City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
Public Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan File ID: 2023-00931
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review and comment on the Public Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan.
Contact: Amy Yang, Associate Planner, (916) 808-5023, [email protected]; Matt Hertel, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager, (916) 808-7158, [email protected], Community Development Department
Presenter: Matt Hertel, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager, (916) 808-7158, [email protected], Community Development Department; Andrew Hill, Principal, Dyett and Bhatia Urban & Regional Planners (General Plan consultant) Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Significant Draft Policies and Implementation Actions 3-Summary of Feedback from Commissions
4-Letters and Correspondence Received To-Date
5-Public Review Draft 2040 General Plan
Additional Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: In 2019, the Sacramento City Council initiated a multi-year process to comprehensively update the General Plan and Climate Action Plan. The new 2040 General Plan will replace the 2035 General Plan and serve to guide Sacramento in its long-term growth and development. The General Plan Update has been focused on addressing new state laws, updating goals, policies, and actions to reflect changed conditions and priorities, and managing growth sustainably and equitably in ways that benefit the whole community, increasing opportunity and prosperity for all.
In 2021, Council directed staff to prepare the Draft 2040 General Plan based on a draft land use map, proposed roadway changes, and key strategies that were developed from extensive public outreach, technical analysis, and the results of a scientific survey carried out in the early phases of
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
the project. Since then, the project team has been working closely with each of the City’s Departments, conducting analysis and preparing the draft documents including goals, policies, and implementing actions that build upon the land use map, proposed roadway changes, and key strategies approved by Council.
On April 28th, 2023, the project reached an important milestone with the public release of the Draft 2040 General Plan and the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). The draft plans are available for public review through August 2023 via the Self-Guided Online Workshop, which is accessible from the project website at www.sac2040gpu.org. Links to the full Draft 2040 General Plan and Climate Action and Adaptation Plan can also be found directly on the project webpage. Public comments may be submitted at any time during the public review period through the self-guided workshop.
Additionally, comment letters can be submitted via email at [email protected].
Today, staff will present an overview of the Draft 2040 General Plan and the ongoing public review process, including a summary of the feedback received from the City’s Commissions (see Attachment 3). Staff is also seeking input from City Council on the draft goals, policies, and implementing actions contained in the Public Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan.
Staff will return to City Council on August 22
nd to present the Draft Climate Action and Adaptation
Plan.
More information on the organization and content of the 2040 General Plan is found in the background section of this report. Attachment 5 includes a link to the Public Review Draft 2040 General Plan. This evening’s presentation will also highlight some of the significant policies and implementing actions included in the Draft 2040 General Plan (see Attachment 2).
Next Steps
To raise awareness of the Draft 2040 General Plan and encourage community input during the public review period, the project team has undertaken a community engagement program that has involved staff participation at 20 community meetings, events, markets, and festivals to-date. Staff plan to continue outreach activities through the summer. See the Background section for a list of these activities.
In late August or early September, the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) will be completed and published for the state-required 45-day public review period. At the conclusion of the public review period, staff will compile all comments and provide recommended changes to the draft plans based on community input received throughout the review period. Public hearings for the adoption of the 2040 General Plan, Climate Action and Adaptation Plan and MEIR are anticipated to take place in early 2024.
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
Policy Considerations: The Draft 2040 General Plan is consistent with the Vision and Guiding Principles adopted by Council in November 2019 and the January 2021 Council Resolution (No. 2021-00220) directing staff to proceed with the draft land use map, proposed roadway changes, and other key strategies for the purposes of the preparation of the 2040 General Plan, Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, and the Master Environmental Impact Report.
Economic Impacts: If adopted, the 2040 General Plan is anticipated to have a positive economic impact. First, the goals, policies, and implementing actions of the Economic Development Element aim to create a dynamic, resilient economy with a diverse array of businesses; create sustained, inclusive growth that generates long-term, shared value in the community and creates economic opportunities for all residents; fosters a business environment conducive to growth, investment, collaboration, and the exchange of ideas; and ensure the workforce is equipped with the resources and skills needed to succeed in the 21st century economy.
Second, the proposed land use development patterns focus on promoting infill development and reuse of underutilized properties, as well as on intensifying development near transit and mixed-use activity centers. An interconnected network of mixed-use corridors and centers with a range of housing, employment, educational, cultural, and recreational options is anticipated to help diversify the housing supply, address affordability, and ultimately boost the vitality of local businesses.
Third, the Draft 2040 General Plan’s commitment to increasing housing types is complimented by the 2021-2029 Housing Element’s (adopted separately in 2021) aim to affirmatively further fair housing on all fronts. The adopted 2021-2029 Housing Element includes policies and programs that aim to foster the development of more housing options for all economic segments of the community and further protect residents from displacement, which supports inclusive economic and community development throughout the city, especially in neighborhoods that have been historically denied access to high-quality services and resources.
Environmental Considerations: The informational update in this report is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), because it is an administrative activity that does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(4) and is, therefore, not subject to CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3). Evaluation of the 2040 General Plan and Climate Action and Adaptation Plan will be included in the Master Environmental Impact Report that will be provided to City Council for their consideration and certification prior to action on the project. In late August or early September, the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) will be completed and published for the state- required 45-day public review period.
Sustainability: Policies pertaining to sustainability have been incorporated into the Draft 2040
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
General Plan and Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. Policies and implementing actions in both documents support the city’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly by 2030 and puts the city on a path to reach carbon neutrality by 2045, as well as increase the community’s ability to adapt to the impacts of climate change such as extreme heat and increased flooding risk. The documents also emphasize an equitable approach toward fostering a more sustainable city, working to make sure the most vulnerable and historically underrepresented communities are seeing infrastructure and climate investments.
Commission/Committee Action: On June 8, 2023, the Planning and Design Commission provided review and comment on the Draft 2040 General Plan. See Attachment 3 - Summary of Feedback from Commissions, for the full list of Commissions that provided input on the Draft 2040 General Plan.
Rationale for Recommendation: On April 28, 2023, the Draft 2040 General Plan was released for public review. Staff is requesting comments on the Draft 2040 General Plan by the end of August 2023. Staff is presenting to City Council as an additional opportunity for community members to provide input, as well as to seek input from the Council on the significant draft goals, policies, and implementing actions contained in the Public Review Draft 2040 General Plan.
Financial Considerations: Not applicable.
Background
SACRAMENTO 2040 UPDATE PROCESS
The General Plan Update process involves four main phases as shown in the diagram below.
Phase 1 focused on identifying issues and opportunities to address in updating the General Plan and culminated in a Vision and Guiding Principles, adopted by City Council in November 2019, that describe Sacramento’s shared values and its aspirations for the future.
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
Phase 2 explored key strategies necessary to achieve the vision. The strategies were refined through input from community members and decision-makers and distilled into a preferred land use map, proposed roadway changes and key strategies to guide preparation of the Draft 2040 General Plan.
Phase 3 saw the creation of draft goals, policies, and implementing actions of the Draft 2040 General Plan based on the approved vision and key strategies from prior phases.
Phase 4, currently in process, involves public review of the Draft 2040 General Plan and Draft Climate Action & Adaptation Plan, additional community outreach to raise awareness in the community and solicit feedback on the draft documents, and public hearings before the Planning and Design Commission and the City Council prior to adoption of the plans and certification of the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR).
WHAT IS A GENERAL PLAN?
The General Plan is a legal document, and much of its content is established by statutory requirements relating to background data, analysis, maps, and exhibits. The legal adequacy of the General Plan is critical, since many City actions and programs are required to be consistent with the General Plan. California Government Code section 65300 requires each city and county to adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which… bears relation to its planning.” The Sacramento General Plan can be considered a blueprint for development and conservation - a set of policies that guide the City’s land use and capital investment decisions for the next two decades. The Sacramento General Plan serves to:
• Establish a long-range vision that reflects the aspirations of the community and outlines steps to achieve it;
• Guide decision-making related to development, housing, transportation, environmental quality, public services, parks, open space, and agricultural conservation; • Help Sacramento achieve compliance with applicable State and regional policies, including housing production and environmental regulations;
• Allow City departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the community, preserve environmental resources, and minimize hazards; and • Provide the basis for establishing and setting priorities for detailed programs, such as the Planning and Development Code and future specific plans.
Due to the broad and long-range nature of the General Plan, there will be instances where more detailed studies and plans will be necessary to implement the General Plan’s policies, as illustrated in Figure I-1.
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
HOW WILL THE GENERAL PLAN BE USED?
The City’s General Plan is intended for use by all members of the community including residents, businesses, developers, City staff, and decision-makers. For City staff, the Planning & Design Commission, other boards and commissions, and the City Council, the General Plan is a tool to help make land use and public investment decisions. Future development decisions must be consistent with the General Plan. Finally, the General Plan is also intended to help other public agencies, from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), to local school districts, as they contemplate future actions in and around Sacramento.
The organization of the 2040 General Plan allows users to find topics or sections that interest them and to quickly review City policies. Users are encouraged to keep in mind that the policies throughout the General Plan are interrelated, meaning they should be examined comprehensively and considered together when making planning decisions.
WHAT’S INCLUDED IN THE GENERAL PLAN?
The 2040 General Plan addresses the eight state-mandated topics as well as several additional topics of local importance. The 2021-2029 Housing Element, which fulfills the state requirement for a certified housing element, was adopted in 2021 and published separately. The General Plan is organized into four parts, as follows:
• Part 1: Introduction to the 2040 General Plan and Sustainability and Equity. Part 1 of the General Plan introduces the document and how it was developed, provides an understanding of how to read and use it, and begins to show how this plan is committed to fostering a sustainable and equitable city.
o Introduction
. The Introduction to the 2040 General Plan includes an overview of the
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
plan background, a profile of Sacramento demographics, the scope and purpose of the General Plan, historical context, the update process including a summary of community involvement, the guiding Vision of the General Plan, overview of how the plan is organized, and a description of how to use the plan accompanied by a comprehensive policy index that organizes policies under central themes, including but not limited to active transportation network; community engagement and collaboration; equitable access to facilities, services, and amenities.
o Sustainability and Equity
. The Sustainability and Equity Chapter provides a summary of how sustainability and equity are reflected throughout the 2040 General Plan. It also provides a table of indicators that can be used to measure progress toward the Vision for Sacramento in 2040 and whether implementation of the General Plan has been contributing to a more sustainable and equitable city.
• Part 2: Citywide Goals and Policies. Part 2 encompasses all the elements of the General Plan. Each element includes citywide goals, policies, and implementing actions that support the Vision of the General Plan.
o Land Use and Placemaking Element.
This Element describes the existing land use
pattern and provides an explanation of the General Plan’s approach to citywide growth, presenting policies and standards for land use designations and development intensities, urban design, green building, arts, culture, and placemaking. o Historic and Cultural Resources Element. This Element establishes a comprehensive framework to identify and protect valuable historic and cultural resources, thoughtfully integrate new infill development into the existing urban fabric, and encourage community education and appreciation of the city’s historic and cultural resources. This Element underscores the City’s commitment to these important community resources. o Economic Development Element.
This Element establishes a framework to foster
growth strategies that leverage community assets and guide investments in human capital and infrastructure over time. This Element recognizes the transformative potential of growth and seeks to harness it to increase opportunity and improve quality of life in the community.
o Environmental Resources and Constraints Element.
This Element reflects the City’s
commitment to the protection of its environmental resources, as well as protection of life and property from the impacts of environmental constraints. This Element includes a framework for the preservation and maintenance of these environmental resources, and continued creation of a safe environment that enhances community character,
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
residents’ quality of life, and contributes to a city’s livability and economic productivity. o Environmental Justice Element. This Element is organized around five key goals: clean air, water, and soil; access to healthy food; safe and sanitary housing; active engagement in civic life; and public and private investments that address long-standing inequities, empower disadvantaged residents, and build neighborhood resilience. This Element outlines actions the City will take to promote public health, engage community members in decision-making, and enrich the quality of life for all residents, with a particular focus on addressing inequities and empowering all residents to reach their full potential.
o Mobility Element.
This Element outlines a strategy for mobility and access improvements that enhance transportation safety, bolster connectivity, and shift trips to active modes, public transit, and high-occupancy vehicles to meet the needs of all users citywide. This Element discusses standards and proposals that meet demands resulting from changes in land use proposed in this General Plan, while also recognizing the need to prioritize investments in disadvantaged areas with the highest need as part of the roadmap to a sustainable and equitable city. o Public Facilities and Safety Element.
This Element establishes a framework to guide
planning and decision-making for public facilities and safety that support a sustainable and equitable city. This Element discusses the maintenance and proactive planning of the utility infrastructure and services that will serve current daily demands as well as meet the demands resulting from changes in land use proposed in this General Plan.
Additionally, this Element incorporates strategies to help ensure resilience in the face of climate change.
o Youth, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element.
This Element outlines a
collaborative framework to guide decision-making and investment in parks, recreation programs, youth services, and natural open space areas that contribute to a sustainable and equitable city.
• Part 3: Community Plans and Special Study Areas. Part 3 provides area-specific policy direction for community plan areas and special study areas, supplementing the citywide goals, policies, and actions contained in Part 2. Within the city of Sacramento, there are ten community plan areas and five special study areas. Community plan areas have their own issues and opportunities, some that require more specific policies beyond what is covered in citywide policies. Special study areas are outside of, but adjacent to, existing city limits and are identified in this plan because the City is interested in how these areas develop and how that relates to the planning within the city, whether or not they are annexed. Part 3 begins with an introduction that provides an overview of Part 3, historical context for using community plans to provide policy direction in various areas of the city, community engagement that focused in these community plan areas, and a goal with a handful of policies that provide
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
direction on the maintenance and administration of these community plans.
The ten community plan areas are as follows:
o Arden Arcade
o Central City
o East Sacramento
o Fruitridge/Broadway
o Greater Land Park
o North Natomas
o North Sacramento
o Pocket/Greenhaven
o South Area
o South Natomas
o Special Study Areas
The five special study areas are as follows:
o Arden Arcade Study Area
o East Study Area
o Fruitridge-Florin Study Area
o Natomas Basin Study Area
o Town of Freeport Study Area
• Part 4: Administration and Implementation. Part 4 describes the major actions to be undertaken by the City in order to provide an overall sense of the priorities for future actions in support of accomplishing the goals of the General Plan. Part 4 includes Table 12-1:
Implementation, which lists and prioritizes actions to implement various General Plan concepts.
• Appendices. The appendices provide supplemental information. They include the following:
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
o Appendix A: Vision and Guiding Principles
o Appendix B: Glossary and Acronyms
o Appendix C: Photograph/Illustration Credits
Community Engagement
Outreach to raise awareness of the Draft 2040 General Plan and Climate Action and Adaptation Plan and encourage community input during the public review period has involved the following:
· Three virtual orientation webinars which provided an overview of the project, an explanation of how to participate in the self-guided online workshop, and an opportunity for participants to ask questions. Webinars took place on May 10, June 6, and June 29, 2023. Webinar recordings and slides can be found on the project website at www.sac2040gpu.org <http://www.sac2040gpu.org>. These orientation webinars engaged over 150 participants. · Attendance at various community and neighborhood meetings and events throughout the city with a specific focus on bringing this information to and encouraging participation in disadvantaged communities. Pop-up booth locations and community meetings scheduled for this outreach include:
o May 17: Climate Coalition
o May 17: Community Ambassador Meeting
o May 18: Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS)
o May 24: Environmental Justice Collaborative Governance Committee (EJCGC) o June 4: Filipino Fiesta <http://www.sacramentofiesta.org/> o June 10: Celebrate Oak Park <https://www.facebook.com/events/1419458352219429? active_tab=about>
o June 10/11: Sacramento Pride Festival <https://sacramentopride.org/> o June 15: Newton Booth Neighborhood Association
o June 17: Juneteenth <https://sacramentojuneteenthinc.com/> o June 24: One Natomas Farmers Market <https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/mayor- council/district-1/district-1-events>
o July 7: California Black Chamber of Commerce Mixer
o July 8: Second Saturdays at Florin Square
<https://www.facebook.com/secondsaturdaysFS/>
o July 10: East Sacramento Community Association (ESCA) o July 13: Natomas Street Eats <https://www.karinatalamantes.org/upcoming-events-1> o July 14: Oki Park Food Trucks <http://www.cityofsacramento.org/ -/media/Corporate/Images/CommunityDevelopment/Planning/General-Plan/Oki-Park- o July 15: Oak Park Farmers Market <https://www.facebook.com/OPFM916> o July 28: Latino/Chicano Celebration
o August 1: Sacramento Realtor’s Association
o August 1: National Night Out
o August 3: Strong SacTown
o August 12: Oak Park Farmers Market <https://www.facebook.com/OPFM916>
File ID: 2023-00931 8/8/2023 Discussion Item 17.
o August 19: Concert in the Park @ Cabrillo Park
o August 25: Tahoe Park Food Trucks <http://www.cityofsacramento.org/ -/media/Corporate/Images/CommunityDevelopment/Planning/General-Plan/Tahoe-Park- · Maintenance of the project website, preparing press releases, advertising through radio announcements, social media content, and e-mail blasts to alert the public about upcoming meetings and opportunities for public input on the draft plans. · Promotion of the Self-Guided Online Workshop, encouraging residents to provide input through the topical stations. As of July 20, 2023, the Self-Guided Online Workshop has collected over 350 comments.
· Installation of 50 multilingual lawn signs throughout Sacramento. These signs contain information directing people to the Self-Guided Online Workshop through both a weblink and QR code.
· Presentations on the Draft 2040 General Plan to various City commissions (summary of input from City commissions can be found in Attachment 3) and Council including at the following meetings:
o June 1- Parks and Community Enrichment Commission
o June 5 - Youth Commission
o June 7 - Disabilities Advisory Commission
o June 8 - Planning and Design Commission (Focused on the Draft 2040 General Plan) o June 12 - Arts, Culture, and Creative Economy Commission o June 15 - Active Transportation Commission
o June 21 - Preservation Commission
o June 22 - Planning and Design Commission (Focused on the Draft CAAP) o August 8 - City Council (Focused on the Draft 2040 General Plan) o August 22 - City Council (Focused on the Draft CAAP)
· Receipt of comment letters and correspondence (see Attachment 4).
Printed copies of the Public Review Draft 2040 General Plan can be viewed at the following locations:
· The Sacramento Central Library at 828 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 · The permit counter of the Community Development Department at 300 Richards Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95811
Attachment 3 – Significant Draft Policies and Implementation Actions Land Use and Placemaking
LUP-4.1 Transit-Supportive Development . The City shall encourage increased residential and commercial development intensity within one-quarter mile of existing and planned light rail stations, commuter rail stations, and high - frequency bus stops to support more frequent, reliable transit service and vibrant, walkable neighborhoods.
LUP-4.2 Incentivizing Infill. The City shall consider a range of incentives to attract development to centers, corridors, and sites, including the following:
Prioritization of capital investment strategies for infrastructure, services, and amenities to support development;
Economic incentives (e.g., fee reductions, regulatory exemptions, or tools such as enhanced infrastructure financing districts (EIFDs), Opportunity Zones, and Enterprise Zones);
Streamlined development review, environmental review, and permitting processes;
By-right entitlements for development projects consistent with applicable zoning;
Ministerial approval of infill housing and mixed-use projects consistent with objective development and design standards;
Public-private partnerships; and
Proactive solicitation of development.
LUP-4.12 Drive-Through Restaurants. The City shall prohibit new drive -through restaurants within ¼-mile walking distance of existing and proposed light rail stations and high-frequency transit stops.
LUP-4.13 Future-Ready Gas Stations. The City shall prohibit the establishment of new gas stations or the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure at existing gas stations unless the project proponent provides high -speed electric vehicle charging stations on site at a ratio of at least 1 charging station per 3 fuel pumps.
LUP-6.2 Range of Residential Development Intensities. The City shall allow for a range of residential development intensities throughout the community to cultivate a mix of housing types at varying sales price points and rental rates, provide options for residents of all income le vels, and protect existing residents from displacement.
LUP-6.3 Variety of Housing Types. The City shall promote the development of a greater variety of housing types and sizes in existing and new growth
communities to meet the needs of future demographics and changing household sizes, including the following:
Single-unit homes on small lots,
Accessory dwelling units,
Tiny homes,
Alley-facing units,
Townhomes,
Lofts,
Live-work spaces,
Duplexes,
Triplexes,
Fourplexes,
Bungalow courts, and
Senior and student housing.
LUP-6.8 Gated Communities. The City shall discourage the creation of new gated private streets in residential communities to promote social cohesiveness and maintain street network efficiency, adequate emergency response times, and convenient travel routes for all street users.
LUP-6.11 Home-Based Businesses. The City shall encourage home businesses to support workforce participation and lower need for vehicular travel by eliminating commutes for more workers and supporting “complete neighborhoods” by allowing residents to provide services locally.
LUP-A-1 Area of Concern . The City shall work with Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) to designate the Natomas Basin Study Area as an Area of Concern to provide the City with greater influence on land use decisions and other governmental actions that directly and indirectly affect the city of Sacramento in this important area beyond its Sphere of Influence.
LUP-A-3 Fruitridge-Florin Annexation . The City s hall study the feasibility of annexing the Fruitridge -Florin Study Area with a view of streamlining the delivery of public services, addressing infrastructure needs, promoting neighborhood revitalization, and improving the quality of life for local residents. The study should involve outreach to area residents and consider fiscal and environmental impacts as well as inclusive economic development opportunities. Based on the results of the study, the City shall consider an annexation application with the Sac ramento Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) if appropriate.
LUP-A-8 Planning and Development Code Update . The City shall update the Planning and Development Code to implement the 2040 General Plan, including amendments to:
Rezone parcels for consistency with the 2040 General Plan land use, intensity, and density diagrams;
Remove maximum residential density standards from multi -unit, commercial, and industrial zones and replace them with floor area ratio-based intensity stan dards and minimum residential density standards;
Broaden the range of housing types allowed by-right within single-unit and duplex dwelling residential zones;
Update development standards for missing -middle housing types, such as accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and bungalow courts;
Require new residential development of a certain size to include a variety of housing unit types and sizes;
Establish requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in new and expanded gas stations citywide; Establish incentives to promote efficient parcel utilization and consolidation, particularly in transit -oriented development (TOD) areas;
Prohibit new drive -through restaurants in areas where a strong pedestrian and transit orientation is desired;
Allow for flexibility of new commercial uses in neighborhood-oriented commercial centers; and
Establish incentives to facilitate the retrofit of existing shopping centers with pedestrian amenities, EV charging, bike parking, traffic- calming features, plazas and public areas, shade trees, lighting, public art, farmers markets, retail and other services that provide for everyday needs, and community events.
LUP-A-9 Home Occupation Regulations . The City shall evaluate changes to the home occupation regulations in the Planning and Development Code to allow home businesses by-right and expand eligible home business permits to allow greater variety of home businesses as part of a strategy to remove barriers to entrepreneurship, suppo rt workforce participation, promote walkability, lower vehicle miles travelled, and allow residents to provide services locally.
Mobility
M-1.2 User Prioritization. The City shall prioritize mobility, comfort, health, safety, and convenience for those walking, followed by those bicycling and riding transit, ahead of design and operations for those driving.
M-1.11 Increase Bicycling and Walking. The City shall strive to increase bicycling and walking citywide so that it can meet its equity, reduced vehic le miles traveled, and sustainability goals.
M-2.13 Curb and Mobility Use Data. The City may implement technologies for inventory and curb usage data to monitor the effectiveness of curbside management guidelines and provide evidence to support or make changes to curb space designations and/or management strategies.
M-2.17 Parking Management Strategy. The City shall continue to deploy a parking management strategy that optimizes the use of existing supply, minimizes the need for the construction of new parking facilities, and promotes the use of active modes of transportation, public transit, and high -occupancy vehicles. Program components could include the following:
Adjusting parking management strategies based on goals and needs; Adjusting parking meter hours and pricing for effective management; Eliminating City-mandated parking minimums;
Implementing parking maximums along established transit corridors; Allowing unbundled parking in conjunction with strategies to reduce the need for private automobiles;
Incorporating or facilitating technology such as smart-phone apps and wayfinding signage that direct drivers to open parking spaces in real- time, automated and/or stacked parking systems, or parking technologies that improve parking efficiency in mixed-use centers and corridors;
Supporting the use of alternative modes by providing alternative programs in lieu of monthly parking passes and discounts; and Improving branding, communications, and wayfinding signage.
Environmental Resources and Constraints
ERC-4.4 Sensitive Uses. The City shall consult, as appropriate, with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) in evaluating exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants, and will impose conditions, as appropriate, on projects to protect public health and safety.
ERC-A.4 Heat Reduction in the Public Realm. The City should explore opportunities to amend development standards and guidelines so as to promote the use of heat mitigation strategies to reduce temperatur es in the public realm, particularly near light rail transit (LRT) stations and along transit corridors.
Requirements may include the incorporation of the following:
Building design strategies (varied building heights; setbacks from sidewalks; vertical and horizontal shade features);
Cooling materials, treatments, and coatings;
Multiple layers of shading to maximize coverage throughout the day; and
Street trees, and landscaping.
ERC-9.11 Neighborhood Resilience. The City shall facilitate and coordinate with community organizations for the development of neighborhood -level resilience plans to improve initial emergency response, subsequent recovery, and ongoing self -sufficiency throughout the city. The City should provide resources, training, and information, prioritizing disadvantaged communities (DACs) and vulnerable areas of the city for creation of these plans.
Environmental Justice
EJ-5.5 Investment Prioritization. The City shall prioritize investments in infrastructure and interventions that address long -standing inequities, empower disadvantaged residents, and build neighborhood resilience.
EJ-A.3 Diverse Representation. The City shall develop and implement a coordinated plan to increase diversity on City boards and commissions and in City-sponsored activities and events. Steps should include the following:
Developing a proactive recruitment program reaching out to numerous communities.
Recruiting individuals from underrepresented populations, including, but not limited to, communities of color, youth, and low -income populations, to represent their communities.
Reporting annually to the City Council on the diversity of City boards, commissions, and committees.
EJ-A.9 Outreach Funding. The City shall st udy the feasibility of establishing funding that City departments draw on for community outreach. The intent would be to provide a source of funding to supplement departmental budgets and grant funding in order to ensure that City objectives for community outreach can be achieved.
EJ-A.4 Amortization Ordinance. The City shall study the feasibility of an amortization ordinance that would phase out polluting industries currently located near sensitive receptors. The study should identify a process and criteria for determining which industries to amortize.
EJ-A.5 Performance Zoning. The City shall develop zoning standards applicable to new and existing industrial and manufacturing developments to minimize or avoid adverse effects related to air quality, noise, or safety on sensitive populations in disadvantaged communities and other areas of the city where industrial and manufacturing uses are near residential uses, such as the Robla neighborhood.
EJ-A.6 Healthy Food Zoning. The City shall update the Zoning Code to promote and protect healthy food options. Possible amendments to the code include the following:
Incorporate zoning controls that prohibit tobacco sales points near school and other areas;
Clearly defining “healthy food grocery stores” to e nsure that businesses meeting that description have access to incentives developed with them in mind;
Include standards and incentives flexible enough to accommodate “alternative” grocery stores, which use less space, require less parking, and focus on the day-to-day needs of nearby residents; or Preserve grocery store uses in underserved areas through zoning designations.
EJ-A.10 Healthy Food Initiatives Partnership. The City shall identify partners and coordinate closely with other agencies who together would be responsible in assessing, designing, and implementing City healthy food initiatives. City staff will engage in cross-departmental and inter -agency coordination, program administration, and community relations.
EJ-A.7 Racial Equity Analysis. The City shall pilot and develop capacity in applying a racial equity analysis from Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) and other equity centered strategies for preventing racism and for identifying new options to remedy long-standing inequities.
EJ-5.6 Embedding Racial Equity. The City shall leverage and apply the racial equity analysis from the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) to embed racial equity in City practices, both internally and externally.
Youth, Parks, Recreation and Open Space
YPRO-1.3 Parkland Service Standard. The City shall evaluate, as needed, the equitable increase of public park acreage to serve the needs of the current and future residents with high -quality facilities. The City shall continue to strive to achieve a parkland service standard of 5 acres of neighborhood and community parkland per 1,000 residents.
YPRO-1.10 Parkland Access Standard. The City shall strive to provide accessible public park or recreational open space within a m10 -minute walk of all residences in Sacramento.
YPRO-A.7 Performance-Based Prioritization. Youth, Parks, & Community Enrichment (YPCE) shall update the park project programming guide to incorporate a performance-based system for prioritizing parks and recreation investments that links facility improvement priorities to safety standards, funding availability, disadvantaged communities, public health, and recreational goals through a ranking scale that includes public health outcomes.
Attachment 4 – Summary of Feedback from Commissions
Following the release of the Public Review Draft 2040 General Plan on April 28, 2023, staff presented the draft plan to various City commissions. Each commission was asked to review and provide feedback on the draft plan. This document summarizes the feedback staff received.
Parks and Community Enrichment Commission (June 1, 2023) Public comment: none.
Recommended staff consider offering comment cards at outreach events. Recommended staff consider conducting outreach at 916 events in the fall. Recommend clarifying YPCE’s role in expanding the tree canopy, as there is limited budget allocation for maintenance.
Youth Commission (June 5, 2023)
Public comment: none.
Expressed interest in how the urban tree canopy will be expanded. Expressed interest in healthy food zoning and its potential unintended impacts on lower-income residents.
Disabilities Advisory Commission (June 7, 2023)
Public comment: none.
Encouraged staff to consider that accessibility and inclusion have different meanings.
Expressed concern over equity of accessing new technology such as environmentally friendly cars or appliances.
Encouraged design of spaces where community can interact, considering the costs of entering spaces for differently abled persons and how design can be used to reduce isolation of the most vulnerable populations. Recommend mirroring the Age Friendly Action Plan and creating an action plan for differently abled people.
Planning and Design Commission (June 8, 2023)
Public comment:
o Support for FAR increase: suggested increase applied more uniformly, higher FAR for high opportunity/resource areas, and higher FAR for transit areas.
o Support for making transportation convenient, reliable, and safe, including adding more Class 1 bike corridors, closing down streets to cars, eliminating parking minimums and establishing maximums. Expressed interest in how Candidate High-Frequency Transit Corridors (Map M- 3) were selected.
Encouraged staff to be mindful of how historic preservation efforts interact with our commitment to equity.
Recommended staff consider a policy priority of affordability and variety of mixed-income households within transit corridors.
Recommended that homelessness should be an element of the General Plan moving forward.
Expressed interest in the process of addressing parking minimums and maximums.
Expressed interest in the Mixed-Income Housing Study and inclusionary housing. Recommended staff consider reworking Policy 4.1 (Transit-Supportive Development) to incorporate a more explicit standard for development around transit.
Recommended staff consider using half-mile buffer, instead of a quarter-mile buffer, for policies concerning development around transit stations. Recommended staff pay more attention to displacement of cultural resources and consider a policy that codifies arts and culture districts.
Arts, Culture, and Creative Economy Commission (June 12, 2023) Public comment: none.
Expressed concern about parking congestion.
Expressed hope for more consistent and frequent bus service. Expressed concern about the trend where promoting the arts can lead to increased cost of living, especially for artists.
Expressed interest in bike lanes.
Expressed interest in low-income development and what it means to promote and build additional housing development.
Expressed interest in how the plan could potentially support digital art and equipment-share opportunities to support and bring in more creative people.
Active Transportation Commission (June 15, 2023)
Public comment:
o Support for infill housing near light rail.
o Request increasing light rail proximity buffer to half-mile rather than quarter-mile.
o Request focus on protected bike lanes and closing sidewalk gaps. o Expressed concern General Plan and Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (CAAP) fail to meet several standards set by Council and Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change.
o Feels that policy language is too soft and orients residents to use cars. o Feels that policy language is vague around noise and air pollution. o Feels that policy language lacks ambition around bike and pedestrian access.
o Support eliminating parking minimums and instituting parking maximums. o Support allowing more housing in high opportunity areas and near transit.
o Support improving street safety for pedestrians and bicyclists by slowing down car traffic.
o Expressed concern that CAAP active transportation goal is unacceptable; needs to be more aggressive to meet Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change recommendations.
Commission planning to agendize approval of a formal comment letter for items within the Commission’s purview at the August 17, 2023 meeting Recommended ensuring sidewalks and lighting are present on all residential streets within a quarter-mile of light rail stations.
Recommended the creation of a Class I bike trail at levee level with the construction of a new light rail bridge connecting South Natomas over the American River.
Recommended that the city prohibit new drive-through restaurants citywide, as opposed to in select locations.
Recommended identifying streets for removal of regular through-traffic, moving towards pedestrianization of city streets with a focus on fostering dining and entertainment corridors.
Recommended streamlining the approval process as a part of developing an outdoor dining program.
Recommended having an allowable FAR of 2 citywide and minimum allowable FAR of at least 5 on already built parcels zoned for commercial and mixed-use. Suggested that CAAP recommendations for active transportation are way too low; aim higher to get better results.
Expressed interested in last mile connectivity to transit. Expressed concern over limited funding for infrastructure improvements. Expressed hope that City will continue to plant trees in median to improve tree canopy and beautify streets.
Preservation Commission (June 21, 2023)
Public comment:
o Recommended including definitions of some key terms helpful to understanding what cultural resources entails.
Expressed interest in resources required, specifically staff time, to implement actions.
Expressed interest in how the General Plan addresses outreach to tribal communities.
Emphasized that historic districts are also critical to the climate change strategy. Recommended that the City focus on surveying older neighborhoods of Sacramento that have yet to be surveyed. Many of these are also historically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Having historic designation can help with grant funding opportunities.
Expressed interest in the Post-Disaster Plan and what it entails.
Attachment 4 –Letters and Correspondence Received To-Date (as of 7/21/23)
1. Email from David Morrow, received May 22, 2023
2. Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), received June 7, 2023
3. Email from Steve Rosen, received June 12, 2023
4. Email from Matt Anderson, received June 22, 2023
5. North State Building Industry Association (BIA), received July 10, 2023
1 Amy Yang
From: David Morrow
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 9:28 AM
To: Sac 2040 Gpu
Subject: General Plan update
Hello,
I have a suggestion for the GP update and Climate Action Plan. Given that electric bicycles have become affordable and reliable, they are the low hanging fruit for zero emission transportation.
The main reason more folks don't ride bicycles for transportation (vs recreation) is the lack of safe streets. Cities worldwide have found that when the streets are safe for cyclin g, many people will shift from cars to bicycles. New York and Washington DC are prime examples. What Sacramento needs is a connected network of protected bike lanes. These can be shared with transit vehicles as appropriate. In this vein, more bike/pedestrian bridge s and safe crossing points for major streets are appropriate as well.
Remember, 60% of all trips are five miles or less. Many of these trips could be made by electric (or conventional) bike if there is a safe place to ride.
thank you,
Dave Morrow
Lord, grant me chastity and temperance,
but not yet.
St. Augustine of Hippo
June 7, 2023
Greg Sandlund, Planning Director
Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Blvd., 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
RE: Publ
ic Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan
Dear Mr.
Sandlund:
Thank
you for inviting SACOG’s input on the Public Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan (Public Review Draft General Plan). The basis for our comments is the 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS), which lays out a land use and transportation strategy to reduce congestion, vehicles miles traveled, and greenhouse gas emissions using smart growth principles. The MTP/SCS establishes an ambitious, but achievable land use forecast and transportation system predicated, in part, on robust housing development and low-carbon transportation options in the City of Sacramento. The future described in the MTP/SCS will take leadership and commitment from local jurisdictions to support implementation strategies that will facilitate a shift from outcomes we have seen in the past.
The city
’s Public Review Draft General Plan offers the bold policy action needed to implement the MTP/SCS. SACOG would like to express our support for the staff proposal and recognize some of the specific actions that are well aligned with policies and recommendations from the MTP/SCS. While SACOG commends the direction of the Public Review Draft General Plan, we would like to offer recommendations for how the policies, actions, and implementing maps can even better move the needle on our shared goals. We have organized these recommendations into the general plan elements as they appear in the plan below:
Land U
se and Placemaking
We are exc
ited to see the city continue to work towards allowing for a greater array of housing types in existing single family neighborhoods and facilitating transit supportive growth along key commercial corridors. Opening single family neighborhoods to more housing product types and continuing to support growth along commercial corridors has tremendous potential for addressing our housing crisis, reducing vehicle miles traveled, and reducing residential segregation. These strategies are consistent with many recommended policies and actions in SACOG planning efforts. Policy 1 in the MTP/SCS promotes actions to support higher density housing options and a diversity of housing for all residents. The TOD Action Plan includes an explicit strategy for the City of Sacramento to regulate density through floor area ratio (S.1) and to increase single family densities (S.5). Additionally, the SACOG Housing Policy Toolkit includes recommendations to allow for missing middle products on all residentially zoned land and to consider using floor area ratio instead of units/acre to regulate intensity. All these recommendations are implemented in the city’s proposed land use element.
The pr
oposed Maximum Floor Area Ratio Map (LUP-6) is a significant improvement on the status quo and positions the city to be a leader in both the region and the state in building an inclusive housing regulatory environment. That said, we encourage the city to explore higher Floor Area Ratios (FARs) within a ½ mile of all high frequency transit areas. Policy LUP-4.1 commits the city to “encourage increased residential and commercial development intensity within one-quarter mile of existing and planned light rail stations, commuter rail stations, and high-frequency bus stops…” While ¼ mile from stations and stops is a good start, we recommend expanding this area to ½ mile to be consistent with statutory definitions (like those of SB 375 and SB 743) as well as with the city’s own TOD Ordinance, which applies to developments within ½ mile of all existing and planned light rail stations.
Additio
nally, it appears this policy is not uniformly applied to all station areas in Map LUP-6. The existing light rail stations that stand out in this respect are the areas surrounding the 39th St/UC Davis Heath, 48th St, Broadway, and 4th Ave/Wayne Hultgren, and Arden/Del Paso stations. In these station areas, the transit adjacent parcels in the high-demand and high opportunity East Sacramento, Elmhurst, Land Park, and Woodlake neighborhoods have the lowest maximum FAR in the City (1.0). If the City is seeking to “plan for higher development intensities around current and planned transit” as is stated in policy LUP-2.4 (Development Intensity Linked to Transit), we recommend these transit-rich and high opportunity neighborhoods have an FAR of at least 2.0, consistent with other transit-rich neighborhoods like Oak Park.
We recog
nize that the Public Review Draft General Plan, as proposed, is increasing allowed densities across the board, but the Maximum FAR map is still a signal to the market with increased development incentives where higher intensities are allowed.
The Plan includes multiple policies aimed at reducing the risk of displacement (EJ-3.1, LUP-6.2, and many policies in the adopted Housing Element). There is a risk in the current Maximum FAR map for development to still favor neighborhoods like Oak Park, where the maximum FAR is 2-4, over the high demand, high opportunity neighborhoods described above, where maximum FAR is largely still 1.0. This may actually increase the risk of displacement rather than reducing it. The FAR allowances across the inner ring neighborhoods of East Sacramento, Elmhurst, Oak Park, Curtis Park, Land Park, and Woodlake should be based on policy and not on previous density restrictions with exclusionary origins. As a part of this General Plan Update, the city has an opportunity to set a new precedent and facilitate a low-carbon and inclusive regulatory environment that strongly aligns with the city’s stated policies and outcomes. A higher maximum in places within walking distance of light rail, great schools, low pollution burden, and access to economic opportunities will help to facilitate the type of growth called for in both the city’s and SACOG’s stated goals.
To this end, we recommend the city explore more explicit language in Policy LUP-4.1 that defines or references a specific definition of existing and planned high frequency transit and then commits to a minimum allowed FAR higher than 1.0 within a ½ mile buffer of these transit stations and corridors. The city has already adopted a methodology for walking-distance ½ mile buffers around its existing and planned light rail stations in its TOD Ordinance. This approach could be applied to all existing and planned high frequency transit. While we recommend the city use the SB 375 definition of high quality transit defined in PRC Section 21155(b), or if the city prefers to use its own definition we recommend that it include key corridors identified through the Regional Transit Network Plan (see mobility section below). This standardized methodology would ensure that the intensity gradient in the Maximum FAR map is policy-driven and not subject to exceptions based on precedent.
Econo
mic Development
This e
lement aligns well with regional efforts to support economic prosperity formalized in the Regional Prosperity Strategy, which provides a strategic framework and action plan for inclusive economic growth. In particular, we commend the focus on facilitating the creation of tradable sector clusters, inclusive development, and innovation/ collaboration. It will be critical to pair specific policies and programs to the identified job clusters as a means of increasing the likelihood of success. To this end, we recommend that implementing action E-A.7 (Development Incentives) include language directly tying future incentives to the tradable sector outcomes discussed in the Business Attraction and Development section. These outcomes could include specific clusters like food and agriculture, advanced manufacturing, and life sciences/health services, as identified in Policy E-1.1.
Mobili
ty
We comm
end the city for the policies and programs aimed at prioritizing walking, biking, and transit over automobile use through measures like road reallocations (Map M-1), User prioritization (Policy M-1.2), and station access improvements (M-1.12).
These strategies are an effective means by which the city can help to reduce vehicle miles traveled that put a strain on the region’s transportation system and increase harmful tailpipe emissions, reduce future costs to maintain transportation infrastructure, and create a safer environment for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. This strategy is consistent with multiple MTP/SCS policies, including Policy 1 to build and maintain streets that are safe and attractive for all roadway users, Policy 20 to prioritize cost effective safety improvements that will help the region eliminate fatal transportation related accidents, Policy 22 to invest in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and Policies 6 and 25 to prioritize transportation infrastructure that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled.
SACOG recently embarked upon an extensive effort called the Regional Transit Network plan (RTN). RTN is a coordinated six-county effort, bringing together all transit operators, regional transportation planning agencies, and transportation districts to develop a common regional transit framework and focused implementation strategies.
The final RTN plan, which will be ready for public review later this summer, will be integrated into SACOG’s 2025 Blueprint and include near-term speed and reliability improvements, a defined long-term high-capacity network, and a list of prioritized high- capacity corridors intended to complement existing services.
SACOG encourages the city to consider these draft corridors and potential related transit-supportive improvements when finalizing Map M-3 (Candidate High-Frequency Transit Corridors). While many of the candidate high-frequency transit corridors in M-3 are consistent with the draft RTN corridors, there are a handful of potential corridors that are not included, like J St./Fulton, the existing RT Bus Route 62 on Freeport, and the regionally serving “Long High-Capacity Transit” trunk line corridors for inter-county and long-distance trips. These corridors meet many of the characteristics of successful high- frequency transit described on the preceding page (highly linear, serve developed areas with anchors on the ends of the lines, connect with other routes, etc.). Expansion of, and creating demand for, these high-capacity transit lines is critical to reaching SACOG’s GHG reduction targets, as well as the City of Sacramento’s sustainability targets of11% transit mode share and a 20% VMT/capita reduction below 2020 levels by 2030.
Similarly, the City of Sacramento’s sustainability target of moving from a 4.4% active transportation mode share to a 12% mode share in 2045 will require significant changes to the City’s public right of way. While it is great to see the City explore some potential road reallocations in Map M-1, we recommend the City explore road reallocations in all of its Vision Zero Top Ten Corridors as a means of reaching its active mode goals (M-
1.11), reducing reliance on single-occupant vehicles (Goal M-2), prioritizing walking over vehicle modes (Policy M-1.2), and achieving the M-4 goal of “a safer transportation system.”
For actio
n M-A.5, the City commits to “completing a study to assess the feasibility of regional VMT mitigation measures, including banks, exchanges, and impact fees.” Given SACOG’s potential role in implementing a regional VMT mitigation bank, we ask that the city add language that commits to coordinating with regional, and potentially, state partners in this effort. For Policy M-1.41 (Funding), we recommend the city modify the language related to exploring “actions to ensure adequate shares of regional funding.” Per FHWA requirements, all federal funds through SACOG must be distributed through a performance-based process. The term “adequate shares” indicates a "fair share" approach and does note align with a performance-based approach to regional funding.
Better phrasing for this Policy could be “actions to position the city to better capture sufficient funding through regional funding programs”.
Thank you again for inviting SACOG’s input on the City’s Public Review Draft of the Sacramento 2040 General Plan. SACOG applauds the city for its commitment to creating a more inclusive and sustainable future as evidenced in the policies and strategies being considered in the general plan update. We look forward to engaging with the city on this topic through adoption of the plan. If you have further questions or need further assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me at (916) 340-6205.
Sincere
ly,
James
Corless
Executive Director
1 Amy Yang
From: Steve Rosen
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:24 AM
To: Sac 2040 Gpu
Subject: GPU 2040 Comment
Good morning.
Regarding the corridor development strategy:
Cramming population along the most polluted streets in the city is inequitable and a crime against environmental justice. The benefits accrue to the homevoters behind the corridor, who see unsightly strip malls get replaced. The costs of poor health and shorter lifespans are imposed on the people who have to settle for living in the deadliest parts of our city.
In addi
tion to the traffic deaths that await them right outside their front doors and the air pollution that will be worse from EVs' worse tire and brake particulate pollution, noise pollution (from tires on pavement and car audio systems) literally kills.
Noise pollution kills:
https://cas5‐0‐
urlprotect.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.nytimes.com%2finteractive%2f2023 %2f06%2f09%2fhealth%2fnoise%2dexposure%2dhealth%2dimpacts.html&umid=47357919‐fd53‐4267‐9ece‐ d28fb6e38ab5&auth=0c78d5381d8efeba9ba4477b3ca23a49d0ab462f‐1115e9ae5bf9bd6c9ee86453497ac696305dc27e
Upzone the neighborhoods, not just the strip malls. Our children and grandchildren deserve better.
There are more important things in the world than endlessly increasing single‐family house resale prices and protecting the petty aesthetic preferences of existing homeowners.
Thank you.
Steve Rosen
Eric Guerra's District
1 Amy Yang
From: Matt Anderson
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2023 2:53 PM
To: Matt Anderson
Cc: Sac 2040 Gpu
Subject: CAAP Comments
Hello Commissioners,
I hope you are well. I am writing in reference to Item 6 tonight, the public review of the draft CAAP. Unfortunately I cannot attend the meeting and wanted to pass along a few comments and specific action suggestions, applicable to both GP and CAAP. Apologies in advance for the wall of text.
Overall - This is a fantastic document that really will be held up as an example of a comprehensive CAAP to cities around the state, staff and the city as a whole should be proud of this document. This body (and staff!) is most likely to determine whether or not this CAAP is successful - the vast majority of emissions (and adaptation actions) pertain to the built environment (especially transportation), directly in the purview of this body. A few comments:
Multimodality - both the GP and CAAP talk about prioritizing pedestrian and active transportation but focus on electrifying cars to reduce emissions. This makes sense from a legal perspective (emissions must be quantified) but from a practical and equity point of view, much more emphasis on active transportation and transit should be considered. 1) Consider reviewing and increasing the active transportation targets. 6% won’t get us to carbon-neutral, will continue to disproportionately impact disadvantaged communities (noise, particulate matter from increased EVs) and frankly probably won’t even be enough infrastructure to stop the ever-increasing number of bicycle/pedestrian deaths. If 6% is still deemed appropriate, please consider saying explicitly "triple active transportation mode share" as seems to be suggested by the calculations.
2) Consider alternate or additional tracking opportunities for the (currently) 6% KPI (traffic cameras that are used to track cars approaching intersections can also be used to track/estimate bicycle counts. The City of Sacramento already has these cameras at some intersections and would likely only need a software upgrade.)
Infill - Again, transportation is the single largest category of emissions. Whether or not Sacramento achieves these targets is going to depend on development patterns & related VMT. Combined with the housing crisis we are currently undergoing, I believe the following are the bare minimum of what we should do to allow more housing in Sacramento. The commissioner was spot-on last meeting when he noted that these plans need to address homelessness (outside of just the housing
2 element!) – our lack of housing success or failure is inextricably linked to our planning and zoning regulations.
3) Increase maximum FAR of all residential development within ½ mile of all high frequency transit stops to at least 4.0. (GP Map LUP-6, more generalized language on increasing FAR in E-5)
4) Increase maximum FAR for all areas zoned “neighborhood” to 2.0 (GP Map LUP-6)
5) Add bullet point to E-5.1 or E-5.4 to have staff review additional planning regulations that can be detrimental to new housing (minimum lot sizes, setbacks, etc.) and have staff propose changes. [This is partially covered in missing middle study but would be useful to have explicitly.]
Adaptation/Trees - One of the distinguishing features of Sacramento and integral to this plan. Also typically one of the top community feedback comments, but when the City of Sacramento designs plans for the public right-of-way (e.g., recent transportation plan you reviewed) they are often secondary consideration, if considered at all.
6) Add item CS-1.5: Prioritize urban canopy in city projects and require all city planning documents for the public right of way to identify location of trees. [or similar verbiage as staff sees fit]
Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Matt
1536 Eureka Road o: 916 677 5717
Roseville, CA 95661 northstatebia.org
July 10, 2023
Mr. Matt Hertel
Principal Planner, City of Sacramento
300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Sacramento, CA 96711
Subject: General Plan 2040 - LUP 3.1 Maximum FAR
Dear Mr. Hertel,
On behalf of the North State Building Industry Association (BIA) and its more than 500 member companies in the home building industry, I am writing to offer feedback on the City’s proposed 2040 General Plan. A key component of the plan sets the vision for the future of housing in the city, including the central business district downtown. If adopted, the current proposed limits under land and use placemaking (LUP) 3.1 on floor to area ratios (FAR) in these areas may stifle the increase of all types of housing where the city most stands to benefit.
When it comes to downtown business centers in urban areas, it cannot always be the case, but cities should strive for a policy of ‘the sky is the limit.’ As currently drafted, the 2040 general plan establishes a maximum FAR of 15 on residential buildings within the central business district as shown in map LUP 6. Such a policy stands starkly opposite of the existing policy which has no height restrictions and promotes new construction in an area with minimal lots available. Some builders may have purchased sites in this area with the intention of one day exceeding a 15 FAR.
FAR results in reducing intensity and height on a part of the lot to reach compliance, by for example creating a parking garage or a two-story building next to the larger primary building to reduce the FAR. This approach is feasible in areas where there are lots of adequate size. In Sacramento, most of the lots are small, so this approach would be likely infeasible, and a FAR cap would call into question the feasibility of many projects. This would be an unfortunate unintended consequence of this policy.
The city’s proposal that a 15 FAR can be exceeded using density bonus statute amounts to a backdoor mandate on inclusionary zoning at a time when many projects are already infeasible.
The inclusionary zoning debate is set to occur later this year or next year, where the council will provide clear policy direction, so it is our view that the General Plan is not the appropriate place for such a measure. Thank you for considering our feedback and concerns. We appreciate the opportunity to work with the City of Sacramento to help create a successful future.
Sincerely,
Vance Jarrard, Legislative Advocate
North State Building Industry Association
Cc: Mayor Darrell Steinberg
City Manager Howard Chan