PIXIE FRINGE FLOWER

MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM 'PUTAH CREEK' / PUTAH CREEK MYOPORUM

VERBENA CANADENSIS 'HOMESTEAD PURPLE' / HOMESTEAD PURPLE VERBENA CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE SITE 211

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
SITE 211
0 SCALE: 1" =30'
3030 1560
L 2 - the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
N. C street
N. B street
16th st
16th st
Site Key Map
SITE 200
SITE 211
SITE 215

BUILDING SUMMARY
TOTAL BLDG SF: 62,827 sf
TOTAL COMMERCIAL FLR 1: 1,887 sf TOTAL APARTMENTS SF: 60,440 sf
Leasable Apt. Floors 2-6: 50,500 sf
Non Leasable Apt. SF: 10,440 sf

TOTAL APARTMENTS: 70 units TOTAL BLDG HEIGHT: +/- 72 ft TOTAL BICYLCE PARKING: 36 long term / 9 short term
215 - Site Plan
SITE 211
N. 16th street
N. C street
SITE 200 Wood Bros. Flooring
N. C street
Self Storage
Vacant Lot
w/ Fence
Wood Bros.

Yard
(E) Bldg to Remain
(E) Bldg.
+/- 3800 sf
(E) Bldg.
+/- 5000 sf
(E) Bldg.
4300 sf
TOTAL PARKING STALLS: (under podium) 39 stalls Standard Dimensions: 8.5’ x 18’
Compact Dimensions: 8’ x 15’
Drive Aisle Width: 24’

PROJECT DATA
Address: 215 N. 16th Street (1610 N. C street)
Sacramento, CA 95811
APN: 001-0152-001/ 002 / 003 / 004 / 005 / 006 / 007
General Plan: ECLR Employment Center Low Rise
Zoning: C4 - SPD (SPD River District)
Proposed Zoning: C2-SPD
Parking: Traditional
Historic Resource: 3 (E) Bldgs are Contributing - not landmark Specific site is not within N. 16th Historic District
Design Review: River District
TOD: Within .25 miles of Lightrail
Lot Size (lots 001 / 002 / 003) : .36 ac = 15,600 sf (site = 150’ x 104’) Building Use: Residential / Mixed Use
Occupancy: R-2 / B Mixed Use
Allowable Height: 45ft per general C4
Proposed Height: 72ft (deviation req’d)
Allowable SF: 15,600 sf (1.0 FAR x site area)
Proposed SF: 62,827 sf
Allowable Units: 25 units (60 units / acre)
Proposed Units: 70 units
Parking: Traditional within .25 miles Lightrail (zero stalls) Project is Majority Residential

Allowable Parking: 0 req’d (1 stall / DU = 75 stalls x 50%) Proposed Parking: 39 stalls on site under podium
Required Bike Parking: Long Term Short Term (1/2) Apartments: 35 (1 per 2 units) 8 (1 per 10 units) Commercial: 1 (1 per 1000sf) 1 (1 per 2000sf)

SITE 215
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
150’

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
SITE 215
5 STORIES O/ PODIUM
+/-70 UNITS

ENTRY DRIVE TO GRADE
PARKING; ROLL UP GATE

PROVIDED

SECURE TENANT ENTRY

COURTYARD TO LOBBY

GROUND FLOOR RETAIL

OR TENANT AMENITY

SPACE AT NORTHWEST

CORNER OF NEW BLDG
24’-0”

2.5’ EASEMENT ALONG EA.

SIDE OF SOUTH R.O.W.
2ND FLR TENANT

PATIOS AND SHARED

AMENITY SPACE AT

PODIUM LEVEL
5’

ONE WAY

TRAFFIC
5’
3’5’

PROPOSED TRANSFORMER

LOCATION, TBD W/ SMUD
SITE 215 - PRESERVATION NOTES: (per N. 16th St. HDP)
This lot is just outside the outline border of the HDP.

However, it does seek to follow the design guidelines as established in the HDP.
(3.1) Orient taller bldg masses and primary facades toward N. 16th Street.
(3.3.) Preserve historic pattern of zero lot line to the street. (3.4) Use forms and mtrls that are compatible with existing character of the district
(3.5) Incorporate and reference awning forms
(3.6) Draw inspiration from varied footprints in the area.

R.O.W. S70º 29’ 15”E 1040.00’
BLDG SETBACK AT N. &
S. PROP. LINE
+5FT SETBACK TO (E) BLDG
& ASSUMED PROP. LINE.
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 30’
R.O.W. S 19º 30’ 00”E 104.00’

REMOVE (E) SHED, THIS

CORNER (HATCHED)
R.O.W. S70º 29’ 15”E 1040.00’

PROJECT SITE

STREET TREES TBD W/
CITY ARBORIST, TYP.

R.O.W. S 19º 30’ 00”E 104.00’

DELIVERY ZONE
(E) CONTRIBUTING BLDGS

TO REMAIN (RED)
NOTE: SEE ALSO CIVIL PLAN AND LANDSCAPE PLAN AS PART OF THIS ENTITLEMENT PACKET Allowable Height: 45ft per general C4
Proposed Height: 72ft (deviation req’d)
Allowable SF: 25,600 sf (1.0 FAR x site area)
Proposed SF: 93,375 sf
Allowable Units: 35 units (60 units / acre)
Proposed Units: 110 units
Parking: Traditional within .25 to .50 miles Lightrail (50%) Project is Majority Residential

Allowable Parking: 56 stalls (1 stall / DU = 110 stalls x 50%) Proposed Parking: 56 stalls on site under podium
Required Bike Parking: Long Term Short Term (1/2) Apartments: 55 (1 per 2 units) 11 (1 per 10 units) Commercial: 1 (1 per 1000sf) 1 (1 per 2000sf)

PARKING STALLS AT GRADE
OPEN SPACE CALCULATION: PRIVATE PUBLIC TOTAL / REQ’D SITE 200* 8,239 SF 44,401 SF 52,640 SF / 35,000 SF SITE 211B 5,645 SF 2,693 SF 8,338 SF / 10,500 SF SITE 215 1,715 SF 3,900 SF 5,615 SF / 7,000 SF OVERALL TOTALS: 15,599 SF 50,994 SF 66,593 SF / 52,500 SF *note that total overall provided open space exceeds required open space Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
5 Floors over Podium
Note: Total number of units will
depend on unit mix and final unit size.

Ground Floor Plan 2nd Floor Plan
TOTAL UNITS: 70 units
STUDIOS (18’x30’) +/- 60 tbd
ONE BEDROOM +/- 08 tbd
TWO BEDROOM +/- 02 tbd
C st. Elevation of Contributing Bldgs

UNIT COUNT

LEASABLE SPACE
1880 SF

SECURE COURTYARD TO
MAIN LOBBY & ELEV.
1887sf
office /
bike / mail

TRASH RM /

EXIT STAIR

PARKING
GARAGE
ENTRY

PARKING UNDER

PODIUM DECK
39 STALLS
N. C STREET
N. 16th ST.

N. B ST.

N. 16th ST.

PODIUM DECK W/

PATIOS & TENANT

AMENITIES
N. B ST.

N. 16th ST.

TRANS
& ELEC
2ND FLR
14 UNITS
FLRS 2-5
56 UNITS
(14 UNITS / FLR)
FLRS 6
14 UNITS
5FT BLDG STEP
BACK AT 2ND FLR
PODIUM

ENTRY COURTYARD
AND BLDG LOBBY S. EXIT STAIR

CASINO PARKING
BEYOND
N. C STREET
(E) CONTRIBUTING

HISTORIC BLDGS (RED)
TO REMAIN, TYP.
(E) BLDGS TO
REMAIN

CASINO PARKING
BEYOND
N. 16th ST.
1 bd
1 bd
2 bd
2 bd
5ft EASEMENT AT
SOUTH PROP. LINE,
(2.5’ EA. SIDE)
N. EXIT STAIR
& TRASH
CHUTES
TYP. STUDIO UNIT: 18’ x 30’
SEE UNIT PLAN SHT. THIS SET
TYP. STUDIO UNIT: 18’ x 30’
SEE UNIT PLAN SHT. THIS SET

2.5’ EASEMENT AT SOUTH

PROPERTY LINE
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 30’ SITE 215

NORTH FACE OF TWO (E)

CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC
BLDGS TO REMAIN, TYP.

FIRE

PROPOSED TRANSFORMER
LOCATION, FINAL LOC TBD.

TENANT PODIUM DECK W/

PLANTERS AND TENANT

AMENITIES

PROPOSED TRANSFORMER

LOCATION ALONG (E)

EASEMENT
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022

BLDG HGT
+/- 70ft
PODIUM
+/- 15ft
North Elevation Study - N. C street West Elevation Study - 16th Street +/- 28 ft

UNIT BALCONIES
BOLT ON, TYP.

SECURE ENTRY COURT

TO LOBBY

TRASH RM
/ STAIR EXIT BR-1
MTL-1
MTL-2
CP-2
MTL-1
BR-1
South Elevation Study
MTL-2

TENANT PODIUM DECK
CP-1CP-1
CP-1
CP-2
CP-2
East Elevation Study
MTL-2
MTL-1
6FT WALK TO PARKING

BETWEEN BLDGS
(SECURE FOR TENANTS
ONLY)6FT WALK TO PARKING

BETWEEN BLDGS
(SECURE FOR TENANTS
ONLY)
CP-3
CP-3
CP-1MECH SCREEN TO HIDE

ALL ROOFTOP HVAC
STEP BACK AT 6TH FLR

UNIT BALCONIES
BOLT ON, TYP.

BR-1 FULL BRICK VENEER DARK BLEND
MTL-1 CORR. METAL SIDING GALV
MTL-2 CORR. METAL SIDING GREY
CP-1 CEMENT PLASTER LIGHT GREY
CP-2 CEMENT PLASTER TERRA COTTA
CP-3 CEMENT PLASTER DARK GREY

WINDOWS VINYL, VPI
CP-1

GLAZING AT

CORRIDOOR BEYOND
CP-3
CP-2
CP-1
MTL-1

MECH SCREEN TO HIDE

ALL ROOFTOP HVAC
CP-2

PARKING BELOW

PODIUM W/ ACCESS

TO LOBBY

EXTERIOR MATERIALS LIST
CP-3
MTL-1
N. 16 STREET
6'-0"
N. C STREET
N. 16 STREET
0 3015 FT 60 FT
N
SCALE: 1” = 30’
N. C STREET
SITE 215

PARKING UNDER PODIUM(E) BLDG(E) BLDG
(E) BLDG
(E) BLDG

PROPOSED

TRANSFORMER

LOCATION

GARAGE ENTRY
OFF N. C STREET

STEEL FENCING

AND HALF WALL AT

PARKING LEVEL
Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA
February 09, 2022
NOTE: VIEWS ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY

SEE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS FOR FULL UPDATES
View to Site 215 from N. C st to 16th St
SITE 215

MASSING STEPS BACK AT
6TH FLR

UNIT BALCONIES
BOLT ON, TYP.

EXTERIOR MATERIALS OF

CORRUGATED METAL

SIDING AND CEMENT
PLASTER.

NEW FULL BRICK

VENEER AT CORNER

TENANT ENTRY GATE TO

COURTYARD AND LOBBY

STOREFRONT IN BRICK
OPENINGS, TYP.

Sacramento, CA

07.16.21 | the Grower’s District
Sacramento, CA

05.21.21 the Grower’s District

PROJECT SITE

WEST SIDE
Map
01_View to Site on 16th St. (west) 02_(E) Building East of Site 04_Full View South on 16th Street
Lot 215 -

PROJECT SITE

NORTH SIDE

PROJECT SITE

NORTH SIDE & WEST
SITE 200 BEYOND

PROJECT SITE

WEST SIDE

LOT TO ACROSS
16TH STREET
SITE 200
SITE 211
03_View South on 16th Street

SELF STORAGE TO NORTH
OF SITE ACROSS N. C
STREET

PROJECT SITE
N
01 03
02 05
04 Lot 215 -

PROJECT SITE

NORTH SIDE
(E) BRICK BLDG ON

SITE TO REMAIN
(E) BRICK BLDGS

ON SITE TO REMAIN
05_(E) Building on Looking West
(E) STORAGE

FACIILITY
(E) STORAGE

FACIILITY FENCE
WW
E
E
C
C
W
E
C
E E
W
W E
C
D
D
D

THORNTON AVENUE
N 16TH ST
N B ST
SITE 211

LOADING ZONE
FF=26.7
- the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
SITE 211 IMPROVEMENT PLAN
0 SCALE: 1" =20'
2020 1040
C5
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE:

LEGEND:

DS
C
W
E
W

LOADING ZONE
C
D
N C ST
SITE 215
N 16TH ST
CITY STREET TREE - 15 GALLON
PLACED 30` ON CENTER ALONG N. 16TH STREET.

NYSSA SYLVATICA / TUPELO

ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
LOW WATER USE ORNAMENTAL GRASS TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE TEXTURE AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

FESTUCA GLAUCA / BLUE FESCUE
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA `BREEZE` TM / BREEZE MAT RUSH

MUHLENBERGIA CAPILLARIS / PINK MUHLY GRASS
PENNISETUM ALOPECUROIDES `LITTLE BUNNY` / LITTLE BUNNY FOUNTAIN GRASS

PENNISETUM ORIENTALE / ORIENTAL FOUNTAIN GRASS

SMALL SHRUBS
LOW WATER USE SHRUB TO BE 2`-3` TALL AND WIDE TO PROVIDE COLOR AND ACCENT THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

CEANOTHUS MARITIMUS 'VALLEY VIOLET' / VALLEY VIOLET MARITIME CEANOTHUS DIANELLA REVOLUTA 'DR5000' TM / LITTLE REV FLAX LILY

DIETES VEGETA / AFRICAN IRIS

HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA 'BRAKELIGHTS' / BRAKELIGHTS RED YUCCA

LAVANDULA ANGUSTIFOLIA 'SHARON ROBERTS' / SHARON ROBERTS ENGLISH LAVENDER

LAVANDULA STOECHAS 'OTTO QUAST' / OTTO QUAST SPANISH LAVENDER PENSTEMON HETEROPHYLLUS `MARGARITA BOP` / MARGARITA BOP PENSTEMON

SALVIA X 'DARA'S CHOICE' / DARA'S CHOICE SAGE
CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE SITE 215

CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN
SITE 215
0 SCALE: 1" =30'
3030 1560
L 3 - the Grower's District

02.09.22 Project Planning Civil Engineering Landscape Architecture 2940 Spafford Street, Suite 200
Davis, CA 95618
(530) 758-2026
2120 20th Street, Suite Three
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 455-2026
Sacramento OfficeDavis Office
CECWEST.COM
Sacramento, CA
September 16, 2021

Ron Bess, Associate Planner
City of Sacramento
300 Richards Blvd
Sacramento, CA 95811

Re: MTP/SCS Consistency for the Grower’s District Project

Dear Mr. Bess:

You requested SACOG’s confirmation that the proposed Grower’s District Project is consistent with the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) and is located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA), pursuant to PRC § 21155.4. SACOG provides a consistency determination at the request of the lead agency.

However, it is the responsibility of the lead agency to make the final determination on a project’s consistency with the MTP/SCS. This letter concurs with the City’s determination that the Grower’s District Project is consistent with the MTP/SCS and is located within a TPA. SACOG reviewed the project description and SCS consistency analysis compared to the MTP/SCS assumptions for the project area in order to make our determination.

The Grower’s District Project is located at 200, 211 and 215 North 16 th Street in the City
of Sacramento and includes four mixed use buildings (one eight story and three five story) totaling 445,472 square feet of development. The Project consists of 540 multi- unit dwellings, 275 parking spaces, 70,887 square feet of commercial space and has an FAR of 1.88. The project is located within a Transit Priority Area, pursuant to PRC § 21155.4. Transit Priority Areas are areas of the region within one-half mile of a major transit stop existing or planned (if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a Regional Transportation Plan adopted pursuant to Section 450.216 or 450.322 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations). The Project site is within ½ mile from multiple light rail stations on Sacramento Regional Transit’s Blue Line, which qualify as major transit stops. The Project’s proximity to these stations demonstrate that the project site is within a TPA.

The Grower’s District Project is an infill project within the Center/Corridor Community designation of the MTP/SCS for the City of Sacramento. Within the Center/Corridor Community, the MTP/SCS forecasts a range of low to high density residential, commercial, office, and industrial uses (MTP/SCS Appendix D). The project’s land uses fall within this range of general uses, densities, and building intensities. The MTP/SCS also relies heavily on consistency with the City’s General Plan. Infill projects that are consistent with the General Plan are generally considered consistent with the MTP/SCS.

Therefore, development at the proposed densities is consistent with the build out assumptions for the area within this community type of the MTP/SCS.

With respect to consistency with the MTP/SCS policies, the applicable policies are embedded in the metrics and growth forecast assumptions of the MTP/SCS. For the purposes of determining SCS consistency, projects consistent with the growth forecast assumptions of the MTP/SCS are consistent with these policies. The MTP/SCS housing forecast for the Center/Corridor Communities was based not only on the City’s land use plans and policies, but also on the following: an assessment of past building activity, current project entitlement activity, and consideration of changing demographic and housing market demand. Infill development and redevelopment is a strategy essential to the success of the Blueprint Preferred Scenario and the MTP/SCS. The Blueprint Preferred Scenario and the 2020 MTP/SCS achieve transportation, air quality, and other quality of life benefits by relying in part on infill and redevelopment projects such as this one. The proposed project is consistent with MTP/SCS growth forecast assumptions.

Thank you for inviting SACOG’s input as to the consistency of the Grower’s District Project with the MTP/SCS. Our confirmation of the project’s consistency with the MTP/SCS is not intended to express any opinion on the site design or the appropriate conditions of approval of the project. If you have further questions or need further assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me at (916) 340-6246.

If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact me.

Sincerely,

Clint Holtzen
Planning Manager

DETERMINATION OF MTP/SCS CONSISTENCY WORKSHEET
As of October 27, 2020i

Background: Pursuant to SB 375 and SB 743, streamlined CEQA review and analysis is available to certain land use projects that are consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). The SCS was adopted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Board as part of the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) on November 18, 2019.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) provided an Acceptance of GHG Quantification Determination for the SACOG SCS in October 2020.

Purpose: The purpose of this worksheet is to provide lead agencies with guidance to determine whether a project is consistent with the general land use designation, density, intensity, and applicable policies of the 2020 MTP/SCS adopted by SACOG.

The lead agency has responsibility to make the final determination on these matters and to determine the applicable and appropriate CEQA streamlining, if any.

Directions: This worksheet should be completed by the lead agency, relying on the project description of the proposed project and Appendix C and D of the MTP/SCS . Regardless of whether this optional
worksheet is used to assist in determining consistency with the MTP/SCS, a project can only be consistent with the MTP/SCS if it is consistent with the general land use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in the adopted MTP/SCS. This worksheet only applies to the 2020 MTP/SCS (adopted November 18, 2019); subsequent MTP/SCS adoptions may require updates to this form.

Lead agencies are welcome to contact SACOG for assistance in completing this worksheet. For assistance, contact Dov Kadin at [email protected].

Project Title
Proposed Project is Located In
(city/county name)
Applicable Community Type
Proposed Project is Located in

The MTP/SCS land use forecast is
illustrated using Community Types. In
order to determine the general use
designation, density and intensity of the
Project area within the MTP/SCS, the
Project must be located within a
Community Type designated in the
MTP/SCS. Use the map on page 4 of
Appendix C of the MTP/SCS to identify the
Community Type for the Project.
☐ Center and Corridor Community
☐ Established Community
☐
Developing Community (list the specific name of the
Developing Community as identified in Appendix C of the MTP/SCS beginning on page 5):

☐ Rural Residential Community

DETERMINATION OF MTP/SCS CONSISTENCY WORKSHEET
As of October 16, 2020
2 Required Consistency with the SCS: General Use Designation, Density and Intensity, and Applicable MTP/SCS Policies (PRC § 21155(a) and PRC § 21159.28(a)) General Use Designation, Density and Building Intensity. The foundation of the land use designations for the MTP/SCS is adopted and proposed local general plans, community plans, specific plans and other local policies and regulations. A project is consistent with the MTP/SCS if its uses are identified in the applicable MTP/SCS Community Type and its uses meet the general density and building intensity assumptions for the Community Type. The proposed project does not have to include all allowed uses in the MTP/SCS.

Applicable MTP/SCS Policies. For the purposes of determining SCS consistency, the policies of the MTP/SCS are embedded in the metrics and growth forecast assumptions of the MTP/SCS. Projects consistent with the growth forecast assumptions of the MTP/SCS, as determined by the criteria below, are consistent with the MTP/SCS and its policies.

Determine consistency of the Project using one of the four methods below:

Consistency
Option Criteria
Option A
☐
The Project is located in a Center and Corridor Community or an Established Community and the Project uses are consistent with the allowed uses of the applicable adopted local land use plan as it existed in 2019 and are at least 80 percent of the maximum allowed density or intensity of the allowed uses of the applicable local land use plans. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the MTP/SCS.ii
Option B
☐
The Project is located in a Center and Corridor Community or an Established Community and the Project uses have been reviewed in the context of, and are found to be consistent with, the general land use, density, and intensity information provided for this Community Type in Appendix D of the MTP/SCS
(beginning on page 30). Therefore, the Project is consistent with the MTP/SCS.

Option C
☐
The Project is located in a Rural Residential Community and the Project residential density does not exceed the maximum density of one unit per acre as specified in the MTP/SCS, and employment development in the Project is at least 80 percent of the maximum allowed density or intensity of the applicable local land use plans. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the MTP/SCS.

Option D
☐
The Project is located in a Developing Community and the Project’s average net density meets or exceed the average net density described for this specific Developing Community (as referenced by name of applicable specific plan, master plan, or special plan in Appendix D of the MTP/SCS) and employment development in the Project is consistent with the general employment land uses described for this specific Developing Community.iii In addition, development from the project when added to other entitled projects will not exceed the MTP/SCS build out assumptions for the area within this Community Type, which are:

New Housing Units:

New Employees:

DETERMINATION OF MTP/SCS CONSISTENCY WORKSHEET
As of October 16, 2020
3 Conclusion
The proposed project is consistent with
the General Use Designation, Density and
Intensity, and Applicable MTP/SCS
Policies for the following reasons
(summarize findings on use designation,
density and intensity for the Project
evaluation completed above):
i This document may be updated as users provide feedback on its utility. ii The MTP/SCS general land use, density and intensity in Center and Corridor Communities and Established Communities is based on 80 percent of the maximum allowed density or intensity of the land use designations in applicable local land use plans as they existed in 2016, unless otherwise noted in Appendix C and D. iii The MTP/SCS land use forecast in Developing Communities was modeled according to adopted and proposed specific plans, master plans, and special plans as they existed in 2016, and is based on the housing and employment totals and the average net density of these plans, as outlined in Appendix C and D.

RESOLUTION NO. 2011-077
Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
February 15, 2011

CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE
RIVER DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT (M09-003 and M10-012)

BACKGROUND
A. On January 13, 2011 the City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on, and forwarded to the City Council a recommendation to approve with conditions, the River District Specific Plan Project.

B. On February 15, 2011, the City Council conducted a public hearing , for which notice was given pursuant to Sacramento City Code Section 17.200.010 (C)(2)(a, b, and c)(publication, posting, and mailing (500 feet) and received and considered evidence concerning the River District Specific Plan Project.

BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1.The City Council finds that the Environmental Impact Report for River District Specific Plan (herein EIR) which consists of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR (Response to Comments) (collectively the "EIR") has been completed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures.

Section 2.The City Council certifies that the EIR was prepared, published, circulated and reviewed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures, and constitutes an adequate, accurate, objective and complete Final Environmental Impact Report in full compliance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures.

Section 3.The City Council certifies that the El R has been presented to it that the City Council has reviewed the EIR and has considered the information contained in the EIR prior to acting on the proposed Project, and that the EIR reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis.

Section 4.Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093 and in support of its approval of the Project, the City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of approval of the Project as set forth in the attached Exhibit A of this Resolution.

Section 5.Pursuant to CEQA section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, and in support of its approval of the Project, the City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program to require all reasonably feasible mitigation measures be Resolution 2011-077 February 15, 2011 1
hirley Conc lino, City Clerk
implemented by means of Project conditions, agreements, or other measures, as set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program as set forth in Exhibit B of this Resolution.

Section 6.The City Council directs that, upon approval of the Project, the City's Community Development Department shall file a notice of determination with the County Clerk of Sacramento County and, if the Project requires a discretionary approval from any state agency, with the State Office of Planning and Research, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA section 21152.

Section 7.Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in, and may be obtained from, the Office of the City Clerk at 915 I Street, Sacramento, California. The City Clerk is the custodian of records for all matters before the City Council.

Section 8. Exhibits A and B are a part of this Resolution.

Table of Contents:

Exhibit A — CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Exhibit B — Mitigation Monitoring Program
Adopted by the City of Sacramento City Council on February 15, 2011 by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Ashby, Cohn, D Fong, R Fong, McCarty, Pannell, Schenirer, Sheedy.

Noes: None.

Abstain: None.

Absent: Mayor Johnson.
&,,,., P.dp Bonnie Pannell, Vice-Mayor
Attest:

Resolution 2011-077 February 15, 2011 2
Exhibit A: CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Description of the Project
Currently, the River District area is a mix of underutilized and underdeveloped parcels, large parcels, and parcels with incompatible adjacent land uses, encompassing approximately 748 acres of land. The proposed River District Specific Plan project (RDSP) (Specific Plan) would establish planning and development standards for the redevelopment of the area. The goal of the proposed project is to master plan the district as a transit-oriented, urban neighborhood that supports a mix of uses with parcels ready for development. To meet this goal, the RDSP would lay the policy and implementation framework for the evolution of the Plan area from a primarily light- industrial, low-intensity district, to a cohesive district with a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, public, and open space uses. The Specific Plan would provide the general vision and broad policy concepts to guide development of a new neighborhood.

The RDSP is consistent with the City's 2030 General Plan and provides area-specific development policies that address the unique aspects of the River District. The proposed RDSP is a long range policy and planning document that is intended to guide development in the Specific Plan area over the next 25 years. The Specific Plan would serve to guide future decisions regarding land use, intensity of development, circulation, public spaces, urban design, and the necessary infrastructure improvements to support future development. Finally, the Plan would identify the resources necessary to finance and implement the public improvements and infrastructure needed to support the vision for the new Specific Plan area.

This project would also provide the backbone infrastructure necessary for development of individual parcels in accordance with the Specific Plan. No parcels would be developed as part of this Proposed Project. Instead the individual parcel owners would develop their parcels in accordance with the Specific Plan.

Findings Required Under CEQA

1. Procedural Findings
The City Council of the City of Sacramento finds as follows:

The City of Sacramento's Environmental Planning Services determined that the River District Specific Plan Project (hereinafter called "Project") may have a significant effect on the environment and prepared an environmental impact report ("EIR") on the Project, River District Specific Plan EIR (SCH 2009062023). The EIR was prepared, noticed, published, circulated, reviewed, and completed in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §21000 et seq. ("CEQA"), the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §15000 et seq.), and the City of Sacramento environmental guidelines, as follows:
a. A Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR was filed with the Office of Planning and Research and each responsible and trustee agency and was circulated for public comments from June 2, 2009 through July 2, 2009. b. A Notice of Completion (NOC) and copies of the Draft EIR were distributed to the Office of Planning and Research on July 27, 2010 to those public agencies that have jurisdiction by law with respect to the Project, or which exercise authority over resources that may be affected by the Project, and to other interested parties and agencies as required by law. The comments of such persons and agencies were sought.
c. An official 45-day public comment period for the Draft El R was established by the Office of Planning and Research. The public comment period began on July 27, 2010 and ended on September 9, 2010.
d. A Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR was mailed to all interested groups, organizations, and individuals who had previously requested notice in writing on July 23, 2010. The NOA stated that the City of Sacramento had completed the Draft EIR and that copies were available at the City of Sacramento, 300 Richards Boulevard, Third Floor, Sacramento, CA. The letter also indicated that the official 45-day public review period for the Draft EIR would end on September 9, 2010. e. A public notice was placed in the Sacramento Bulletin on July 27, 2010 which stated that the Draft EIR was available for public review and comment. f. A public notice was posted in the office of the Sacramento County Clerk on July 23, 2010.
g. Following closure of the public comment period, all comments received on the Draft EIR during the comment period, the City's written responses to the significant environmental points raised in those comments, and additional information added by the City were added to the Draft El R to produce the Final EIR.

2. Record of Proceedings
The following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these findings:
a. The Draft and Final EIR and all documents relied upon or incorporated by reference;
b. The City of Sacramento 2030 General Plan adopted March 3, 2009, and all updates;
c. The Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Sacramento 2030 General Plan certified on March 3, 2009, and all updates; d. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Adoption of the Sacramento 2030 General Plan adopted March 3, 2009, and all updates;
e. Zoning Ordinance of the City of Sacramento;
f. Blueprint Preferred Scenario for 2050, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, December, 2004;
g. Richards Boulevard Area Plan;
h. River District Specific Plan and Design Guidelines;
Application materials, including application information; j. The Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Project; and k. All records of decision, staff reports, memoranda, maps, exhibits, letters, synopses of meetings, and other documents approved, reviewed, relied upon, or prepared by any City commissions.

3. Findings
CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environment impacts that would otherwise occur. Mitigation measures or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are infeasible or where the responsibility for the project lies with some other agency. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, sub. (a)(b).)
With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its "unavoidable adverse environmental effects." (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15093, 15043, sub. (b); see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, sub. (b)) In seeking to effectuate the substantive policy of CEQA to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental effects to the extent feasible, an agency, in adopting findings, need not necessarily address the feasibility of both mitigation measures and environmentally superior alternatives when contemplating approval of a proposed project with significant impacts. Where a significant impact can be mitigated to an "acceptable" level solely by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures, the agency, in drafting its findings, has no obligation to consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternative that could also substantially lessen or avoid that same impact — even if the alternative would render the impact less severe than would the proposed project as mitigated. (Laurel Hills Homeowners Association v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521; see also Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 730-731; and Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California ("Laurel Heights I') (1988) 47 Ca1.3d 376, 400-403.) In these Findings, the City first addresses the extent to which each significant environmental effect can be substantially lessened or avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. Only after determining that, even with the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, an effect is significant and unavoidable does the City address the extent to which alternatives described in the EIR are (i) environmentally superior with respect to that effect and (ii) "feasible" within the meaning of CEQA.

In cases in which a project's significant effects cannot be mitigated or avoided, an agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve the project if it first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the specific reasons why the agency found that the "benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment." (Public Resources Code, Section 21081, sub. (b); see also, CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15093, 15043, sub.(b).) In the Statement of Overriding Considerations found at the end of these Findings, the City identifies the specific economic, social, and other considerations that, in its judgment, outweigh the significant environmental effects that the Project will cause.

The California Supreme Court has stated that "[t]he wisdom of approving ... any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced." (Goleta 11 (1990) 52 Ca1.3d 553 at 576.)
In support of its approval of the Project, the Planning Commission makes the following findings for each of the significant environmental effects and alternatives of the Project identified in the EIR pursuant to Section 21080 of CEQA and section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines:

A.

Significant or Potentially Significant Impacts Mitigated to a Less Than Significant Level.

The following significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project, including cumulative impacts, are being mitigated to a less than significant level and are set out below. Pursuant to section 21081(a)(1) of CEQA and section 15091(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, as to each such impact, the Planning Commission, based on the evidence in the record before it, finds that changes or alterations incorporated into the Project by means of conditions or otherwise, mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen to a level of insignificance these significant or potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project. The basis for the finding for each identified impact is set forth below.

Air Quality
Impact 5.1-1: Construction activities within the RDSP area could result in NOx levels above 85 pounds per day. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Many different types of construction equipment would be used in various combinations for the many individual development projects that are expected to occur in the RDSP area. Much of this equipment likely would be diesel-fueled and would emit NO as part of the fuel-combustion process. The amount of NO emitted per day at any individual development project site would depend on the number and type of equipment used; specifically the total daily average construction NO for the entire RDSP area would depend on the number and intensity of concurrent individual development projects.

Specific information on the construction schedules and equipment use by every development project that would be built in the RDSP area is currently not available. For this reason the impact is considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.1-1(a) The following shall be incorporated into all City construction contracts and included on all construction plans.
• Water all exposed surfaces two times daily. Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to soil piles, graded areas, unpaved parking areas, staging areas, and access roads.
• Cover or maintain at least two feet of free board space on haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material on the site. Any haul trucks that would be traveling along freeways or major roadways should be covered.
• Use wet power vacuum street sweepers to remove any visible trackout mud or dirt onto adjacent public roads at least once a day.

Use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
• Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph). • All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, parking lots to be paved should be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Minimize idling time either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the time of idling to 5 minutes (as required by the state airborne toxics control measure [Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations]). Provide clear signage that posts this requirement for workers at the entrances to the site.
• Maintain all construction equipment in proper working condition according to manufacturer's specifications. The equipment must be checked by a certified mechanic and determine to be running in proper condition before it is operated.

5.1-1(b) The following shall be incorporated into all construction plans for projects that estimated construction related NO emissions exceed 85 lbs/day.

Category 1: Reducing NO emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment
The project shall provide a plan, for approval by the lead agency and SMAQMD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) self- propelled off-road vehicles to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NO reduction and 45 percent particulate reductionl compared to the most recent CARB fleet average at time of construction.
and
The project representative shall submit to the lead agency and SMAQMD a comprehensive inventory of all off-road construction equipment, equal to or greater than 50 horsepower, that will be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours during any portion of the construction project. The inventory shall include the horsepower rating, engine production year, and projected hours of use for each piece of equipment. The inventory shall be updated and submitted monthly throughout the duration of the project, except that an inventory shall not be required for any 30-day period in which no construction activity occurs. At least 48 hours prior to the use of subject heavy-duty off-road equipment, the project representative shall provide SMAQMD with the anticipated construction timeline including start date, and name and phone number of the project manager and on-site foreman.

5.1-1(c) The following shall be incorporated into all construction plans for projects that estimated construction related NO emissions exceed 85 lbsiday.

Category 2: Controlling visible emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment.

The project shall ensure that emissions from all off-road diesel powered equipment used on the project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be repaired immediately, and the lead agency and SMAQMD shall be notified within 48 hours of identification of non-compliant equipment. A visual survey of all in-operation equipment shall be made at least weekly, and a monthly summary of the visual survey results shall be submitted throughout the duration of the project, except that the monthly summary shall not be required for any 30-day period in which no construction activity occurs. The monthly summary shall include the quantity and type of vehicles surveyed as well as the dates of each survey. The SMAQMD and/or other officials may conduct periodic site inspections to determine compliance. Nothing in this section shall supercede other SMAQMD or state rules or regulations.
and/or:

If at the time of construction, the SMAQMD has adopted a regulation applicable to construction emissions, compliance with the regulation may completely or partially replace this mitigation. Consultation with SMAQMD prior to construction will be necessary to make this determination.

5.1-1(d) The following shall be incorporated into all construction plans for projects that estimated construction related NO emissions exceed 85 lbs/day.

If projected construction related emissions for a project are not reduced below the 85 lbs/day by application of MM 5.1-1(b&c), then an off-site construction mitigation fee shall be applied. The construction mitigation fee shall be calculated based upon the SMAQMD's current construction mitigation fee at the time of project specific evaluation.

Verification of payment of the mitigation fee shall be provided to the City prior to issuance of any grading permits
Finding: Each project applicant within the RDSP area is required to submit a plan and inventory which demonstrates that the heavy duty off-road vehicles used during construction would achieve project-wide emission reductions, based on the most recent CARB fleet average. In addition, the applicants are required to pay a construction mitigation fee to the SMAQMD sufficient to offset project emissions of NO above 85 pounds per day. A reduction of construction vehicle emissions and payment of mitigation fees would reduce the impact related to a temporary increase in NO emissions to a less than significant level. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.1-2: Construction within the RDSP could result in PK () concentrations that exceed acceptable thresholds. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Most construction sites in the RDSP area would have to be graded and prepared for development. Additionally, many of the areas would require demolition of existing structures. Grading activities involve clearing and leveling the land using heavy equipment such as scrapers, bulldozers, and backhoes. As the ground is disturbed, fugitive dust or PK ° is generated. The total amount of PM io generated is normally determined by the size of the graded area and the length of time of grading activities.

The larger the area and the longer the grading operation, the more PK ° is created.

Particulate emissions also occur to a lesser extent during other construction phases.

For these reasons, the impact is considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.1-2(a) Comply with MM 5.1-1(a).

MM 5.1-2(b) Grading and ground disturbance activities shall not exceed 15 acres per day for any individual development project.

Finding: The SMAQMD's Guide to Air Quality Assessment recommends measures to reduce the amount of particulate matter generated during grading.

Each project applicant is required to ensure that all off-road diesel powered equipment does not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes. In addition each applicant shall submit a dust-control plan to the City of Sacramento Community Development Department.

Measures within the dust-control plan would reduce fugitive particulate matter emissions to a less than significant level. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Biological Resources
Impact 5.2-2: Implementation of the RDSP could adversely affect special-status birds due to the substantial degradation of the quality of the environment or reduction of the population or habitat below self-sustaining levels due to loss or disturbance of nesting and/or foraging habitat. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Implementation of the proposed RDSP would allow for infill development within the project boundary and could result in the demolition of existing structures to redevelop parcels in accordance with the SP. There is a potential for special-status birds (burrowing owl, Swainson's hawk, and purple martins) within the RDSP area that could be adversely impacted by construction within the RDSP area. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.2-2(a) Preconstruction surveys for burrowing owls shall be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (The California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993), which calls for surveying out to 500 feet from project limits where suitable habitat is present. If owls are identified in the biological study area, mitigation measures will be implemented as outlined in the CDFG's 1995 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 1995). These measures will include those listed here.

If occupied owl burrows are found within the biological study area, a determination will be made by a qualified biologist in consultation with the CDFG regarding whether work will affect the occupied burrows or disrupt reproductive behavior.

If it is determined that construction will affect occupied burrows during August through February, the subject owls will be passively relocated from the occupied burrow(s) using one-way doors. One-way doors will be in place for a minimum of 48 hours before burrows are excavated.

If it is determined that construction will physically affect occupied burrows or disrupt reproductive behavior during the nesting season (March through July), avoidance is the only mitigation available. Construction will be delayed within 300 feet of occupied burrows until it is determined that the subject owls are not nesting or until a qualified biologist determines that juvenile owls are self sufficient or are no longer using the natal burrow as their primary source of shelter.

MM 5.2-2(b) Construction and demolition activities shall be conducted during the non-nesting season (August 1 through March 19) whenever feasible.

If construction or demolition activities occur during the nesting season (between March 20 and July 30), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for nesting Swainson's hawk within a 0.5 mile of the demolition/construction activities using the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley or as required by CDFG.

Surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to commencement of construction activities, and shall be conducted in accordance with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) protocol as applicable.

If no active Swainson's hawks nests are identified a copy of the preconstruction survey and letter report stating the survey results shall be sent to the City of Sacramento and no further mitigation is required.

If active nests are found, measures consistent with the CDFG Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson's hawks in the Central Valley of California shall be implemented. These measures include, but shall not be limited to:

No intensive disturbances (such as heavy equipment operation associated with construction, use of cranes, or rock-crushing) or other project-related activities that may cause nest abandonment or forced fledging, can be initiated with 200 yards (buffer zone) of an active nest between March 20 and July 30. The size of the buffer area may be adjusted by a qualified biologist
If demolition/construction activities are unavoidable within the buffer zone, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to monitor the nest to determine if abandonment occurs. If the nest is abandoned and the nestlings are still alive, the project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified biologist to reintroduce the nesting(s) (recovery and hacking).

Prior to implementation, any hacking plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Services Division and Wildlife Management Division of the CDFG.

Completion of the nesting cycle will be determined by a qualified biologist.

MM 5.2-2(c) Prior to any grading, demolition, or construction activities from March 15 to May 15 within 100 feet of the bridges over the American River adjacent to the project site, a preconstruction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 15 days of the start of project- related activities. If active nests are present, no construction shall be conducted within 100 feet of the edge of purple martin colony (as demarcated by the active nest hole closest to the construction activity) at the beginning of the purple martin breeding season from March 15 to May

15. The buffer areas shall be avoided to prevent disturbance to the nest(s) until it is no longer active. The size of the buffer areas may be adjusted in a qualified biologist and CDFG determine is would not be likely to have adverse effects on the purple martins. No project activity shall commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist confirms that the nest(s) is no longer active.

Finding: Prior to any ground disturbance for the River District Specific Plan project, the applicants shall initiate a burrowing owl consultation with the CDFG. With Implementation of burrowing owl surveys and appropriate mitigation as recommended in consultation with CDFG, the impact to burrowing owls would be less than significant.

Prior to site disturbance, during the Swainson's hawk breeding season, a pre- construction survey shall be conducted within 30 days prior to site disturbance/construction activities. With implementation of appropriate mitigation as recommend by CDFG, the impact to Swainson's hawk would be less than significant.

Prior to and grading or construction activities during the nesting season, a pre- construction survey would be conducted within 15 days prior to site disturbance/construction activities. With implementation of appropriate mitigation as recommend by CDFG, the impact to purple martins would be less than significant.

With implementation of the mitigation measure, these impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.2-3: Implementation of the RDSP could adversely affect special-status mammals due to the substantial degradation of the quality of the environment or reduction of population or habitat below self-sustaining levels. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Although no special-status bat species were observed during the biological reconnaissance survey, their potential presence is assumed in this DEIR. There are bridges over the American River adjacent to the RDSP area. Crevices in the bridges could provide marginal roosting habitat for bats. Other structures within the RDSP could also be used by bats as maternity roosts, as evidenced by the findings in the Township 9 project area.

The project does not propose any work on either the bridge structures or within the rights of way for the bridges. However, implementation of the proposed RDSP would involve the removal of existing structures, both for roadway extensions and new roads and to redevelop parcels in accordance with the RDSP vision. For this reason, proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts to special-status mammals (bats).

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measures have been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.2-3 Prior to demolition activities, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a focused survey for bats and potential rooting sites within the area of disturbance. If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be sent to the City of Sacramento and no further mitigation is required.

If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season (May 1 through October 1), then they shall be evicted as described under (c) below. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, then they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This can occur either by visual inspection of the bat pups, if possible, or monitoring the roost for sounds of bat pups after the adults leave for the night. If the roost is determined to not be a maternal roost, then the bats shall be evicted as described under (c). Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. A 250-foot (or as determined in consultation with CDFG) buffer zone shall be established around the roosting site within which no construction shall occur.

Eviction of bats shall be conducted using bat exclusion techniques, developed by Bat Conservation International (B C° and in consultation with CDFG, that allow the bats to exist the roosting site but prevent re-entry to the site. This would include, but not be limited to, the installation of one- way exclusion devices. The devices would remain in place for seven days and then the exclusion points and any other potential entrances shall be sealed. This work shall be completed by a BCI-recommended exclusion professional.

Finding:Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-3 would reduce the potential impacts to a less-than-significant level by identifying potential bat roosting sites within the areas of construction disturbance, and either protecting maternal roosts or providing bat exclusion techniques that would allow for the bats to relocate before construction begins. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.2-4: Implementation of the RDSP could result in the loss of CDFG-defined sensitive natural communities, such as an elderberry savanna, resulting in a substantial adverse effect. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The valley elderberry longhorn beetle (VELB) species is almost always found on, or close to, its host plant, the elderberry. Several elderberry shrubs are present within the RDSP study area, in the elderberry savannah in the eastern portion of the plan area, and in scattered disturbed lots and ruderal fields. The VELB is federally listed as threatened; and therefore, the take of the beetle and/or the disturbance of its habitat are prohibited by law. Implementation of the RDSP could result in the loss of habitat for a federally-protected species, the VELB, which is considered a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.2-4
(a) Prior to any ground-disturbing, demolition, or construction activities, the project applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a survey to identify and document all potential valley elderberry longhorn beetle habitat (VELB). The survey and evaluation methods shall be performed consistent with the US Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) VELB survey methods. The survey shall include a stem count of stems greater than, or equal to, one-inch in diameter and an assessment of historic or current VELB use. If no such habitat is found, mitigation is not necessary. (b) Avoidance
(1) The proposed project shall be designed to avoid ground disturbance within 100 feet of the dripline of elderberry shrubs identified in the survey, as noted in (a) above, as having stems greater than or equal to one inch in diameter. The 100-foot buffer could be adjusted in consultation with the USFWS. If avoidance is achieved, a letter report confirming avoidance shall be sent to the City of Sacramento and no further mitigation is required.
(2) Before any ground-disturbing activity, a qualified biologist shall flag the elderberry shrubs that will be retained adjacent to the biological study area. Thereafter, the City shall ensure that a minimum 4-foot-tall temporary, plastic mesh—type construction fence (Tensor Polygrid or equivalent) is installed at least 100-feet from the driplines of the flagged elderberry shrubs. This fencing is intended to prevent encroachment by construction vehicles and personnel. The fencing shall be strung tightly on posts set at a maximum interval of 10 feet.

The fencing shall be installed in a way that prevents equipment from enlarging the work area beyond the delineated work area. The fencing shall be checked and maintained weekly until all construction is completed. Signs shall be placed at intervals of 50 feet and must be readable at a distance of 20 feet. This buffer zone will be marked by signs stating:
"This is habitat of the valley elderberry longhorn beetle, a threatened species, and must not be disturbed. This species is protected by the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Violators are subject to prosecution, fines, and imprisonment."
(3) No construction activity, including grading, clearing, storage of equipment or machinery shall be allowed until this condition is satisfied. The fencing and a note reflecting this condition will be shown on the construction plans.

In addition to (b)(1-3) above, the following shall also be implemented:

The City will ensure that dust control measures are implemented for all ground-disturbing activities in the project area. These measures may include application of water to graded and disturbed areas that are unvegetated; however the City or its contractor may use other measures more appropriate for site-specific conditions, as long as dust is minimized to the maximum extent practicable. To avoid attracting Argentine ants, at no time will water be sprayed within the driplines of elderberry shrubs.

Pursuant to the USFWS VELB Guidelines, the City will implement the following measures to mitigate for the direct and indirect impacts on VELB before groundbreaking occurs for the proposed project.

If disturbance within 100-feet of the dripline, or approved equal by the USFWS, of the elderberry shrub with stems greater than or equal to one- inch in diameter is unavoidable, then the project applicant shall retain the services of a qualified biologist to develop VELB mitigation plan in accordance with the current USFWS mitigation guidelines for unavoidable take of VELB habitat pursuant to either Section 7 or Section 10(a) of the Federal Endangered Species Act. The mitigation plans shall be reviewed and approved by the USFWS prior to any disturbance within the 100-foot dripline.
(c) Compensatory Mitigation
(1) Transplant Directly Affected Elderberry Shrubs
Elderberry shrubs will be transplanted when the plants are dormant, approximately November through the first two weeks in February, after they have lost their leaves. Transplanting during the non-growing season will reduce shock to the plant and increase transplantation success. The project applicant shall follow the specific transplanting guidance provided in the USFWS VELB Guidelines.

Shrubs shall be transplanted to the French Camp Conservation Bank, or another UFWS-approved site. Elderberry seedlings and associated native plants will also be established at the site according to the ratios outlined in the Guidelines. See USFWS Biological Opinion, page 6, Table 1 issued on October 8, 2009 for the ratios.
(2) Compensate for Direct Impacts on Elderberry Shrubs
According to the USFWS VELB Guidelines, adversely affected shrubs that are "transplanted or destroyed" should be mitigated for according to the measures outlined in Table 1 of the USFWS VELB Guidelines. The City will mitigate for impacts on the shrubs by purchasing mitigation credits at a USFWS-approved mitigation bank. A summary of the required mitigation is provided in Table 3.7-2. As shown in the table, the proposed project would require 22 elderberry seedlings and 28 associated native plants (six VELB credits) to be planted at a USFWS-approved mitigation bank.

Currently, VELB mitigation credits are available at French Camp Conservation Bank. The shrubs identified for transplantation will be transplanted to this mitigation bank.

Compensation for Impacts on VELB Habitat
. Locabo
n
Stem Diameter Class
at Ground Level in
Centimeters (inches)
Exit
Holes?
Stem
Count
Elderber
ry
Seedling
Ratio
Associat
ed Native
Plant
Ratio
Non-
riparian 2.5-7.6 (1-3) No
Yes
5 0
1:1
2:1
1:1
2:1
Non-
riparian 7.6-12.7 (3-5) No
Yes
1 0
2:1
4:1
1:1
2:1
Non-
riparian >12.7 (>5) No
Yes
3 1
3:1
6:1
1:1
2:1
If the VELB is delisted by the USFWS prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing, demolition, or construction activities, the project applicant shall comply with any requirements that accompany the VELB delisting notice.

Finding:Implementation of the mitigation measure would require a site-specific protocol survey be conducted to determine the presence of VELB in any elderberry bushes in the area of disturbance. If habitat is identified, then implementation of the mitigation measure would ensure that the project is designed to avoid disturbance. If disturbance within the buffer is unavoidable, the transplantation and replacement of VELB habitat as specified by the USFWS's VELB mitigation guidelines would ensure that the habitat is protected from loss. For these reasons, potential impacts to the VELB habitat would be less than significant.

With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.2-5: Implementation of the RDSP could result in a violation of City Code Section 12.64.040 (related to Heritage trees). Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measures have been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.2-5 Prior to the removal of any Heritage tree, the project applicant shall contact the City's Arborist and develop and enact a tree mitigation plan in compliance with the City's requirements.

Finding:There could be Heritage trees on parcels that would be developed or redeveloped as part of the RDSP. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.2-5 would ensure that development within the RDSP would mitigate for the loss of Heritage trees, as required by the City. For this reason, the impact would be less than significant. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 5.4-1: Construction associated with development in accordance with the RDSP could result in the exposure of people to hazards and hazardous materials during construction activities. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Construction activities due to development in the RDSP area could expose people to existing contamination. There are areas of known soil and groundwater contamination in the Specific Plan area due to historic uses, both within, and adjacent to, the Project area. In addition, development of some parcels in accordance with the RDSP may result in demolition of existing structures. Due to the age of some existing structures it is likely that asbestos containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paint are present. In addition to demolition, the grading, excavation, and dewatering of parcels for new or re- development within the RDSP area could also expose construction workers and the public to known, or previously unknown, hazards and/or hazardous materials present in the soil or groundwater. This impact is considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measures have been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.4-1(a) Prior to any ground-disturbing or site construction activities associated with development of a parcel east of 12 th Street, a determination shall be made by the County's Environmental Management Department (EMD) as to whether the parcel is within 1,000 feet of the following County Assessor's Parcels. If so, the applicant shall contact the County of Sacramento's Local Enforcement Agency, per Title 27, California Code of Regulations, Section 21190. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the EMD regarding development and use of the parcel and provide written confirmation of such to the City of Sacramento.
• 003-0032-008
• 003-0032-009
• 001-0160-010
• 001-0160-011
• 003-0032-012
• 003-0041-006
• 001-0170-022
• 003-0410-003

5.4-1(b) Prior to demolition or renovation of structures, the project applicant shall provide written documentation to the City that either there is no asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint in the structure or that such materials have been abated and that any remaining hazardous substances and/or waste have been removed in compliance with application State and local laws.

Finding:Compliance with the federal, State, and local regulatory framework (including General Plan policies) would ensure that workers and the public are protected from hazards and hazardous materials during ground disturbing, demolition and/or construction activities within the RDSP boundary. Mitigation Measure 5.4- 1(a)(b) enhances this framework by ensuring that project applicants provide written documentation to the City that development in the RDSP area does not expose people to potential hazards due to asbestos, lead-based paint, and the closed landfill. For these reasons, the potential impacts resulting from construction associated with development in accordance with the RDSP resulting in the exposure of people to hazards and hazardous materials during construction activities are less than significant. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Noise and Vibration
Impact 5.6-2: Implementation of the RDSP could result in residential interior noise levels of Ldn 45 or greater caused by an increase in noise levels. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Proposed residentially zoned areas in the RDSP that are subject to traffic noise and exterior noise sources that exceed the normally acceptable levels, may also result in residential interior noise levels of 45 dBA Ldn or greater caused by noise level increases due to the project. As a result, areas of the RDSP proposed for residential zoning could result in future uses being subject to interior noise levels that exceed the City's standards.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.6-2 Implement Mitigation Measure 5.6-1
Finding:Because no development is currently proposed it is not possible provide adequate specific mitigation measures related to the design features of future buildings. In order to achieve the reduction of interior noise levels of future residential uses, future projects involving sensitive receptors that could be exposed to noise levels exceeding the City's noise standards will be required to prepare a project specific acoustical analysis that identifies potential impacts and noise attenuation methods, such as higher sound transmission rated windows, site design, and other mechanisms to reduce interior noise levels resulting in a less than significant impact. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.6-3: Construction of the development in accordance with the RDSP could result in construction noise levels that exceed the standards in the City of Sacramento Noise Ordinance. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The primary source of temporary or periodic noise within the Plan area would be construction activity. This involves both construction-site activity and the transport of workers and equipment to and from the construction sites. While specific construction activities and schedules are not presently known for the RDSP, future noise from construction activities will occur and will be subject to General Plan Policy EC 3.1.10.

This policy requires that development projects subject to discretionary approval assess potential construction noise impacts on nearby sensitive uses and to minimize impacts on these uses to the extent feasible. Since this policy would require mitigation of construction noise from future development, mitigation measures are provided for the Project.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.6-3 The contractor shall ensure that the following measures are implemented during all phases of construction.
• Whenever construction occurs adjacent to occupied residences (on or offsite), temporary barriers shall be constructed around the construction sites to shield the ground floor of the noise-sensitive uses. These barriers shall be of %-inch Medium Density Overlay (MOO) plywood sheeting, or other material of equivalent utility and appearance, and shall achieve a Sound Transmission Class of STC-30, or greater, based on certified sound transmission loss data taken according to ASTM Test Method E90 or as approved by the City of Sacramento Building Official.
• Construction equipment staging areas shall be located as far as feasible from residential areas while still serving the needs of construction contractors.
• Quieter "sonic" pile-drivers shall be used, unless engineering studies are submitted to the City that show this is not feasible and cost-effective, based on geotechnical considerations.

Finding: The mitigation would require construction methods to reduce construction noise from future development. Compliance with the mitigation measure would reduce the severity of construction noise from development in the RDSP area, resulting in a less- than-significant impact. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.6-5: Implementation of the RDSP could result in adjacent residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Development proposed for sites alongside major heavy and light rail lines or adjacent to major freeways in the RDSP area would have the potential for exposure to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations. In general, the potential for vibration-induced structural damage from such sources would be very rare under any circumstances, but vibration-induced disruption could occur if the uses were close enough to rail lines or major freeways, resulting in a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure was adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.6-5 Implement Mitigation Measure 5.6-4(b).

Finding:Compliance with General Plan Policy EC 3.1.6, which requires new residential and commercial projects located adjacent to major freeways, hard rail lines, or light rail lines to follow the FTA screening distance criteria, would limit vibration impacts along with Mitigation Measure 5.6-4(b) and would ensure that vibration guidelines are adhered to. As a result, vibration impacts on residential and commercial areas would be less than significant. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.6-6: Implementation of the RDSP could result in exposure of historic buildings and archaeological sites to vibration-peak-particle velocities greater than 0.25 inches per second due to project construction, highway traffic, and rail operations. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Construction activities or highway traffic in close proximity to historic buildings and archeological sites may cause structural damage under certain circumstances, for example, when blasting, pile driving, heavy earth-moving, etc. take place very close to sensitive buildings or sites. Within the RDSP area there are existing listed historic structures and structures potentially eligible for listing along with a potential historic district and contributing resources. Construction activities could occur adjacent to each of these areas; thereby resulting in a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.6-6 Implement Mitigation Measures 5.6-4 and 5.6-5.

Finding:General Plan Policy EC 3.1.7 would ensure that the City require an assessment of the damage potential of vibration-induced construction activities, highways, and rail lines in close proximity to historic buildings and archeological sites and require all feasible mitigation measures be implemented to ensure no damage would occur. In addition to, and compatible with, Policy EC 3.1.7, prior to development activities, project proponents would be required to comply with Mitigation Measures 5.6-4 and 5.6-5. Because historic buildings and archeological sites would be assessed for damage potential prior to construction activities and mitigation implemented to prevent damage, the impact to these resources would be less than significant. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.6-8: Implementation of the RDSP could result in cumulative construction noise and vibration levels that exceed the standards in the City of Sacramento Noise Ordinance as well as vibration-peak-particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

For a cumulative impact due to vibration to occur, project-related construction would have to occur within 50 feet of a receptor simultaneously with construction of some other development in the area. It is not anticipated that this would occur in residential areas where many sensitive receptors are located. Construction at distances greater than 50 feet from a receptor would not have the capacity to add to any cumulative vibration effect. However, numerous pieces of equipment operating within 50 feet of a receptor would have a combined effect that could result in substantial VdB levels resulting in a significant cumulative impact due to vibration levels.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.6-8 Implement Mitigation Measures 5.6-3 and 5.6-4.

Finding: Because City policy would require mitigation of construction noise and vibration from individual future development projects and because construction noise and vibration from each project would be restricted in intensity and hours of occurrence by the City Code, construction noise and vibration from each project would be mitigated and the project's contribution would not be considerable. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this cumulative impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

Impact 5.6-9: Implementation of the RDSP could result in cumulative impacts on adjacent residential and commercial areas exposed to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Development proposed for sites alongside major heavy and light rail lines or adjacent to major freeways in the RDSP area would have the potential for exposure to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations. In general, the potential for vibration-induced structural damage from such sources would be very rare under any circumstances, but vibration impacts could occur if the uses were close enough to rail lines or major freeways. Since it is anticipated that traffic volumes would increase along the 1-5 Freeway and that in the future is it anticipated that more freight trains may access the city along with an increase in light rail trains resulting in exposing more sensitive areas to vibration-borne effects.

Compliance with General Plan policies would limit vibration impacts. Implementation of these policies along with the Mitigation Measure 5.6-4(h) would ensure that vibration guidelines are adhered to. With implementation of the mitigation measure, this cumulative impact is reduced to a less than significant level.

B. Significant or Potentially Significant Impacts for which Mitigation Measures Found To Be Infeasible.

Mitigation measures to mitigate, avoid, or substantially lessen the following significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project have been identified.

However, pursuant to section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code and section 15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, as to each such impact and mitigation measure, the Planning Commission, based on the evidence in the record before it, specifically finds that the mitigation measures are infeasible. The impact and mitigation measures and the facts supporting the finding of infeasibility of each mitigation measure are set forth below. Notwithstanding the disclosure of these impacts and the finding of infeasibility, the Planning Commission elects to approve the Project due to the overriding considerations set forth below in Section (G), the statement of overriding considerations.

Noise and Vibration
Impact 5.6-1: Implementation of the RDSP could result in exterior noise levels that are above the upper value of the normally acceptable category for various land uses due to an increase in noise levels. Without mitigation this is a potentially significant impact.

Residential development in the RDSP area could experience traffic related exterior noise greater than the "Normally Acceptable" levels. The installation of sound walls could reduce the exterior noise levels to levels below the normally acceptable level; however, this is not considered a feasible mitigation measure because this would require new access points so that continuous soundwalls could be constructed along the street frontages. In addition the installation of sound walls would also be in conflict with the City's General Plan Policy EC 3.1-11, which encourages the use of design strategies and other methods along transportation corridors to attenuate noise in lieu of sound walls. As a result, sensitive receptors to noise could be subject to exterior noise levels above the upper value of the normally acceptable level category for the residential land use. This would be a significant impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. However, for the reasons set forth below, the mitigation measure is rejected as infeasible:

MM 5.6-1 Future development projects in the RDSP area consisting of noise sensitive receptors shall have an acoustical analysis prepared to measure any potential project noise impacts and identify specific noise attenuation features to reduce impacts associated with exterior noise, to the extent feasible, to a less than significant level consistent with the policies of the General Plan.

Finding: While mitigation measures could be implemented to reduce exterior noise impacts there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce noise generated by traffic adjacent to several residentially-zoned areas below the upper value of the normally acceptable noise category. The installation of sound walls could reduce the noise levels to acceptable levels; however, this is not considered feasible mitigation because this would require new access points so that continuous sound walls could be constructed along the street frontages. In addition, the installation of sound walls would be in conflict the City's General Plan policy encouraging the use of design strategies along transportation corridors to attenuate noise in lieu of sound walls. For these reasons, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.6-4: Implementation of the RDSP could result in existing and/or planned residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration-peak-particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to project construction. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Existing and proposed residential and commercial uses could be exposed to vibration- peak-particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to construction activities within the RDSP. Future construction activities that could occur under the River District Specific Plan could have the potential to generate ground-borne vibration. Construction activities would occur at discrete locations throughout the RDSP area and vibration from such activities may impact existing buildings (i.e., through structural damage) and their occupants (i.e., through activity disruption, annoyance, etc.) if they are located close enough to the construction sites. In general, vibration-induced structural damage could only occur when certain types of construction activity (e.g., blasting, pile driving, heavy earth-moving) take place very close to existing structures, while vibration-induced disruption/annoyance could occur during more common types of construction activity (e.g., truck movements) at greater distance from the activity area.

Impacts related to construction vibration are event- and location-specific; these impacts would not occur at great distances. However, when construction vibration occurs at sensitive land uses close to construction sites, the impacts would be considered significant.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. However, for the reasons set forth below, the mitigation measure is rejected as infeasible:

MM 5.6-4: Implement Mitigation Measure 5.6-3 and;
a) During construction, should damage occur despite the above mitigation measures, construction operations shall be halted and the problem activity shall be identified. A qualified engineer shall establish vibration limits based on soil conditions and the types of buildings in the immediate area. The contractor shall monitor the buildings throughout the remaining construction period and follow all recommendations of the qualified engineer to repair any damage that has occurred to the pre-existing state, and to avoid further structural damage.
b) Prior to individual development projects, the applicant shall have a certified vibration consultant prepare a site-specific vibration analysis for residential uses and historic structures that are within the screening distance (shown in Table 5.6-7) for freight and passenger trains or light rail trains. The analysis shall detail how the vibration levels at these receptors would meet the applicable vibration standards to avoid potential structural damage and annoyance. The results of the analysis shall be incorporated into project design.

Vibration-induced structural damage could be avoided in all cases by prohibiting any construction projects that have any potential for causing structural damage to nearby structures. Since it is not feasible to prohibit all construction close to existing structures (i.e., within 150 feet), the residual potential for vibration impacts at certain receptors could be significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.6-7: Implementation of the RDSP along with other development in the region could result in an increase in interior and exterior noise levels in the Policy Areas that are above acceptable levels. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact Due to anticipated increases in traffic on most local roadways due to increases in development within and outside of the Project area, noise levels in excess of City standards attributed to growth per the General Plan and the Project would represent a considerable contribution. This is considered a significant cumulative impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level; however, for the reasons set forth below, the mitigation is rejected as infeasible:

MM 5.6-1 Future development projects in the RDSP area consisting of noise sensitive receptors shall have an acoustical analysis prepared to measure any potential project noise impacts and identify specific noise attenuation features to reduce impacts associated with exterior noise to a less than significant level, to the extent feasible, consistent with the policies of the General Plan, to the extent feasible.

Finding: While mitigation measures could be implemented to reduce exterior noise impacts there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce noise generated by cumulative traffic conditions adjacent to several residentially-zoned areas below the upper value of the normally acceptable noise category. The installation of sound walls could reduce the noise levels to acceptable levels; however, this is not considered feasible mitigation because this would require new access points so that continuous sound walls could be constructed along the street frontages.

In addition, the installation of sound walls would be in conflict the City's General Plan policy encouraging the use of design strategies along transportation corridors to attenuate noise in lieu of sound walls. For this reason, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Traffic and Circulation
Impact 5.10-2: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impact on study roadway segments in 2015. Without mitigation this is a potentially significant impact.

The traffic generated by development within the RDSP area in year 2015 would result in significant traffic impacts for the following roadway segments:
• Richards Boulevard just east of Bercut Drive
• 16th Street south of Richards Boulevard
Finding: No feasible mitigation measure was found to lessen the impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation would require widening of Richards Boulevard wider than planned in the RDSP to add vehicle lanes for additional vehicle capacity.

This is inconsistent with the City's goals to create pedestrian-friendly streets and the City's Smart Growth policies. For this reason, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.10-3: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impacts on study freeway mainline segments in 2015.

The traffic generated by RDSP would result in significant traffic impacts in 2015 for one freeway mainline segment in the study area:
• State Route 160 northbound at the American River bridge during P.M. peak hour Finding:No feasible mitigation measure was found to lessen the impact on SR 160 northbound at the bridge. To fully mitigate this impact, it would be necessary to reduce the RDSP traffic such that no additional traffic is added to the freeway segment, or to improve the operation of the freeway segment from LOS F to LOS E. Widening the freeway would reduce the impact, but is not considered feasible because of the numerous transportation structures that would need to be modified or replaced. For this reason, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.10-11: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impacts on study roadway segments in 2035. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The traffic generated by RDSP would result in significant traffic impact under cumulative conditions for the following roadway segments in the study area:
• Richards Boulevard east of Bercut Drive
• Richards Boulevard east of Dos Rios Street
• 16th Street south of Richards Boulevard
• 12th Street north of Richards Boulevard
• 16th Street north of Richards Boulevard
• North 4th Street north of Richards Boulevard
• North 4th Street south of Richards Boulevard
• North 4th Street south of Bannon Street
• 10th Street south of Railyards Boulevard
• 12th Street south of North B Street
Finding:No feasible mitigation measures were identified that would reduce the impacts on the roadway segments. Mitigation would require additional widening of the roadways within the RDSP area, to add more vehicle lanes to increase vehicle capacity, which is inconsistent with City goals to create pedestrian-friendly streets and the City's Smart Growth policies. For these reasons, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.10-12: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impacts on study freeway mainline segments in 2035. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The traffic generated by RDSP would result in significant traffic impact in 2035 for the following freeway mainline segments in the study area:
• Northbound 1-5 south of 1 Street on-ramp — AM and PM peak hours • Northbound 1-5 south of Richards Boulevard off-ramp — PM peak hour • Northbound 1-5 north of Richards Boulevard off-ramp — PM peak hour • Northbound 1-5 north of Richards Boulevard on-ramp — PM peak hour • Southbound 1-5 north of Richards Boulevard off-ramp — AM and PM peak hours
• Southbound 1-5 north of Richards Boulevard on-ramp — AM and PM peak hours
• Southbound 1-5 north of J Street off-ramp — AM and PM peak hours • Southbound 1-5 north of 1 Street on-ramp —PM peak hour • Northbound SR 160 at the American River — PM peak hour Finding:No feasible mitigation measures were found to lessen the impact on these freeway segments. It would be necessary to reduce the traffic generated in the RDSP area such that no additional traffic were added to the freeway segment or to improve the operations of the freeway segments from Level of Service F to Level of Service E.

Widening the freeway would reduce the impact, but was not considered feasible because of the numerous transportation structures that would need to be modified/ replaced.

For these reasons, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.10-13: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impacts on study freeway interchanges in 2035. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The traffic generated by RDSP would result in significant traffic impact the following freeway interchange locations within the study area:
• Northbound 1-5 off-ramp to Richards Boulevard — PM peak hour • Northbound 1-5 off-ramp to Garden Highway — PM peak hour • Southbound 1-5 off-ramp to Richards Boulevard — AM peak hour • Southbound 1-5 on-ramp from Richards Boulevard — PM peak hour • Southbound 1-5 off-ramp to J Street — PM peak hour
Finding: No feasible mitigation measures were identified that would reduce the impact of the project on 1-5 off-ramps. It would be necessary to reduce the traffic generated in the RDSP area such that no additional traffic were added to the freeway ramps or to improve the operations of the freeway ramps. Widening the ramps would reduce the impact, but was not considered feasible because of the numerous transportation structures that would need to be modified/ replaced.

Therefore the impact of the project remains significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.10-14: Implementation of the RDSP could result in potentially significant impacts on study freeway off-ramp queues in 2035. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

The traffic generated by RDSP would result in significant traffic impact for one freeway off-ramp queue in the study area:
• 1-5 northbound off-ramp to J Street — AM peak hour.

Finding: With implementation of MM 5.10-10(gg), freeway off-ramp queues at the 1-5 northbound off-ramp at J Street would be 1,028 feet in the A.M. peak hour, and would exceed the available storage. No feasible mitigation measures were identified at this location. It would be necessary to reduce the traffic generated in the RDSP area such that no additional traffic were added to the freeway ramp or to improve the operations of the freeway ramp. Widening the ramp would reduce the impact, but was not considered feasible because of the numerous transportation structures that would need to be modified/ replaced.

Therefore the impact of the project remains significant and unavoidable.

C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts.

The following significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the Project, including cumulative impacts, are unavoidable and cannot be mitigated in a manner that would substantially lessen the significant impact.

Notwithstanding disclosure of these impacts, the Planning Commission elects to approve the Project due to overriding considerations as set forth below in Section G, the statement of overriding considerations.

Air Quality
Impact 5.1-6: Implementation of the RDSP, in conjunction with other construction activities in the SVAB, would increase cumulative construction-generated NO levels above 85 pounds per day. Without mitigation this is a potentially significant impact.

Construction activities for other projects outside of the RDSP Area that occur simultaneously with project construction within the RDSP Area would contribute emissions of NO,. While those emissions would be temporary, combined they could exceed the SMAQMD thresholds. However, the SMAQMD oversees a large area outside of the RDSP Area boundaries that would require projects comply with SMAQMD mitigation requirements. It is anticipated that individual projects within the RDSP Area would comply with policies requiring implementation of feasible mitigation.

Nonetheless, concurrent projects both within the RDSP Area as well as within the SVAB would likely exceed the SMAQMD significance threshold, resulting in a significant cumulative impact.

Mitigation Measure (From MMP): The following mitigation measure has been identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. However, for the reasons set forth below, the mitigation measure is rejected as infeasible:

MM 5.1-6 Comply with MM 5.1-1 (a - d)
Finding:Compliance with General Plan policies requiring implementation of SMAQMD standard mitigation measures (MM 5.1-1(a — d)) would result in reductions in construction emissions from individual projects in the RDSP Area including compliance with SMAQMD standard construction measures; payment into SMAQMD's construction mitigation fund would reduce off-site sources to ensure that construction emissions would not result in substantial increases in ozone precursors in the air basin. However, there are no other feasible mitigation measures to ensure that construction emissions for multiple concurrent projects, including projects outside of the Policy Area, can be reduced below the 85 pounds per day threshold.

Therefore, the project's contribution to this impact would remain considerable and the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.1-8: Implementation of the RDSP, in conjunction with other development in the SVAB, would emit particulate pollutants associated with construction activities at a cumulative level equal to, or greater than, five percent of the CAAQS (50 micrograms/cubic meter for 24 hours). Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Significant levels of particulate matter could be generated during project grading and other construction activities taking place within the RDSP Area. Those impacts could be reduced below the significance threshold for individual projects through the implementation of the identified mitigation measures. However, PK () emissions from construction projects that occur simultaneously in the vicinity of one another and within the RDSP Area combined with development in the larger SVAB could have significant cumulative effects. Because the particulate matter emissions due to implementation of the RDSP and other development in the region could exceed established thresholds, its contribution would be considerable resulting in a significant cumulative impact.

MM 5.1-8 Comply with MM 5.1-2(a & b)
Finding:Compliance with General Plan policies, which requires implementation of feasible mitigation measures, including MM 5.1-2(a & b) to reduce PMio emissions, would result in reductions in construction PK ° emissions from individual projects within the RDSP Area. However, there are no other feasible mitigation measures to ensure that construction emissions for multiple concurrent projects, including those outside of the RDSP Area boundaries, can be reduced to ensure that PK ° emissions would not exceed thresholds.

Therefore, emissions of PK () in the Policy Area would remain cumulatively considerable and the impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Cultural and Historic Resources
Impact 5.3-1: Implementation of the RDSP could cause a substantial change in the significance of historical resources (State Printing Plant) as defined in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure 5.3-1: None available (for State Printing Plant only).

Finding:Full implementation of the RDSP requires the construction of several streets within the Specific Plan area. North 6 tn Street would be extended from North B Street to Richards Boulevard, in order to extend the Central City street grid pattern. Bannon Street would be extended eastward to 7 th Street. Portions of the extended North 6 th Street and Bannon Streets would traverse the site of the State of California Printing Plant. This facility is eligible as a historic resource in the Sacramento Register. However, the extension of the street grid to the RDSP area is one of the primary objectives of the project. The traffic circulation within the District is dependent upon traffic accessing the area from the south, to include North 6 th Street. For this reason, the impact is significant and unavoidable.

Impact 5.3-2: Implementation of the RDSP could cause a substantial change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Without mitigation, this is a potentially significant impact.

Mitigation Measure 5.3-2 (From MMP): The following mitigation measures have been adopted to address this impact:

MM 5.3-2 The following shall apply to any ground disturbing activities associated with development in accordance with the RDSP. a. Prior to any excavation, grading or other construction on the project site, and in consultation with Native American Tribes and the City's Preservation Director: a qualified archaeologist will prepare a testing plan for testing areas proposed for excavation or any other ground-disturbing activities as part of future projects, which plan shall be approved by the City's Preservation Director. Testing in accordance with that plan will then ensue by the qualified archaeologist, who will prepare a report on findings, and an evaluation of those findings, from those tests and present that report to the City's Preservation Director. Should any findings be considered as potentially significant, further archaeological investigations shall ensue, by the qualified archaeologist, and the archaeologist shall prepare reports on those investigations and evaluations relative to eligibility of the findings to the Sacramento, California or National Registers of Historic & Cultural Resources/ Places and submit that report to the City's Preservation Director and SHPO with recommendations for treatment, disposition, or reburials of significant findings, as appropriate.

Also, at the conclusion of the pre-construction testing, evaluation and reports and recommendations, a decision will be made by the City's Preservation Director as to whether on-site monitoring during any project- related excavation or ground-disturbing activities by a qualified archaeologist will be required.
b. Discoveries during construction: For those projects where no on- site archaeological monitoring was required, in the event that any prehistoric subsurface archeological features or deposits, including locally darkened soil ("midden"), that could conceal cultural deposits, animal bone, obsidian and/or mortars are discovered during construction-related earth-moving activities, all work within 50 meters of the resources shall be halted, and a qualified archeologist will be consulted to assess the significance of the find. Archeological test excavations shall be conducted by a qualified archeologist to aid in determining the nature and integrity of the find. If the find is determined to be significant by the qualified archeologist, representatives of the City and the qualified archeologist shall coordinate to determine the appropriate course of action. All significant cultural materials recovered shall be subject to scientific analysis and professional museum curation. In, a report shall be prepared by the qualified archeologist according to current professional standards. c. If a Native American site is discovered, the evaluation process shall include consultation with the appropriate Native American representatives. d. If Native American archeological, ethnographic, or spiritual resources are involved, all identification and treatment shall be conducted by qualified archeologists, who are certified by the Society of Professional Archeologists (SOPA) and/or meet the federal standards as stated in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR 61), and Native American representatives, who are approved by the local Native American community as scholars of the cultural traditions.
e. In the event that no such Native American is available, persons who represent tribal governments and/or organizations in the locale in which resources could be affected shall be consulted. If historic archeological sites are involved, all identified treatment is to be carried out by qualified historical archeologists, who shall meet either Register of Professional Archeologists (RPA), or 36 CFR 61 requirements. f. If a human bone or bone of unknown origin is found during construction, all work shall stop in the vicinity of the find, and the County Coroner, and City's Preservation Director, shall be contacted immediately.

If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, who shall notify the person most likely believed to be a descendant. The most likely descendant shall work with the contractor to develop a program for re- internment of the human remains and any associated artifacts. No additional work is to take place within the immediate vicinity of the find until the identified appropriate actions have taken place. Work can continue on other parts of the project site while the unique archeological resource mitigation takes place.

Finding:Mitigation 5.3-2 outlines a plan to test sites in the RDSP area where projects will involve excavation or other ground-disturbing activities, and to specifies the proper handling of any archeological resources uncovered during ground- disturbing construction anticipated by the RDSP. While unforeseen archeological resources may still be found during any ground disturbing activities, following the guidelines in Mitigation 5.3-2 will significantly reduce potential impacts to archeological resources in the RDSP area; however, because the potential impacts to significant archeological resources may still occur during ground disturbing activity there is the potential that implementation of the RDSP may cause a significant environmental impact as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. For these reasons, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

D. Findings Related to the Relationship Between Local Short-term Uses of the Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity.

Based on the EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the City Council makes the following findings with respect to the project's balancing of local short term uses of the environment and the maintenance of long term productivity:
• As the project is implemented, certain impacts would occur on a short-term level.

Such short-term impacts are discussed above. Where feasible, measures have been incorporated in the project to mitigate these potential impacts. • The project would result in the long-term commitment of resources to develop and operate the project including water, natural gas, fossil fuels, and electricity.

The long-term implementation of the project would provide economic benefits to the City. The project would be developed within an existing urban area and not contribute to urban sprawl. Notwithstanding the foregoing, some long-term impacts would result.

Although there are short-term and long-term adverse impacts from the project, the short-term and long-term benefits of the project justify implementation.

E. Project's Contribution of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The City of Sacramento has adopted a proactive and comprehensive approach to climate change issues, including adoption of the 2030 General Plan to encourage a pattern of urban development that avoids dispersed residential and employment centers that by their design encourage motor vehicle trips, one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Likewise, the 2030 General Plan calls for strengthening the City's efforts to promote building standards to reduce the carbon footprint of buildings, another of the major contributors. The River District Specific Plan project is consistent with this approach and implements the City's plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The 2030 General Plan and the Master Environmental Impact Report The City Council approved the 2030 General Plan on March 3, 2009. As part of its action, the City Council certified the Master Environmental Impact Report (Master EIR) that evaluated the environmental effects of development that is reasonably anticipated under the 2030 General Plan. The Master EIR includes extensive discussion of the potential effects of greenhouse gas emissions. The Master EIR discussions regarding climate change are incorporated here by reference. See, for example:

Draft EIR: 6.1 Air Quality (Page 6.1-1)
Final EIR: City Climate Change master Response (Page 4-1) Errata No. 2: Climate Change (Page 12)
The impact of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, specifically with regard to global climate change, has been acknowledged by the City of Sacramento and others as an inherently cumulative effect. Global climate change occurs, by definition, on a global basis. Greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for extended periods, and combine with GHG emissions from other areas of the globe, thus creating an inherently cumulative impact.

The 2030 General Plan and Master EIR recognized these unique aspects of the problem. The Master EIR acknowledges that the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from development that would be consistent with the 2030 General Plan would be cumulatively considerable, and significant and unavoidable. See Errata 2, February 23, 2009.

In addition, at City Council direction staff reviewed the various policies and implementation programs in the 2030 General Plan that could mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, and determined that a number of these policies could be revised. A list of such policies, and the changes that were made to respond to the continuing discussion of climate change, were included as part of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan that implemented mitigation identified in the Master EIR.

The effects of the 2030 General Plan promote denser urban development within the current City territorial limits to accommodate population growth, which will reduce growth pressures and sprawl in outlying areas. While total greenhouse gas emissions within the General Plan policy area may increase over time due to growth in population in the region, this increase is less than what would have occurred if the 2030 General Plan were not adopted and development of more land in outlying areas had been permitted under the 1988 General Plan. Adoption of the 2030 General Plan put these key strategies in place immediately and has begun to shape development as well as the activities of day-to-day living and move the City and the region toward a more sustainable future.

Because the actual effectiveness of all the feasible policies and programs included in the 2030 General Plan that avoid, minimize, or reduce greenhouse gas could not be quantified, the impact was identified in the Master EIR as a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact.

General Plan Consistency of the River District Specific Plan Project The 2030 General Plan identifies a mix of Traditional Neighborhood Low Density (TNLD), Traditional Neighborhood Medium Density (TNMD) and Traditional Center (TC) on the River District Specific Plan site. These designations include detached and attached single-family homes, multifamily dwellings, commercial or mixed use development and compatible public and quasi-public uses. The Land Use and Urban Form Diagram in the 2030 General Plan designates TNLD for the northern portion of the site, TNMD for the central portion and TC in the southern portion. Each of the three designations permit residential and commercial development. The development program analyzed in the Master EIR for the River District Specific Plan site included a mix of 549 attached and detached dwelling units and 200,000 square feet of commercial development.

The proposed River District Specific Plan project development program and mix of uses is generally consistent with the development program anticipated by the 2030 General Plan and the Master EIR. The River District Specific Plan project proposes a mix of TNLD, TNMD, Traditional Neighborhood High Density, and TC development. The proposal locates lower density single family homes to the north, higher density attached homes and apartments in the central area and commercial uses to the south. The proposed 527 dwelling units fall within the range anticipated by the General Plan (549).

The 259,000 square feet of commercial space appears to be about 30% greater than was studied in the Master EIR. However, the commercial floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.37 is well within the range of 0.3-2.0 FAR permitted in TC. As a result, the land uses and their associated density and intensity are consistent with the 2030 General Plan.

In addition to determining consistency with the Land Use and Urban Form Diagram, goals and policies of the General Plan's ten elements are relevant.

Land Use and Urban Design Element:

LU 5 Traditional Center Urban Form Guidelines (2030 General Plan, Page 2-68) While the guidelines are not goals or policies, and are not mandatory or binding on the applicant, they do express the City's desired urban form vision. For Traditional Centers, the guidelines call for:

1. small, rectangular blocks;

2. small, narrow lots providing a fine-grained development pattern;

3. building heights ranging from one to four stories;

4. lot coverage not exceeding 80 percent;

5. buildings sited at or near the sidewalk and typically abutting one another with limited side yard setbacks;

6. building entrances set at the sidewalk;

7. rear alleys and secondary streets providing service access to reduce the need for driveways and curb cuts on the primary street;

8. parking provided on-street as well as in.. .lots at the side or rear of structures;

9. transparent building frontages with pedestrian-scaled articulation and detailing;

10.moderately wide side sidewalks;

11.public streetscapes serving as the center's primary open space, complemented by outdoor seating, plazas, courtyards, and sidewalk dining areas.

These guidelines provide the staff and applicant with guidance regarding project design, and support the City's identified goal of encouraging development by providing specific and enforceable standards for development.

LU 5 Traditional Centers Goals and Policies
Policy LU 5.3.1 Development Standards. The City shall continue to support development and operation of centers in traditional neighborhoods by providing flexibility in development standards, consistent with public health and safety, in response to constraints inherent in retrofitting older structures and in creating infill development in established neighborhoods.

Mobility Element:

The following goals and policies are relevant to the design of the River District Specific Plan project. They primarily relate to the design of public and private streets and the desired relationships among buildings, streets and parking facilities.

Policy M 1.3.1 Grid Network. The City shall require all new residential, commercial, or mixed-use development that proposes or is required to construct or extend streets to develop a transportation network that provides for a well- connected, walkable community, preferably as a grid or modified grid.

Policy M 1.3.2 Private Complete Streets. The City shall require large private developments (e.g., office parks, apartment complexes, retail centers) to provide internal complete streets that connect to the existing roadway system.

Policy M 2.1.3 Streetscape Design. The City shall require that pedestrian- oriented streets be designed to provide a pleasant environment for walking including shade trees; plantings; well-designed benches, trash receptacles, news racks, and other furniture; pedestrian-scaled lighting fixtures; wayfinding signage; integrated transit shelters; public art; and other amenities.

Policy M 2.1.4 Cohesive Network. The City shall develop a cohesive pedestrian network of public sidewalks and street crossings that makes walking a convenient and safe way to travel.

Policy M 2.1.5 Continuous Network. The City shall provide a continuous pedestrian network in existing and new neighborhoods that facilitates convenient pedestrian travel free of major impediments and obstacles.

Policy M 2.1.6 Building Design. The City shall ensure that new buildings are designed to engage the street and encourage walking through design features such as placing the building with entrances facing the street and providing connections to sidewalks.

Policy M 2.1.7 Parking Facility Design. The City shall ensure that new automobile parking facilities are designed to facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian access, including clearly defined corridors and walkways connecting parking areas with buildings.

Policy M 2.1.8 Housing and Destination Connections. The City shall require new subdivisions and large-scale developments to include safe pedestrian walkways that provide direct links between streets and major destinations such as transit stops and stations, schools, parks, and shopping centers.

Policy M 3.1.12 Direct Access to Stations. The City shall ensure that projects located in the Central City and within 1/2 mile walking distance of existing and planned light rail stations provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to the station area, to the extent feasible.

Goal M 4.3 Neighborhood Traffic. Enhance the quality of life within existing neighborhoods through the use of neighborhood traffic management techniques, while recognizing the City's desire to provide a grid system that creates a high level of connectivity.

Policy M 4.3.1 Neighborhood Traffic Management. The City shall continue wherever possible to design streets and approve development applications in such as manner as to reduce high traffic flows and parking problems within residential neighborhoods.

M 5.1.8 Connections between New Development and Bikeways. The City shall ensure that new commercial and residential development projects provide frequent and direct connections to the nearest bikeways.

Buildings constructed as part of the project would be required to comply with current California building codes that enforce energy efficiency.

The City of Sacramento has adopted an approach that seeks to implement community development principles that encourage pedestrian-friendly, multi-use development that reduces vehicle miles travelled. The various goals and policies applicable to the project through the 2030 General Plan provides just such a framework, and are effective tools to mitigate climate change through reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. These goals and policies have accurately been described in the Master EIR as mitigation for such effects.

The City has acknowledged that the sum of greenhouse gas emissions that could be generated by development under the 2030 General Plan would be cumulatively considerable, and has identified the goals and policies under the 2030 General Plan as the primary vehicle to mitigating such impacts. This programmatic approach achieves reductions in the two main emitting categories: motor vehicle emissions and energy used in buildings. By adopting measures that are applicable community-wide, the City has implemented a reduction strategy that is fair and can be implemented with confidence that emission reductions will actually occur.

The City has identified greenhouse gas reductions goals as stated in AB 32 and other State guidance as relevant to the impact analysis. This is consistent with guidance provided by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD).

In its CEQA Guide, December 2009, the District suggests that local agencies properly consider adopting a threshold that considers whether an individual project's GHG emissions would substantially hinder the State's ability to attain the goals identified in AB 32. (CEQA Guide, page 6-11)
The Master EIR concluded that greenhouse gas emissions that could be emitted by development that is consistent with the 2030 General Plan would be cumulatively considerable and unavoidable (Errata No. 2, Page 12). The Master EIR includes a full analysis of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, and adequately addresses these issues.

The project is consistent with the City's goals and policies as set forth in the 2030 General Plan and Master EIR relating to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The project would not impede the City's efforts to comply with AB32 requirements. The project would not have any significant additional environmental effects relating to greenhouse gas emissions or climate change.

F. Project Alternatives.

The City Council has considered the Project alternatives presented and analyzed in the final EIR and presented during the comment period and public hearing process. Some of these alternatives have the potential to avoid or reduce certain significant or potentially significant environmental impacts, as set forth below. The City Council finds, based on specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, that these alternatives are infeasible. Each alternative and the facts supporting the finding of infeasibility of each alternative are set forth below.

Alternatives Considered and Dismissed from Further Consideration Alternative Site
Section 15126.6(f)(2)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines states, "If the lead agency concludes that no feasible alternative locations exist, it must disclose the reasons for this conclusion, and should include the reason in the EIR." A feasible alternative location for the proposed project that would result in substantially reduced impacts does not exist.

The CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[b]) requires that only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR. The Off-Site Alternative would involve the construction of the proposed project on an alternative location. The Off-Site Alternative could have the same type and intensity of uses as the proposed project. Although other vacant properties are located in the City of Sacramento, infill parcels of substantial size like the project site are limited. It should also be noted that, by definition, CEQA states that an alternative should avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the environmental effects of the project. Alternative locations within the City would generally contain similar characteristics as the project site, and the development of greenfield sites located outside the City would likely result in greater impacts than the proposed project.

Therefore, development of the project on an alternative location would be expected to result in at least the same level of impacts as the proposed project. As a result, an environmentally feasible off-site location that would meet the requirements of CEQA, as well as meet the basic objectives of the proposed project, does not exist.

No Project/No Development Alternative
This alternative assumes that the Project would not be implemented and that there would not be any new development within the RDSP area. The project area is composed of approximately 400 parcels, under the ownership of approximately 200 entities. It is not feasible to consider an alternative that assumes no owners would want to develop their properties.

Summary of Alternatives Considered
No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative
Section 15126.6 (e)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that a "no project alternative" be evaluated in comparison to the proposed project.

The No Project/No Build Alterative is defined in this section as the continuation of the existing condition of the project site. Development would be consistent with the currently allowed land uses, zoning, and development alternative. The No Project/No Development Alternative would allow the project site to continue in the existing state.

Currently the RDSP area is a mix of underutilized and underdeveloped parcels and parcels with incompatible adjacent land uses.

Facts in Support of Finding of Infeasibility
This alternative would result in a continuation of the current mix of underutilized and underdeveloped parcels and parcels with incompatible adjacent uses and would not meet any of the project objectives to redevelop and revitalize the area.

Existing Street Pattern/Historic Preservation Alternative This alternative assumes that there would be a River District Specific Plan to guide the development and redevelopment of the area and that no new streets would be developed. As with the Project, this alternative assumes that the density of development allowed within the Specific Plan area would be less than allowed by the Zoning Code, due to the proposed Specific Plan and the Design Guidelines. Parcel sizes would remain the same as the current configuration, which is large in some areas than would occur with the Project's street grid. This could result in different types of development than envisioned by the Project and could result in less residential development. It is assumed that the amount of office and commercial development would remain the same as the Project.

This alternative would develop the same footprint as the Project; and therefore, the impacts related to the location of development, such as potential loss of biological and archeological resources, exposure to hazards and hazardous materials, and changes to local hydrology would be the same.

Assuming less residential development, this alternative could result in less impacts to public services. However, the need for expanded or new facilities would result from development of either the Project or this alternative.

The impacts to residents on Bannon Street due to increased noise from traffic could be less under this alternative because the street grid would not be extended. Traffic on Bannon Steet would not be anticipated to increase enough to result in significantly increased noise for the residents. However, without the gridded street pattern, it is anticipated that more cars would travel on Richards Boulevard than with the Project, thereby resulting in greater traffic noise to the existing residential development on Dos Rios Street.

The impacts to public utilities would be slightly less because less residential development is assumed with this alternative.

It is anticipated that operational air impacts would be greater because there would not be the gridded street pattern to expand the circulation system and provide drivers with more choices.

This alternative would not require the demolition of the State Printing Plant, which is eligible for listing as a historic resource. The demolition of this building is considered a Significant and Unavoidable impact of the Project. This alternative would not result in this impact and would not result in significant impacts to historic resources.

Facts in Support of Finding of Infeasibility
This alternative would meet some of the objectives established for the Project; however, the objectives of making the River District area an integral part of the circulation system with the areas to the east and south would not be met.

G. Statement of Overriding Considerations:

Pursuant to Guidelines section 15092, the City Council finds that in approving the Project it has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant and potentially significant effects of the Project on the environment where feasible, as shown in Sections 5.1 through 5.10. The City Council further finds that it has balanced the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project against the remaining unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the Project and has determined that those benefits outweigh the unavoidable environmental risks and that those risks are acceptable. The City Council makes this statement of overriding considerations in accordance with section 15093 of the Guidelines in support of approval of the Project.

The project would establish the planning and development standards for redevelopment of an underutilized area. The goal of the Project is to master plan the district as a transit-oriented, urban neighborhood that supports a mix of uses with parcels ready for development. The Project would provide the policy and implementation framework for the evolution of the Project area from a primarily light-industrial, low intensity district to a cohesive district with a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, public and open space uses.

The City Council adopts the mitigation measures in the final Mitigation and Monitoring Program, incorporated by reference into these Findings (see Exhibit B), and finds that any residual or remaining effects on the environment resulting from the project, identified as significant and unavoidable in the Findings of Fact, are acceptable due to the benefits set forth in this Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council makes this Statement in accordance with section 10593 of the CEQA Guidelines in supporting approval of the project.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis – Site 200 Grower’s District – P21-024

City Code Section 17.808.180 requires a development project located within a Sacramento Register -listed historic district to be consistent with t he Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards) or meet certain other conditions that would make consistency with the Standards infeasible. In this case, staff has concluded the proposed adaptive reuse is fully consistent with the Standards as they are applied to adaptive reuse projects. When conducting a Standards analysis, it is important to understand the historic context and significance of the resources potentially affected by the proposed project. The North 16th Street Historic District notes:

 Significance (B.1.b.ii). “The properties in the district are unified aesthetically and thematically by their development in one of Sacramento’s primary industrial centers. The design and development of the buildings reflect their original industrial function and share similar patterns of development and design. They were strategically located along spurs of the railroad and the major highway connection of North 16th Street in order to efficiently transport goods to m arket. Reflecting their utilitarian use, the buildings were constructed largely out of unpainted brick in vernacular styles with minimal decoration or embellishment. Many buildings include loading bays and curve to conform to the adjacent railroad tracks. The continuous use of several of these buildings for industrial or commercial purposes is a testament to the functionality of their design. Despite decades of use, renovations, and in some cases neglect, the buildings continue to reflect their historic character.”

 Period of Significance (B.1.b.iI). “The historic district preserves a collection of buildings that are representative of Sacramento’s role as the main terminal and produce distribution point for the region’s agricultural industry from the early - to mid-twentieth century. In particular, the resources in the district reflect the invaluable connection between the establishment of the Central and Southern Pacific Railroads in Sacramento and the growth of these agricultural industries, both of which re presented the major employers for the city’s workforce and contributed to Sacramento’s development into a major metropolitan city.”

 Design Context. The project is located at the center of the North 16th Street Historic District boundaries. Fire Insurance Sanborn Map show Site 200 was associated with Sacramento’s emergence as the hub of the region’s produce industry, as well as its association with the development of the North 16 th Street area into one of Sacramento’s industrial centers. North 16 th Street status as a major distribution point for agriculture produce and automotive center flourished until the 1960’s and eventually declined in the 1980’s, as a result of the opening of the Port of Sacramento in West Sacramento and the construction of in terstate highway around the city diverted automotive traffic from older transportation corridors, such as North 16 th Street. By 1966, the railroad spurs that once played an integral role in the development of the district were taken out of service and removed. By the 1980’s many of the industries that contributed to the North 16 th Street vibrance were declining.

Throughout its history, North 16th Street predominately industrial character and isolation from the city had attracted homeless, transient, and of f-season agricultural workers to the area, a characteristic that persists in the twenty -first century. The proximity of the Southern Pacific Railroad depot contributed to the influx of homeless men to the area, due to the subculture of “hobos” who traveled the country by jumping on and off freight trains. During the Great Depression, Hoovervilles of makeshift shelters sprang up along the American River, levees, and railroad tracks north of Sacramento. These encampments were home to thousands of unemployed w orkers. Drawn by the population of homeless and transients residing in the area, religious and charitable organizations, such as Loaves and Fishes, moved into several buildings along North 16th Street after the industrial and agricultural tenants moved out in the 1980s and began serving the surrounding community. They continue to occupy a large portion of the historic district, particularly the former industrial buildings on North C Street. Meanwhile, commercial and recreational businesses haver replaced ea rlier agricultural and industrial tenants on North 16th Street . Some small residential subdivisions emerged in the area around North 16 th Streets, however, their proximity to the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops – and the railroad company’s increasingly noisy, congested, and polluting industrial activities, made the street and environs undesirable to most residents or commercial establishments.

Staff has added a series of proposed conditions to ensure the restoration of these features and spaces, whic h have been classified by Historic Environment Consultants as being of primary significance, will comply strictly with the Standards as they relate to restoration of original features and materials.

The Standards address four treatments: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. As stated in the applicable federal regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part68) promulgating the Standards, “one set of standards…will apply to a property undergoing treatment, depending on the property’s significance, existing physical condition, the extent of documentation a vailable, and interpretive goals, when applicable.

The Standards will be applied taking into consideration the economic and technical feasibility of each project.” The associated Guidelines have been developed by the National Parks Service to help apply the Standards to a specific type of historic resources.

The purpose of the Standards and associated Guidelines is to provide guidance to those involved in a project involving a historic property before beginning work. The Guidelines are intended as an aid to assist in applying the Standards to all types of historic buildings.

They are not meant to give case -specific advice or address exceptions to unusual conditions. After review of the proposed project staff has concluded the project is consistent with all ten of the Standards:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

The Sacramento Produce Terminal building consists of a large one- and two-story industrial building with a U -shaped plan that wraps around an expansive paved central courtyard, which opens onto North 16th Street. The proposed project will maintain the loading docks and warehouse space along the first and second floor and repurpose the space into commercial services. The north wing will include a five-story residential addition and an eight-story building will be constructed in the central courtyard , stepped back from the brick security tower facing North 16 th Street. While the proposed project does change the use of this building from one focused on food product processing and transportation to a mixed use residential/commercial building, the project would do so causing minimal change to its distinctive materials, f eatures, spaces, and spatial relationships that define the building . The majority of the building’s single-story massing would remain intact. The loading dock, fenestration, brick cladding, and other distinctive materials and features would be preserved and restored. While the large expanse within the center of the structure would be infilled with a new building, the “U - shaped” circulation pattern that helps define the building as an auto-oriented agricultural logistics center would be preserved in the proposed circulation pattern, and the new building would be kept well back from the surrounding loading docks, key features that define the building. The new addition would be constructed within a portion of the widest (northern) wing, which would allow the new addition to be stepped back from the primary facades of the historic building, and allow the two buildings to read as separate structures. Therefore, the adaptive reuse of building at 200 North 16th Street is consistent with Standard No. 1 since the project would allow for adaptive reuse of the building, a manner that preserves the distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships that define the building.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

The character-defining features of the existing building include three long, narrow, one-story wings that form a U-shape around a large central courtyard – two-story towers with red clay tile roofs and blind arched bays, clinker brick cladding, repeating bays of gara ge door openings, long raised concrete loading platforms, covered shed awnings, and multi -lite steel clerestory windows. Materials such as textured and multicolored clinker brick cladding and red clay tile roofing, as well as elements that convey its industrial, utilitarian design, including board formed concrete loading platforms, some original multi-lite steel and wood windows, metal shed awnings, and interior wood post and beam construction , will be preserved and not replicated within the new propos ed project. Therefore, the proposed design is consistent with Standard No. 2.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.

Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural featur es or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

The proposed project does not attempt to mimic historic features or elements from other historic properties. Rather, the proposed new mixed-use buildings strive to stand on its own arc hitectural merits of its own time. The contemporary reinterpretation of historic elements will not create a false sense of historic development as they will use modern materials and composition, including corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plast er, and steel balconies , vinyl storefront windows on all residential units, and block patterning used along street frontages. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 3.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significanc e in their own right will be retained and preserved.

Some changes to the building ha ve occurred over time. These include modifications to the loading dock, doors, windows, and an addition to the service station located at the center of U -shaped footprint. None of these alterations can be considered to have acquired historic significance in their own right. The proposed project would restore the loading dock canopies, windows, doors to the district and building’s period of significance and reverse alterations that detract from the building’s original, historic character , thus, the project com plies with Standard No. 4.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

All distinctive materials, features, finishes, construction techniques, or exa mples of craftsmanship will be preserved on the existing commercial building. The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 14) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance.

These features will be repaired wherever possible, and when not feasible to repair, original features will be replaced in -kind. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 5.

6. Deteriorated hi storic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials.

Replacement of missing f eatures will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 14) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance. Any deteriorated significant materials, features, and finishes will be fully restored as part of the proposed project. Any damage to the existing structure during construction will be repaired to match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Therefor e, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 6.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

While no chemical or p hysical treatments are currently envisioned, if any are proposed, these will be reviewed by qualified preservation staff to ensure compliance with this standard. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 7.

8. Archaeological resources w ill be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

This Standard focuses on known archaeological resources and their protection.

No known archaeological resources are located at the projec t site. Thus, this Standard is not applicable, and the project can be considered consistent with Standard No. 8.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.

The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

As specified in the North 16th Street Historic District Plan discussion, the project was designed to be compatible with adjacent structures, differentiating setback, materiality and not replicate existing styles to clearly delineate historic and new construction. The project steps back the ap artment building from the front and street side facades, which allows the historic building to stand alone, and the use of materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies helps differentiate the new building fro m surrounding historic buildings, while ensuring the building is compatible with historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing which will ensure the protection of the North 16 th Street Historic District and surrounding contributing resources to the district. For these reasons, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 9.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integr ity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

Building One is entirely separate from the surrounding historic building, and preserves the stand alone building within its footprint. Building Two is primarily attached to the northern wing of the historic building, and preserves the one- and two-story building as a base to the new roof top addition, which steps back from the contributing structure. Therefore, if either building were removed in the future, neither the contributing resource nor the district would be impaired. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard Ten No. 10.

The analysis above confirms the project complies with the Standards. As directed by the federal regulations (36 CFR Part 68), staf f has considered the property’s significance, existing physical condition, the existing documentation for the property to conclude that the project is consistent with the Standards and concluded the project could not result in the substantial adverse chang e to the essential physical features necessary to convey the historic significance of the district or contributing resources. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the project.

Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Analysis – Site 211 Grower’s District – P21-024

City Code Section 17.808.180 requires a development project located within a Sacramento Register -listed historic district to be consistent with t he Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (Standards) or meet certain other conditions that would make consistency with the Standards infeasible. In this case, staff has concluded the proposed adaptive reuse is fully consistent with the Standards as they are applied to adaptive reuse projects. When conducting a Standards analysis, it is important to understand the historic context and significance of the resources potentially affected by the proposed project. The North 16th Street Historic District notes:

 Significance (B.1.b.ii). “The properties in the district are unified aesthetically and thematically by their development in one of Sacramento’s primary industrial centers. The design and development of the buildings reflect their original industrial function and share similar patterns of development and design. They were strategically located along spurs of the railroad and the major highway connection of North 16th Street in order to efficiently transport goods to m arket. Reflecting their utilitarian use, the buildings were constructed largely out of unpainted brick in vernacular styles with minimal decoration or embellishment. Many buildings include loading bays and curve to conform to the adjacent railroad tracks. The continuous use of several of these buildings for industrial or commercial purposes is a testament to the functionality of their design. Despite decades of use, renovations, and in some cases neglect, the buildings continue to reflect their historic character.”

 Period of Significance (B.1.b.iI). “The historic district preserves a collection of buildings that are representative of Sacramento’s role as the main terminal and produce distribution point for the region’s agricultural industry from the early - to mid-twentieth century. In particular, the resources in the district reflect the invaluable connection between the establishment of the Central and Southern Pacific Railroads in Sacramento and the growth of these agricultural industries, both of which represented the major employers for the city’s workforce and contributed to Sacramento’s development into a major metropolitan city.”

 Design Context. The project is located at the center of the North 16th Street Historic District boundaries. Fire Insurance Sanborn Map show development of Site 211 began in 1922 with the construction of a new headquarters for the A.

Meister and Sons Company, and was associated with production of automobile, truck, bus, and railcar bodies , and was associated with the development of the North 16th Street area into one of Sacramento’s industrial centers. North 16th Street status as a major distribution point for agriculture produce and automotive center flourished until the 1960’s and eventually declined in the 1980’s, as a result of the opening of the Port of Sacramento in West Sacramento and the construction of interstate highway around the city diverted automotive traffic from older transportation corridors, such as North 16th Street. By 1966, the railroad spurs that once played an integral role in the development of the district were taken out of service and removed. By the 1980’s many of the industries that contributed to the North 16th Street vibrance were declining.

Throughout its history, North 16th Street ‘s predominately industrial character and isolation from the city had attracted homeless, transient, and off -season agricultural workers to the area, a characteristic that persists in the twenty -first century. The proxim ity of the Southern Pacific Railroad depot contributed to the influx of homeless men to the area, due to the subculture of “hobos” who traveled the country by jumping on and off freight trains . During the Great Depression, Hoovervilles of makeshift shelter s sprang up along the American River, levees, and railroad tracks north of Sacramento. These encampments were home to thousands of unemployed workers.

Drawn by the population of homeless and transients residing in the area, religious and charitable organ izations, such as Loaves and Fishes, moved into several buildings along North 16th Street after the industrial and agricultural tenants moved out in the 1980s and began serving the surrounding community. They continue to occupy a large portion of the histo ric district, particularly the former industrial buildings on North C Street. Meanwhile, commercial and recreational businesses haver replaced earlier agricultural and industrial tenants on North 16th Street.

Some small residential subdivisions emerged i n the area around North 16 th Streets, however, their proximity to the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops – and the railroad company’s increasingly noisy, congested, and polluting industrial activities, made the street and environs undesirable to most re sidents or commercial establishments.

The Standards address four treatments: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. As stated in the regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 68) promulgating the Standards, “one set o f standards…will apply to a property undergoing treatment, depending on the property’s significance, existing physical condition, the extent of documentation available, and interpretive goals, when applicable.

The Standards will be applied taking into consideration the economic and technical feasibility of each project. The associated Guidelines have been developed by the National Parks Service to help apply the Standards to a specific type of historic resources.

The purpose of the Standards and associated Guidelines is to provide guidance to those involved in a project involving a historic property before beginning work. The Guidelines are intended as an aid to assist in applying the Standards to all types of historic buildings.

They are not meant to gi ve case -specific advice or address exceptions to unusual conditions. After review of the proposed project staff has concluded the project is consistent with all ten of the Standards:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

Site 211 contains a 25,280-square-foot commercial building with the oldest portion of the building being constructed in 1922 as part of the A. Meister Sons Company auto, truck, bus, and railcar manufacturing plant. In 1932, all but the north gabled wing of the A. Meister Sons Company plant was demolished and incorporated into a new building designed by local Sacramento contractor C.J. Hopkinson for owner George Baxter, who leased units within the building to various tenants. When it was originally constructed, the building contained an automobile service shop, garage, and restaurant. The building continued to be used in an automotive and transportation related capacity until at least 1975. From roughly 1984 to 2021, it was used as Rulands Used Office Furnishings.

Given the goals and vision of the River District Specific Plan to transition from an industrial and heavy commercial district, it is unlikely a similar use would use this property as it was previously used. An important aspect of historic preservation is the thoughtful repurpose and reuse of important resources. An unused property will inevitably be threatened by neglect . Neglect overtime not only causes community blight, but also will threaten the building with complete demolition. The historic uses of Site 211 were commercial and industrial in nature, and the proposed project would preserve key elements of the building for compatible commercial related-uses. The proposed project would rehabilitate the primary face of the north and east building, and roof gables, which have been identified as the most architectural significant portion of the building. While the project proponents have worked to design the new addition as compatible, while differentiating it from the historic building . The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 15) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance. Through careful preservation of the most historic elevations of the building, stepping back the addition from the primary facades, and designing a compatible new addition, this project is consistent with Standard Number 1.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 15) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance. The character-defining features of the existing building include the brick piers and wall, red clay til e roofing, corrugated metal roofing, warehouse windows at ground level, brick gable, ridge line and tile roof , which will be preserved and restored. Therefore, the proposed design conforms to Standard No.

2. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.

Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

The proposed project does not attempt to mimic historic features or elements from other historic properties. Rather, the proposed new mixed-use buildings strive to stand on its own architectural merits of its own time. The contemporary reinterpretation of historic elements will not create a false sense of his toric development as they will use modern materials and composition, including stepping back the building from the front and street side setbacks, such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies , vinyl storefront windows on all residential units, block patterning used along street frontages. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 3.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

The building has had extensive alterations overtime, including the reconstruction of the southwest portion of the building. However, none of these changes are considered to have gained historic significance in their own right. Therefore, removal and reconfiguring these portions of the building to help relate the historic building to the new building, is consistent with Standard Number 4.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 15) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance. All character-defining features, including distinctive materials, features, finishes, construction techniques, or examples of craftsmanship , will be preserved on the existing historic building. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 5.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials.

Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

The Historic Resources Evaluation prepared by Page and Turnbull (Attachment 15) describes the character-defining features from the building’s period of significance. Any significant deteriorated materials, features, and finishes will be fully restored on the existing commercial building. Any damage to the existing structure during construction will be repaired to match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 6.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

While no chemical or physical treatments are curren tly envisioned, if any are proposed, these will be reviewed by qualified preservation staff to ensure compliance with this standard. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 7.

8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserve d in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

This Standard focuses on known archaeological resources and their protection.

No known archaeological resources are located at the project site. Thus, this Standard i s not applicable, and the project can be considered consistent with Standard No. 8.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.

The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

As specified in the North 16th Street Historic District Plan discussion, the project was designed to be compatible with adjacent structures, differentiating setback, materiality and not replicate existing styles to clearly delineate historic and new construction. The project’s use of stepping back the apartment building from the front and street side setbacks allows the historic building to stand alone, and the use of materials such as corrugated metal siding, brick veneer, cement plaster, and steel balconies . These elements help differentiate the new building from surrounding historic buildings, while ensuring the building is compatible with historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing which will ensure the protection of the North 16 th Street Historic District and surrounding contributing resources to the district. For these reasons, the proposed project is consistent with Standard No. 9.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

Since the building is primarily attached to the northern and west wing of the contributing building, retaining the one- and two -story massing, and roof top additions step back from the contributing structure, if removed in the future, neither the contributing resource nor the district would be impaired. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Standard Ten No. 10.

The analysis above confirms the project complies with the Standards. As directed by the federal regulations (36 CFR Part 68), staff has considered the property’s significance, existing physical condition, the existing documentation for the property to conclude th at the project is consistent with the Standards and concluded the project could not result in the substantial adverse change to the essential physical features necessary to convey the historic significance of the district or contributing resources. Therefo re, staff recommends approval of the project.

SACRAMENTO PRODUCE TERMINAL BUILDING
200 NORTH 16TH STREET

HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
[21122]

PREPARED FOR BAUEN CAPITAL, LLC
February 22, 2022

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 4 II. EXISTING HISTORIC STATUS .......................................................................................................................... 5 National Register of Historic Places ......................................................................................................... 5 California Register of Historical Resources ............................................................................................. 5 California Historical Resource Status Codes ........................................................................................... 5 Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources ......................................................................... 6 III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 8 16th Street Façades ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Courtyard Facades .................................................................................................................................... 11 North C Street Façade .............................................................................................................................. 18 Ahern Street Façade ................................................................................................................................. 20 North B Street Facade .............................................................................................................................. 21 Interior Features ........................................................................................................................................... 23 Storage/Security Office & Site Features .................................................................................................... 26 Surrounding Neighborhood ........................................................................................................................ 28 IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT..................................................................................................................................... 30 Early Sacramento History ............................................................................................................................ 30 North 16th Street ........................................................................................................................................... 31 Produce Terminal Markets .......................................................................................................................... 36 V. SITE HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................ 39 Site Development ......................................................................................................................................... 39 Construction Chronology......................................................................................................................... 49 Ownership and Occupant History .............................................................................................................. 53 Ownership History .................................................................................................................................... 53 Known Occupant History ......................................................................................................................... 53 Select Owner and Occupant Biographies .............................................................................................. 55 VI. EVALUATION ................................................................................................................................................ 63 California Register of Historical Resources ............................................................................................... 63 Criterion 1 (Events) ................................................................................................................................... 63 Criterion 2 (Persons) ................................................................................................................................. 64 Criterion 3 (Architecture) ......................................................................................................................... 66 Criterion 4 (Information Potential) ......................................................................................................... 67 Integrity .......................................................................................................................................................... 67 Character-Defining Features ....................................................................................................................... 70 Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 1 February 22, 2022
VII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 73 VIII. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 74 IX. APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................. 79 Appendix A – Original Dean & Dean Architectural Drawings ............................................................. 79 Appendix B – Building Permit Applications ........................................................................................... 80 Appendix C – Preparer Qualifications .................................................................................................... 81 Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 2 February 22, 2022

I. INTRODUCTION
This Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) for the Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street has been prepared at the request of Bauen Capital, LLC in anticipation of a future project at the site. The property consists of an irregularly shaped 3.86-acre parcel located on the west side of North 16th Street between North C Street to the north, Ahern Street to the west, and North B Street to the south (Figure 2 to Figure 3). The building was originally constructed in 1925 for the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company, headed by Edward A. and Albert R. Meister, and was designed by prominent Sacramento architecture firm Dean & Dean. The produce terminal was expanded through 1961 with the construction of several additions that were designed to give the building a unified, cohesive appearance. Although the number of tenants within the building began to decline around 1952, the building continues to be used as a wholesale produce terminal in 2021.

Figure 1. The central city of Sacramento. The approximate location of the subject property is marked with a white arrow.

California State Capitol

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 3 February 22, 2022

Figure 2. Aerial view of the Sacramento Produce Building. Source: Google Maps, 2021. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Figure 3. Assessor's parcel map. The subject parcel is highlighted in red. Source: Sacramento County Assessor's Office. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 4 February 22, 2022

METHODOLOGY
This report Historic Resource Evaluation report provides a summary of the current historic status, a building description, and historic context for the Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 N. 16th Street. Page & Turnbull prepared this report using research collected at various local repositories, including the Center for Sacramento History, Sacramento County Office of the Clerk- Recorder, and the Sacramento Public Library, as well as various online sources including Ancestry.com, the California Digital Newspaper Collection, Newspapers.com, Calisphere.org, and SacMaps.org. Key primary sources consulted and cited in this report include original architectural drawings by Dean & Dean in the Nicholas A. Tomich Collection at the Center for Sacramento History, Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps, Sacramento building permit applications, Sacramento city directories, Sacramento County Assessor’s records, Sacramento water tap records, historical newspapers, and historic aerial photographs. Page & Turnbull staff conducted a site visit to 200 N. 16th Street on June 23, 2021. All photographs within this report were taken at that time, unless otherwise noted.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Upon evaluation of the subject property, Page & Turnbull finds the Sacramento Produce Terminal building to be eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources at the local level of significance under Criterion 1 (Events) for its association with Sacramento’s emergence as the hub of the region’s produce industry, as well as its association with the development of the North 16th Street area into one of Sacramento’s industrial centers. The property is also individually eligible under Criterion 2 for its association with Edward A. and Albert R. Meister, whose efforts as largescale landowners, owners of the A. Meister & Sons Company, and founders of the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company catalyzed the industrial development of the North 16th Street area. Lastly, the building is individually eligible under Criterion 3 as a rare intact example of a produce terminal market building that was constructed in the early to mid-twentieth century. Thus, the property appears to qualify as a historic resource for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 5 February 22, 2022

II. EXISTING HISTORIC STATUS
The following section examines the national, state, and local historic status currently assigned to the Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street.

National Register of Historic Places
The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nation’s most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level.

The subject property is not listed on the National Register.

California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens.

The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.

The subject property is not listed on the California Register.

California Historical Resource Status Codes
Properties listed or under review by the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are listed within the Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) and are assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code (Status Code) of “1” to “7” to establish their historical significance in relation to the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or California Register of Historical Resources (California Register).1 Properties with a Status Code of “1” or “2” are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of “3” or “4” appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of “5” have typically been determined to be locally significant or to have contextual

1 California State Office of Historic Preservation, Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), Sacramento County, updated March 2020.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 6 February 22, 2022

importance. Properties with a Status Code of “6” are not eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of “7” means that the resource has not been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation.

The subject property is listed in the BERD database for Sacramento County with a status code of 5S2, meaning “an individual property that is eligible for local listing or designation.”2 The most recent update to the BERD database was in March 2020.

Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources
The Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources (Sacramento Register) is the City of Sacramento’s official list of properties designated as local landmarks, historic districts, or contributing resources under Chapter 17.604.210 of the Sacramento Municipal Code. The Municipal Code provides criteria that must be met in order for a property to gain historic designation, many of which are similar to the criteria for listing on the National or California Registers.3 The Sacramento Register meets the requirements of a local register of historical resources under CEQA.

The Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street is listed on the Sacramento Register as a contributor to the North 16th Street Historic District.

2 California State Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation, Technical Assistance Bulletin No. 8: User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historical Resource Inventory Directory (Sacramento, November 2004). 3 City of Sacramento Municipal Code, 17.604.210 Criteria and requirements for listing on, and deletion from, the Sacramento register, accessed June 30, 2021, http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-vi-17_604-ii- 17_604_210&frames=on.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 7 February 22, 2022

Figure 4. Map showing the boundaries of the North 16th Street Historic District. The subject property is outlined in a red dotted line. Source: Sacramento Historic District Plans, 2019, 277. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 8 February 22, 2022

III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building consists of a large one- and two-story industrial building with a U-shaped plan that wraps around an expansive paved central courtyard, which opens onto North 16th Street (Figure 5). The building is composed of a north wing along North C Street, a rear wing along Ahern Street, and a south wing along North B Street (Figure 6). The north wing incorporates several large additions along its north side; its northwest corner curves along the path of a railroad spur track that has since been removed. The rear wing features a two-story rectangular volume at the corner of Ahern Street and North B Street. The majority of the building is covered by flat roofs; however, other roof types appear in specific locations. Both the north and south wings terminate in two-story towers, facing North 16th Street, with low pitched hipped roofs and red clay tile covering. A portion of the north wing’s northwest corner is covered by a large arched roof. The building is clad with unpainted bricks laid in common bond that are anchored to the substructure using iron wall anchors and tie rods. Typical fenestration consists of metal roll-up garage doors at the elevated first floor level and a variety of multi-lite steel windows and narrow vents at the clerestory level.

The building is set slightly off the cardinal directions; however, for the purposes of this evaluation, the closest cardinal directions are used.

Figure 5. The Sacramento Produce Terminal building, view northwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 9 February 22, 2022

Figure 6. Aerial view of the Sacramento Produce Building. Source: Google Maps, 2021. Edited by Page & Turnbull.
16th Street Façades
A pair of two-story towers, facing North 16th Street, frame the central courtyard, serving as the monumental main entrance to the property. The towers have a cement plaster base with unpainted clinker brick cladding of a variety of colors and textures above. The west façade of each tower, facing North 16th Street, features two arched blind bays, containing a series of window openings, and wood flag poles affixed with wrought iron brackets. At the south tower, the bays contain large, roughly square openings at the first floor and arched window openings at the second floor, all of which are covered with wood boards (Figure 7). An exterior wood staircase and the east façade of a one-story addition with stucco cladding extend into the central courtyard from of north façade of the south tower. At the north tower, the blind arches contain a metal door at the street level and paired aluminum windows at the second floor (Figure 8). Long narrow openings between the first and second floors are either blind or contain wood framed windows, some of which are covered with wood boards. To the left (south) of the north tower, a brick wall extends into the central courtyard.

To the right (north) of the tower, a shorter, one-story brick façade, also clad with clinker bricks and containing long narrow air vent openings, extends toward North C Street. The west façade of an adjoining addition to the north is clad with common bricks and does not contain any fenestration (Figure 9).

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 10 February 22, 2022

Figure 7. The south tower, view west.

Figure 8. The north tower and east façade of a north addition, view west.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 11 February 22, 2022

Figure 9. Clinker brick on the main portion of the north tower (left) and common brick cladding on an addition (right).

Courtyard Facades
The following description of the facades facing the central courtyard is organized looking from left to right as one faces west toward the courtyard from North 16th Street (Figure 10). The majority of the courtyard facades are characterized by continuous board formed concrete loading platforms that are covered by a long shed awning with metal supports, exposed wood eaves, and metal tension rods. The awning covers repeating concrete bays of garage door openings. Concrete ramps and, in some cases, short wood stairs lead up to the loading platforms from the courtyard. The garage door openings typically contain metal roll-up garage doors, though some have been infilled with plywood, man doors, windows, or other materials. Above the awnings, fixed multi-lite steel windows line are evenly arranged at the clerestory level of the facades.

Figure 10. The central courtyard, looking west from North 16th Street.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 12 February 22, 2022

The south side of the courtyard is enclosed by the north-facing façades of the south wing. This includes the north façades of the south tower and two additions, followed by the north façade of the main portion of the south wing. The north façade of the south tower contains one arched blind bay (Figure 11). A small, one-story office addition with a flat roof, aluminum slider windows, and stucco cladding extends north into the courtyard from the first floor of the tower. The wood staircase along North 16th Street leads to the second story of the tower, which contains a single panel door and an aluminum slider. A slightly taller one-story portion with corrugated metal cladding adjoins the tower to the west. This portion was damaged by a fire in 2018, and openings have been boarded up with plywood. This is followed by a one-story concrete addition that extends north into the courtyard and contains no fenestration. Further to the west, the concrete loading platform beneath the shed awning has been infilled with plywood walls and aluminum slider windows (Figure 12). Adjacent to the concrete addition, corrugated metal walls have been added above the awning to increase the height of the building (Figure 13). Elsewhere, multi-lite steel clerestory windows remain exposed, though metal bands have been installed across them. The far west end of the north-facing courtyard façade is part of the two-story volume at the southwest corner of the building (Figure 14). This portion of the façade extends slightly out into the courtyard and features a dentilled brick cornice.

Concrete loading platforms, shed awnings, and clerestory windows remain exposed at this location.

At the ell with the east-facing courtyard façade, an ADA-accessible concrete ramp with metal pipe handrails leads up to the loading platform level from the courtyard.

Figure 11. The east end of the north-facing courtyard facades, including a fire-damaged portion at center, view southwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 13 February 22, 2022

Figure 12. The main portion of the north-facing courtyard facade with infilled loading platforms, view south.

Figure 13. Corrugated metal roof addition and infilled loading platforms, view southwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 14 February 22, 2022

Figure 14. Two-story portion and loading platform at the west end of the north-facing courtyard facade.

The east-facing façade has a concrete loading platform and shed awning that extends across its full length (Figure 15). Garage openings at its north end have been infilled with vertical wood boards and a sliding aluminum window. Original windows at this end have also been replaced with fixed aluminum windows (Figure 16).

Figure 15. East-facing courtyard facade, view west.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 15 February 22, 2022

Figure 16. An infilled garage door opening (left) and replaced windows (right).

The south-facing courtyard façade similarly features a continuous concrete loading platform that stretches across its entire length and is covered by a long shed awning (Figure 17 and Figure 18).

Several of the bays along this facade have been infilled with brick or plywood; some contain massive wood doors with heavy metal hinges and latches (Figure 19). The west end features the south façade of the north tower (Figure 20). This features an arched blind bay with a solid wood door at the first floor; at the second story, multi-lite wood windows flank two fixed wood windows.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 16 February 22, 2022

Figure 17. The south-facing courtyard façade, view northwest.

Figure 18. Loading platforms, shed awnings, and repeating garage door bays along the south-facing courtyard façade, view northwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 17 February 22, 2022

Figure 19. Heavy wood door with metal latches and hinges.

Figure 20. The south facade of the north tower, view northeast.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 18 February 22, 2022

North C Street Façade
The façade along North C Street consists of the conjoined north facades of a series of additions at the north side of the building. These smaller facades join to form one continuous brick-clad façade that steps up at its east and west ends at slightly taller additions and curves south at its west end along the path of a removed railroad spur (Figure 21 to Figure 23). The façade is punctured by several garage door openings of various sizes and a few multi-lite steel windows. The garage door openings contain metal roll-up or wood garage doors or have been infilled with brick or plywood.

Figure 21. Stepped section at the east end of the North C Street facade.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 19 February 22, 2022

Figure 22. The North C Street facade, view southwest.

Figure 23. Curved walls at the west end of the facade, view southwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 20 February 22, 2022

Ahern Street Façade
The façade facing Ahern Street has an irregular shape that features a straight section with minimal fenestration at its north end before curving outward to a section with foundation level vents, two metal roll-up garage doors, and evenly spaced rectangular vents with wood louvers at the clerestory level. The far south end of the façade consists of the east façade of the two-story volume at the building’s southwest corner. This contains a centered garage door opening and a set of tripartite multi-lite windows at the elevated first floor level. Five fixed metal windows with reflective glass are arranged symmetrically across the second story.

Figure 24. North end of the Ahern Street facade, including curved portion, view northeast.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 21 February 22, 2022

Figure 25. South end of the Ahern Street facade, view east.

North B Street Facade
The façade facing North B Street includes the south façade of the two-story volume at the southwest corner of the building, a long board-formed concrete loading platform, and the south façade of the south tower (Figure 26 and Figure 27). The two-story portion at the west end of the façade includes a metal garage door at the elevated first floor level and six pairs of windows of varying types and materials at the second floor, including aluminum framed windows with reflective glass, double- hung wood windows, and multi-lite metal windows. The concrete loading platform extends from the end of this two-story volume to the south tower. A series of garage door openings line the loading platform. The openings have been infilled with plywood or feature sliding sheet metal doors.

Rectangular vents with wood louvers and a few multi-lite steel windows line the clerestory level above these garage doors. The south façade of the south tower contains an arched blind bay. A garage door opening at the first floor of the bay has been infilled with plywood. Paired second-floor window openings are infilled with brick.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 22 February 22, 2022

Figure 26. The North B Street facade, view northeast.

Figure 27. The North B Street facade, view northwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 23 February 22, 2022

INTERIOR FEATURES
The following brief description of interior spaces inside the subject building is based on select warehouse, storage, and cooler rooms that were accessed during the July 2021 site visit. No office areas were viewed during this visit.

The interior of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building primarily consists of large, double-height open warehouse, storage, and cooler spaces. The wider north wing of the building is generally divided into two halves: an original portion of the building to the south and various conjoined later additions to the north (Figure 28 and Figure 29). These halves are divided by a brick wall that was originally an exterior north façade wall, which runs east-west through the length of the north wing (Figure 30). Additional interior partitions of varying materials subdivide the halves into smaller spaces, such as cooler rooms (Figure 31). The interiors of the warehouses, storage spaces, and cooler rooms typically feature exposed wood post and beam construction, exposed wood ceilings, brick or concrete walls, and concrete floors (Figure 32). Large roll-up or sliding garage doors or wide openings covered with plastic strip curtains commonly provide access to individual interior spaces.

In front of each loading bay, rectangles incised into the concrete floors indicate the original location of scales for weighing produce. High transom level multi-lite steel windows provide natural illumination, while wood vents at the clerestory level provide ventilation and air flow. In many instances, fluorescent lights have been attached to ceiling beams along the lengths of the warehouses to provide additional light.

Figure 28. Interior of a space inside the south half of the north wing, view north.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 24 February 22, 2022

Figure 29. Interior of the north half of the north wing, view northwest.

Figure 30. View looking north from the south half to the north half of the north wing. Note the former exterior wall with clerestory windows that subdivides the halves.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 25 February 22, 2022

Figure 31. A typical cooler room.

Figure 32. Interior of a space inside the south wing, view west.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 26 February 22, 2022

STORAGE/SECURITY OFFICE & SITE FEATURES
The subject building is oriented around a large paved central courtyard that is used for loading and unloading trucks, as well as general parking (Figure 33). A small two-story building is located at the entrance to the courtyard along North 16th Street (Figure 34 and Figure 35). The building is currently used for additional storage and as a security office. It features a one-story concrete structure with a flat roof adjacent to North 16th Street. Two metal roll-up garage doors are located on its north facade. A two-story tower with a hipped roof and boxed overhanging eaves is attached to the west side of the concrete structure. The tower is clad with unpainted clinker bricks at the first story and wood lap siding at the second story. It features a solid door with a metal screen at its north façade and sliding aluminum windows and a second solid door at the second story. An open wood staircase along the west façade of the tower leads from the courtyard to the tower’s second story.

The north and west sides of the property are enclosed by a chain link fence. A surviving steel railroad track bumper from the spur tracks that historically ran along the north side of the building is located at the northeast side of the building near the intersection of North 16th Street and North C Street (Figure 36).

Figure 33. The central courtyard, view southwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 27 February 22, 2022

Figure 34. The storage and security building in the courtyard, view northeast.

Figure 35. The storage and security building in the courtyard, view southwest.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 28 February 22, 2022

Figure 36. A surviving bumper from the removed railroad spur tracks that ran along the north side of the subject building.

SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD
The surrounding neighborhood consists of a variety of industrial and commercial buildings oriented around North 16th Street, one of the primary transportation arteries into and out of downtown Sacramento. The buildings primarily date to the first half of the twentieth century and are mostly one-story, double-height buildings, though some extend to two stories. Directly across from the subject property is a used furniture store at 211-217 North 16th Street that was originally built between 1922 and 1932 as a garage, auto service station, and restaurant and the former W.A. Ward Seed Company building (built 1925) (Figure 37 and Figure 38). To the south is the Sacramento Pipe Works building (built 1923), which has been adaptively reused as a rock climbing gym (Figure 39). To the north are a series of one-story brick industrial buildings of varying uses (Figure 40).

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 29 February 22, 2022

Figure 37. 211-217 North 16th Street, view southeast.

Figure 38. The W.A. Ward Seed Company Building at
235 North 16th Street, view northeast (2018).

Figure 39. Sacramento Pipe Works building to the
south of the subject property, view northwest (2018).

Figure 40. Brick warehouses to the north of the
subject property along North C Street, view
northeast.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 30 February 22, 2022

IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT

EARLY SACRAMENTO HISTORY
Similar to other California cities, the earliest recorded exploration of the Sacramento area was by Spanish explorers and missionaries. In 1808, Gabriel Moraga, the first recorded European to visit the Sacramento Valley, traveled northward along the Sacramento River in search of suitable sites for a future mission. Though Moraga did not settle in the area, he did open up new possibilities for discovery. At this time, the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers consisted mainly of an oak-studded grassland, which was frequently flooded by these two rivers.

For the next two decades, various travelers explored the river and its surroundings, but did not establish any permanent settlements. In 1839, John Sutter, along with a few Hawaiian and European settlers, established a fort on the land known as New Helvetia, which was given to them as part of an agreement with the Mexican government. Sutter’s Fort served defensive as well as commercial purposes due to the ever-increasing number of immigrants coming into the area. Sutter introduced the first horticultural enterprises at this time with the planting of wheat, orchards, and vineyards. In an attempt to expand his valley empire, Sutter erected a sawmill at Coloma, which led to the accidental discovery of gold in the area in 1848.

The subsequent Gold Rush brought a massive influx of miners and immigrants into the area. This event quickly overturned the ranch economy and led to the rapid growth of the city, now known as Sacramento. The proximity to the mouth of the American River made Sacramento an ideal port for goods coming upriver from San Francisco en route to the gold fields. However, this location also welcomed a host of problems including frequent flooding. By 1848, the streets of Sacramento were laid out, and the city’s population quickly rose from 150 in April 1849 to 9,087 in the following year.

When California was admitted to the Union in 1850, Sacramento’s rising population and potential as an economic hub made the city a logical choice as the capital by 1854.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 31 February 22, 2022

Figure 41. Flood in Sacramento, 1862. Source:

California State Library.

Figure 42. View of the State Capitol Building, 1880s.

Source. California State Library.

NORTH 16TH STREET4
The North 16th Street Historic District preserves a concentration of buildings that were once part of a busy industrial and automotive corridor that grew up on the blocks surrounding North 16th Street to the north of Sacramento’s central city and directly east of the Central/Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops.

Unlike most areas within Sacramento’s original street grid, North 16th Street never attracted substantial residential or commercial development. The street and its surrounding blocks were located near the channel of the American River, where flooding was common. After particularly devastating floods in the winter of 1861-1862, the Central Pacific Railroad, later renamed the Southern Pacific Railroad (S.P.R.R.) in the 1880s, agreed to construct a new northern levee along B Street to aid the city’s flood control efforts in return for the right to lay the tracks of its primary transcontinental route along a right-of-way on B Street.5 The levee and railroad tracks created a physical and visual barrier that cut North 16th Street off from the rest of the city, limiting transportation and access to the area. Additional efforts to protect the city from floods by redirecting the channel of the American River north in 1868 created a flood plain between this new channel and the city where North 16th Street was located. In the early twentieth century, the area was dubbed a “no man’s land” by locals because it represented an unpopulated area between the City of Sacramento and North Sacramento.6 Development remained limited until 1905, when the

4 The historic context for North 16th Street is adapted and updated from the “16th Street Historic District Plan,” produced by Page & Turnbull in 2019.
5 Richard J. Orsi, “Railroads and the Urban Environment: Sacramento’s Story,” in River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region, ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2013), 83-84.
6 “’No Man’s Land’ Bristles With Industrial Plants,” Sacramento Bee, 14 September 1942.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 32 February 22, 2022

original channel of the American River and the swamplands to the north of the river were reclaimed in the early twentieth century.7

Figure 43. Map of Sacramento, showing the original and new channels of the American River and north section of the city (1874). The approximate location of the subject property is marked with a red arrow. Source: Library & Archives, California State Railroad Museum, Sacramento, CA, edited by Page & Turnbull.

Although some small residential subdivisions emerged in the area around North 16th Street, its proximity to the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops—and the railroad company’s increasingly noisy, congested, polluting, and dangerous industrial activities—made the street and its environs undesirable to most residents or commercial establishments and dictated that industrial development would dominate the area.8 Land reclamation efforts and improved transportation and access to the area north of the levee spurred industrial development along North 16th Street in the first decades of the twentieth century. In 1915, the 16th Street Bridge was constructed across the American River as part of the Lincoln Highway (later State Route 160 and U.S. Route 40), which included a section running down North 16th Street through the heart of Sacramento. The highway was the first coast-to-coast road in the United States and transformed 16th Street into a busy corridor for automobile and truck travel. Automobile camps and businesses oriented toward the automobile and trucking industries sprang up along the road to serve travelers.9 One of the first

7 Historic Environment Consultants, “River District Architectural and Historical Property Survey Update,” (report, City of Sacramento, 2009), 9-10.
8 “Railroads and the Urban Environment,” 89-90; Historic Environment Consultants, 10. 9 Historic Environment Consultants, 9-10.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 33 February 22, 2022

industrial buildings constructed in the area was the A. Meister & Sons Company automobile manufacturing plant at 211 North 16th Street, completed in 1922.10

Industrial development along North 16th Street increased in the 1920s with the completion of further transportation improvements into the area. In 1924, a dangerous and congested at-grade crossing of 16th Street over the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the B Street levee was replaced by a below-grade crossing. The same year, spur tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad were extended into the area. Improved vehicular access to the area and connections to the main railroad lines catalyzed a period of increased development in the area.11 Several warehousing and distribution facilities were built in the early decades of the twentieth century, many of which served the agricultural industry and contributed to North 16th Street’s transformation into the principal produce distribution center for the region.12 In 1925, the Sacramento Produce Terminal opened at 200 North 16th Street, becoming the distribution hub for the Sacramento region’s wholesale produce industry.

Its completion attracted other agricultural industries to North 16th Street. This included an agricultural seed storage, milling, and cleaning facility for the W.A. Ward Seed Company at 221 North 16th Street, also in 1925. The following year, the Triangle Produce Company occupied several buildings on North C Street.13

Other industries also moved into the area in the 1920s and 1930s, drawn by its easy access to several major transportation routes. Many of these facilities were constructed beside spurs of the Southern Pacific Railroad’s tracks to enable the direct and efficient transportation of goods and materials.14 Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Company (later the Sacramento Pipe Works), a steel pipe manufacturing plant, operated at the corner of North 16th and North B streets from 1923 through the 1970s.15 Other businesses in the area included beverage distribution companies, a manufacturing plant for heavy-duty scales, and oil storage facilities.16 Automobile camps and businesses oriented toward the automobile and trucking industries also sprang up along the road to serve travelers.17 These included the headquarters for two major commercial trucking companies, the Mack Truck International Corp. and F.B. Hart Trucking Co., which occupied the building at 470

10 Page & Turnbull, “211-217 North 16th Street HRE,” 2021. 11 “Three Plans Will Avoid Sixteenth Street Crossings,” Sacramento Bee, 5 February 1924. 12 Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 1998), 2. 13 Paula Boghosian, “W.A. Ward Seed Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Triangle Produce Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “1501 N. C Street,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building.” 14 Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building,” 1. 15 Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Pipe Works,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 16 Paula Boghosian, “Acme Beverage Co.,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “1610- 1620 North C Street,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 17 Ibid., 9-10.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 34 February 22, 2022

North 16th Street at separate times from 1929 until the late 1950s.18 Automotive repair shops, parts distributors, and gas and oil stations were also common along the busy automotive thoroughfare.

These included the Western Body Company at 235 North 16th Street, Flying “A” gas station at 318 North 16th Street, and truck and auto service shops that replaced the A. Meister & Company building at 211-217 North 16th Street in the 1930s.19 By 1943, North 16th Street’s previous identity as a “no man’s land” was considered a misnomer, and the area was bristling with industrial plants.20

Figure 44. The Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Co. pipeworks situated along a spur of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks (ca. 1900). Source: Center for Sacramento History, Frank Christy Collection, 1998/722/0299.

Tenants came and went over the decades, but fire insurance maps published by the Sanborn Map Company in 1952 show that an agricultural and industrial character persisted through the middle of the twentieth century. By then, the California Packing Corporation’s canning operations had expanded from its site on C Street to several buildings on North 16th Street, including the former Triangle Produce Company complex. The Sixteenth Street Bean and Grain Cleaner occupied facilities

18 Paula Boghosian, “Mack Truck International Corp., Crest Carpet Co.,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009).
19 Paula Boghosian, “Western Body Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Russell Brothers Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Flying ‘A’ Gas Station Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 20 “’No Man’s Land’ Bristles With Industrial Plants,” Sacramento Bee, 14 September 1942; “No Man’s Land’ Now is Misnomer,” Sacramento Bee, 30 March 1955.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 35 February 22, 2022

on the same block.21 Many automotive businesses continued to line the corridor, especially to the north where North 16th Street connected to two major freeways.

North 16th Street’s status as a major distribution point for agricultural produce and automotive center began to shift in the 1960s. In 1963, the deep water channel of the Port of Sacramento opened in West Sacramento.22 The Port was built to serve as an inland port for the agricultural industry and specialized in the movement of agricultural goods.23 Its completion drew this kind of activity away from traditional shipping and distribution centers in Sacramento.24 Meanwhile, the construction of interstate highways around the city diverted automotive traffic from older transportation corridors, such as North 16th Street.25 By 1966, the railroad spurs that had played an integral role in the development of an industrial corridor along North 16th Street were taken out of service and removed.26

By the 1980s, many of the industries that had contributed to North 16th Street’s vibrance were declining. In 1981, the California Packing Company closed its Del Monte canning facilities, which had employed many Sacramentans. Blue Diamond Growers moved into the company’s canning facilities along the B Street levee a few years later. Also in 1981, the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops, which had driven much of the industrial development of North 16th Street, began to shrink in size and labor force. The workshops finally closed in 1999.27

Throughout its history, North 16th Street‘s predominately industrial character and isolation from the city had attracted homeless, transient, and off-season agricultural workers to the area, a characteristic that persists in the twenty-first century. The proximity of the Southern Pacific Railroad depot contributed to the influx of homeless men to the area, due to the subculture of “hobos” who traveled the country by jumping on and off freight trains.28 During the Great Depression, Hoovervilles of makeshift shelters sprang up along the American River, levees, and railroad tracks north of Sacramento. These encampments were home to thousands of unemployed workers.29

21 Sanborn Map Company, Sacramento, California [map], vol. 1, 1915-Jan. 1951. 22 Steven Avella, Sacramento: Indomitable City (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2003), 124. 23 “Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel Limited Reevaluation Report (LRR) with Project Economic Analysis,” (report, US Army Corps of Engineers, 2011), https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/portals/68/docs/srdwsc/appendix_e.pdf. 24 Environmental Science Associates, “R Street Corridor Historic District Survey Report,” (report, City of Sacramento Preservation Commission, 2017), 8.
25 William Burg, Sacramento’s K Street: Where Our City Was Born (Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2012), 137-183. 26 Dudek, “Cultural Resources Report for the Blue Diamond Growers (BDG) A Street Annex Building Project,” 2018, 20. 27 Avella, 147-148.
28 Historic Environment Consultants, 12.
29 Gary Brechin and Lee M.A. Simpson, “Unseen Investment: New Deal Sacramento,” in River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region, ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2013), 187.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 36 February 22, 2022

Drawn by the population of homeless and transients residing in the area, religious and charitable organizations, such as Loaves and Fishes, moved into several buildings along North 16th Street after the industrial and agricultural tenants moved out in the 1980s and began serving the surrounding community. They continue to occupy a large portion of the historic district, particularly the former industrial buildings on North C Street.30 Meanwhile, commercial and recreational businesses have replaced earlier agricultural and industrial tenants on North 16th Street.

PRODUCE TERMINAL MARKETS
Produce terminals are a unique type of building that combines industry, agriculture, and commerce.

Often constructed in the urban core of a city, they were considered the center of the produce universe. Prior to the early twentieth century, produce markets in many urban areas consisted of daily open-air street markets that took place on a cluster of streets in the downtown area in which growers sold their goods from stalls or directly to customers from their wagons or trucks. Starting around late 1910s and 1920s, these ad hoc produce markets began to be centralized into modern, purpose-built facilities, commonly called produce terminal markets. Among these early twentieth- century produce terminals constructed in major cities in the United States were the Union Terminal Annex in Los Angeles (opened in 1917), South Water Market in Chicago (opened in 1925), and Pittsburgh Produce Terminal in Pittsburgh (opened in 1926).31

Produce terminals often consisted of one or more long, narrow one- to three-story buildings constructed along a combination of major transportation networks, such as railroad tracks, major urban streets, and waterways. Long loading platforms faced these transportation networks so that produce could be quickly loaded into and out of the terminal onto railcars, trucks, or boats waiting on either side. Direct connection to multiple methods of transportation allowed perishable fruits and vegetables to be quickly, efficiently, and safely transported from major growing centers to markets around the country. No longer were individual growers responsible for selling their goods directly to customers. Instead, they could sell large hauls of produce to wholesalers and let them sell to buyers. Produce terminals in the early twentieth century also introduced modern sanitation and cooling methods and other design elements to help preserve perishable fruits and vegetables before they were sold to market.32 The buildings were generally utilitarian in design, with minimal ornamentation and occasionally subtle nods to popular architectural styles. In spite of this, they were sometimes designed by prominent architecture firms. The Union Terminal Annex in Los

30 Historic Environment Consultants, 13.
31 Janice M. Kresin, “Terminal Markets: The Center of the Produce Universe,” The Packer, 3 December 2019, accessed July 29, 2020, https://d22t9forbost52.cloudfront.net/news/industry/terminal-markets-center-produce-universe; “They ‘Step on It,” Los Angeles Times, 5 July 1931.
32 Kresin, “Terminal Markets: The Center of the Produce Universe.” Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 37 February 22, 2022

Angeles, for instance, was designed by architect John Parkinson, who also designed the Los Angeles City Hall and the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.33

The development of produce terminals in the late 1920s and 1930s helped catalyze the growth of California’s produce industry. However, produce terminals appear to have been mostly limited to major urban cities. As a result, research indicates that only a small number were constructed in California the first half of the twentieth century. When the Union Terminal Annex was completed in Los Angeles in 1917, it was the second largest wholesale produce terminal in the world. It was soon joined by two additional produce terminals, the Ninth Street Produce Terminal a few blocks away, and the Central Manufacturing District Terminal, built in 1928, just outside the Los Angeles city limits at Downey Road and District Boulevard in the city of Vernon. The Union Terminal Annex, now known as the Seventh Street Produce Market, survives and continues to host produce markets as part of the ROW DTLA redevelopment.34 Sacramento constructed its first produce terminal in 1925, followed by a second in 1933. San Jose opened its own produce terminal in 1932, but it was phased out in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It was reopened in 1996; however, research did not reveal its current status.35 In San Francisco, the city’s produce market consisted of a cluster of one- and two- story warehouses that were constructed around Washington, Sacramento, Front, Battery, Davis, Sansome, and Clay streets after the 1906 earthquake and fire. Efforts were repeatedly made to replace this market with a modern facility, but it wasn’t until 1963 that a new terminal, the Golden Gate Terminal, was opened in South San Francisco. Following its completion, the old produce market district was demolished to make way for the Golden Gateway Redevelopment Project.36

33 Jean Trinh, “100 Years of Changes at Downtown’s Historic Seventh Street Produce Market,” LA Weekly, 12 October 2017, accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.laweekly.com/100-years-of-changes-at-downtowns-historic-seventh-street-produce- market/.
34Trinh, “100 Years of Changes at Downtown’s Historic Seventh Street Produce Market.” 35 Michael McCabe, “Farmers Market Sets Up in Historic Spot,” SFGate, 24 May 1996, accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Farmers-Market-Sets-Up-in-Historic-Spot-San-2981203.php. 36 “Wente Heads Produce Fete,” The Times (San Mateo, CA), 21 August 1963; “Great Saving of Time Seen by Retailers,” San Francisco Examiner, 5 February 1927; Chris Carlsson, “Produce Market,” FoundSF.org, accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=Produce_Market.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 38 February 22, 2022

Figure 45. The Union Annex in Los Angeles, undated.

Source: Los Angeles Public Library.

Figure 46. Detail of the Union Terminal Annex in Los
Angeles, ca. 1900. Source: USC Digital Library.

Figure 47. Pittsburgh Produce Terminal, Pittsburg,
Pennsylvania, undated. Source: Historic Pittsburgh.

Figure 48. South Water Market in Chicago, Illinois,
undated. Source: Chicagology.com.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 39 February 22, 2022

V. SITE HISTORY

SITE DEVELOPMENT
The land on which the subject building is located was transferred from J.B. and Agnes Rowray and Flora M. Moulton to brothers Edward A. Meister and Albert R. Meister in January 1925. A few days later, newspaper articles in The Sacramento Bee announced that the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company, formed by Edward and Albert Meister, had begun construction on a new produce terminal and market building at the site.37 The produce terminal was intended to replace Sacramento’s existing produce wholesaling system, which consisted of nightly street sales and car- door deliveries on I Street between 3rd Street and 5th Street in downtown Sacramento, and centralize all of the city’s wholesale produce business in a single facility with modern conveniences, up-to-date sanitation, and improved connections to rail and road transportation networks.38

Almost immediately after construction began on the new produce terminal, the development began to attract new agricultural industries to North 16th Street. In March 1925, the W.A. Ward Seed Company announced it would relocate to a new two-story warehouse, seed cleaning plant, and offices at North 16th and North B streets. According to an article published in The Sacramento Bee at the time, “the proximity to the terminal caused the decision to locate in that industrial section.”39

The Sacramento Produce Terminal building was completed in May 1925 at an estimated cost of roughly $300,000.40 Upon its opening, The Sacramento Bee declared “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California.” The building was designed by prominent Sacramento architecture firm Dean & Dean after months of studying similar produce terminal buildings in other cities around the country.41 The concept and design of the terminal appears to have been strongly influenced by Edward Meister, who was credited with coming up with the idea of unifying the region’s wholesale produce activity in one location in which “everything has been provided for the comfort and convenience of the man and his vehicle.”42

Initially, the produce terminal consisted of two separate buildings arranged on the north and south sides of a 170-foot-wide central courtyard, containing a long covered concrete platform that ran

37 “Work Started on Produce Terminal,” Sacramento Bee, 12 January 1925. 38 “New Produce Terminal Centralized Wholesale Business in This City,” Sacramento Bee, 29 May 1925. 39 “Ward Seed Firm to Build Plant Costing $60,000,” Sacramento Bee, 26 March 1925. 40 “Sacramento Elks to Erect $1,000,000 Home,” Lincoln News Messenger (Lincoln, CA), 16 January 1925. 41 “New Produce Terminal Centralized Wholesale Business in This City.” 42 “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California,” Sacramento Bee, 29 May 1925.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 40 February 22, 2022

east-west down its center.43 The courtyard was designed to be large enough to prevent traffic congestion for the hundreds of trucks that were expected to drive through daily and provide plenty of light and space for handling the perishable food products.44 The courtyard also included a gas and oil station at its center, facing North 16th Street, which operated day and night to allow truck operators to refuel.45

Each of the two buildings were about 380 feet long and were constructed of reinforced concrete with concrete platforms that were elevated to railcar height at the rear and truck height at the front to minimize the effort of loading and unloading produce. The buildings were clad with brick and were designed with double-height ceilings and ample ventilation to provide for the free circulation of cool air at all times, considered essential due to the perishable nature of agricultural produce.46 Both buildings terminated in two-story towers facing North 16th Street with low pitched hipped roofs and red clay tiles. The north tower contained offices for the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company, while the south tower contained additional offices and a restaurant to feed hungry workers.47

The south building was designed for produce wholesalers, also known as “jobbers,” who purchased produce in bulk and sold it to retailers. The north building, meanwhile, was specifically intended for use by “carload” or “carlot” buyers and shippers, who purchased produce from growers at the central platform and loaded them onto railcars to take the freshly grown produce to other markets as quickly as possible. These railcars arrived at the terminal via two parallel spur tracks that ran from the Southern Pacific Railroad’s main line on the B Street levee around the west and north sides of the produce terminal. The tracks could accommodate 52 refrigerated rail cars and were designed to give the produce firms inside the building direct access to two railcars at the same time from the rear sides of the buildings. This allowed for the possibility of loading and unloading two cars at a time, one from a road that ran between the spur tracks and another directly from loading platforms at the rear of the terminal. Direct and efficient access to the produce terminal was considered a boon that “[gave the] Sacramento produce business the incentive to growth that it never before possessed, and which [was] claimed to be the cause of the slow growth of the produce business [in Sacramento], [due to] the essential qualification of moving perishable fruit quickly.”48

43 “Produce Business Now Located in Terminal North of City Subway,” Sacramento Bee, 11 July 1925; Dean & Dean Architects, “Produce Terminal & Market for Sacramento Produce Terminal Co.” [architectural drawings], Nicholas A. Tomich Collection, 1898/005/001, Center for Sacramento History.
44 “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California.” 45 “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California;” “Produce Business Now Located in Terminal North of City Subway.”
46 “New Produce Terminal Centralized Wholesale Business in This City.” 47 “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California.” 48 “Produce Business Now Located in Terminal North of City Subway.” Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 41 February 22, 2022

Figure 49. First floor plan, Dean & Dean Architects. Source: Center for Sacramento History.

Figure 50. Elevation drawings, Dean & Dean Architects, Source: Center for Sacramento History.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 42 February 22, 2022

The covered central platform was the busiest place in the produce terminal. At 30 feet wide and 380 feet long, it was the location where local produce growers displayed and sold their goods to buyers operating trucks from nearby cities, as well as local produce supply merchants. Jobbers from the south building would also take some of their goods to the central platform and exchange imported or non-local produce there for locally grown foods. When the terminal opened, 66 produce businesses had already leased space on the central platform.49

Figure 51. The Sacramento Produce Terminal building, undated. Source: Center for Sacramento History.

Figure 52. The Sacramento Produce Terminal Building, 1925. Source: “Sacramento is Fruit and Produce Hub for Rich Valley,” Sacramento Bee, 29 May 1925.

49 “Produce Business Now Located in Terminal North of City Subway.”

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 43 February 22, 2022

Figure 53. The Sacramento Produce Terminal in the 1920s. Source: “Remember When,’ Sacramento Bee, 3 July 1983.

Figure 54. Trucks at loading platforms at the Sacramento Produce Terminal building, 1934. Source: “Sacramento Has Big Business as Produce Shipper,” Sacramento Bee, 12 May 1934.

Alterations to the property began almost immediately after the facility opened. In June 1925, the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company contracted with John T. and Thomas B. Hall to construct refrigeration additions to the terminal at a cost of more than $41,000.50 The additions were likely for the Pacific Fruit and Produce Company, which had signed a ten-year lease at the building and was reported to have begun construction on a new building at the rear of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building the same month. The addition included a “complete ice plant, cold storage rooms, and a seven-car capacity banana curing room, where imported bananas will be cured for the market on arrival.”51 This work aligns with architectural drawings Dean & Dean prepared in 1925 for an

50 “Three New Building Contracts Are Filed,” Sacramento Bee, 18 June 1925. 51 “Produce Firm Enters State on Big Scale,” Sacramento Bee, 20 June 1925.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 44 February 22, 2022

addition, containing a “banana room” at the west side of the north and south buildings, which connected the two buildings and completed the terminal’s distinctive U-shape.52

When the Sacramento Produce Terminal building opened in 1925 it was one of only a handful of buildings that had been completed along North 16th Street. The largest buildings in the immediate vicinity of the produce terminal included the A. Meister & Sons Company automobile manufacturing plant (built in 1922), Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Company pipe works building (built in 1923), and W.A.

Ward Seed Company building (built in 1925) (Figure 55).

Figure 55: 1928 aerial photograph. The subject property is outlined in red. Source: Flight C-163, Frame D-1, Fairchild Aerial Surveys, UCSB Library, FrameFinder. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Upon the terminal’s opening in 1925, the amount of produce passing through the terminal was estimated to be worth more than $2.2 million a year. Hundreds of trucks, representing over 400 local growers, reportedly arrived at the terminal on a daily basis.53 By 1929, The Sacramento Bee reported that the terminal’s success at uniting industry and agriculture had helped Sacramento attain “the position of being the fruit and produce hub of the great Sacramento Valley.” Because of its status as the largest city in Central California, surrounded by rich farmland with immediate access

52 Dean & Dean Architects, “Produce Terminal & Market for Sacramento Produce Terminal Co.” [architectural drawings], Nicholas A. Tomich Collection, 1898/005/001, Center for Sacramento History. 53 “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California.” Schaw, Ingram, and Batcher
Company building
A. Meister & Sons Company
building
W.A. Ward Seed
Company building
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 45 February 22, 2022

to railroad freight service, Sacramento had come to serve as “the main outlet for the millions of dollars’ worth of crops taken from the soil of Superior California.”54

Reflecting Sacramento’s growing role in the region’s agricultural industry, a second wholesale produce market for the city was constructed in 1933 to the south of Y Street (now Broadway) between 3rd and 5th streets. This second terminal was built by the New Market Development Company, a cooperative of 102 Sacramento-area growers, and was designed by architect W.E.

Coffman.55 A piece of this produce terminal survives at the site of The Mill residential development.

The following year, the Sacramento County commissioner reported that he believed only Los Angeles County had a larger distribution of produce than Sacramento County, because Sacramento possessed the only produce markets between Portland, Oregon to the north and Salt Lake City, Utah to the east. Hundreds of produce trucks from Sacramento traveled to Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, and Washington every month.56 In the 1940s, traffic around the Sacramento Produce Terminal building became so congested that the County Engineer and state highway department officials were solicited for help.

Historic aerial photographs reveal that the Sacramento Produce Terminal was repeatedly expanded between the late 1930s and 1960s. By 1937, a long rectangular addition had been constructed at the north side of the north wing, adjacent to North 16th Street (Figure 56). This addition was expanded to the north sometime before 1947 (Figure 57). It was again expanded slightly to the west between 1947 and 1952 (Figure 58). During this same period, a large addition with a curved façade was completed at the northwest corner of the terminal, and the central platform was at least partially demolished and replaced with parking. Building permits for the construction of a $2,500 addition and a $5,000 warehouse were issued in 1955 and 1957, respectively, though the exact location of these additions is unknown.57 By this period, historic aerial photographs show that the central platform and gas station had been completely removed (Figure 59). By 1961, aerial photographs reveal that a small gap between additions on the north side of the building had been filled in, completing the existing footprint of the north wing (Figure 60). This may have been the warehouse addition described in 1957. Sometime between 1966 and 1998, a small two-story building was constructed on the site of the gas station (Figure 61).

54 “Sacramento Is Fruit and Produce Hub for Rich Valley,” Sacramento Bee, 29 May 1925. 55 “Produce Market Homes Ordered,” Sacramento Bee, 22 August 1933. 56 “Sacramento Has Big Business as Produce Shipper,” Sacramento Bee, 12 May 1934.” 57 “Inspector Reports Decrease in Construction,” Sacramento Bee, 12 May 1955.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 46 February 22, 2022

In 1960, the North 16th Street area was formally annexed into the City of Sacramento.58 Thus, the earliest building permit records for the subject property that are on file with the City of Sacramento date to the 1960s. In 1967, a small stucco-clad office addition and an exterior wood staircase was added at the north side of the south tower. Other alterations recorded in building permit records between the late 1960s and 1990s include the construction of a concrete slab and restraining walls inside a warehouse, completion of a small exterior concrete ramp along the south side of the courtyard, installation of frame and stucco partitions inside an office area, installation of roof condensers, re-roofing, repairs to fire damage in 1975, enlargement of an office building in 1980, and various unspecified work to remodel portions of the building.59

Although the Sacramento Produce Terminal has continued to operate in its original use through the present day, a transition in activity at the building appears to have occurred following World War II.

Whereas approximately 15 to 20 businesses occupied the produce terminal from the 1920s to 1945, between 1952 to 1961, that number fell to less than 10.60 By 1966, the spur tracks that had serviced the building were removed.61

Additional changes have occurred more recently. In 2018, a four-alarm fire damaged a portion of the south wing, adjacent to the south tower. At the time, this area of the building was reported to have been vacant for at least the previous six months.62 Other alterations to the building that are not clearly documented in building permit records but which were visible during a June 2021 site visit include infilling many of the loading platforms along the south wing with plywood, adding a corrugated metal rooftop addition on the south wing, replacing windows in the two-story portion at the southwest corner of the building with metal framed windows and reflective glass, and infilling or replacing various other windows or doors throughout the building with a variety of different materials.

58 “City of Sacramento Historical Growth by Annexation,” City of Sacramento, accessed July 21, 2021, https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Long-Range/New- Growth/AnnexationHistory_A.pdf?la=en.
59 Building permit records, City of Sacramento.
60 Sacramento city directories, Ancestry.com.
61 Dudek, “Cultural Resources Report for the Blue Diamond Growers (BDG) A Street Annex Building Project,” 2018, 20. 62 “Large Blaze at Warehouse Under Investigation,” Sacramento Bee, 21 October 2018.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 47 February 22, 2022

Figure 56. Aerial photograph, 1937. Source: Flight
ABC-1937, Frame 110-91, Laval Company Inc, UCSB
Library FrameFinder

Figure 57. Aerial photograph, 1947. Source:

HistoricAerials.com.

Figure 58. Aerial photograph, 1952. Source: Flight
PAI-ABC, Frame Y5-125, Pacific Air Industries, UCSB
Library FrameFinder.

Figure 59. Aerial photograph, 1957, Source:

HistoricAerials.com.

Figure 60. Aerial photograph, 1961. Source: Flight-
CAS-SAC, Frame 2-192, Cartwright Aerial Surveys,
UCSB Library Frame.

Figure 61. Aerial photograph, 1998. Source:

HistoricAerials.com.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 48 February 22, 2022

Figure 62. Chronology diagram, showing major exterior additions and alterations to the building over time.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 49 February 22, 2022

Construction Chronology
The following table provides a timeline of construction activity at the Sacramento Produce Terminal building based on building permit applications on file with the City of Sacramento. Cancelled and expired permits and those pertaining to mechanical, electrical, or plumbing work are not included.

Date Filed Permit
App, # Owner Contractor(s) Work
9/22/1967 F-8531 Sacramento
Produce Terminal
Bill Rumberger,
architect
Edwards Case &
Construction,
contractor
Construct office addition to
produce terminal, $3,300
3/20/1968 F-9854 Sacramento
Produce Terminal
W.J. Alexander,
architect
Edwards Case &
Construction,
contractor
Construct slab and restraining walls
in warehouse
6/13/1968 G-648 Sacramento
Produce Terminal
Edward Case
Construction
Construct concrete ramp at
warehouse
1/18/1971 G-9893 Sacramento
Produce Terminal Edward Case Co. Install frame and stucco partitions for office area in produce terminal
12/3/1973 A-9512 Sacramento
Produce Co. Owner Remodel portion
12/17/1973 A-9808 Sacramento
Produce Co. Owner Remodel portion
12/31/1973 A-11056 General Produce Cardinal
Refrigeration Install roof condensers
1/11/1974 A-11277 General Produce Alex Engardt
Roofing Reroof comm. building
4/1/1975 C-2104 Sacramento
Produce Terminal
Petersen &
Associates Repair fire damage to warehouse
10/13/1976 D-8123 Ed McCormack Alex Engardt
Roofing Re-roof, partial only
7/12/1980 F-6366 Ed McCormack Alex Engardt
Roofing Re-roofing
5/22/1980 H-3470 Sacramento
Produce Zero Line Prod. Enlarge office building
9/6/1991 A-5142-C Rohrer Bros.

Products Not listed Remodel office space

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 50 February 22, 2022

DEAN & DEAN, ARCHITECT
The architecture firm of Dean & Dean was formed in Sacramento by brothers Charles F. Dean (1884- 1956) and James S. Dean (1885-1962) in 1922 and remained active until 1929. The brothers were born and raised in Belton, Texas. Both were educated at Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College (Texas A&M). Charles studied civil engineering, while James received a degree in architecture.

Following their graduations from Texas A&M, the brothers’ careers diverged for a period of time.

Charles spent two years working in San Antonio followed by seven years with the firm of Englehart and Engelhart in Chicago. In 1908, he moved to California in response to a call for draftsmen and architects to help rebuild San Francisco following the 1906 earthquake and fire. After a few months of working in San Francisco, he arrived in Sacramento, where he worked as chief designer for the office of the state architect until 1922.63 James followed his graduation from Texas A&M with additional architectural studies at the Boston Institute of Technology (now the Massachusetts Institute of Technology). He then worked as a draftsman in Texas for two years before joining the engineering department of the Santa Fe Railway in 1905. In 1906, he returned to Texas A&M to serve as a drawing instructor, and in 1911, he became a special instructor in architecture at the university.

The same year, he opened a short-lived general architecture practice in Waco, Texas that operated until 1912. That year, he relocated to Sacramento, where he joined his brother as an assistant architectural designer in the California State Architect’s Office. In 1916, he became assistant state architect under George McDougall, a position he held until 1920, when he left to become chief deputy for the architectural firm of Hemmings, Peterson and Hudnett, which had formed to complete an elementary school building program for the City of Sacramento.64

In 1922, James and Charles formed their own architecture firm, Dean & Dean. The firm rose to become one of the leading architecture firms in Sacramento and designed many of the city’s most prominent buildings. Charles was largely responsible for the firm’s design work, while James served as chief executive.65 The firm engaged in all types of building designs, and became known for its attention to detail, refined but vigorous designs, and choice of materials that enhanced their buildings through the subtle use of color and texture.66

In the firm’s first year, the contract for Sacramento’s elementary school building program was transferred from Hemmings, Peterson and Hudnutt to Dean & Dean. As part of the contract, the

63 “Charles F. Dean, Capital Architect, Is Dead at 72,” Sacramento Bee, 2 July 1956; Walter G. Reed, History of Sacramento County, California with Biographical Sketches (Los Angeles: Historic Record Company, 1923), 518, accessed July 23, 2021, https://www.westminsac.org/post/about-architect.
64 John F. Donovan, “Recent Work of Dean and Dean Architects,” The Architect and Engineer 90, no. 1 (July 1927); “James Dean, ExState Finance Chief, Dies,” Sacramento Bee, 11 November 1962; Roland-Nawi Associates, “Landmark Nomination, Sierra 2 Community Center,” 2005, 9-10.
65 “Charles F. Dean, Capital Architect, Is Dead at 72.” 66 John F. Donovan, “Recent Work of Dean and Dean Architects.” Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 51 February 22, 2022

firm was charged with designing and building ten new elementary schools for the city and enlarging the existing Marshall (27th and G streets) and Stanford schools (38th Street and 4th Avenue). Schools designed by Dean & Dean under this contract included the Jefferson (16th and N streets), Newton Booth (26th and V streets), Elmhurst/Coloma (46th and 47th streets), El Dorado (53rd and J streets), Bret Harte (Franklin Blvd.), David Lubin (36th and K streets), Fremont (24th and N streets), Riverside/John Muir (Riverside Blvd.) and Sierra (3rd Avenue and 24th Street) schools.67

Dean & Dean were also prolific residential designers. They were selected to design three model homes in the South Curtis Oaks development and ultimately designed at least eleven houses in the neighborhood. Residential designs by the firm were featured in The Architect & Engineer in 1922 and 1927, as well as a pattern book published by the House and Garden Magazine.68 Noting the firm’s care and attention to detail, The Architect & Engineer lauded Dean & Dean’s residential work, stating that “their houses are homes – not residences.”69

This residential training, and the earlier school contract with the City of Sacramento, prepared Dean & Dean for the design of schools, which became one of Charles’ specialties until the end of his life.

The Architect & Engineer noted that schools buildings designed by Dean & Dean featured “a little touch of home to all of them” and “lacked institutional lines and impressions.”70 Among Dean & Dean’s notable school work was the design of buildings for Sacramento Junior College (now Sacramento City College), including Hughes Stadium, as well as Galt High School and Shasta Union High School in Redding.

Although it designed all types of buildings, Dean & Dean is perhaps best known for several major institutional buildings it completed in Sacramento, including National Register-listed Memorial Auditorium (1925-1927) and Westminster Presbyterian Church (1927), as well as the locally landmarked Sutter Club (1930). The firm also designed the Dean Apartments (1929), Sacramento YWCA building (1932), and fire stations at 2nd and L streets (1927) and 43rd and J streets (1927).

The partnership between Charles F. and James S. Dean ended in 1929, when James left the firm to become City Manager for the City of Sacramento. He remained in the position until 1942, when he was appointed State Director of Finance by Governor Earl Warren. Following his retirement in 1956, he was named director of the California State Fair. He died in 1962.71 Charles continued the firm’s

67 “Dean & Dean Gets School Contract,” Sacramento Bee, 6 June 1922; The Western Architect 33, no. 11 (November 1924); Roland-Nawi Associates, “Landmark Nomination, Sierra 2 Community Center.” 68 Paula Boghosian, “South Curtis Oaks, Gateway District,” California Department of Parks and Recreation District Record 523D forms, 2021.
69 John F. Donovan, “Recent Work of Dean and Dean Architects,” The Architect and Engineer 90, no. 1 (July 1927), 41. 70 Donovan, “Recent Work of Dean and Dean Architects,” 42. 71 “James Dean, ExState Finance Chief, Dies.”
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 52 February 22, 2022

work under his own name. Ivan Saterlee joined him in 1930, eventually becoming a partner in 1945.

Nicholas A. Tomich joined the firm in 1931 and became a partner in 1955. Charles F. Dean died in 1956 at the age of 72. His last project was the design of Hiram F. Johnson High School.72 The following year, Saterlee and Tomich renamed the firm after themselves.73 Other successor firms include Tomich and Yee, founded by Tomich and Henry F. Yee in 1973.74

72 “Charles F. Dean, Capital Architect, Is Dead at 72.” 73 “Satterlee, Tomich Change Name of Firm,” Sacramento Bee, 20 July 1957. 74 “Tomich and Yee Form Architectural Firm,” Sacramento Bee, 17 June 1973.

Figure 63. Sacramento Memorial Auditorium.

Figure 64. Westminster Presbyterian Church,
Sacramento.

Figure 65. Sutter Club, Sacramento.

Figure 66. Sacramento Children's Home.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 53 February 22, 2022

OWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANT HISTORY
Ownership History
The following table provides a summary of the ownership history of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building beginning with the year of construction, compiled from property records held at the Sacramento County Clerk-Recorder’s office and Sacramento County Assessor map books.

Known Occupant History
The following table provides a summary of the occupant history of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building, compiled from city directories, newspaper articles, and building permit applications on file with the City of Sacramento.

Occupant(s) Business Type/Occupation
Sacramento Produce Terminal
• Capital Produce Co. Inc. (ca. 1927)
• Meister Co. (ca. 1927)
• Northern California Berry Growers Association (ca.
1927-1933)
• Pacific Fruit & Produce Co. (ca. 1927-1940)
• Sacramento Growers Market (ca. 1927-1928)
• Ricket Produce Co. (ca. 1928-1933)

Not listed
Not listed
Not listed

Not listed
Not listed
Wholesale produce

Figure 67. Fremont School, Sacramento.

Figure 68. Newton Booth School, Sacramento.

Date(s) Owner(s), if known
1925-2021 Meister Family
McCormack Family
Spear Family

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 54 February 22, 2022

Occupant(s) Business Type/Occupation
• W.L. McPherson (ca. 1928)
• Inland Produce Co. (ca. 1928)
• J.M. McMahon (ca. 1928-1931)
• A.R. Meister (ca. 1928-1940)
• Nojiri Fruit Co./Noburo Nojiri (ca. 1928-1933)
• Gus Prevolos (ca. 1928-1945)
• Quong Fung Co. (ca. 1928-1940)
• Red River Lumber Co. (ca. 1928)
• Sac Growers Inc. (ca. 1928)
• S.B. Schumacher & Son (ca. 1928)
• Tong Sung Co. (ca. 1928-1933)

• Triangle Produce Co. (ca. 1928)
• Turlock Produce Co. (ca. 1928-1940)
• Sacramento Produce Terminal Co. (1932-1933)
• Central Produce Co. (ca. 1931-1933)
• Home Produce Co. (1931)
• Lincoln Fruit Co. (ca. 1931-1933)
• Nye & Nissen Inc. (ca. 1931-1932)
• Nick Petros (ca. 1931-1932)
• Simonian Bros. (1931)
• S.M. Tamura (1931)
• Terminal Produce Co. (1931)
• Western States Grocery Co. (1931)
• Fresno Produce Co. (1932)
• James Kallas (1932)
• A. Levy & J. Zentner Co. (ca. 1932-1982)
• Postal Telegraph Cable Co. (1932-1940)
• Star Produce Co. (1932)
• Morris Alterman (1933)
• E.C. Armstrong (1933)
• Davis Johnson Lumber Co. (1933)
• Greenhalgh Bros & McNeely (1933)
• C.H. Harris (1933)
• Karl Kelkoan (1933)
• Mutual Produce Co. (1933)
• Chris Prevolos (1933)
• Samuel Sentos (1933)
• Joseph Virga/Virga Produce Co. (1933-1982)
• H.S. Waldman (1933)
• Thomas Williams (1933)
Wholesale produce
Not listed
Billiards
Mechanical engineer, real estate
Not listed
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce
Lumber
Not listed
Not listed
Wholesale produce, commercial
merchant
Wholesale produce
Not listed
Not listed
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce
Not listed
Eggs
Not listed
Wholesale produce
Produce
Not listed
Broker
Not listed
Billiards
Wholesale produce
Not Listed
Wholesale fruit
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce
Lumber
Wholesale produce
Wholesale fruit
Restaurant
Not listed
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce, delivery
Wholesale produce
Wholesale produce
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 55 February 22, 2022

Occupant(s) Business Type/Occupation
• N.C. Furr (1937-1945)
• General Produce & Fish Co. (ca. 1937-2021)
• Hibbard Orville (1937)
• W.L. Hoffman (1937)
• Matsui Produce Co. (1937)
• Rohrer Bros. Produce Co. (ca. 1937-2021)
• L.H. Schleien Produce (1937)
• Threlkeld & Co./Threlkeld Commissary Co. (1937-1945)
• Mrs. B. H. Bennett (1940)
• Louie Lem (1940-1945)
• T.G. Frazier (1945-1952)
• J.L. Russill (1945)
• Sacramento Freight Lines (1945)
• S.H. LaBrasca (1952)
• Stop & Shop (1952)
• A.M. Citrus Distributors (1955)
• Capitol Citrus Pure Juice Co. (1955)
• John J. Downey (1955)
• Bell Distribution Co. (1961)
• J.V. Citrus Distributors (1961)
• Rehm Distributing Co. (1961-1982)
• Kim Clinton Brokerage Co. (1965-1982)
• Sam Lota & Son Poultry Co. (1965-1982)
• Ripon Egg Co. (1965)
• Olson Bros Inc. (1975-1982)
• Jurin’s Distributing Co. (1975-2021)
Produce
Produce
Produce
Restaurant
Produce
Produce
Produce, wholesale delivery
Produce
Restaurant
Produce
Produce
Produce
Not listed
Produce
Warehouse
Not listed
Not listed
Produce
Wholesale wine
Not listed
Orange juice
Brokering
Poultry
Delivery and wholesale
Wholesale eggs
Beverages, fruit juices

Select Owner and Occupant Biographies
SACRAMENTO PRODUCE TERMINAL COMPANY & HEIRS (OWNERS, 1925-2021) The Sacramento Produce Terminal Company originally owned and developed the subject building.

Heirs of the original ownership group continue to own the property. The Sacramento Produce Terminal Company was founded around 1925 by brothers Edward A. Meister (1874-1929) and Albert R. Meister (1878-1952), George McCormack and his wife Gladys McCormack, and Charles E. Spear.75 Edward and Albert Meister initially led the company, with Edward serving as president and Albert serving as vice-president.76 Prior to forming the Sacramento Produce Company, the Meister brothers had been the owners and leaders of the A. Meister & Sons Company, an automobile,

75 “Remember When,” Sacramento Bee, 3 July 1983.
76 “Three Firms Begin Business in Industrial Tract North of City,” Sacramento Bee, 19 August 1931.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 56 February 22, 2022

railcar, bus, and truck body manufacturing company founded by their father, August, to manufacture carriages in the 1860s.77 Between 1917 and 1923, Edward and Albert Meister purchased much of the land to the east and west of North 16th Street and began developing it into an industrial center for Sacramento.78 In 1922, they constructed the new headquarters for A. Meister & Sons Company at 211-217 North 16th Street; at the time, it was one of the first industrial buildings constructed in the area. A. Meister & Sons Company went bankrupt in 1924.79 Edward and Albert quickly shifted their attention to developing a produce terminal and market for Sacramento on their land along North 16th Street and formed the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company. Historic newspaper articles published around the time of the terminal’s completion in 1925 credited Edward with the idea of centralizing Sacramento’s wholesale produce industry in one location, as well as many of the concepts incorporated into the property’s design. However, Edward did not live to see much of the Sacramento Produce Terminal’s growth and success. He died in 1929 at the age of 55.

Following his death, Albert Meister took over as president of the company. After his death in 1952, the subject property transferred to Albert’s wife, Ethel. She passed the property on to the couple’s children, Margaret B. Meister (1904-1992), Dorothy Miller (1906-1980), August Meister (1909-1990), and Marilyn Hanson (1923-2005) after her own death in 1956.80

August Meister worked as a clerk for the California Department of Justice, rising to become assistant chief of the criminal identification and information division. He retired after 42 years of service with the Department of Justice. He also served as president of the International Association for Identification for a period and was a member of the Peace Officers Research Association of California. He died in 1990.81 Marilyn Hanson was an active member of the parent teacher association, Mercy Guild, Fremont Presbyterian Church, and served as a Girl Scout and Boy Scout Den Mother. She and her husband, Bill, contributed photographs to the book Images of America: East Sacramento by Lee M.A. Simpson. She was the last of the Meister children to die in 2005.82 Research revealed minimal information about the life or contributions of Margaret Meister or Dorothy Miller.

They died in 1992 and 1980, respectively.

George McCormack’s role in the operation of the Sacramento Produce Company or ownership of the subject property remains unknown. George F. McCormack was born in Virginia City, Nevada in 1883. After graduating with a civil engineering degree from the University of Nevada in 1904, he went to work for the Southern Pacific Railroad. In 1912, he moved to Sacramento to become an

77 “Auto Body Plant Has Big Payroll,” Sacramento Bee, 4 August 1923; “Make Trip to Quincy in Seven Hours,” Sacramento Bee, 2 March 1918.
78 Sacramento County Assessor Map Books, Center for Sacramento History. 79 “Judgment for $35,000 South By D.F. Appling,” Sacramento Bee, 28 January 1928. 80 “Ethel M. Meister,” Sacramento Bee, 19 March 1956.
81 “Meister, August,” Sacramento Bee, 27 December 1990. 82 “Hanson, Marilyn Ann,” Sacramento Bee, 6 December 2005.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 57 February 22, 2022

engineer in charge of all river levees used by the Southern Pacific Railroad. McCormack also served as chairman of the American River Flood Control Board from its inception in 1928 until 1970.

McCormack’s knowledge of the levees and North 16th Street area likely informed his decision to help develop the Sacramento Produce Terminal building in the area. He retired from his work with the railroad in 1948, after 44 years of service. Throughout the course of his life, McCormack served as a member of the American River Fire District. He was also a consulting engineer for the Sacramento- Yolo Port District, a life member of the Sacramento A Movie Forum, and chairman of the Red Cross’ Visual Aid Committee. He died in 1975 at the age of 91.83

McCormack married Sacramento native Gladys Pratt (1891-1961) in 1912, the same year he arrived in Sacramento.84 Gladys became one of the cofounders of the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company and served as secretary-treasurer of the company for 36 years until her death in 1961.

During her life, she was also active in local education work, serving on the city board of education from 1927 to 1942, the board of directors of the California Congress of Parent Teacher Associations as secretary and treasurer of the organization from 1932 to 1948, the Crippled Children’s Society, American Red Cross, and on the board of directors of the Girls Scouts of America.85

Likewise, research revealed little about Charles E. Spear’s involvement with the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company. He was born in Geneva, Nebraska in 1874.86 In 1898, he married Emma M.

Froelke in Nebraska.87 By the 1910s, the couple had moved to Santa Barbara, where Charles worked as a commercial agent for the Southern Pacific Railroad in Santa Barbara.88 In the early 1920s, the couple relocated to Sacramento.89 Charles continued his work with the Southern Pacific Railroad as a district agent.90 He died in 1943.91

Various heirs and descendants of original founders of the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company continue to own the subject property.

83 “Former Member of City School Board Is Dead,” Sacramento Bee, 6 April 1961. 84 “Marriage Licenses,” Sacramento Star, 16 October 1912. 85 “Former Member of City School Board Is Dead.”
86 “Spear,” Sacramento Bee, 11 January 1943.
87 Nebraska, U.S., Select County Marriage Records, 1855-1908, Ancestry.com. 88 U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards, 1917-1918, Ancestry.com. 89 1921 Sacramento city directory, Ancestry.com.
90 “Freight Rate Cut Likely in New Order,” Sacramento Bee, 30 July 1923. 91 U.S., Find a Grave Index, 1600s-Current, Ancestry.com.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 58 February 22, 2022

A. LEVY & J. ZENTNER COMPANY (OCCUPANTS, CA. 1932-1982) A. Levy & J. Zentner Company operated out of the Sacramento Produce Terminal for a period of more than 50 years, from 1932 to at least 1982, the date of the most recently available Sacramento city directory.92 The company was founded in 1870 by Julius Zentner and Adolph Levy.93 In 1926, the company acquired the Wood-Curtis Company, a move which resulted in the merger of two of the oldest and largest produce companies in California at the time. Three years later, the firm purchased the Pacific Fruit and Produce Company’s produce wholesaling businesses in some cities in Northern California, Oregon, and Washington.94 In 1932, the company moved into the Pacific Fruit and Produce Company’s old quarters at the Sacramento Produce Terminal, taking over the entire west end of the building and a portion of the north and south wings. As a result of these moves, the company grew into a chain of produce shipping and distribution plants with offices in Fresno, Oakland, Reno, Eureka, Santa Rosa, and Los Angeles, with additional representatives in Oregon and Washington. Through these offices, the firm distributed fruits and vegetables throughout Northern California and Nevada and made regular carload shipments throughout North America.95 The company continued to expand over the following decades. In 1938, it purchased the physical property of the Triangle Produce Company, consolidating the two largest wholesale jobbing and produce companies on the West Coast.96 By 1947, it was also distributing beer and wine as Bell Distributing Company.97 Following Julius Zentner’s retirement in 1949, Adolph Levy’s son, Sidney, took over as chairman of the board. By 1962, the company was the largest wholesale produce firm on the West Coast, owning or operating more than 20 packing houses in California and 13 wholesale distributing branches across California and Nevada.98 Sidney Levy died in 1962, but the company continued to operate at least through the 1980s.

GENERAL PRODUCE COMPANY & THE CHAN FAMILY (OCCUPANTS, 1933-2021) General Produce Company is a produce wholesaling company that has continuously operated out of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building from its formation in the 1930s to the present day. The company was founded by Chan Tai Oy in 1933, in the midst of the Great Depression. Chan Tai Oy immigrated to the United States from Canton, China in 1905. Shortly after his arrival, he went to work for the Tong Sun Company in Sacramento, first as a cook and later as a produce and fruit salesman. One of the early, short-lived tenants of the Sacramento Produce Terminal, the Tong Sun Company went out of business during the Great Depression. Shortly after the company’s demise,

92 “Produce Concern Is In New Home,” Sacramento Bee, 2 January 1932; Sacramento city directory, 1982, Ancestry.com. 93 “S.T. Levy, Produce Tycoon,” San Francisco Examiner, 22 September 1962. 94 “Wholesale Firm Plans Expansion,” Sacramento Bee, 30 January 1929. 95 “Produce Concern Is In New Home.”
96 “Produce Firm is Purchased for $500,000,” Sacramento Bee, 21 February 1938. 97 “Petition to Restrict Competition is Denied,” Sacramento Bee, 7 May 1952. 98 “S.T. Levy, Produce Tycoon.”
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 59 February 22, 2022

Chan Tai Oy opened his own wholesale produce business. He initially wished to call the company Chan & Sons but ultimately decided on the name General Produce Company to help the company surmount racist attitudes toward Chinese men and women that were prevalent at the time.99

Chan ran General Produce Company with his three sons – Thomas S. Chan (1919-1998), Daniel S.

Chan (1915-2004), and Edward Chan (1913-2001) – and his nephew, Davis Sun (1914-2005). Daniel Chan served as the company’s chief buyer and salesman, working for the family business from his graduation from Sacramento High School in 1933 until this retirement in 1994.100 Edward and Thomas Chan also worked for the company as young men. Thomas eventually rose to assume management of the company in the 1950s, while Edward became a partner in the firm.101 Davis Chan similarly started out at the company during his youth, but left temporarily for military service during World War II. While serving with the 261st Field Artillery Battalion, he fought in the Battle of the Bulge and survived 132 days of combat. Following his return, Sun rose to become senior partner at the family company.102 The General Produce Company also had a broader role in the war effort, serving Beale Air Force Base and McLellan Air Force Base during the war.103

During the 1950s, the Chan family expanded its influence into commercial and residential development, primarily in the South Land Park area. The family was responsible for developing the South Land Park Terrace subdivision, which they improved, subdivided, and sold off as individual lots. They also built a shopping center at Sutterville Road and South Land Park Drive and started a short-lived discount store called Sacramento Employee Enterprises.104

Chan Tai Oy died in 1971 at the age of 83. The General Produce Company continued under the leadership of Chan’s sons and nephew. The tradition of training the next generation and preparing them to lead the company continued in 1979, when Chan Tai Oy’s grandsons, Thomas O. Chan (son of Thomas S. Chan) and Daniel W. Chan (son of Daniel S. Chan) returned to Sacramento from careers in the Bay Area and began learning the family business.105 By the 1990s, the company began to transition to new leadership under this third generation of the Chan family, as the firm’s elder statesmen began to retire. Thomas S. Chan stepped down in 1991, and Daniel S. Chan retired in

99 “History,” General Produce Company, accessed July 16, 2021, https://www.generalproduce.com/about/history; “History of General Produce” [video], YouTube , posted February 17, 2014, accessed July 16, 2021, https://youtu.be/Su1oqfKFw10. 100 “Daniel S. Chan, a Family Businessman of Many Parts,” Sacramento Bee, 15 April 2004. 101 “Thomas S. Chan, 79, Ran Family’s Produce Firm,” Sacramento Bee, 1 August 1998; “Chan, Edward Shue,” Sacramento Bee, 6 January 2002.
102 “Sun, Davis,” Sacramento Bee, 10 July 2005.
103 “History of General Produce” [video], YouTube , posted February 17, 2014, accessed July 16, 2021. 104 “Daniel S. Chan, a Family Businessman of Many Parts.” 105 “A Fruitful 60 Years,” Sacramento Bee, 11 October 1993.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 60 February 22, 2022

1994.106 Around the same time, Thomas O. Chan became president of the company, and Daniel W.

Chan became vice-president. By that time, the General Produce Company had grown into the largest independent produce dealer in the Sacramento area, employing roughly 175 people and moving approximately 300 tons of fruit and vegetables a day.107 Edward Chan died in 2001, followed by Thomas S. Chan in 2003 and Daniel S. Chan in 2004.108 Davis Sun, the last of the company’s original leaders, retired in 2003 at the age of 88. He passed away in 2005.109 The General Produce Company remains a family-owned and operated company to the present day and has continued to occupy the subject property. The company distributes produce throughout Northern California, Western Nevada, and Southern Oregon, and exports produce to countries in the Pacific Rim and Asia.110

Figure 69. Chan Tai Oy in front of Tong Sung Company in Old Sacramento around 1910. Source: “History,” General Produce Company, https://www.generalproduce.com/about/history.

106 “Daniel S. Chan, a Family Businessman of Many Parts.” 107 “Thomas S. Chan, 79, Ran Family’s Produce Firm;” “A Fruitful 60 Years.” 108 “Thomas S. Chan, 79, Ran Family’s Produce Firm;” “Daniel S. Chan, a Family Businessman of Many Parts;” “Chan, Edward Shue.”
109 “Sun, Davis.”
110 “Distribution Areas,” General Produce Company, accessed July 28, 2021, https://www.generalproduce.com/operations/distribution.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 61 February 22, 2022

Figure 70. Chan Tai Oy (first row, center) surrounded by his family in 1949. His sons and business partners, Thomas S. Chan, Daniel S. Chan, Davis Sun, and Edward Chan, are lined up from left to right in the back row.

Source: “History,” General Produce Company, https://www.generalproduce.com/about/history.

ROHRER BROTHERS PRODUCE COMPANY (OCCUPANTS, CA. 1937-2021) Rohrer Brothers Produce Company has continuously occupied the subject property from at least 1937 to 2021. The produce wholesale company was founded by brothers Charles (1897-1983) and Joseph (1900-1995) Rohrer in Sacramento in 1935. Born in Sacramento, the brothers were the sons of Joseph Rohrer, a Swedish immigrant and bar keeper, and his wife, Bertha, a German immigrant.111 The younger Joseph Rohrer started his career in the produce business selling produce by steamship around Lake Tahoe for the Wood-Curtis Fruit and Produce Company when he was around the age of

13.112 His brother, Charles, initially took a different career path, following an interest in photography into work as a filmmaker and motion picture projectionist during the early days of the film industry in the early 1900s. He contributed to state highway motion picture projects with Harold McCurry, Sr., the founder of McCurry Camera Stores, and worked for the Edison Theater in Sacramento during World War I. He later became the owner of two motion picture theaters in downtown Sacramento.

111 1900 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
112 “Jospeh Rohrer,” Sacramento Bee, 25 November 1995.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 62 February 22, 2022

After an illness in the 1920s, he retired from the film industry and began working as a rancher at the family farm in El Dorado County.113 In 1935, Joseph and Charles merged their experience in the sale and cultivation of produce to form their own wholesale business, Rohrer Brothers Fruit and Produce Company. The company operated out of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building and served markets across Northern California and Nevada. In the 1950s, a third brother, Albert P. Rohrer (1895-1985) joined his brothers in the family produce company.114 He became a partner in the company and worked there until the late 1970s and died in 1985.115 Joseph Rohrer sold his shares in the company in 1978, ending the Rohrer family’s association with the company that bears its name.

He died in 1995.116 After his retirement, Charles Rohrer focused on restoring old photographs, some of which hang in the former state capitol building in Benicia. He died in 1983.117 Joseph’s grandsons, Ken and Jim Catchot, followed in their grandfather’s footsteps, founding JC Produce Company in West Sacramento. In 1994, JC Produce Company was the only independent statewide distributor of fruits and vegetables in California.118 Research conducted for this report did not reveal any additional information about the role of influence of Rohrer Brothers Produce Company in the produce industry or state or local history.

VIRGA PRODUCE COMPANY & JOSEPH VIRGA (OCCUPANT, CA. 1933-1982) Giuseppe “Joe” Virga began operating a wholesale produce company out of the Sacramento Produce Terminal from at least 1933 to 1982. Born in Piana Dei Greca, Italy in 1898, he immigrated to the United States in 1911.119 He initially operated a grocery store in Los Angeles, before relocating to Sacramento in 1927.120 He retired in 1959, after which he sold the company to his son-in-law, Anthony Cirincione. Joe Virga died in 1989 at the age of 91.121

113 “Charlie Rohrer,” Sacramento Bee, 19 October 1983.
114 Sacramento City Directory, 1952, Ancestry.com.
115 “Albert Rohrer, Sacramento Bee, 28 October 1985.
116 “Joseph Rohrer.”
117 “Charlie Rohrer.”
118 “A Growing Concern,” Sacramento Bee, 11 December 1994. 119 U.S. World War II Draft Cards Young Men, 1940-1947, Ancestry.com. 120 “Joseph Virga,” Sacramento Bee, 19 May 1898.
121 “Joseph Virga.”
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 63 February 22, 2022

VI. EVALUATION

CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens.

The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.

In order for a property to be eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found significant under one or more of the following criteria.

• Criterion 1 (Events): Resources that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.

• Criterion 2 (Persons): Resources that are associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history.

• Criterion 3 (Architecture): Resources that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values.

• Criterion 4 (Information Potential): Resources or sites that have yielded or have the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

The following section examines the eligibility of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building for individual listing in the California Register.

Criterion 1 (Events)
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street is individually significant under Criterion 1 for its association with the growth and development of Sacramento into the hub of the region’s agricultural industry in the early twentieth century, as well as its role in transforming North 16th Street area into one of the city’s main industrial centers oriented around the agricultural and transportation industries. When the Sacramento Produce Terminal was completed in 1925, it Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 64 February 22, 2022

centralized and modernized the city’s wholesale produce industry in one location, replacing informal street markets and sales that had up until that point taken place in the downtown area. Within a few years of its completion, the Sacramento Produce Terminal’s ability to combine agriculture, industry, and efficient transportation was credited as one of the primary reasons for Sacramento’s emergence as the hub of the Sacramento Valley’s agricultural industry. In 1934, Sacramento remained the only city in Northern California with a produce terminal between Oregon, to the north, and Salt Lake City, to the east.

In addition to its role in expanding Sacramento’s influence in the state’s agricultural economy, the Sacramento Produce Terminal was also a major catalyst of the development of the North 16th Street area. The produce terminal was one of the earliest industrial buildings completed along North 16th Street, following the A. Meister & Sons Company automobile body manufacturing plant in 1922 and Sacramento Pipe Works building in 1924. Prior to the 1920s, the North 16th Street area was considered a “no man’s land,” with little or no development due to a history of flooding and lack of adequate transportation access. The Sacramento Produce Terminal, while not the first industrial building completed in the area, appears to have been one of the largest and most consequential early developments in the area that immediately attracted more industrial development to North 16th Street, specifically those related to agriculture and transportation. In one such instance, the W.A. Ward Seed Company building was completed roughly around the same time directly in response to the anticipated completion of the produce terminal. By the early 1940s, North 16th Street was a bustling industrial center, dominated by agricultural and transportation-related businesses, such as canneries; produce wholesaler companies; farm equipment, truck, and automobile manufacturers; truck and automobile service shops; gas stations; and other associated businesses.

The period of significance for the property under Criterion 1 extends from the Sacramento Produce Terminal’s completion in 1925 to 1952, when activity at the terminal began to show a consistent decline. The year 1952 also aligns with the death of original owner Albert Meister.

Criterion 2 (Persons)
The Sacramento Produce Terminal Building is individually significant under Criterion 2 for its association with original owners and developers Edward A. and Albert R. Meister. Between 1917 and 1923, Edward and Albert Meister purchased most of the land along North 16th Street, immediately north of the B Street levee, and began to develop the previously underutilized area into one of Sacramento’s industrial centers. They began by constructing a new headquarters building for their family automobile manufacturing company, A. Meister & Sons Company, at 211-217 North 16th Street. When it was constructed, this was one of the first industrial buildings in the area. The Meister Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 65 February 22, 2022

brothers followed this by forming the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company with George and Gladys McCormack and Charles Spear around 1925. The company was responsible for developing the Sacramento Produce Terminal, which attracted more agricultural and transportation-related industries to North 16th Street and catalyzed the area’s development into a bustling industrial hub.

Edward Meister was credited with the idea of centralizing Sacramento’s wholesale produce industries in one modern facility. He died in 1929 but his brother, Albert, continued to lead the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company until his death in 1952. In 1932, the first building constructed by the brothers in the area, the A. Meister & Sons Company headquarters, was demolished and replaced with the existing building at that address, leaving the Sacramento Produce Terminal as the building with the most direct connection to Edward and Albert Meister’s impact on the development of North 16th Street. Although George and Gladys McCormack and Charles Spear were also part of the original ownership group, research did not reveal their specific role or contributions to the development and operation of the Sacramento Produce Terminal. They do not appear to have owned and developed land in the North 16th Street area to the same degree as the Meister brothers and appear to have a smaller overall impact on the area’s development.

Research did not indicate that other long-term businesses associated with the building made sufficient contributions to the history of Sacramento, the state, or the nation to merit listing on the California Register. A. Levy & J. Zentner Company was based in San Francisco, and its offices at the subject property were part of a chain of facilities that the company operated throughout California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. In spite of their longevity and long history of operation at the Sacramento Produce Terminal, research did not indicate that Rohrer Brothers Produce Company, Joseph Virga Produce Company, or their owners were particularly influential or innovative in their respective industries or in local, state, or national history. If more information about the historic impact of these companies, compared to other similar businesses, comes to light in the future, this evaluation may be reassessed.

General Produce Company was founded by Chinese immigrant Chan Tai Oy in the 1930s and has been continuously owned and operated by his descendants out of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building since its founding, a period of more than 80 years. Although the Chan family is an example of a successful Chinese American family that established a long-running business in the Sacramento community, research conducted for this report was unable to establish the family’s prominence in Sacramento or within the local Chinese American community, nor was it able to identify the impact of General Produce Company on the local wholesale produce industry. Research to compare General Produce Company to other Chinese American businesses that have existed for 50 years or more is outside the scope of this report. Further study of Sacramento’s Chinese American community and businesses is recommended and may warrant revising this assessment in the future.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 66 February 22, 2022

The period of significance for the subject property under Criterion 2 encompasses the formation of the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company under the leadership of Edward and Albert Meister in 1925 and ends with the death of Albert Meister in 1952.

Criterion 3 (Architecture)
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building is individually eligible for listing on the California Register under Criterion 3 because it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a wholesale produce terminal built in the early twentieth century and is the only such surviving building in Sacramento from the period and a rare example of this property type in California. Built in 1925, the building has many of the characteristic features of this property type, including long, narrow one-story buildings, each lined with garage door openings, raised loading platforms, and covered awnings which allowed fresh produce to be stored and loaded onto waiting trucks and railcars. The terminal buildings are oriented around a broad central courtyard that historically contained a long central platform where growers sold their produce to the wholesale companies in the north and south wings. Although this platform no longer exists, the central courtyard continues to be used by produce trucks to load and unload their goods into the terminal buildings. The building was also purposely located along spur tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad. Surviving elements that convey this relationship to the railroad include the curved northwest corner of the building and a surviving railroad bumper where the tracks ended at the northeast corner of the building. The Sacramento Produce Terminal also features a relatively utilitarian design that reflects its industrial use, including unpainted brick cladding, primarily flat or shed roofs, and minimal decoration or ornamentation.

Additionally, the Sacramento Produce Terminal is a rare intact example of a produce terminal built in California in the early twentieth century and is the only building of its type in Sacramento. A second produce terminal was built in Sacramento in the 1933; however, this building was almost entirely demolished in the 2010s and is now the site of a housing development. Other known produce terminals built in California in the early twentieth century include the extant Union Terminal Annex (now Seventh Street Produce Market) in Los Angeles and Central Manufacturing District Terminal in Vernon. The warehouses that comprised San Francisco’s produce market area for the first half of the twentieth century were demolished and replaced with a new produce terminal building in South San Francisco in 1963. Research did not reveal the existence of other produce terminals in California from a similar period.

The Sacramento Produce Terminal was designed by master architects Dean & Dean, a partnership of brothers Charles F. and James S. Dean. While Dean & Dean were best-known for their school, residential, and large civic and institutional work in Sacramento, the Sacramento Produce Terminal Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 67 February 22, 2022

displays some of features that often characterize the firm’s work. The building’s multi-colored clinker brick cladding reflects the firm’s considered use of materials, color, and texture, while its red clay tile roofs and application of blind arched bays at the front towers shows the subtle and restrained influence of the Mediterranean Revival style that Dean & Dean often employed. However, the building is not representative of the firm’s best work, of which many examples survive, and is better understood as a utilitarian building that minimally reflects the design influence and aesthetics for which Dean & Dean are most well-known.

The period of significance for the property under Criterion 3 extends from the produce terminal’s original date of construction in 1925 to the completion of the last major additions to the building’s footprint by 1961. This end date may be refined in the future if research identifies an exact date when the last of these major additions was completed.

Criterion 4 (Information Potential)
The “potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of California” typically relates to archeological resources, rather than built resources. When California Register Criterion 4 (Information Potential) does relate to built resources, it is relevant for cases when the building itself is the principal source of important construction-related information. The analysis of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building for eligibility under Criterion 4 is beyond the scope of this report.

INTEGRITY
In order to qualify for listing in any local, state, or national historic register, a property or landscape must possess significance under at least one evaluative criterion as described above and retain integrity. Integrity is defined by the California Office of Historic Preservation as “the authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance,” or more simply defined by the National Park Service as “the ability of a property to convey its significance.”122

In order to evaluate whether the subject property retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance, Page & Turnbull used established integrity standards outlined by the National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Seven variables, or aspects, that define integrity are used to evaluate a resource’s integrity—location, setting, design, materials,

122 California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistance Series No. 7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources (Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001) 11; U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1995) 44.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 68 February 22, 2022

workmanship, feeling, and association. A property must possess most, or all, of these aspects in order to retain overall integrity. If a property does not retain integrity, it can no longer convey its significance and is therefore not eligible for listing in local, state, or national registers.

The seven aspects that define integrity are defined as follows:

Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred;

Setting addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the landscape and spatial relationships of the building(s);

Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of the property;

Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form the historic property;

Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory;

Feeling is the property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time; and

Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and the historic property.

LOCATION
The subject property retains integrity of location. The Sacramento Produce Terminal building has remained situated at the location of its original construction since 1925.

SETTING
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity of setting. When it was first constructed in 1925, the building was one of only a handful of industrial buildings that had been completed along North 16th Street, including Sacramento Pipe Works building directly to the south and W.A.

Ward Seed Company building and A. Meister & Sons Company building directly to the east. All of these buildings, except for the A. Meister & Sons Company building, which was mostly replaced by a Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 69 February 22, 2022

new building in the 1930s, remain in their original locations. Thus, the immediate streetscape around the subject property remains consistent with its appearance in the early twentieth century.

The surrounding area continues to be characterized by a mix of industrial and commercial buildings that were constructed during the building’s periods of significance from the early to mid-twentieth century. Although railroad spur tracks at the north and west sides of the building have been removed, a surviving railroad bumper at the northeast corner of the building and curved façade at the northwest side of the building preserve the path of these tracks.

DESIGN
The Sacramento Produce Terminal retains integrity of design. The property continues to convey much of its original 1925 design by Dean & Dean, including its overall composition – consisting of three long, narrow, one-story wings that form a U-shape around a large central courtyard – two- story towers with red clay tile roofs and blind arched bays, clinker brick cladding, repeating bays of garage door openings, long raised concrete loading platforms, covered shed awnings, and multi-lite steel clerestory windows. The property also retains several large-scale additions that were completed to expand the building during its most active period through the middle of the twentieth century. These additions appear to have been designed to create an overall unified exterior appearance and are nearly indistinguishable from the original 1920s construction. They are similarly clad with unpainted red bricks and feature raised loading docks that once faced the spur tracks at the north and west sides of the building. Although the removal of the central platform between 1947 and 1957 resulted in a loss of some of the building’s original 1925 design, this alteration took place during the property’s period of significance under Criterion 3 and does not impact the property’s overall integrity of design. Later alterations appear to be limited to a few smaller, easily identifiable exterior additions, the replacement or infill of windows and doors, and enclosure of platforms along the south wing. However, these changes are relatively minor compared to the scale of the building.

The building retains its overall historic scale, form, spatial relationships, materials, and features that together comprise the building’s historic design.

MATERIALS
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity of materials. The building continues to display the characteristic elements of its original 1925 Dean & Dean design, such as textured and multicolored clinker brick cladding and red clay tile roofing, as well as elements that convey its industrial, utilitarian design, including board formed concrete loading platforms, some original multi-lite steel and wood windows, metal shed awnings, and interior wood post and beam construction. Recent exterior material alterations include the replacement of several exterior openings with new windows or doors, re-roofing, and addition of non-historic plywood cladding Although they do not contribute to the building’s overall significance, interior spaces also retain their Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 70 February 22, 2022

original concrete floors and wood roof structures and supports. These strengthen the building’s overall retention of original materials.

WORKMANSHIP
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity of workmanship. The skill and craftsmanship required to construct the produce terminal remain visible in its textured and multicolored clinker brick cladding, board formed concrete platforms and exterior walls, and interior post and beam construction.

FEELING
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity of feeling. By retaining its historic location and setting along the industrial corridor of North 16th Street, surrounded by other industrial buildings of a similar age, as well as its historic scale, form, spatial relationships, and character- defining utilitarian design features and materials, the Sacramento Produce Terminal continues to convey the feeling of a prominent industrial building that was once bustling with commercial and transportation related activity.

ASSOCIATION
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity of association. With its long concrete loading platforms and shed awnings covering repeating bays of garage door openings, large paved courtyard facing the major transportation artery of North 16th Street, retention of recognizable industrial features and materials, such as brick and concrete walls and post-and-beam construction, the Sacramento Produce Terminal continues to readily convey its identity as a wholesale produce terminal, dating to the early to mid-twentieth century, that influenced the development of North 16th Street into an industrial center for Sacramento and contributed to the city’s emergence as a hub for the region’s produce industry.

Overall, the Sacramento Produce Terminal building retains integrity.

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES
For a property to be eligible for national or state designation under criteria related to type, period, or method of construction, the essential physical features (or character-defining features) that enable the property to convey its historic identity must be evident. These distinctive character- defining features are the physical traits that commonly recur in property types and/or architectural styles. To be eligible, a property must clearly contain enough of those characteristics to be considered a true representative of a particular type, period, or method of construction, and these Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 71 February 22, 2022

features must also retain a sufficient degree of integrity. Characteristics can be expressed in terms such as form, proportion, structure, plan, style, or materials.

The character-defining features of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building include, but are not limited to:

Mass & Form
• U-shaped building form surrounding large paved central courtyard • One-story, double-height building above a raised foundation • Two-story towers at the east ends of the north and south wings, facing North 16th Street • Two-story volume at the corner of Ahern Street and North B Street • Curved walls along Ahern Street and North C Street that aligned with adjacent railroad spur tracks (since removed)
• Flat roofs with straight parapet walls over main body of building and additions • Low-pitched gabled roofs over towers facing North 16th Street • Arched roof over curved addition at the corner of Ahern Street and North C Street Exterior Materials
• Unpainted red brick cladding laid in common bond, including walls with variety of multi- colored and textured clinker bricks and plain common bricks • Board formed concrete walls and piers
• Cement plaster bases
• Exposed iron wall anchors and tie rods
• Red clay tile roofing
• Brick chimneys
Fenestration
• Rows of evenly spaced garage door openings at facades facing the central courtyard and adjacent streets, some with original rolling steel garage doors • Variety of multi-lite steel windows (fixed, casement, hopper, transom, etc.) • Heavy wood double doors with large iron hinges and latches • Window openings in arched recesses of towers facing North 16th Street • Narrow louvered vents
Ornamentation
• Dentilled brick cornice
• Arched recesses on facades of towers facing North 16th Street • Flagpoles with decorative wrought iron straps
Exterior Produce Terminal Features
• Concrete loading platforms, ramps, and steps
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 72 February 22, 2022

• Continuous shed awnings with exposed wood ceilings and wood and metal post-and-beam construction along facades facing the central courtyard Site Features
• Open central courtyard for parking and truck circulation • Surviving remnants of railroad spur infrastructure, such as the bumper at the intersection of North C Street and North 16th Street

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 73 February 22, 2022

VII. CONCLUSION
The Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street was originally constructed in 1925 by prominent Sacramento architecture firm Dean & Dean and expanded to the north during its peak period of activity through the early 1960s. The property is listed as a contributor to the locally designated North 16th Street Historic District. Based on the evaluation in this report, it is also individually eligible for listing on the California Register at the local level of significance under Criterion 1 for its association with the development of the North 16th Street area into one of Sacramento’s industrial centers, as well as for its contributions to the city’s emergence as the hub for the Sacramento region’s produce industry. The property is individually eligible under Criterion 2 for its association with Edward A. and Albert R. Meister, whose efforts as largescale landowners, owners of the A. Meister & Sons Company, and founders of the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company catalyzed the industrial development of the North 16th Street area. Lastly, the building is individually eligible under Criterion 3 as a rare intact example of a produce terminal market building that was constructed in the early to mid-twentieth century. Thus, the property appears to qualify as a historic resource for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 74 February 22, 2022

VIII. REFERENCES
Published Works & Reports
Avella, Steven. Sacramento: Indomitable City. San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing. 2003.

Boghosian, Paula. “1501 N. C Street.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “1610-1620 North C Street.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Acme Beverage Co.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Flying ‘A’ Gas Station Building.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Mack Truck International Corp., Crest Carpet Co.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009.
--- . “Russell Brothers Company.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Sacramento Pipe Works.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Sacramento Produce Building.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 1998. ---. “South Curtis Oaks, Gateway District.” California Department of Parks and Recreation District Record 523D forms. 2021.
--- . “Triangle Produce Building.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “W.A. Ward Seed Company.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009. --- . “Western Body Company.” DPR 523. California Office of Historic Preservation. 2009.

Brechin, Gary and Lee M.A. Simpson. “Unseen Investment: New Deal Sacramento.” In River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region. Ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. 2013.

Burg, Willam. Sacramento’s K Street: Where Our City Was Born. Charleston, SC: The History Press. 2012.

California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Bulletin No. 7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources. Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, September 4, 2001.

California Office of Historic Preservation. Technical Assistance Bulletin No. 8: User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historic Resources Inventory Directory.

Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing. November 2004. Accessed October 22, 2018, http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/tab8.pdf.

CEQA Guidelines. Accessed May 10, 2018. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/guidelines/.

Dudek. “Cultural Resources Report for the Blue Diamond Growers (BDG) A Street Annex Building Project.” 2018.

Environmental Science Associates. “R Street Corridor Historic District Survey Report.” Report. City of Sacramento Preservation Commission. 2017.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 75 February 22, 2022

Historic Environment Consultants. “River District Architectural and Historical Property Survey Update.” 2009.

Orsi, Richard J. “Railroads and the Urban Environment: Sacramento’s Story.” In River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region. Ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2013.

Reed, Walter G. History of Sacramento County, California with Biographical Sketches. Los Angeles:

Historic Record Company, 1923. Accessed July 23, 2021, https://www.westminsac.org/post/about-architect.

Roland-Nawi Associates. “Landmark Nomination, Sierra 2 Community Center.” 2005. “Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel Limited Reevaluation Report (LRR) with Project Economic Analysis.” Report. US Army Corps of Engineers. 2011.
https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/portals/68/docs/srdwsc/appendix_e.pdf.

Newspapers & Periodicals
“A Fruitful 60 Years.” Sacramento Bee. 11 October 1993. “A Growing Concern.” Sacramento Bee. 11 December 1994.
“Albert Rohrer.” Sacramento Bee. 28 October 1985.
“Auto Body Plant Has Big Payroll.” Sacramento Bee. 4 August 1923. “Chan, Edward Shue.” Sacramento Bee. 6 January 2002.
“Charles F. Dean, Capital Architect, Is Dead at 72.” Sacramento Bee. 2 July 1956. “Charlie Rohrer.” Sacramento Bee. 19 October 1983.
“Daniel S. Chan, a Family Businessman of Many Parts.” Sacramento Bee. 15 April 2004. “Dean & Dean Gets School Contract.” Sacramento Bee. 6 June 1922.

Donovan, John F. “Recent Work of Dean and Dean Architects.” The Architect and Engineer 90, No. 1, July 1927.
“Ethel M. Meister.” Sacramento Bee. 19 March 1956.
“Former Member of City School Board Is Dead.” Sacramento Bee. 6 April 1961. “Freight Rate Cut Likely in New Order.” Sacramento Bee. 30 July 1923. “Great Saving of Time Seen by Retailers.” San Francisco Examiner. 5 February 1927. “Hanson, Marilyn Ann.” Sacramento Bee. 6 December 2005. “Inspector Reports Decrease in Construction.” Sacramento Bee. 12 May 1955. “James Dean, ExState Finance Chief, Dies.” Sacramento Bee. 11 November 1962. “Jospeh Rohrer.” Sacramento Bee. 25 November 1995.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 76 February 22, 2022

“Joseph Virga.” Sacramento Bee. 19 May 1898.
“Judgment for $35,000 South By D.F. Appling.” Sacramento Bee. 28 January 1928. “Large Blaze at Warehouse Under Investigation.” Sacramento Bee. 21 October 2018. “Make Trip to Quincy in Seven Hours.” Sacramento Bee. 2 March 1918. “Marriage Licenses.” Sacramento Star. 16 October 1912.
“Meister, August.” Sacramento Bee. 27 December 1990.
“New Produce Terminal Centralized Wholesale Business in This City.” Sacramento Bee. 29 May 1925. “’No Man’s Land’ Bristles With Industrial Plants.” Sacramento Bee. 14 September 1942. “Petition to Restrict Competition is Denied.” Sacramento Bee. 7 May 1952. “Produce Business Now Located in Terminal North of City Subway.” Sacramento Bee. 11 July 1925. “Produce Concern Is In New Home.” Sacramento Bee. 2 January 1932 “Produce Firm Enters State on Big Scale.” Sacramento Bee. 20 June 1925. “Produce Market Homes Ordered.” Sacramento Bee. 22 August 1933. “Remember When.” Sacramento Bee. 3 July 1983.
“Sacramento Elks to Erect $1,000,000 Home.” Lincoln News Messenger (Lincoln, CA). 16 January 1925. “Produce Firm is Purchased for $500,000.” Sacramento Bee. 21 February 1938. “Sacramento Has Big Business as Produce Shipper.” Sacramento Bee. 12 May 1934.” “Sacramento Is Fruit and Produce Hub for Rich Valley.” Sacramento Bee. 29 May 1925. “Sacramento Now Has the Largest and Most Complete Produce Terminal in Northern California.” Sacramento Bee. 29 May 1925.
“Satterlee, Tomich Change Name of Firm.” Sacramento Bee. 20 July 1957. “Spear.” Sacramento Bee. 11 January 1943.
“S.T. Levy, Produce Tycoon.” San Francisco Examiner. 22 September 1962. “Sun, Davis.” Sacramento Bee. 10 July 2005.
“They ‘Step on It.” Los Angeles Times. 5 July 1931.
“Thomas S. Chan, 79, Ran Family’s Produce Firm.” Sacramento Bee. 1 August 1998 “Three Firms Begin Business in Industrial Tract North of City.” Sacramento Bee. 19 August 1931. “Three New Building Contracts Are Filed.” Sacramento Bee. 18 June 1925. “Tomich and Yee Form Architectural Firm.” Sacramento Bee. 17 June 1973.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 77 February 22, 2022

Trinh, Jean. “100 Years of Changes at Downtown’s Historic Seventh Street Produce Market.” LA Weekly. 12 October 2017. Accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.laweekly.com/100-years-of- changes-at-downtowns-historic-seventh-street-produce-market/. “Ward Seed Firm to Build Plant Costing $60,000.” Sacramento Bee. 26 March 1925. “Wente Heads Produce Fete.” The Times (San Mateo, CA). 21 August 1963. “Wholesale Firm Plans Expansion.” Sacramento Bee. 30 January 1929.

The Western Architect 33, No. 11, November 1924.
“Work Started on Produce Terminal.” Sacramento Bee. 12 January 1925.

Public Records
California State Office of Historic Preservation. Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), Sacramento County. Updated March 2020.

City of Sacramento Municipal Code, 17.604.210 Criteria and requirements for listing on, and deletion from, the Sacramento register. Accessed June 30, 2021,
http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-vi-17_604-ii- 17_604_210&frames=on.

Archival Records
1900 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
1910 United States Federal Census. Ancestry.com.
1920 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
1930 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
1940 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.

Building permit records. City of Sacramento.

California, U.S. Death Index, 1940-1997, Ancestry.com.

California, U.S., Marriage Index, 1960-1985, Ancestry.com.

Dean and Dean Architects. “Produce Terminal & Market for Sacramento Produce Terminal Co.” [architectural drawings]. Nicholas A. Tomich Collection. 1898/005/001. Center for Sacramento History.

Nebraska, U.S., Select County Marriage Records, 1855-1908, Ancestry.com.

Property records. Sacramento County Clerk-Recorder.

Sacramento city directories, 1922-1982. Ancestry.com.

Sacramento County Assessor Map Books. Center for Sacramento History.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 78 February 22, 2022

Sanborn Map Company fire insurance maps. Sacramento, California. Sacramento Public Library.

U.S. Find a Grave Index, 1600s-Current, Ancestry.com.

U.S. Social Security Applications and Claims Index, 1936-2007, Ancestry.com.

U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards, 1917-1918. Ancestry.com.

U.S., World War II Draft Cards Young Men, 1940-1947, Ancestry.com.

Internet Sources
Carlsson, Carl. “Produce Market.” FoundSF.org. Accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.foundsf.org/index.php?title=Produce_Market. “City of Sacramento Historical Growth by Annexation.” City of Sacramento. Accessed July 21, 2021, https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Long-Range/New- Growth/AnnexationHistory_A.pdf?la=en.
“Distribution Areas.” General Produce Company. Accessed July 28, 2021, https://www.generalproduce.com/operations/distribution. “History.” General Produce Company. Accessed July 16, 2021, https://www.generalproduce.com/about/history.
“History of General Produce” [video]. YouTube. Posted February 17, 2014. Accessed July 16, 2021, https://youtu.be/Su1oqfKFw10.

Kresin, Janice M. “Terminal Markets: The Center of the Produce Universe.” The Packer. 3 December 2019. Accessed July 29, 2020, https://d22t9forbost52.cloudfront.net/news/industry/terminal- markets-center-produce-universe.

McCabe, Michael. “Farmers Market Sets Up in Historic Spot.” SFGate. 24 May 1996. Accessed July 29, 2021, https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Farmers-Market-Sets-Up-in-Historic-Spot-San- 2981203.php.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 79 February 22, 2022

IX. APPENDICES
Appendix A – Original Dean & Dean Architectural Drawings The following appendix contains original architectural drawings of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building by Dean & Dean that are included in the Nicholas A. Tomich Collection at the Center for Sacramento History. Additional drawings by Dean & Dean of early additions and alterations are available for viewing at the Center for Sacramento History.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 80 February 22, 2022
Appendix B – Building Permit Applications
Front and back pages of building permit applications currently on file with the City of Sacramento.

Cancelled and expired permits are not included.

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. BUILDING INSPECTIONS DIVISION

CITY OF SACRAMENTO

CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
This Building, the address of which is i.c AL:1
Sacramento. California. is hereby classified as a Group Occupancy, to wit:
, and is of Type
Construction as defined in the Sacramento City Building Code. It has been constructed and com- pleted in accordance with the requirements of the Sacramento City Building Code and, where applicable, with the requirements of the State Laws.

Therefore, as of this date it is hereby Certified for the Occupancy described above and may be occupied.

PERMIT NO.:

OWNER: D.T. SULLIVAN, SUPERINTENDENT
Building Inspections Division
Post in a
Conspicuous Place by.
(over) Building Inspector
9115

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 Sacramento Produce Terminal, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 81 February 22, 2022
Appendix C – Preparer Qualifications
This Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared by Page & Turnbull of Sacramento, California. Page & Turnbull staff responsible for this report include: Ruth Todd, FAIA, Principal-in-charge; Christina Dikas Associate Principal; Melisa Gaudreau Associate Principal, project manager; and Clare Flynn, Cultural Resources Planner, primary author, all of whom meet or exceed the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Historic Architecture, Architectural History, or History.
211-217 NORTH 16TH STREET

HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
[21122]

PREPARED FOR BAUEN CAPITAL, LLC
February 22, 2022

Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................................... 4 II. EXISTING HISTORIC STATUS .......................................................................................................................... 5 National Register of Historic Places ......................................................................................................... 5 California Register of Historical Resources ............................................................................................. 5 California Historical Resource Status Codes ........................................................................................... 5 Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources ......................................................................... 6 III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................... 7 Primary Façade ........................................................................................................................................... 8 North Façade ............................................................................................................................................. 10 East Façade ................................................................................................................................................ 11 South Façade ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Interior ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 Surrounding Neighborhood .................................................................................................................... 16 IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT..................................................................................................................................... 18 Early Sacramento History ............................................................................................................................ 18 North 16th Street ........................................................................................................................................... 19 V. SITE HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................ 24 Site Development ......................................................................................................................................... 24 Construction Chronology......................................................................................................................... 32 C.J. Hopkinson, Contractor ...................................................................................................................... 33 Ownership and Occupant History .............................................................................................................. 35 Ownership History .................................................................................................................................... 35 Known Occupant History ......................................................................................................................... 35 Select Owner and Occupant Biographies .............................................................................................. 36 VI. EVALUATION ................................................................................................................................................ 40 California Register of Historical Resources ............................................................................................... 40 Criterion 1 (Events) ................................................................................................................................... 41 Criterion 2 (Persons) ................................................................................................................................. 42 Criterion 3 (Architecture) ......................................................................................................................... 43 Criterion 4 (Information Potential) ......................................................................................................... 43 Integrity .......................................................................................................................................................... 44 Character-Defining Features ....................................................................................................................... 45 VII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 46 VIII. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 47 Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 1 February 22, 2022
IX. APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................. 51 Appendix A – Building Permit Applications ........................................................................................... 51 Appendix B – Preparer Qualifications .................................................................................................... 52 Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 2 February 22, 2022
I. INTRODUCTION
This Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) has been prepared for 211-217 North 16th Street at the request of Bauen Capital, LLC in anticipation of a future project at the site. The property contains a 25,280-square-foot commercial building located on the east side of North 16th Street between Thornton Avenue to the north and North B Street to the south (Figure 1 to Figure 3). The oldest portion of the building was constructed in 1922 as part of the A. Meister Sons Company auto, truck, bus, and railcar manufacturing plant. In 1932, all but the north gabled wing of the A. Meister Sons Company plant was demolished and incorporated into a new building designed by local Sacramento contractor C.J. Hopkinson for owner George Baxter, who leased units within the building to various tenants. When it was originally constructed, the building contained an automobile service shop, garage, and restaurant. The building continued to be used in an automotive and transportation related capacity until at least 1975. From roughly 1984 to 2021, it was used as Rulands Used Office Furnishings.

Figure 1. The central city of Sacramento. The approximate location of the subject property is marked with a white arrow.

California State Capitol

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA PAGE & TURNBULL 3 February 22, 2022
Figure 2. Aerial view of 211-217 North 16th Street. Source: Google Maps, 2021. Subject parcel outlined in red.

Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Figure 3. Assessor's parcel map. The subject parcel is shaded in red. Source: Sacramento County Assessor's Office. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 4 February 22, 2022

METHODOLOGY
This report Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) report provides a summary of the current historic status, a building description, and historic context for the commercial building at 211-217 North 16th Street. Page & Turnbull prepared this report using research collected at various local repositories, including the Center for Sacramento History, Sacramento County Office of the Clerk-Recorder, and the Sacramento Public Library, as well as various online sources including Ancestry.com, the California Digital Newspaper Collection, Newspapers.com, Calisphere.org, and SacMaps.org. Key primary sources consulted and cited in this report include Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps, Sacramento building permit applications, Sacramento city directories, Sacramento County Assessor’s records, Sacramento water tap records, historical newspapers, and historic aerial photographs. Page & Turnbull staff conducted a site visit to 211-217 North 16th Street on June 23, 2021. All photographs within this report were taken at that time, unless otherwise noted.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Page & Turnbull evaluated the property for significance according to the significance criteria of the California Register and found that it does not appear to be individually eligible under any criteria.

However, the property continues to be a contributor to the locally designated North 16th Street Historic District and is considered a historic resource under CEQA.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 5 February 22, 2022

II. EXISTING HISTORIC STATUS
The following section examines the national, state, and local historic status currently assigned to 211-217 North 16th Street.

National Register of Historic Places
The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) is the nation’s most comprehensive inventory of historic resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and includes buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts that possess historic, architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural significance at the national, state, or local level.

The subject property is not listed on the National Register.

California Register of Historical Resources
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens.

The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.

The subject property is not listed on the California Register.

California Historical Resource Status Codes
Properties listed or under review by the State of California Office of Historic Preservation are listed within the Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD) and are assigned a California Historical Resource Status Code (Status Code) of “1” to “7” to establish their historical significance in relation to the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or California Register of Historical Resources (California Register).1 Properties with a Status Code of “1” or “2” are either eligible for listing in the California Register or the National Register, or are already listed in one or both of the registers. Properties assigned Status Codes of “3” or “4” appear to be eligible for listing in either register, but normally require more research to support this rating. Properties assigned a Status Code of “5” have typically been determined to be locally significant or to have contextual

1 California State Office of Historic Preservation, Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD), Sacramento County, updated March 2020.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 6 February 22, 2022

importance. Properties with a Status Code of “6” are not eligible for listing in either register. Finally, a Status Code of “7” means that the resource has not been evaluated for the National Register or the California Register, or needs reevaluation.

The subject property is listed in the BERD database for Sacramento County with a status code of 5S2, meaning “an individual property that is eligible for local listing or designation.”2 The most recent update to the BERD database was in March 2020.

Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources
The Sacramento Register of Historic & Cultural Resources (Sacramento Register) is the City of Sacramento’s official list of properties designated as local landmarks, historic districts, or contributing resources under Chapter 17.604.210 of the Sacramento Municipal Code. The Municipal Code provides criteria that must be met in order for a property to gain historic designation, many of which are similar to the criteria for listing on the National or California Registers.3 The Sacramento Register meets the requirements of a local register of historical resources under CEQA.

211-217 North 16th Street is listed on the Sacramento Register as a contributor to the North 16th Street Historic District.

2 California State Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation, Technical Assistance Bulletin No. 8: User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historical Resource Inventory Directory, (Sacramento, November 2004). 3 City of Sacramento Municipal Code, 17.604.210 Criteria and requirements for listing on, and deletion from, the Sacramento register, accessed June 30, 2021, http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-vi-17_604-ii- 17_604_210&frames=on.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 7 February 22, 2022

Figure 4. Map showing the boundaries of the North 16th Street Historic District. The subject property is shaded red. Source: Sacramento Historic District Plans, 2019, 277. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

III. ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION
211-217 North 16th Street is a one-story commercial building with a square footprint that fills nearly the entire subject parcel. The building is composed of several smaller volumes with different roof forms (Figure 5). A long, side-facing gabled roof extends across the front of the building along North 16th Street (referred to in this description as the “front gabled volume”). The west-facing slope of this roof is covered with red clay tiles, while the east-facing slope is covered with composition shingles.

All other roofs of the building are covered with corrugated metal. Behind this front gabled volume, a wider gabled roof with three wire glass skylights extends across the length of the north side of the building along Thornton Avenue (referred to as the “north gabled volume”). A shorter gabled roof of a similar width runs along a portion of the south side of the building along North B Street (referred to as the “south gabled volume”). The largest volume of the building is located at the southeast corner of the building. This volume is covered by a gable-on-hip roof with three wire glass skylights on its west slope and several long narrow skylights on its east slope (referred to as the “rear gable- on-hip volume”). The middle portion of the building appears to also have a gable-on-hip roof

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 8 February 22, 2022

(referred to as the “middle gable-on-hip volume”). The building is generally clad with unpainted red brick laid in common bond.

For ease of reading and consistency, cardinal directions (north, south, east, west) have been used to describe individual building facades.

Figure 5. Aerial view, showing the various volumes that make up the subject building. Source: Google Maps, 2021. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Primary Façade
The primary, west, façade faces North 16th Street contains the main pedestrian entrances to the building and is roughly divided into three sections (Figure 6). The north end of the façade contains a traditional storefront with a main entry at its center, consisting of two glazed doors, flanked by low brick bulkhead walls and a band of large, metal-framed display windows with a strip of transom windows above (Figure 7). A metal sign is centered above the storefront entrance. To the south, the center of the façade features four large bays that appear to be infilled storefront windows (Figure 8). The openings have been infilled with brick walls and a variety of fixed windows, doors, and signage. Two steel structures that once supported signs protrude from the roof above these Front gabled
volume
North gabled volume
Middle
gable-on-hip
volume
Rear gable-on-hip
volume
South gabled
volume
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 9 February 22, 2022

openings. The south end of the façade features two metal doors set into an otherwise uninterrupted expanse of brick wall (Figure 9).

Figure 6. The primary façade, view southeast.

Figure 7. Storefront at the north end of the primary facade, view east.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 10 February 22, 2022

Figure 8. Infilled openings at the middle of the
primary facade, view southwest.

Figure 9. Metal doors and brick cladding at the south
end of the primary facade, view southwest.

North Façade
The north façade contains twelve bays divided by brick piers (Figure 10 and Figure 11). These piers support a concrete lintel that runs along the full length of the facade. The bays in the middle portion of the façade are roughly equal in size, while those located at the extreme east and west ends are narrower. The bays contain multi-lite steel windows and two infilled garage door openings. The first garage door opening is located in the fourth bay from the left (east) and is infilled with plywood cladding and a plywood door. The second garage door opening is located in the eighth bay from the left. It is infilled with a brick-clad base wall with plywood siding above and contains a glazed metal door with a metal shed awning. The two bays at the west end of the façade are located beneath the gable end of the long, narrow gabled volume at the front of the building. A painted wood sign reading “Retail Wholesale” is attached to the gable end above the concrete lintel.

Figure 10. The north facade, view southeast.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 11 February 22, 2022

Figure 11. The north facade, view southwest.

East Façade
The east façade is located at the rear of the building. Like the north façade, it is composed of a series of twelve bays that are divided by brick piers and support a concrete lintel (Figure 12). Bays at the far north and south ends are blind; all other bays contain multi-lite steel windows in their upper half.

The majority of the bays are part of the large hip-on-gable volume portion at the southeast corner of the building, with the exception of the three bays at the far north end of the façade. These three bays are located beneath the gabled portion of the building that runs along Thornton Avenue. This gable end is clad with corrugated metal and contains a circular metal vent.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 12 February 22, 2022

Figure 12. The east facade, view west. The lot containing SMUD infrastructure is in the foreground.

South Façade
The south façade faces North B Street and is composed of three sections (Figure 13). The far west end of the façade contains the south gable end of the long, gabled volume that extends across the front of the building. This section is clad with brick and contains a secondary entrance to the building, which consists of a large, glazed opening filled with metal framed double doors, sidelites, and transom windows. To the right (east), the middle section of the façade is part of a shorter gabled volume along North B Street. This is clad with corrugated metal and contains a metal door and a sliding, corrugated metal garage door that extends from the floor to the ceiling. The east end of the façade to the right is part of the large hip-on-gable roof at the rear of the building. It contains a row of floor-to-ceiling sliding, corrugated metal garage doors. To the right of these doors, the far east end of the facade is clad with unpainted brick.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 13 February 22, 2022

Figure 13. The south facade, view northeast.

Interior
The interior of the building is subdivided into several different spaces that roughly correspond to the different roof shapes that are visible in aerial imagery. The front gabled volume along North 16th Street contains finished office spaces with carpet floors and plaster partition walls (Figure 14). The south portion of this space was reconstructed following a fire around 1966 and contains a rebuilt exposed wood truss ceiling (Figure 15). Other office areas feature dropped plaster ceilings and skylights that provide daylight.

Figure 14. Office space at the front of the building,
view southeast.

Figure 15. Reconstructed office area at the south side
of the front gabled volume, view south.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 14 February 22, 2022

The north gabled volume that extends along Thornton Avenue was most recently used to store office furniture. It is enclosed by brick walls on all sides. The interior brick wall along the south side appears to have once been an exterior wall and contains multi-lite steel windows like those on the north and south façades of the building. The east end of the space features an exposed wood truss ceiling; at the west end of the space, the truss is covered by a dropped acoustical tile ceiling (Figure 16 and Figure 17).

Figure 16. East end of the north gabled volume with
an exposed wood truss ceiling, view west.

Figure 17. West end of the space with dropped
acoustical tile ceilings, view northeast.

The south gabled volume is also used to store used furniture. It features a concrete floor and an exposed wood truss ceiling that has been reinforced with wood and steal beams (Figure 18). A fire- rated wall separates the space from adjacent spaces to the east and west. Natural light is provided by a series of long, narrow skylights in the corrugated roof.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 15 February 22, 2022

Figure 18. Interior of the south gabled volume, view southwest.

The middle hip-on-gable roof volume is split into a finished office area with carpet floors, plaster partition walls, dropped plaster ceilings, and skylights, and an adjacent space with concrete floors and an exposed wood truss ceiling from which heavy crane machinery is suspended (Figure 19 and Figure 20). The walls of this space consist of a brick wall with infilled window openings to the north, a fire-rated wall to the east, and a corrugated metal partition to the south.

Figure 19. Office area in the middle gable-on-hip
volume, view north.

Figure 20. Exposed wood truss ceiling with crane
machinery and brick wall, view north.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 16 February 22, 2022

The rear gable-on-hip roof volume is the largest space inside the building (Figure 21). The vast open space features an exposed bowstring truss ceiling from which heavy crane machinery is suspended.

The space is enclosed by a fire-rated partition wall to the west, brick walls to the north and east, and corrugated metal walls with floor-to-ceiling sliding garage doors to the south. The north brick wall is part of the north gabled volume and contains some concrete block infill and multi-lite steel windows. A series of skylights in the corrugated metal roof provide daylight to the interior.

Figure 21. Bowstring truss inside the large gable-on-hip roof volume at the rear of the building, view northeast.

Surrounding Neighborhood
The surrounding neighborhood consists of a variety of industrial and commercial buildings oriented around North 16th Street, one of the primary transportation arteries into and out of downtown Sacramento. The buildings primarily date to the first half of the twentieth century and are mostly one-story, double-height buildings, though some extend to two stories. Directly across from the subject property is the Sacramento Produce Terminal building (built 1925) at 200 North 16th Street (Figure 22). The former W.A. Ward Seed Company building (built 1925) is located directly to the north (Figure 23). Directly behind the building to the east, there is a lot that contains Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) infrastructure (Figure 12). Further to the east and directly to the

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 17 February 22, 2022

south are several buildings that are part of the Blue Diamond Almond complex (Figure 24 and Figure 25).

Figure 22. The Sacramento Produce Terminal
building at 200 North 16th Street, view northwest.

Figure 23. The W.A. Ward Seed Company Building at
235 North 16th Street, view northeast (2018).

Figure 24. Blue Diamond Almond buildings to the
east of the subject property, view northeast (2018).

Figure 25. Blue Diamond Almond warehouse to the
south of the subject property, view southeast (2018).

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 18 February 22, 2022

IV. HISTORIC CONTEXT

EARLY SACRAMENTO HISTORY
Similar to other California cities, the earliest recorded exploration of the Sacramento area was by Spanish explorers and missionaries. In 1808, Gabriel Moraga, the first recorded European to visit the Sacramento Valley, traveled northward along the Sacramento River in search of suitable sites for a future mission. Though Moraga did not settle in the area, he did open up new possibilities for discovery. At this time, the confluence of the American and Sacramento Rivers consisted mainly of an oak-studded grassland, which was frequently flooded by these two rivers.

For the next two decades, various travelers explored the river and its surroundings, but did not establish any permanent settlements. In 1839, John Sutter, along with a few Hawaiian and European settlers, established a fort on the land known as New Helvetia, which was given to them as part of an agreement with the Mexican government. Sutter’s Fort served defensive as well as commercial purposes due to the ever-increasing number of immigrants coming into the area. Sutter introduced the first horticultural enterprises at this time with the planting of wheat, orchards, and vineyards. In an attempt to expand his valley empire, Sutter erected a sawmill at Coloma, which led to the accidental discovery of gold in the area in 1848.

The subsequent Gold Rush brought a massive influx of miners and immigrants into the area. This event quickly overturned the ranch economy and led to the rapid growth of the city, now known as Sacramento. The proximity to the mouth of the American River made Sacramento an ideal port for goods coming upriver from San Francisco en route to the gold fields. However, this location also welcomed a host of problems including frequent flooding. By 1848, the streets of Sacramento were laid out, and the city’s population quickly rose from 150 in April 1849 to 9,087 in the following year.

When California was admitted to the Union in 1850, Sacramento’s rising population and potential as an economic hub made the city a logical choice as the capital by 1854.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 19 February 22, 2022

Figure 26. Flood in Sacramento, 1862. Source:

California State Library.

Figure 27. View of the State Capitol Building, 1880s.

Source. California State Library.

NORTH 16TH STREET
The North 16th Street Historic District preserves a concentration of buildings that were once part of a busy industrial and automotive corridor that grew up on the blocks surrounding North 16th Street to the north of Sacramento’s central city and directly east of the Central/Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops.

Unlike most areas within Sacramento’s original street grid, North 16th Street never attracted substantial residential or commercial development. The street and its surrounding blocks were located near the channel of the American River, where flooding was common. After particularly devastating floods in the winter of 1861-1862, the Central Pacific Railroad, later renamed the Southern Pacific Railroad (S.P.R.R.) in the 1880s, agreed to construct a new northern levee along B Street to aid the city’s flood control efforts in return for the right to lay the tracks of its primary transcontinental route along a right-of-way on B Street.4 The levee and railroad tracks created a physical and visual barrier that cut North 16th Street off from the rest of the city, limiting transportation and access to the area. Additional efforts to protect the city from floods by redirecting the channel of the American River north in 1868 created a flood plain between this new channel and the city where North 16th Street was located. In the early twentieth century, the area was dubbed a “no man’s land” by locals because it represented an unpopulated area between the City of Sacramento and North Sacramento.5 Development remained limited until 1905, when the

4 Richard J. Orsi, “Railroads and the Urban Environment: Sacramento’s Story,” in River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region, ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2013), 83-84.
5 “’No Man’s Land’ Bristles With Industrial Plants,” Sacramento Bee, 14 September 1942.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 20 February 22, 2022

original channel of the American River and the swamplands to the north of the river were reclaimed in the early twentieth century.6

Figure 28. Map of Sacramento, showing the original and new channels of the American River and north section of the city (1874). The approximate location of the subject property is marked with a red arrow. Source: Library & Archives, California State Railroad Museum, Sacramento, CA, edited by Page & Turnbull.

Although some small residential subdivisions emerged in the area around North 16th Street, its proximity to the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops—and the railroad company’s increasingly noisy, congested, polluting, and dangerous industrial activities—made the street and its environs undesirable to most residents or commercial establishments and dictated that industrial development would dominate the area.7 Land reclamation efforts and improved transportation and access to the area north of the levee spurred industrial development along North 16th Street in the first decades of the twentieth century. In 1915, the 16th Street Bridge was constructed across the American River as part of the Lincoln Highway (later State Route 160 and U.S. Route 40), which included a section running down North 16th Street through the heart of Sacramento. The highway was the first coast-to-coast road in the United States and transformed 16th Street into a busy corridor for automobile and truck travel. Automobile camps and businesses oriented toward the automobile and trucking industries sprang up along the road to serve travelers.8 One of the first

6 Historic Environment Consultants, “River District Architectural and Historical Property Survey Update,” (report, City of Sacramento, 2009), 9-10.
7 “Railroads and the Urban Environment,” 89-90; Historic Environment Consultants, 10. 8 Ibid., 9-10.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 21 February 22, 2022

industrial buildings constructed in the area was the A. Meister & Sons Company automobile manufacturing plant at 211 North 16th Street, completed in 1922.9

Industrial development along North 16th Street increased in the 1920s with the completion of further transportation improvements into the area. In 1924, a dangerous and congested at-grade crossing of 16th Street over the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the B Street levee was replaced by a below-grade crossing. The same year, spur tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad were extended into the area. Improved vehicular access to the area and connections to the main railroad lines catalyzed a period of increased development in the area.10 Several warehousing and distribution facilities were built in the early decades of the twentieth century, many of which served the agricultural industry and contributed to North 16th Street’s transformation into the principal produce distribution center for the region.11 In 1925, the Sacramento Produce Terminal opened at 200 North 16th Street, becoming the distribution hub for the Sacramento region’s wholesale produce industry.

Its completion attracted other agricultural industries to North 16th Street. This included an agricultural seed storage, milling, and cleaning facility for the W.A. Ward Seed Company at 221 North 16th Street, also in 1925. The following year, the Triangle Produce Company occupied several buildings on North C Street.12

Other industries also moved into the area in the 1920s and 1930s, drawn by its easy access to several major transportation routes. Many of these facilities were constructed beside spurs of the Southern Pacific Railroad’s tracks to enable the direct and efficient transportation of goods and materials.13 Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Company (later the Sacramento Pipe Works), a steel pipe manufacturing plant, operated at the corner of North 16th and North B streets from 1923 through the 1970s.14 Other businesses in the area included beverage distribution companies, a manufacturing plant for heavy-duty scales, and oil storage facilities.15 Automobile camps and businesses oriented toward the automobile and trucking industries also sprang up along the road to serve travelers.16 These included the headquarters for two major commercial trucking companies, the Mack Truck International Corp. and F.B. Hart Trucking Co., which occupied the building at 470

9 Page & Turnbull, “211-217 North 16th Street HRE,” 2021. 10 “Three Plans Will Avoid Sixteenth Street Crossings,” Sacramento Bee, 5 February 1924. 11 Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 1998), 2. 12 Paula Boghosian, “W.A. Ward Seed Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Triangle Produce Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “1501 N. C Street,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building.” 13 Boghosian, “Sacramento Produce Terminal Building,” 1. 14 Paula Boghosian, “Sacramento Pipe Works,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 15 Paula Boghosian, “Acme Beverage Co.,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “1610 - 1620 North C Street,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 16 Ibid., 9-10.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 22 February 22, 2022

North 16th Street at separate times from 1929 until the late 1950s.17 Automotive repair shops, parts distributors, and gas and oil stations were also common along the busy automotive thoroughfare.

These included the Western Body Company at 235 North 16th Street, Flying “A” gas station at 318 North 16th Street, and truck and auto service shops that replaced the A. Meister & Company building at 211-217 North 16th Street in the 1930s.18 By 1943, North 16th Street’s previous identity as a “no man’s land” was considered a misnomer, and the area was bristling with industrial plants.19

Figure 29. The Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Co. pipeworks situated along a spur of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks (ca. 1900). Source: Center for Sacramento History, Frank Christy Collection, 1998/722/0299.

Tenants came and went over the decades, but fire insurance maps published by the Sanborn Map Company in 1952 show that an agricultural and industrial character persisted through the middle of the twentieth century. By then, the California Packing Corporation’s canning operations had expanded from its site on C Street to several buildings on North 16th Street, including the former Triangle Produce Company complex. The Sixteenth Street Bean and Grain Cleaner occupied facilities

17 Paula Boghosian, “Mack Truck International Corp., Crest Carpet Co.,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009).
18 Paula Boghosian, “Western Body Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Russell Brothers Company,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009); Paula Boghosian, “Flying ‘A’ Gas Station Building,” (DPR 523, California Office of Historic Preservation, 2009). 19 “’No Man’s Land’ Bristles With Industrial Plants,” Sacramento Bee, 14 September 1942; “No Man’s Land’ Now is Misnomer,” Sacramento bee, 30 March 1955.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 23 February 22, 2022

on the same block.20 Many automotive businesses continued to line the corridor, especially to the north where North 16th Street connected to two major freeways.

North 16th Street’s status as a major distribution point for agricultural produce and automotive center began to shift in the 1960s. In 1963, the deep water channel of the Port of Sacramento opened in West Sacramento.21 The Port was built to serve as an inland port for the agricultural industry and specialized in the movement of agricultural goods.22 Its completion drew this kind of activity away from traditional shipping and distribution centers in Sacramento.23 Meanwhile, the construction of interstate highways around the city diverted automotive traffic from older transportation corridors, such as North 16th Street.24 By 1966, the railroad spurs that had played an integral role in the development of an industrial corridor along North 16th Street were taken out of service and removed.25

By the 1980s, many of the industries that had contributed to North 16th Street’s vibrance were declining. In 1981, the California Packing Company closed its Del Monte canning facilities, which had employed many Sacramentans. Blue Diamond Growers moved into the company’s canning facilities along the B Street levee a few years later. Also in 1981, the Southern Pacific Railroad’s workshops, which had driven much of the industrial development of North 16th Street, began to shrink in size and labor force. The workshops finally closed in 1999.26

Throughout its history, North 16th Street‘s predominately industrial character and isolation from the city had attracted homeless, transient, and off-season agricultural workers to the area, a characteristic that persists in the twenty-first century. The proximity of the Southern Pacific Railroad depot contributed to the influx of homeless men to the area, due to the subculture of “hobos” who traveled the country by jumping on and off freight trains.27 During the Great Depression, Hoovervilles of makeshift shelters sprang up along the American River, levees, and railroad tracks north of Sacramento. These encampments were home to thousands of unemployed workers.28

20 Sanborn Map Company, Sacramento, California [map], vol. 1, 1915-Jan. 1951. 21 Steven Avella, Sacramento: Indomitable City (San Francisco: Arcadia Publishing, 2003), 124. 22 “Sacramento Deep Water Ship Channel Limited Reevaluation Report (LRR) with Project Economic Analysis,” (report, US Army Corps of Engineers, 2011), https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/portals/68/docs/srdwsc/appendix_e.pdf. 23 Environmental Science Associates, “R Street Corridor Historic District Survey Report,” (report, City of Sacramento Preservation Commission, 2017), 8.
24 William Burg, Sacramento’s K Street: Where Our City Was Born (Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2012), 137-183. 25 Dudek, “Cultural Resources Report for the Blue Diamond Growers (BDG) A Street Annex Building Project,” 2018, 20. 26 Avella, 147-148.
27 Historic Environment Consultants, 12.
28 Gary Brechin and Lee M.A. Simpson, “Unseen Investment: New Deal Sacramento,” in River City and Valley Life: An Environmental History of the Sacramento Region, ed. Christopher J. Castaneda and Lee M.A. Simpson (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2013), 187.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 24 February 22, 2022

Drawn by the population of homeless and transients residing in the area, religious and charitable organizations, such as Loaves and Fishes, moved into several buildings along North 16th Street after the industrial and agricultural tenants moved out in the 1980s and began serving the surrounding community. They continue to occupy a large portion of the historic district, particularly the former industrial buildings on North C Street.29 Meanwhile, commercial and recreational businesses have replaced earlier agricultural and industrial tenants on North 16th Street.

V. SITE HISTORY

SITE DEVELOPMENT
Brothers Edward A. Meister and Albert R. Meister purchased much of the land along North 16th Street, north of the Sacramento city limits from W.H. Basler between 1917 and 1922 and began to develop the area into a new industrial center for Sacramento.30 Development of the subject property began in 1922 with the construction of a new headquarters for the A. Meister and Sons Company, which had been founded by Edward and Albert’s father in the 1860s. The company initially manufactured carriages in the 1860s but by the 1920s had evolved to specialize in the production of automobile, truck, bus, and railcar bodies. The A. Meister and Sons Company building cost $30,000 to complete.31 At the time, it was one of the first buildings that had been constructed in the new industrial area that was emerging along North 16th Street north of the B Street levee in the early 1920s, just prior to the completion of an automobile crossing under the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the B Street levee and additional railroad spur tracks that opened the area up to rail and automobile traffic.32A photograph taken at the time of the building’s completion shows the building with a square footprint, composed of a two-story central volume flanked to the north and south by one-story wings (Figure 30). All three parts of the building appear to have been constructed of brick and had low pitched hipped roofs. The wings had repeating bays of windows alternating with large garage door openings.

29 Historic Environment Consultants, 13.
30 Sacramento County Assessor Map Books, Center for Sacramento History. 31 “Development,” Sacramento Bee, 28 October 1922.
32 “Spur Tracks Are Approved In One-Sided Hearing,” Sacramento Bee, 2 October 1923; “Three Plans Will Avoid Sixteenth Street Crossings,” Sacramento Bee, 24 February 1924.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 25 February 22, 2022

Figure 30. Photograph of the completed A. Meister & Sons Company headquarters at its completion in 1922.

Source: “Development,” Sacramento Bee, 28 October 1922.

By 1923, the property had been sold to local building contractors George L. Herndon and Henry Finnigan.33 Research did not reveal the reason the building was sold so quickly after its completion, however, it may have been an indication that the business was struggling financially (Figure 31). Two years later, A. Meister and Sons Company went bankrupt, and the subject property was sold to George L. Baxter, a chemist with the Southern Pacific Railroad.34 Baxter used the property as an investment and leased the building to a series of tenants.35 Like A. Meister and Sons Company, these tenants consisted of auto body manufacturers, including the F.A. Lowden Body Company and Sacramento Body Company.

In spite of the A. Meister and Sons Company’s demise, aerial photographs and newspaper articles indicate that within a few years of the subject building’s completion, development along North 16th Street was increasing at a rapid pace. In June 1924, only the A. Meister & Sons Company building, Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Company pipe works building (built 1923), and O’Connor Building Material Company building had been completed (construction date unknown).36 An aerial photograph taken in 1928 shows that by this time several additional industrial buildings had been completed in the immediate vicinity of the subject property, including the Sacramento Produce Terminal Building (built in 1925) to the west and W.A. Ward Seed Company building (also built in 1925) to the north (Figure 32).

33 Sacramento County Assessor Map Book, 1923, Center for Sacramento History. 34 “Meister Factory Sold to George Baxter at $31,500,” Sacramento Bee, 6 May 1925. 35 “Judgment for $35,000 South By D.F. Appling,” Sacramento Bee, 28 January 1928; “Meister Factory Sold to George Baxter At $31,500,” Sacramento Bee, 6 May 1925.
36 “Weeks Building Permits Reach $135,075 Total,” Sacramento Bee, 7 June 1924.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 26 February 22, 2022

Figure 31. 1923 Sacramento County Assessor Map Book. The subject property, shaded red, is shown as owned by G.H. Herndon and H. Finnigan. Source: Center for Sacramento History.

Figure 32: Aerial photograph, 1928. The subject property is outlined by a red dotted line. Source: Flight C-163, Frame D-1, Fairchild Aerial Surveys, UCSB Library, FrameFinder. Edited by Page & Turnbull.

Schaw, Ingram, and Batcher
Company building
Sacramento Produce Terminal
W.A. Ward Seed
Company building
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 27 February 22, 2022

Figure 33. Aerial photograph showing the A. Meister & Son Company building viewed from the southeast, 1932.

Source: Sacramento Room, Sacramento Public Library.

An aerial photograph taken in 1932 indicates that the building’s overall form and appearance had been relatively unchanged since its completion (Figure 33). However, the building was about to be significantly altered. In September 1932, The Sacramento Bee reported that a new garage, restaurant, and service station constructed by local contractor C.J. Hopkinson was about to be completed at the address and would open later that month. V.B. Bennett was set to lease the garage and sub-lease the service station to C.W. McKay. Don Bennetts would lease the restaurant.37 The earliest known image of the property after the completion of this work consists of an aerial photograph taken in 1937 (Figure 34). The photograph shows a building with a square floorplan composed of five different adjoining volumes. A long, gabled volume extended across the front of the building, facing North 16th Street, and additional gabled volumes extended along the north and south sides of the building. The largest volume was located at the rear of the building, and a smaller gabled volume was at the center. A comparison of the earlier photographs of the building to this 1937 aerial photo suggests that while the majority of the A. Meister and Sons Company building was demolished and replaced by the new garage, service station, and restaurant in 1932, at least the north wing of the earlier building appears to have been retained and incorporated into the new building. Surviving interior brick walls with multi-lite steel windows along the south side and east façade of the existing north gabled wing that were viewed during a 2021 site visit support this conclusion.

37 “New Garage, Stores To be Opened Monday,” Sacramento Bee, 9 September 1932.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 28 February 22, 2022

Figure 34. Aerial photograph, 1937. Subject property outlined in dotted red line. Source: Flight ABC-1937, Frame 110-91, Laval Company Inc, UCSB Library FrameFinder.

In 1943, a fire that started by a defective flue in the restaurant (then operated by James M.

McMahon as the Terminal Café) spread to the Terminal Truck Service garage and a wholesale refrigeration company called J.N. Blair & Company that was also operating in the building at the time.38 The fire caused $20,000 in damage, most of it to Terminal Truck Service’s facilities. A newspaper article reporting the fire contains the earliest known photograph of the front of the building after it was rebuilt in 1932 (Figure 35). It shows storefronts across roughly the north two- thirds of the façade and a series of garage door openings at the south end of the facade.

Fire insurance maps produced by the Sanborn Map Company in 1952 show the interior configuration of the building at this time (Figure 36). The building was subdivided into numerous areas with different functions. The north side of the building was separated from the rest of the building by a pilastered brick wall and occupied by a shop. Although the Sanborn map shows the unit in use by a sheet metal works, city directories from the period indicate that this area remained in use by J.N. Blair and Company at the time. A restaurant remained in the unit at 215 North 16th Street directly to the south. The rest of the building appears to have been occupied by various spaces that served auto and truck repair businesses. The large space at the rear of the building had

38 “20,000 Fire Hits North 16th Street Building,” Sacramento Bee, 27 February 1943.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 29 February 22, 2022

a wood truss roof supported by pilasters and wood posts and four wireglass skylights. An automobile gas and oil service station was located at the southwest corner of the building.

Figure 35. The front of the subject building during a fire in 1943. Source: “$20,000 Fire Hits North 16th Street Building,” Sacramento Bee, 27 February 1943.

Figure 36: Detail of the Sanborn Map Company map of Sacramento, 1915-1952. Sheet 99e. The subject property is outlined in red. Source: Sacramento Public Library.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 30 February 22, 2022

In 1960, Terminal Truck Services was issued a permit to replace much of the brick wall along the south façade of the building with a series of corrugated metal garage doors. Around 1965 or 1966, another fire broke out, causing major damage to the building, primarily to the southwest corner of the building. The gasoline service pumps and tanks were removed from the front of the building.

The front (west) and south brick façade walls and roof truss at this corner of the building were rebuilt and partitioned as office space. Wood roof trusses in immediately adjacent areas were inspected for damage, cleaned, and reinforced as needed to repair damage, and new corrugated metal roofing was installed. New fire walls were also constructed inside the building. The north and rear areas of the building did not sustain any damage. All other permit records from the 1960s describe the installation of signs for various units of the building. 39

In 1966, the property was sold to Ben and Doris McDonald. The couple opened McDonalds Food Equipment Company in the unit at 217 North 16th Street. From this point on, much of the historic uses of the building shifted. The unit at 215 North 16th Street – which had remained in continuous use as a restaurant, café, or tavern since 1932 – became an appliance repair shop operated by the McDonalds in the 1970s. Likewise, the unit at 213 North 16th Street became a furniture warehouse during the same period. Truck and automobile servicing, which had occupied the majority of the building since 1932, ended between 1975 and 1984 and was replaced by Rulands Used Office Furnishings. In 1989, Stephen Ruland, proprietor of Rulands Used Office Furnishings, purchased a fiberglass bull from a meat market in Elk Grove and installed it at the front of the property facing North 16th Street. The bull, nicknamed RUOFS (an acronym of the company’s name pronounced to sound like “Rufus”), became a well-known point of local interest due to the comical costumes, messages, and jokes Ruland frequently decorated him with. The bull was the focus of features in the Sacramento Bee in 1990 and 2007.40 In 2001, Ruland and his wife purchased the subject property and expanded the company throughout the entire building, as well as several adjacent properties, over the next 20 years. The Rulands sold the property in 2021.41

39 Building permit records and associated film reels, Center for Sacramento History. 40 “Furniture Store Has Steer for All Seasons,” Sacramento Bee, 11 January 1990; “Seeing Red,” Sacramento Bee, 7 February 2007.
41 Property records, Sacramento County Clerk-Recorder’s Office.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 31 February 22, 2022

Figure 37. Chronology diagram, showing major exterior alterations over time.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 32 February 22, 2022

Construction Chronology
The following table provides a timeline of construction activity at 211-217 North 16th Street based on building permit applications on file with the City of Sacramento. Cancelled and expired permits and those pertaining to mechanical, electrical, or plumbing work are not included.

Date Filed
Permit
App. # Applicant Contractor(s) Work
4/19/1946
15962
Terminal Club Electric Sign
Service Co.

Erect electric sign (215 N. 16th
St.)
2/15/1960 D-4690 Harper United
Construction
Construct doors in exit42 wall of
building. (211 N. 16th St.)
5/9/1960 S-2003 Hires Bottling Co. Ad-Art Sign Co. Construct sign Class E. (215 N. 16th St.)
10/18/1962 S-3015 Crystal Creamery Best Neon Co. Construct sign. (215 N. 16th St.) 11/20/1962 S-3056 Ben Perini Best Neon Co. Construct sign Class E (215 N. 16th St.)
10/15/1964 S-3871 Seven Up Bottling Wilmunder
Neon Construct sign. (215 N. 16th St.)
5/16/1966 F-4236 Amy Baxter Peterson &
Associates
Repair fire damage to
warehouse and auto repair
shop
3/21/1974
S-8060,
S-8061,
S-8062
Major Appliances Owner (Ben
McDonald) Construct signs (215 N. 16th St.)

42 “Exit” may be a typo and instead have been intended to read “existing.” Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 33 February 22, 2022

C.J. Hopkinson, Contractor
The majority of the existing building at the subject property was constructed by contractor Clarence J. Hopkinson in 1932.

Hopkinson was born in Sacramento, California in 1888, the son of English immigrants. As a young man he learned the building trade by working as a carpenter.43 By 1917, he was employed as a building contractor, a career he continued for much of the rest of his life.44 Notable buildings completed by Hopkinson in Sacramento include the First Baptist Church at 2324 L Street, completed in 1929; the Andrews and Greilich Funeral Home at 2221 28th Street, completed in 1933 but since demolished; the Coca-Cola Bottling Company Building at 2200 Stockton Boulevard, completed in 1936; and several other churches (Figure 39 through Figure 41). Hopkinson’s contracting firm later became Peterson & Associates General Contractors.45

Hopkinson was also an active and prominent member of the Sacramento community in his personal life. He joined the board of the YMCA in 1934 and by 1934 had been elected president of the organization’s Sacramento branch.46 He continued to serve as the chapter’s director for 20 years.47 Hopkinson was also a member of the Sacramento Masonic Lodge No. 40 for about 50 years as well as the Scottish Rite. 48 Hopkinson was married twice. In 1915, he married Henrietta Perryman, a native of Amador City.49 Following her death in 1962, he married his second wife, Sadie Jeffrey Robert, in 1968.50 He died in 1979 at the age of 91.51

43 1910 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
44 U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards, 1917-1918, Ancestry.com. 45 Photo Record for 1983/001/SBPM02259, Center for Sacramento History, accessed July 12, 2021, https://sacramento.pastperfectonline.com/photo/B9B3F74F-C05F-43FC-AC7D-014473206224. 46 “Three Directors Are Honored For Service to YMCA,” Sacramento Bee, 24 May 1948; “Clarence Hopkinson is Named Y.M.C.A.

Leader,” Sacramento Bee, 10 January 1934.
47 “Clarence J. Hopkinson,” Sacramento Bee, 14 October 1979. 48 “Clarence J. Hopkinson.”
49 “Society Notes,” Sacramento Bee, 22 July 1915.
50 “Henrietta Hopkinson,” Sacramento Bee, 4 September 1962; California, U.S., Marriage Index, 1960-1985, Ancestry.com. 51 “Clarence J. Hopkinson.”
Figure 38.C.J. Hopkinson. Source:

Sacramento Bee, 24 May 1948.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 34 February 22, 2022

Figure 39.The First Baptist Church. Source: Sacramento Room, Sacramento Public Library.

Figure 40. The Andrews and Greilich Funeral Home. Source:
“New Mortuary Chapel Opened,” Sacramento Bee, 1 April
1933.

Figure 41. The Coca-Cola Bottling Company
building. Source: Sacramento Room,
Sacramento Public Library.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 35 February 22, 2022

OWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANT HISTORY
Ownership History
The following table provides a summary of the ownership history of the building at 211-217 North 16th Street beginning with the year of construction, compiled from property records held at the Sacramento County Clerk-Recorder’s office and Sacramento County Assessor map books.

Known Occupant History
The following table provides a summary of the occupant history of the building at 211-217 North 16th Street, compiled from city directories, newspaper articles, and building permit applications on file with the City of Sacramento.

Address Occupant(s) Occupation
211 N. 16th Street A. Meister & Sons Company (1922-1925) F.A. Lowden [Lowdon] Body Co. (1929-1930)
Sacramento Body Co. (1931-1932)
Auto body builders
Auto body builders
Auto repair

Dates of Ownership Owner(s) Occupation
Pre-1923
Edward A. Meister

Albert R. Meister
Secretary-treasurer, A. Meister &
Sons Co.

Manager, A. Meister & Sons Co.
1923-1925
George L. Herndon
Carrie Herndon
Henry Finnigan
Dorris Finnigan
Building contractor
Wife
Building contractor
Wife
1925-1938 George L. Baxter Chemist, Southern Pacific Railroad 1939-1966 Amy Baxter Widow
1966-1998
Ben McDonald

Doris McDonald
Co-owner, McDonald’s Food
Equipment Company
Co-owner, McDonald’s Food
Equipment Company
1999-2001
Kenneth McDonald
Judy Mayes
Kathleen Bell
Diane Belle
John McDonald

2001-2021 Stephen Ruland Owner, Ruland’s Used Office
Furnishings
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 36 February 22, 2022

Address Occupant(s) Occupation
V.B. Bennett/ Terminal Truck Service (ca. 1932-
1972)
H.O. Cummins (1937)
E.N. McPherson (ca. 1940)
Sacramento Spring Works (1943-1955)
Associated Truck & Automotive Inc. (ca. 1975)
Rulands Used Office Furnishings (1984-2021)
Truck repair, Reo dealership

Auto repair
Auto body
Auto repair
Not listed
Used furniture sales
213 N. 16th Street Davis Johnson Lumber Co. (1934)
Martin Westergaard (1935)
James McMahon/Terminal Club (ca. 1937-1961)
National Furniture Inc. (1970-1973)
Lumber milling
Auto body works
Tavern
Furniture warehouse
215 N. 16th Street D.T. Bennetts (1932-1939)
N. H. Lindy (1940-1941)
J.M. McMahon (ca. 1941-1952)
Terminal Restaurant (ca. 1955)
Daisy’s Coffee Shop (ca. 1961)
Zebra Club (ca. 1963-1966)
Major Appliance Reconditioning Center (ca.
1975-1982)
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Coffee shop
Tavern
Appliance repair
217 N. 16th Street Russell Bros Co. (ca. 1939-1940)
J.N. Blair and Company (1943-1954)
California Market Equipment (1954-1961)
Food Equipment Co./McDonald Food Equipment
Company (ca. 1963-ca. 1998)
Auto parts
Commercial Refrigeration
Not listed
Restaurant equipment

Select Owner and Occupant Biographies
A. MEISTER & SONS COMPANY AND THE MEISTER FAMILY (OWNER AND OCCUPANT, 1922-1925)
A. Meister & Sons Company was established in Sacramento, California in 1864.52 Founded by German immigrant August Meister, the company initially specialized in manufacturing wooden wagon wheels and wagon bodies but gradually expanded to the production of other modes of transportation. With the growth of rail travel across the country in the late nineteenth century, the company shifted to building railcars of various models and types.53 As the popularity of the automobile increased in the early twentieth century, the company again transitioned to building automobile, truck, bus, and tractor bodies.54 Buses made by the company were shipped to cities

52 “Auto Body Plant Has Big Payroll,” Sacramento Bee, 4 August 1923. 53 “Make Trip to Quincy in Seven Hours,” Sacramento Bee, 2 March 1918. 54 “Auto Body Plant Has Big Payroll.”
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 37 February 22, 2022

around the world, including Paris, Honolulu, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, and North Bend and Medford, Oregon.55 In 1921, the company merged with the Stockton Tractor Company of Sacramento and the Pacific Car Building Company of Woodland.56 By 1923, the company was considered one of the fastest growing industrial establishments in the North Sacramento area and also had plants in Los Angeles, Fresno, and Woodland. At its headquarters at North 16th Street and North B Street in Sacramento (the subject property), they produced “a class of specially made automobile and truck body [sic] which is proving popular with railroads, auto bus lines and similar establishments requiring a specially built body for transportation.” At its plant in Fresno, the company manufactured trackless streetcars for use in Los Angeles, Glendale, and other cities in Southern California.57 The company suddenly went bankrupt in 1924 after failing to complete several large contracts to “deliver gasoline motors, transmissions and other parts of gasoline- operated cars.”58 The company was forced to sell off its equipment and plants in Sacramento, Fresno, and Woodland and was dissolved.59

A. Meister & Sons Company remained a family owned and operated firm throughout its existence.

August Meister and his wife, Margaret, had one daughter and four sons, all of whom took up professions at the family company. George F. Meister worked as a blacksmith, Albert R. Meister worked as a carriage painter, and Edward A. Meister and Frank H. Meister worked as clerks.60 Edward eventually rose to become the company’s secretary-treasurer.61

The Meister family became a prominent part of the Sacramento community thanks in part to contributions its members made outside of the family business. Between 1917 and 1923, Edward A.

Meister and Albert R. Meister purchased much of the land to the east and west of North 16th Street and were instrumental in developing it into an industrial center for Sacramento.62 In 1922, they constructed the new headquarters for A. Meister & Sons Company at the subject property; at the time, it was one of the first industrial buildings constructed in the area. Shortly after, Edward and Albert co-founded the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company with George McCormack and Charles Spear.63 The brothers led the company, Edward as president and Albert as vice-president.64 The company built and owned the Sacramento Produce Terminal building at 200 North 16th Street.

55 “Twenty-Four Passenger Auto Bus for Stage Line,” Sacramento Bee, 8 May 1915. 56 “Stock Sale Permit Is Granted Meister and Sons,” Sacramento Bee, 12 July 1921. 57 “Meister Company to Build Plant in Fresno,” Sacramento Bee, 28 January 1922. 58 “Judgment for $35,000 South By D.F. Appling,” Sacramento Bee, 28 January 1928. 59 “For Sale,” Sacramento Bee, 1 August 1924.
60 1900 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
61 “Elks to Conduct Final Rites for Edward Meister,” Sacramento Bee, 17 June 1929. 62 Sacramento County Assessor Map Books, Center for Sacramento History. 63 “Remember When,” Sacramento Bee, 3 July 1983; “Three Firms Begin Business in Industrial Tract North of City,” Sacramento Bee, 19 August 1931.
64 “Elks to Conduct Final Rites for Edward Meister.”
Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 38 February 22, 2022

The building became the hub for agricultural produce distribution for the Sacramento region and attracted other associated agricultural and transportation related businesses to the area. Edward also served as Sacramento County supervisor for four years and was a member of the Native Sons of the Golden West. He died in 1929.65 Albert died in 1952.66

GEORGE L. AND AMY BAXTER (OWNERS, CA. 1925-1966)
The majority of the existing building at 211-217 North 16th Street was constructed during the ownership of George L. Baxter. Baxter first took over ownership of the property in 1925 and, in 1932, replaced much of the existing building on the site with an automobile service shop, garage, and restaurant. Baxter was born in Dundee, Scotland around 1886. He immigrated to the United States in 1891 with his mother.67 In 1903, he began working for the Southern Pacific Railroad. He joined the company’s chemistry department in 1910, and eventually rose to become its chief chemist in 1923. 68 He was also a member of the local chapter of the Free and Accepted Masons, the Scottish Rite, and Ben Ali temple of the Sacramento Shriners.69

In 1932, Baxter married Amy Jackson Sprague (born 1886), daughter of Will F. Jackson, who was an internationally recognized landscape painter and curator of the E.B. Crocker Art Gallery (now the Crocker Art Museum). Amy was a graduate of the University of California and worked as a teacher in the Sacramento city school system. She resigned from her teaching position upon her engagement to George Baxter.70 Baxter died a few years later in 1938.71 Amy continued to own the subject property for many decades after her husband’s death. She sold the property in 1966 and died in 1977 at the age of 90.72

THE MCDONALD FAMILY/MCDONALD’S EQUIPMENT COMPANY (OWNERS 1966- 2001, OCCUPANTS, CA. 1966-1984)
The subject property was owned by Ben and Doris McDonald and their descendants from 1966 until 2001. Ben McDonald was born in Selma, Indiana in 1919.73 Doris was born the same year in Texas.74 By 1940, she had moved to Placerville with her father, mother, and sister.75 Around 1963, the couple

65 “Elks to Conduct Final Rites for Edward Meister,” Sacramento Bee, 17 June 1929. 66 California, U.S. Death Index, 1940-1997, Ancestry.com. 67 1920 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.
68 “George L. Baxter Succumbs at Bay,” Sacramento Bee, 6 October 1938. 69 “George L. Baxter Succumbs at Bay.”
70 “Amy Sprague Married to George Baxter,” Sacramento Bee, 11 June 1932. 71 “George L. Baxter Succumbs at Bay.”
72 “Baxter,” Sacramento Bee, 24 January 1977.
73 U.S. Find a Grave Index, 1600s-Current, Ancestry.com. 74 U.S. Social Security Applications and Claims Index, 1936-2007, Ancestry.com. 75 1940 United States Federal Census, Ancestry.com.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 39 February 22, 2022

opened McDonald’s Food Equipment, a restaurant supply store, at the subject building. They took over ownership in 1966. Ben died in 1985.76 Doris continued to run McDonald’s Food Supply until her retirement in 1987.77 After Doris’ death in 1998, the property passed to the couple’s children, Kenneth McDonald, Kathleen Bell, Judy Mayes, and John McDonald.78 They sold it in 2001. Research did not uncover any additional information about the lives of contributions of the McDonald family or activity at McDonald’s Food Equipment.

V.B. BENNETT & TERMINAL TRUCK SERVICE (TENANTS, 1932-1972) Vernard B. (“V.B.”) Bennett was one of the first tenants of the subject property after it was largely rebuilt in 1932 and operated a series of businesses at the address between 1932 and 1967. Bennett was born in Trinity, California in 1899.79 As a young man, he worked as an auto mechanic at a garage in Redding.80 Bennett initially operated a garage at the subject property and leased the neighboring auto service shop to another individual.81 By 1935, the garage was operating under the name of Terminal Truck Service. The company’s name appears to have been inspired by its location directly across the street from the Sacramento Produce Terminal at 200 North 16th Street, the primary produce distribution hub for the Sacramento area. It is likely that Terminal Truck Service served many of the trucks that arrived and departed from the produce terminal on a daily basis. In its early years in the 1930s, the company operated as a 24-hour parts and service department for GMC trucks.82

In 1936, Reo Car Motor Company appointed Bennet and a man named E.E. Lightle to be its Sacramento dealers. The men opened a Reo dealership and showroom at the subject property, adding to Bennett’s business interests at the property.83 Research did not reveal how long the Reo dealership operated out of the subject property, however, it appears to have been relatively short- lived.

In spite of his new business venture, Bennett continued to closely manage the trucking business. In 1937, he installed a $4,000 wheel aligner and frame straightener at the Terminal Truck Service garage, increasing the company’s repairing capabilities. The equipment was designed to work without the need to dismantle a truck and was reportedly only the second such installation in

76 “Ben McDonald,” The Press-Tribune (Roseville, CA), 4 April 1985. 77 “McDonald, Doris Marie,” Sacramento Bee, 13 July 1998. 78 Property records, Sacramento County Clerk-Recorder’s Office. 79 U.S., World War II raft Cards Young Men, 1940-1947, Ancestry.com. 80 U.S., World War I Draft Registration Cards, 1917-1918,” Ancestry.com. 81 “New Garage, Stores To Be Opened Monday,” Sacramento Bee, 9 September 1932. 82 General Motors Trucks & Trailers advertisement, Sacramento Bee, 1 August 1935. 83 “Local Men Are Named to Head New Reo Agency,” Sacramento Bee, 12 August 1936.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 40 February 22, 2022

California at the time.84 In 1943, George F. Waugh joined Bennett in the trucking business as a co- owner. He remained with the company until 1954, after which Bliss K. Harper became a partner in the firm.85 By this time, Terminal Truck Service had added the sale of new and used truck parts to its services. Bennett sold his interest in the company in 1967 and passed away in 1979.86 The company continued to operate at the subject property until 1972, when it relocated to a new facility in Broderick.87

VI. EVALUATION

CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
The California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) is an inventory of significant architectural, archaeological, and historical resources in the State of California. Resources can be listed in the California Register through a number of methods. State Historical Landmarks and National Register-listed properties are automatically listed in the California Register. Properties can also be nominated to the California Register by local governments, private organizations, or citizens.

The evaluative criteria used by the California Register for determining eligibility are closely based on those developed by the National Park Service for the National Register of Historic Places.

In order for a property to be eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found significant under one or more of the following criteria.

• Criterion 1 (Events): Resources that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.

• Criterion 2 (Persons): Resources that are associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history.

• Criterion 3 (Architecture): Resources that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values.

84 “Installs Equipment,” Sacramento Bee, 25 August 1937. 85 “George F. Waugh,” Sacramento Bee, 14 July 1964; “Divorce Is Asked From Truck Service Coowner,” Sacramento Bee, 24 September 1954.
86 “Vernard B. Bennett,” Sacramento Bee, 4 April 1979.
87 “Terminal Truck Service Moves to Broderick,” Sacramento Bee, 22 October 1972.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 41 February 22, 2022

• Criterion 4 (Information Potential): Resources or sites that have yielded or have the potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

The following section examines the eligibility of 211-217 North 16th Street for individual listing in the California Register.

Criterion 1 (Events)
The first building constructed on the subject property was completed in 1922 as the headquarters for the A. Meister & Sons Company, an automobile, railcar, and bus manufacturing company with roots going back to the 1860s. When the building was first constructed, it was one of the first and only buildings in the area north of the B Street levee along North 16th Street, completed immediately prior to the construction of passages under the B Street levee and Southern Pacific Railroad spur tracks that prompted a building boom in the area in the 1920s and 1930s. The establishment of the headquarters of a prominent industrial firm in the area contributed to the development of North 16th Street as one of Sacramento’s primary industrial corridors. The still-extant Schaw, Ingram, Batcher & Company building (later Sacramento Pipe Works), W.A. Ward Seed Company building, and Sacramento Produce Terminal building were all constructed on the blocks directly surrounding the subject property in the years immediately after its completion. The majority of the A. Meister & Sons Company building was demolished and replaced with a new building containing a garage, auto service station, and restaurant in 1932; only the north wing of the original building appears to have been retained and incorporated into the new building.

While the original building on the property played a significant role in the development of the North 16th Street area, the later building was completed at a time when many of the area’s primary, anchor developments had already been completed and North 16th Street’s identity as an industrial center had already been established. Due to the loss of the majority of the original building and resulting loss of integrity, the existing building on the lot is more closely associated with the later period of development along North 16th Street in the 1930s. It therefore represents one of many more minor industrial buildings associated with the automotive and transportation industries that were constructed in the area during this period.

Thus, the subject property does not appear to be individually eligible for listing on the California Register under Criterion 1.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 42 February 22, 2022

Criterion 2 (Persons)
The original building on the subject property was constructed as the headquarters of A. Meister & Sons Company. Founded by August Meister in the 1860s, the company was one of Sacramento’s early successful businesses, specializing in the manufacture of carriages and later automobiles, buses, and railcars. The Meister family was also prominent in the Sacramento community because of other major business endeavors and speculative development led by August’s sons that impacted Sacramento’s development. Two of those sons, Edward A. Meister and Albert R. Meister, purchased much of the land east and west of North 16th Street between 1917 and 1923, which until that point remained largely undeveloped. Their influence and investments, including the construction of some of the area’s first buildings and establishment of key businesses, catalyzed North 16th Street’s emergence as an industrial center for the Sacramento region. The brothers were not only leaders in the family business, which constructed its headquarters on North 16th Street, but also co-founded the Sacramento Produce Terminal Company, along with George McCormack and Charles Spear.

Edward served as president and Albert served as vice-president of the company, leading the construction of the Sacramento Produce Terminal building that became a main anchor for the North 16th Street area and magnet for subsequent agricultural and transportation-related development.

Although a portion of the original A. Meister & Sons Company building associated with the Mester family appears to survive in the existing building, most of that building was replaced in the 1930s by the existing building, such that the existing building no longer retains a strong association with the family. Furthermore, there are other buildings, most notably the Sacramento Produce Terminal building directly across the street at 200 North 16th Street, that are more intact and which better convey the contributions of the Meister family to the development of Sacramento and specifically the North 16th Street area.

The majority of the existing building was constructed under the ownership of George. L. Baxter, a chemist with the Southern Pacific Railroad. After Baxter’s death, the property passed to his wife, Amy. Both George and Amy Baxter used the property as an investment and leased it to various tenants; neither operated any of the businesses on the premises during their lifetimes, nor do they appear to have many important contributions to the history of Sacramento, California, or the United States.

One of the individuals with the longest associations with the building is Vernard B. Bennett, who owned several of the businesses that occupied the building. Bennett was one of the building’s first tenants after it was rebuilt in 1932. One of Bennett’s businesses, a truck repair and parts shop called Terminal Truck Service, operated out of the building from at least 1935 until 1972. Although the company likely provided a valuable service to many vehicles that were associated with the industrial Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 43 February 22, 2022

businesses along North 16th Street, neither the company, nor any of V.B. Bennett’s other businesses at the address, appear to have been particularly notable in the trucking or automotive industry.

The property has had several more recent, long-standing owners and tenants. Bob and Doris McDonald and their descendants owned the property from 1966 to 2001 and operated McDonald Food Equipment Company out of the building from at least 1962 to 1998. Steven and Twila Ruland subsequently owned the property from 2001 until 2021 and operated Rulands Used Office Furniture out of the building from at least 1984 to 2021. At present, an insufficient amount of time has passed to adequately evaluate the historic significance of these individuals and businesses, though their significance may be reevaluated in the future.

Thus, the subject property does not appear to be individually eligible for listing on the California Register under Criterion 2.

Criterion 3 (Architecture)
The oldest portion of the building was constructed in 1922 by an unknown architect or builder as part of a larger auto body manufacturing plant. In 1932, the majority of this earlier building was demolished and replaced by a new one-story brick building containing a garage, auto service shop, and restaurant. The 1932 building was constructed by local contractor C.J. Hopkinson. Although Hopkinson constructed several well-known, extant buildings in Sacramento, research did not indicate that his work rises to the level for consideration as a master builder. The building’s brick cladding, bays of multi-lite steel windows and garage door openings, corrugated metal hipped and gabled roofs, and large open interior spaces with exposed wood roof trusses and concrete floors are all representative of the utilitarian design of industrial buildings designed primarily for automotive and transportation-related businesses. Meanwhile, its front gabled roof with red clay tiles and a traditional storefront are indicative of early twentieth-century commercial building design. While representative of both industrial and commercial design of the early twentieth century, the building at 211-217 North 16th Street is not individually notable and does not appear to have influenced the design of other buildings of its type. Rather, it is a relatively standard example of its kind.

Thus, the subject property does not appear to be individually eligible for listing on the California Register under Criterion 3.

Criterion 4 (Information Potential)
The “potential to yield information important to the prehistory or history of California” typically relates to archeological resources, rather than built resources. When California Register Criterion 4 (Information Potential) does relate to built resources, it is relevant for cases when the building itself Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA

PAGE & TURNBULL 44 February 22, 2022

is the principal source of important construction-related information. The analysis of the property at 211-217 North 16th Street for eligibility under Criterion 4 is beyond the scope of this report.

INTEGRITY
In order to qualify for listing in any local, state, or national historic register, a property or landscape must possess significance under at least one evaluative criterion as described above and retain integrity. Integrity is defined by the California Office of Historic Preservation as “the authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance,” or more simply defined by the National Park Service as “the ability of a property to convey its significance.”88

In order to evaluate whether the subject property retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance, Page & Turnbull used established integrity standards outlined by the National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Seven variables, or aspects, that define integrity are used to evaluate a resource’s integrity—location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. A property must possess most, or all, of these aspects in order to retain overall integrity. If a property does not retain integrity, it can no longer convey its significance and is therefore not eligible for listing in local, state, or national registers.

The seven aspects that define integrity are defined as follows:

Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred;

Setting addresses the physical environment of the historic property inclusive of the landscape and spatial relationships of the building(s);

Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of the property;

Materials refer to the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form the historic property;

88 California Office of Historic Preservation, Technical Assistance Series No. 7: How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources (Sacramento: California Office of State Publishing, 4 September 2001) 11; U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Washington, D.C.: National Park Service, 1995) 44.

Historic Resource Evaluation – Final Grower’s District Historic Resource Evaluation Reports Project Number 21122 211-217 North 16th Street, Sacramento, CA