Sacramento City Council
October 22, 2024

Airport Noise
The Sacramento Executive Airport is the only airport within 3 miles of the Specific Plan Area. The noise contours for Sacramento Executive Airport do not extend into the Specific Plan Area, and the distance from the Specific Plan Area indicates that noise generation from this airport is minimal.

Stationary Sources
A wide variety of stationary noise sources are present in the Specific Plan Area. Residential areas are subject to noise through the use of heating and cooling equipment and through landscape maintenance activities such as leaf blowing and gasoline-powered lawnmowers. Commercial uses can also generate Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-16 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
noise through the operation of rooftop heating and cooling equipment, truck deliveries, and other operational activities. Daily activity of certain industrial uses generate noise as well, especially those that use heavy equipment as part of normal operations such as shipping and loading, concrete crushing, and recycling. Outdoor recreational facilities also produce noise.

3.7.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

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

Predicted noise levels at nearby noise-sensitive land uses were modeled using typical reference noise levels and load factors associated with construction equipment, derived from the FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (Version 1.1) (FHWA 2006).

Construction Vibration
Construction vibration impacts are assessed relative to the increase in vibration levels that could result from the operation of specified construction equipment compared to existing conditions. Specific equipment, techniques, locations, timing, and other project-specific construction activity details associated with future development under the Specific Plan are not available. Analysis of temporary vibration effects that would result from implementation of the Specific Plan is based on construction equipment typically used in residential and urban development projects and identified sensitive receptors. Construction vibration levels at nearby sensitive land uses that would be associated with the proposed Specific Plan are estimated using the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual (2020) and FTA’s Guide on Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment methodology (FTA 2018). Reference levels for vibration emissions for specific equipment are well documented and the usage thereof common practice in the field of acoustics.

Construction activities have the potential to expose nearby buildings to levels of ground vibration that could result in structural damage and/or negative human response. These types of activities were assessed based on the types of construction equipment that could be used, the levels of ground vibration typically generated by these types of equipment, and proximity to nearby existing buildings.

Referenced ground vibration levels for typical construction equipment are provided by the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment manual (FTA 2018). The vibration modeling also assumes a threshold of 0.1 PPV in/sec for the potential for structural damage to historic buildings located within the Specific Plan Area.

Operational Noise and Vibration
Non-Transportation Noise
With respect to non-transportation noise sources (e.g., stationary noise sources) associated with implementation of the Specific Plan, the assessment of long-term (operational) impacts was based on reference noise emission levels, measured noise levels for activities and equipment associated with Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-17
operation (e.g., heating, ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] units, delivery docks), and standard attenuation rates and modeling techniques.

Transportation Noise
Assessment of potential long-term (operational) noise impacts resulting from increases in traffic volumes on roadways in the Specific Plan area due to development under the project was conducted using calculations consistent with the FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5 (FHWA 2004) and projectspecific traffic data provided by Fehr & Peers (Appendix D). To assess noise impacts, traffic noise levels under existing and existing plus project conditions for affected roadway segments were modeled.

The analysis is based on the reference noise emission levels for automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and ground attenuation factors. The modeling conducted does not account for the acoustic dampening effects of any natural or human-made shielding (e.g., vegetation, the presence of walls or buildings) or reflection off building surfaces; and thus, modeled noise levels may be overestimated where such shielding exists.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Appendix G thresholds rely on local standards for temporary and permanent increases in ambient noise, the definition of excessive vibration, and airport land use plan policies. Based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, noise policies and standards in the Sacramento City Code, and Caltrans and FTA vibration and noise standards, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a significant impact related to noise or vibration if it would:
• Generate a substantial temporary increase in noise levels that exceeds the following standards established by City Code Chapter 8.68;
▪ Construction noise would result in a significant impact if activities were to take place between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday or between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Sunday, and exceed the noise standards detailed in Section 8.68.080 when measured at the adjacent property line. ▪ Construction noise would result in a significant impact if it were to exceed the noise standards detailed in Table 3.7-4 in any one hour per City Code Section 8.68.060(D). • Generate short-term construction vibration or expose sensitive land uses to long-term operational vibration that exceeds the following Caltrans and FTA guidance for vibration impacts related to structural damage and human response, respectively:
▪ Structural damage (Table 3.7-2):
• 0.08 in/sec PPV for historic resources
• 0.2 PPV in/sec for normal dwelling houses
▪ Human response (Table 3.7-1)
• For frequent events (i.e., more than 70 events per day): 65 VdB • For occasional events (i.e., 30-70 events): 75 VdB
• For infrequent (i.e., fewer than 30 events per day): 80 VdB • Generate a substantial permanent increase in traffic noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses that exceed the following standards:

Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-18 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
▪ Where noise levels currently do not exceed applicable exterior noise standards of 60 dB CNEL for single-family residential uses and 65 dB CNEL for multi-family residential per exterior noise standards identified in both the 2035 and 2040 General Plan Updates; or ▪ Where City noise standards are currently exceeded for applicable land uses, result in a substantial increase in noise (i.e., 3 dB) (Caltrans 2020). • Generate a substantial permanent increase in stationary noise at noise-sensitive uses that exceeds the following standard established by City Code Chapter 8.68:
▪ Exterior (City Code Section 8.68.110): 55 dB Leq at any point at least 1 foot inside the property line of the affected residential or agricultural property and 3 to 5 feet above ground level.
▪ Interior (City Code Section 8.68.070): 55 Lmax dB for any period of time between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
• Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels if the project is located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such as plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
Operational Vibration
Implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in any new or additional major sources of ground vibration, such as commercial railways, passenger rail transit lines, or major transit stations. Long-term operational activities associated with project implementation are not anticipated to result in permanent or substantial levels of ground vibration and are not discussed further.

Airport Noise
The Specific Plan Area is located approximately 2.3 miles east of the Sacramento Executive Airport.

The Sacramento Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan identifies normally acceptable exterior and interior noise levels of 65 CNEL and 45 CNEL, respectively, for sensitive land uses (SACOG 1999:
17). Based on noise contour maps provided in the Sacramento Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Specific Plan Area is outside of the 65 CNEL noise contour (SACOG 1999:

Figure 7). Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to excessive aircraft-related noise levels. This issue is not discussed further.

Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-19

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.7-1: Generate a Substantial Temporary Increase in Noise Levels at Noise-Sensitive Land Uses in Excess of Standards Established by the City Code Buildout of the Specific Plan would result in construction areas located in close proximity to existing noise-sensitive receptors. Most noise-generating construction activity would be performed during the daytime, construction-noise-exempt hours per Section 8.68.080 of the City Code; however, it is possible that construction activity may be required during the evening and nighttime hours. Activities such as large continuous concrete pours needed for development associated with Specific Plan implementation and/or utility improvements could be required outside of the construction timeframe restrictions established within Section 8.68.080 of the City Code. Thus, potential nighttime construction activities could expose nearby noise-sensitive receptors to noise levels that exceed City Code noise standards identified in 8.68.060. Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7-1b would implement noise reduction measures to minimize construction noise and reduce noise exposure during nighttime activities. Compliance with these requirements would restrict construction operations to less sensitive time periods and would implement construction noise level reductions necessary for specific projects.

Thus, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would involve the construction of various land use developments, including residential mixed use and public/quasi-public projects, throughout the Specific Plan Area.

Other development opportunities within the Specific Plan Area include the development of paved parking lots, the creation of community spaces, and infrastructure and streetscape improvements.

Development projects under the Specific Plan would generate temporary noise level increases on, and adjacent to, individual construction sites. However, specific details regarding the timing, duration, and magnitude of construction activities for individual development are currently unknown. Construction activities would, in some cases, occur near existing residences and other noise-sensitive receptors and extend over the course of several weeks to months, or even longer depending on the individual development type and other project- and location-specific circumstances.

Construction noise can be characterized based on the type of activity and associated equipment needed and, in this analysis, is evaluated by considering noise levels associated with site preparation/foundation work, utility improvements (e.g., trenching, pipe/transmission line installation), roadway improvements (e.g., grading, paving), and vertical construction (e.g., residential, commercial, or other structures), with and without pile driving as these are common construction activities anticipated to result from the buildout of the Specific Plan. Reference noise levels for typical construction equipment required for these activities are shown below in Table 3.7-8.

Table 3.7-8 Reference Noise Levels from Typical Construction Equipment Equipment Typical Noise Level 50 ft from Source, dB
Air Compressor 80
Backhoe/Loader 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Vibrator 76
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-20 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Equipment Typical Noise Level 50 ft from Source, dB
Generator/Pump 82
Grader 85
Jack Hammer 88
Paver 85
Pile-driver (Impact) 101
Pile-driver (Sonic) 95
Trucks 84
Source: FTA 2018: Table 7-1.

Assuming equipment operating simultaneously and typical reference noise levels for construction equipment, representative noise levels for various types of construction activity are shown in Table 3.7-

9. The operation of each piece of off-road equipment within the Specific Plan Area would not be constant throughout the day, as equipment would be turned off when not in use. Most of the time during a typical workday, the equipment would be operating at different locations within the Specific Plan Area and would likely not be operating concurrently.

Table 3.7-9 Noise Levels from Construction Activities
Construction Activity Noise Level (Leq dB) @ 50 feet Noise Level (Lmax dB) @ 50 feet Site Preparation/Foundation Work 87.5 91.5
Building Construction 86.2 90.9
Building Construction with Pile Driving 90.5 96.6
Roadway Construction/Improvements 87.2 91.1
Utility Installation/Improvements 88.1 92.1
Note: Assumes all equipment is fitted with a properly maintained and operational noise control device, per manufacturer specifications. Noise levels listed are manufacture-specified noise levels for each piece of heavy construction equipment.

Leq = equivalent noise level; Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level Source: FTA 2018.

As shown in Table 3.7-9, building construction with pile driving and utility installation/improvement activities under the Specific Plan would likely generate the highest noise levels. However, because not all projects under the Specific Plan would include pile driving, noise levels for building construction without pile driving are also considered. Based on reference noise levels for typical construction equipment and activities, building construction activities without pile driving could result in noise levels of up to approximately 86 dB Leq and 91 dB Lmax at 50 feet from the source, and construction activities that involve pile driving could result in noise levels up to approximately 91 dB Leq to 97 dB Lmax at 50 feet from the source. Utility installation/improvements could generate noise levels of up to 88 Leq to 92 dB Lmax at 50 feet from the source.

The City has established standards for acceptable exterior noise levels in Section 8.68.060 of the City Code. Additionally, the provisions within Section 8.68.080 of the City Code state that noise sources associated with construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sunday are exempt from the City Code noise standards.

The City currently allows nighttime construction only if permitted by the Director of Building Inspections.

Further, Section 8.68.200 of the City Code determines that the operation of any pile drivers, hammers, and other appliances, the use of which is attended by loud or unusual noise, between the hours of Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-21
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is unlawful. Construction activities would only be permitted during the nighttime hours if there are no other reasonable options, such as for some foundation designs that require a continuous pour until complete. In some instances, such a concrete pour may take 20 or more hours, requiring work to occur during the nighttime hours. Additionally, utility installation and roadway improvements associated with Specific Plan implementation could periodically occur during nighttime hours (for example to avoid causing traffic congestion) and thus could expose existing or future residential, schools, churches, or similar uses, and commercial/industrial uses to substantial noise levels during the sensitive times of the day. To ensure a comprehensive evaluation of potential environmental effects, this EIR assumes the potential for limited outdoor nighttime construction activity.

Construction activities performed during these evening hours could result in adverse effects to occupants of nearby sensitive land uses because exterior ambient noise levels typically decrease during nighttime hours as community activities (e.g., commercial activities, vehicle traffic) decrease.

In the absence of noise standards specific for nighttime construction, nighttime construction noise scenarios are compared to City nighttime exterior noise standards included in Section 8.68.060 of the City Code. These noise levels have been adjusted according to the cumulative duration of the intrusive sound. For example, if the cumulative period is 5 minutes per hour, then the standard is adjusted by 10 dB to 60 dB during nighttime hours. If the cumulative period is 30 minutes per hour, no adjustments are made and the standard remains at 50 dB during the nighttime, functionally similar to the average hourly noise level of Leq. The noise level that must not be exceeded for any time per hour is 70 dB during the night, functionally similar to a maximum noise level or Lmax. Therefore, the analysis herein evaluates whether potential nighttime construction activity could exceed a nighttime exterior noise standard of 60 dB Leq or 70 Lmax between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

If a nighttime concrete pour were required (likely the most noise intensive nighttime construction activity that might occur under Specific Plan implementation), associated noise could expose nearby noisesensitive receptors, including locations where people normally sleep, to noise levels that exceed applicable nighttime noise standards of 60 dB Leq or 70 Lmax within 377 feet and 1,500 feet, respectively. See Appendix C for modeling inputs and results.

Due to the programmatic nature of this analysis, individual construction activities and associated noise exposure at receiving land uses cannot be determined at this time. Because these details are not known, it is not possible to conclude that implementation of the Specific Plan would avoid generation of substantial temporary construction noise levels that exceed the standards of City Code Section

8.68.060 during non-exempt hours for all future development under the Specific Plan. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Project Design. The City shall promote the incorporation of new technologies, materials, and design and construction techniques in private development projects that minimize air pollution, noise, excess heat, and other forms of pollution and its impacts (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-4.3). • Construction Noise Controls. The City shall limit the potential noise impacts of construction activities on surrounding land uses through noise regulations in the City Code that address permitted days and hours of construction, types of work, construction equipment, and sound attenuation devices. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-10.9) Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-22 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1b: New Policy for Goal E-1: Environment, Public Health, and Safety The City shall include the following new policy in the Specific Plan:
• Policy XX: Implement additional measures to reduce construction-related noise.

For all projects in the Specific Plan Area that require a building permit, the City shall require that the contractor implement the following measures during all phases of construction:
▪ Construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sunday. Construction outside of these hours may be approved through a development permit based on a site specific “construction noise mitigation plan” and a finding by the Director of Community Development or their designee that the construction noise mitigation plan is adequate to prevent excessive noise disturbance of affected residential uses. The site-specific development permit would allow for work outside normally permitted hours (e.g., overnight) subject to conditions of approval, including performance standards, imposed by the City to limit noise impacts. ▪ All heavy construction equipment and all stationary noise sources shall have manufacturerinstalled mufflers. Mufflers and noise suppressors shall be properly maintained and tuned to ensure proper fit, function, and minimization of noise. ▪ Heavy-duty equipment shall be operated at the lowest operating power possible and shall be restricted in close proximity to sensitive receptors. ▪ For construction activity that occurs during nighttime hours, where available and feasible, equipment with back-up alarms shall be equipped with either audible self-adjusting backup alarms or alarms that only sound when an object is detected. Self-adjusting backup alarms shall automatically adjust to 5 dB over the surrounding background levels. All non-selfadjusting backup alarms shall be set to the lowest setting required to be audible above the surrounding noise levels.
▪ To the extent that noise-generating outdoor construction activity needs to occur at night as part of a continuous construction activity, the activity shall be planned such that the portion that needs to take place closest to sensitive receptors takes place during less noisesensitive daytime hours. Temporary noise barriers shall be constructed, if needed, to screen noise-generating equipment when located near noise-sensitive land uses. ▪ If impact pile driving is required, sonic pile drivers shall be used, unless engineering studies are submitted to the City that show this is not feasible, based on geotechnical considerations.

Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy ERC-4.3 (Project Design), which promotes the use of new construction materials and equipment that minimizes noise impacts; and Policy ERC-10.9 (Construction Noise Controls), which limits construction noise impacts by requiring the City to adopt regulations that restrict hours of construction and the type of work that can be performed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-1b would include additional measures that developments under the Specific Plan would need to adhere to in order to reduce construction-related noise to the extent feasible. Compliance with Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7- 1b would restrict construction operations to less sensitive time periods and implement the best available construction noise level reductions necessary for specific projects. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-23
Impact 3.7-2: Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels Construction activity associated with implementation of the Specific Plan would generate short-term increases in vibration. Construction activity would predominately occur during daytime hours when sensitive receptors would not be as affected by groundborne vibration. Additionally, Mitigation Measures 3.7-2a and 3.7-2b would require that all measures to reduce impacts from construction vibration would be implemented for projects under the Specific Plan by requiring minimum setbacks to sensitive land uses, impact monitoring during pile driving activity, and use of alternative equipment when appropriate and feasible. Thus, the impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Construction activities generate varying degrees of temporary ground vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and activities involved. Construction-related vibration has the potential to damage structures, cause cosmetic damage (e.g., crack plaster), or disrupt the operation of vibration-sensitive equipment. Vibration can also be a source of annoyance to individuals who live or work close to vibration generating activities. The Specific Plan would encourage infill development, and thus would have the potential to result in construction vibration near sensitive receptors.

Typical construction activities, such as the site preparation and grading, may generate substantial vibration near the source. When evaluating construction-related vibration impacts, the activities with the greatest potential to cause impacts (i.e., structural damage or disturbance to sensitive land uses) are the primary focus. Table 3.7-10 includes reference vibration levels for construction activities that generate the highest levels of vibration.

Table 3.7-10 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) at
25 Feet, Inches per Second
Root Mean Square at
25 Feet (VdB)
Pile Driver (impact)
upper range 1.518 112
typical 0.644 104
Pile Driver (sonic)
upper range 0.734 105
typical 0.17 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill (slurry wall)
in soil 0.008 66
in rock 0.017 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drilling 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: FTA 2018: Table 7-4.

As discussed under Impact 3.7-1, specific construction activities, proximity of equipment to structures and sensitive land uses, and specific duration of individual construction projects are not known at this time; therefore, this analysis evaluates the potential for impacts to occur at a programmatic level based on typical construction equipment that could be used for building construction.

Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-24 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Based on the reference levels included in Table 3.7-10, pile driving generates the highest vibration levels. Pile driving could potentially be used during construction of new residential, commercial, or other land uses under the Specific Plan, as well as other infrastructure associated with development, and thus, is of greatest concern when evaluating construction-related vibration impacts. When vibration events occur from the same source more than 70 times per day, as would likely be the case with pile driving, they are considered “frequent events.” Frequent events in excess of 65 VdB are considered to result in a significant vibration impact (FTA 2018). According to the FTA, impact pile driving generates ground vibration levels of 1.518 in/sec at 25 feet, which would attenuate to 0.199 in/sec PPV at 97 feet.

Based on FTA’s recommended procedure for applying a propagation adjustment to these reference levels, vibration levels from impact pile driving could exceed the Caltrans threshold of significance of

0.2 in/sec PPV for structural damage to normal dwellings within 97 feet of pile-driving activities, and the applied threshold for historic buildings of 0.08 in/sec PPV within 180 feet. See Appendix C for modeling details.

Not all construction activity under the Specific Plan would involve pile driving; thus, this analysis also evaluates vibration levels resulting from construction activities that do not involve pile driving. Based on the reference vibration levels for typical construction equipment included in Table 3.7-10, the piece of equipment that could generate the second greatest level of ground vibration is a vibratory roller.

According to the FTA, vibratory rollers generate ground vibration levels of 0.20 in/sec PPV at 25 feet.

Based on the recommended procedure for applying a propagation adjustment, vibration levels from the use of a vibratory roller could exceed the threshold of significance of 0.2 in/sec PPV for structural damage to normal dwelling houses within 26 feet of vibratory roller activities, and the applied threshold of 0.08 in/sec PPV for historic buildings within 48 feet (see Appendix C for modeling details).

Vibration levels can also result in interference or annoyance impacts for residences or other land uses where people sleep, such as residences, hotels, and hospitals. According to FTA, vibration levels associated with pile driving are 112 VdB at 25 feet and 94 VdB at 25 feet for vibratory rollers (FTA 2018: 184). FTA vibration annoyance potential criteria depend on the frequency of vibration events. For construction activities involving pile driving, based on FTA’s recommended procedure for applying propagation adjustments to reference levels for a typical pile driver, vibration levels could exceed the threshold of significance for disturbance to a sensitive land use (65 VdB) within 925 feet of construction activities. Because the use of a vibratory roller would likely not require frequent use, this analysis applies the FTA criterion of 75 VdB threshold for occasional events. For construction activities that would include the use of a vibratory roller, vibration levels from construction could exceed the threshold of significance for disturbance to a sensitive land use within 108 feet of construction activities. See Appendix C for modeling details.

Because the specific construction activities that could result from implementation of the Specific Plan and their potential proximity to sensitive receptors, including historic buildings, the possibility remains for construction activities that generate vibration to occur within the distances identified above, resulting in disturbance to sensitive land uses or structural damage. For this reason, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.7-2a: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Interior Vibration Standards. The City shall require construction projects that are anticipated to generate significant vibration levels to use appropriate methods (i.e., type of equipment, lowimpact tools, modifying operations, increasing setback distance, vibration monitoring) to ensure Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-25
acceptable interior vibration levels at nearby residential and commercial uses based on the current City or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) criteria. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC10.5) • Vibration. The City shall consider the potential for vibration-induced damage associated with construction activities, highways, and rail lines in close proximity to historic buildings and archaeological sites. Where there is potential for substantial vibration-induced damage, the City shall require preparation of a Pre-Construction Survey and Vibration Management and Monitoring Plan, prepared by a qualified historic preservation specialist or structural engineer to document existing conditions, present appropriate methods to avoid or reduce potential vibration damage, monitor for excessive vibration, and ensure any damage is documented and repaired. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-10.7)
Mitigation Measure 3.7-2b: New Policy for Goal E-1: Environment, Public Health, and Safety The City shall include the following new policy in the Specific Plan:
• Policy XX: Implement additional measures to reduce construction-related vibration.

The following vibration control measures (or other equally effective measures approved by the City) shall be included in the plan:
▪ To prevent structural damage, minimum setback requirements for different types of ground vibration-producing activities (e.g., pile driving) for the purpose of preventing damage to nearby structures shall be established based on the proposed activities and locations, once determined. Factors to be considered include the specific nature of the vibration producing activity (e.g., type and duration of pile driving), local soil conditions, and the fragility/resiliency of nearby structures. Established setback requirements can be breached if a project-specific site-specific vibration analysis is conducted by a qualified geotechnical engineer or ground vibration specialist that indicates that no structural damage would occur at nearby buildings or structures.
▪ To prevent disturbance to sensitive land uses, minimum setback requirements for different types of ground vibration producing activities (e.g., pile driving) shall be established based on the proposed activities and locations, once determined. ▪ Alternatives to traditional pile driving (e.g., sonic pile driving, jetting, cast-in-place or auger cast piles, etc.,) shall be considered and implemented where feasible to reduce vibration levels.
▪ Phase pile-driving and high-impact activities so as not to occur simultaneously with other construction activities, to the extent feasible. The total vibration level produced could be significantly less when each vibration source is operated at separate times.

Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.7-2a requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy ERC-10.5 (Interior Vibration Standards), which requires construction projects anticipated to generate excessive vibration levels to ensure acceptable interior vibration levels at nearby residential and commercial uses are met through equipment type, monitoring, and other methods, and Policy ERC10.7 (Vibration), which protects historic buildings from damage due to vibration by requiring the implementation of Pre-Construction Surveys and Vibration Management and Monitoring Plans where there is potential for substantial vibration-induced damage. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7- 2b would include additional measures that developments under the Specific Plan would need to adhere to in order to reduce construction-related vibration to the extent feasible.

Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-26 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-2a and 3.7-2b would serve to reduce potential vibration impacts from the use of equipment during construction activities by requiring minimum setbacks to sensitive land uses, impact monitoring during pile driving activity, and use of alternative equipment when appropriate and feasible. These measures would ensure that construction activities within the Specific Plan Area would reduce the potential exposure to excessive groundborne noise and vibration levels and ensure that construction vibration levels would not impact persons or buildings. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

Impact 3.7-3: Exposure of Existing Sensitive Receptors to Project-Generated Traffic Noise Implementation of development associated with the Specific Plan would result in traffic increases along several modeled roadways in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area, thus increasing traffic noise. A comparison of existing (2018) and future (2040) traffic noise identified seven roadways that would increase from below OPR’s residential exterior noise thresholds (i.e., 60 dB CNEL and 65 dB CNEL for single-family and multi-family residential uses, respectively) under existing conditions beyond them with the buildout of the project. Additionally, noise from nine of the modeled roadways would increase by more than 3 dB. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-3 would require the implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, which would reduce noise impacts to sensitive receptors; however, it cannot be guaranteed at this time that long-term traffic noise associated with development under the Specific Plan would be reduced below the applicable thresholds. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

The Specific Plan establishes the land use development pattern for the future of the Specific Plan Area and accommodates growth and development, including new residential, commercial, and office land uses. Land use development that results in traffic increases can result in long-term traffic noise increases (or decreases) on roadways in the Specific Plan Area, and thus could result in exposure of existing receptors to substantial permanent noise increases. Traffic noise modeling was conducted for existing (2018) and future (2040) conditions using traffic data which was based on anticipated land use development contemplated under growth in the City through 2040.

For community noise assessments Caltrans considers it is “generally not significant” if no noisesensitive uses are located within the project area, or if increases in community noise levels associated with implementation of a project would not exceed +3 dB at noise-sensitive locations in the project vicinity (Caltrans 2020). Existing and existing plus project modeled noise levels associated with roadway segments within the Specific Plan Area are shown in Table 3.7-11. The majority of roadway segments exceed the OPR threshold for single-family residential uses (60 dB CNEL), and almost half of the roadway segments exceed the OPR threshold for multi-family residential uses (65 dB CNEL) with absolute noise levels ranging from approximately 45.5 to 70.9 dB CNEL. Roadway segments that would experience a permanent increase in traffic noise levels either because they would exceed the OPR thresholds for exterior noise at residential receptors with the project or would result in an increase of 3 dB or more from existing conditions are identified in bold. See Appendix C for more detailed information regarding traffic noise calculations.

Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-27
Table 3.7-11 Existing and Projected Traffic Noise Levels Roadway
Segment CNEL (dB)
Change
From To Baseline (dB)
Future With
Project
(2040)
Stockton Blvd Alhambra Boulevard 34th Street 66.2 67.5 1.4 Stockton Blvd 34th Street US 50 On Ramp 64.7 65.3 0.6
Stockton Blvd US 50 On Ramp US 50 Off Ramp 65.0 65.6 0.6 Stockton Blvd US 50 Off Ramp T Street 64.5 65.4 0.9
Stockton Blvd T Street 39th Street 64.7 65.6 0.9
Stockton Blvd 39th Street UC Davis Health Dept. Dwy 65.2 65.9 0.7 Stockton Blvd UC Davis Health Dept. Dwy X Street 65.1 65.9 0.8 Stockton Blvd X Street Y Street 63.6 66.1 2.5
Stockton Blvd Y Street 2nd Avenue 63.6 66.1 2.4
Stockton Blvd 2nd Avenue Broadway 64.9 64.3 -0.7
Stockton Blvd Broadway 11th Avenue 65.9 64.6 -1.3
Stockton Blvd 11th Avenue 14th Avenue 65.3 64.3 -1.0
Stockton Blvd 14th Avenue San Francisco Boulevard 66.0 65.8 -0.2 Stockton Blvd San Francisco Boulevard 21st Avenue 64.6 64.6 0.0 Stockton Blvd 21st Avenue Fruitridge Road 64.5 64.8 0.3 Stockton Blvd Fruitridge Road McMahon Drive 67.3 68.1 0.8 Stockton Blvd McMahon Drive Lemon Hill Avenue 66.7 67.4 0.7 Stockton Blvd Lemon Hill Avenue Dias Avenue 67.2 67.9 0.8 Stockton Blvd Dias Avenue Elder Creek Road 66.9 67.6 0.7 Stockton Blvd Elder Creek Road Fowler Avenue 67.4 67.9 0.5 Stockton Blvd Fowler Avenue 65th Street 67.2 67.7 0.5
65th St US 50 Off Ramp 4th Avenue 70.4 70.9 0.5
65th St 4th Avenue Broadway 70.4 70.6 0.2
65th St Broadway San Joaquin Street 69.4 69.2 -0.2
65th St San Joaquin Street 14th Avenue 69.3 69.2 -0.2
65th St 14th Avenue 18th Avenue 70.6 69.3 -1.4
65th St 18th Avenue 21st Avenue 70.6 69.3 -1.4
65th St 21st Avenue Sacramento County
Cemetery

70.0 68.6 -1.4
65th St Sacramento County
Cemetery
Fruitridge Road 70.0 68.6 -1.4
65th St Fruitridge Road McMahon Drive 69.4 68.3 -1.1
65th St McMahon Drive Lemon Hill Avenue 69.7 68.7 -1.0
65th St Lemon Hill Avenue Elder Creek Road 69.6 68.5 -1.1 65th St Elder Creek Road 53rd Avenue 69.7 68.8 -0.9
65th St 53rd Avenue Stockton Boulevard 66.7 65.8 -0.9
Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-28 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Roadway
Segment CNEL (dB)
Change
From To Baseline (dB)
Future With
Project
(2040)
65th St 65th Street Walmart Dwy 64.3 63.7 -0.6
65th St Walmart Dwy Sky Pkwy 64.5 63.9 -0.6
65th St 65th Street Florin Road 64.1 63.4 -0.7
Martin Luther King Jr Blvd Broadway Keith B Kenny K8 School 59.6 60.7 1.1 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd Keith B Kenny K8 School 14th Avenue 59.0 59.8 0.8 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd 14th Avenue 21st Avenue 61.2 62.1 0.9 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd 21st Avenue 26th Avenue 61.6 62.7 1.1 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd 26th Avenue Fruitridge Road 60.8 61.8 1.0 Martin Luther King Jr Blvd Fruitridge Road Highway 99 62.3 63.2 0.9 47th Ave Highway 99 44th Street 68.0 68.8 0.8
47th Ave 44th Street Sampson Boulevard 67.3 68.1 0.8
47th Ave Sampson Boulevard Steiner Drive 66.8 67.5 0.7
47th Ave Steiner Drive Stockton Boulevard 66.2 66.8 0.6 Elder Creek Rd Stockton Boulevard 65th Street 66.8 67.7 0.9 41st Ave Highway 99 44th Street 45.6 50.0 4.4
Lemon Hill Ave 44th Street Sampson Boulevard 43.0 45.5 2.5 Lemon Hill Ave Sampson Boulevard Dewey Boulevard 47.6 50.1 2.5 Lemon Hill Ave Dewey Boulevard Stockton Boulevard 54.8 56.0 1.2 Lemon Hill Ave Stockton Boulevard 65th Street 47.9 49.9 2.0 Fruitridge Rd Highway 99 Off Ramp Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. 67.5 68.0 0.5 Fruitridge Rd Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. Mendocino Boulevard 67.4 68.5 1.1 Fruitridge Rd Mendocino Boulevard Del Norte Boulevard 67.4 68.5 1.1 Fruitridge Rd Del Norte Boulevard 44th Street 67.3 68.3 1.0 Fruitridge Rd 44th Street Ethel Way 67.4 68.2 0.8
Fruitridge Rd Ethel Way Lawrence Drive 66.7 67.4 0.8
Fruitridge Rd Lawrence Drive Stockton Boulevard 66.7 67.4 0.8 Fruitridge Rd Stockton Boulevard 58th Street 64.8 64.8 0.0 Fruitridge Rd 58th Street 61st Street 63.7 63.6 -0.1
Fruitridge Rd 61st Street 65th Street 65.3 65.2 -0.1
21st Ave Stockton Boulevard 53rd Street 61.1 62.0 0.9
21st Ave 53rd Street 58th Street 59.3 60.7 1.4
21st Ave 58th Street 65th Street 58.6 59.5 0.9
12th Ave Highway 99 On Ramp 3rd Street 60.1 60.8 0.7
12th Ave 3rd Street 36th Street 56.1 57.5 1.4
12th Ave 36th Street Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. 56.1 57.5 1.4 14th Ave Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. East Nicholas Avenue 62.8 64.5 1.6 14th Ave East Nicholas Avenue Stockton Boulevard 61.9 64.0 2.1 Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-29
Roadway
Segment CNEL (dB)
Change
From To Baseline (dB)
Future With
Project
(2040)
14th Ave Stockton Boulevard 50th Street 63.2 66.4 3.2
14th Ave 50th Street 53rd Street 61.4 66.1 4.7
14th Ave 53rd Street 58th Street 58.9 63.9 5.0
14th Ave 58th Street Tallac Shopping Mall 61.5 65.0 3.5 14th Ave Tallac Shopping Mall 65th Street 61.6 64.9 3.3 Broadway Stockton Boulevard 50th Street 58.9 63.7 4.8
Broadway 50th Street 53rd Street 59.1 64.1 5.0
Broadway 53rd Street 59th Street 61.2 64.2 3.0
Broadway 59th Street 61st Street 60.8 63.4 2.6
Broadway 61st Street 65th Street 62.0 63.7 1.8
Notes: dB = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = Community noise equivalent level Bold = Noise level exceeding the OPR threshold for transportation noise levels at residential (low density, duplex, mobile home) receptors, or exceeding the significant increase thresholds of 3dB.

Source: Data provided by Fehr & Peers; Traffic noise modeled by Ascent in 2023.

As shown in Table 3.7-11, modeled traffic noise levels for the majority of roadway segments exceed OPR exterior noise thresholds for residential uses (i.e. 60 dB CNEL and 65 dB CNEL) under both baseline and future project scenarios. Increased traffic noise as a result of development associated with the Specific Plan would result in an increase in noise along a majority of studied roadway segments; a decrease in noise along 20 studied roadway segments, and no change to noise levels along two roadway segments. Additionally, there are nine modeled roadway segments that would result in an increase of +3 dB or more and seven that are below OPR’s residential exterior noise standards under existing conditions but would exceed that with build out of the project (i.e., roadways that would increase from below 60 dB CNEL to above 60 dB CNEL or roadways that would increase from below 65 dB CNEL to above 65 CNEL). Therefore, impacts to traffic noise would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.7-3: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Exterior Noise Standards. The City shall require noise mitigation for all development where the projected exterior noise levels exceed those shown in Table ERC-1 [shown as Table 3.7-2 in this EIR], to the extent feasible. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-10.1) • Interior Noise Standards. The City shall require new development to include noise attenuation to assure acceptable interior noise levels appropriate to the land use, as follows:
▪ 45 dB Ldn for residential, transient lodgings, hospitals, nursing homes, and other uses where people normally sleep; and
▪ 45 dB Leq (peak hour with windows closed) for office buildings and similar uses. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-10.3)
• Alternative Paving Materials. The City shall continue to explore opportunities to use alternative pavement materials such as rubberized asphalt and porous pavement on residential roadways in order to reduce noise generation, extend maintenance cycles, and improve air quality and stormwater management. (2040 General Plan Policy ERC-10.8) Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-30 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.7-3 requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy ERC10.1 (Exterior Noise Standards), which requires mitigation at the project level for development which would exceed the General Plan’s Noise Compatibility standards; Policy ERC-10.3 (Interior Noise Standards), which requires new development to attenuate interior noise levels to appropriate levels; and Policy ERC-10.8, which encourages the use of alternative pavement materials, which would reduce vehicular noise generation. Although the implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-3 would reduce traffic noise to the extent feasible, it is not possible to guarantee that long-term traffic noise associated with development under the Specific Plan would be reduced below the applicable thresholds.

Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.7-4: Expose Noise-Sensitive Land Uses to Operational Stationary Noise that Exceeds Applicable Standards
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the development of areas with a high intensity mix of residential, commercial, office, and public uses. Noise sources associated with these land uses include mechanical equipment such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units, backup generators, vehicular and human activity in parking lots, and activities at commercial/retail land uses.

The City Code establishes noise standards for HVAC equipment. However, exact locations, building footprints, and building orientation have not been identified, and therefore, it is unknown specifically where future stationary noise sources could be located. Therefore, it is possible that new stationary noise sources could exceed City noise standards and result in excessive noise levels at existing sensitive receptors. The implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7-3 would ensure that new stationary noise sources associated with development under the Specific Plan would be mitigated so as not exceed City exterior noise standards at sensitive receptors. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

This impact assesses the long-term exposure of existing sensitive receptors to increased long-term (operational) noise levels from proposed land use development. The Specific Plan Area is predominately designated Residential Mixed Use. As detailed in Chapter 2, “Project Description,” the Residential Mixed Use land use designation is intended to foster walkable areas with a high intensity mix of residential, commercial, office, and public uses. Noise sources associated with these land uses include mechanical equipment such as HVAC equipment and vehicular and human activity in parking lots. Vehicular and human activity in parking lots, outdoor activities, and voices would be intermittent in nature and would vary considerably depending on the specific characteristics of the site. This activity also tends not to be of a level of frequency that would disturb existing sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, schools, or libraries) and would mostly occur during the daytime, when receptors are least sensitive. Therefore, this analysis focuses on noise from mechanical equipment.

Mechanical equipment could take the form of fans, pumps, or chillers. Noise levels associated with HVAC units and backup generators would be similar to those associated with other mechanical equipment such as pumps, air compressors, and exhaust pipes. Thus, this analysis of mechanical equipment is representative of typical noise sources associated with commercial land uses.

Noise levels from HVAC equipment vary substantially depending on unit efficiency, size, and location, but generally range from 45 to 70 dB Leq at a distance of 50 feet (EPA 1971). City Code Section

8.68.110 regulates the noise levels of residential pumps, fans, and air conditioners. Specifically, the regulation states that noise levels from this equipment should not exceed 60 dB Leq at 1 foot inside the property line of the affected residential property or exceed 55 dB Leq in the center of a neighboring patio 3 to 5 feet above ground level or outside of the neighboring living area window nearest the equipment Ascent Noise and Vibration
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.7-31
location. For a more conservative analysis, HVAC units were assumed to operate at a reference noise level of 70 dB Leq. At this noise level, HVAC units would exceed the City noise standard for residential mechanical equipment of 60 dB Leq at one foot inside the residential property line and 55 dB Leq outside of a neighboring patio or nearest living area window within 157 feet and 279 feet, respectively. Because the locations of HVAC units are not currently known, it is not possible to guarantee that HVAC units would be located far enough from sensitive receptors to avoid substantial noise exposure that would exceed City stationary noise standards for sensitive receptors.

Subsequent development under the Specific Plan would be required to comply with the applicable City guidelines, standards, and specifications related to operational noise. However, the specific location of new mechanical equipment associated with new mixed-use structures is not known at this time.

Therefore, it is possible that new stationary sources associated with new development could expose existing sensitive land uses to noise levels that exceed City standards for sensitive land uses. Thus, this impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies.

Implement Mitigation Measure 3.7-3: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies.

Significance after Mitigation
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7-3, as detailed above, would ensure that new stationary noise sources associated with development under the Specific Plan would be mitigated so as not exceed City exterior noise standards at sensitive receptors. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.7-5: Potential for Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Noise Impact Implementation of the Specific Plan, in combination with other cumulative development in the area, would involve a permanent increase in ambient noise. This permanent increase could contribute to significant noise impacts in the area. Although implementation of feasible mitigation measures would reduce plan-specific noise effects associated with implementation of the Specific Plan, all impacts may not be reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, within the cumulative context, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The geographic context for cumulative impacts related to noise includes the Specific Plan Area and areas in the City and County of Sacramento adjacent to the Specific Plan Area. Cumulative noise impacts could occur if sensitive receptors are exposed to elevated noise and vibration levels simultaneously from multiple projects that are in close proximity to one another. Noise impacts are based on factors related to site-specific and project-specific characteristics and conditions, including distance to noise sources, barriers between land uses and noise sources, and other factors. Noise impacts are typically site-specific and only combine when cumulative development is in close proximity to one another.

Noise and Vibration Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.7-32 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Contribute to Cumulative Construction Noise and Vibration Because construction noise and vibration are localized effects, only construction projects that occur close to one another could combine to result in a cumulative noise or vibration effect. Cumulative impacts from construction-generated noise and vibration could result if other future planned construction activities were to take place within close proximity to individual project sites within the Specific Plan Area. Vibration and noise associated with construction activities are of primary concern within proximity of sensitive land uses. At increasing distances from the source, vibration levels dissipate rapidly and have less potential to cause disturbance to people or damage to structures.

Vibration and noise generated from construction would occur for brief and intermittent periods of time.

In consideration of other future development, vibration impacts would remain local and would not combine with vibration sources from other construction activities, even if construction activities at other future development were to occur simultaneously with project construction activities. The Specific Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to construction noise and vibration impacts.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Contribute to Cumulative Traffic Noise Impact
As shown in Table 3.7-11, there are nine roadways within the vicinity of the Specific Plan area that would generate a significant increase (i.e., +3 dB) in traffic noise levels above existing conditions and seven roadways which would increase beyond OPR’s residential exterior noise standards of 60 dB CNEL and 65 dB CNEL for single-family residential and multi-family residential uses, respectively.

Therefore, cumulative traffic noise from implementation of the Specific Plan would exceed Caltrans noise standards, resulting in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the significant cumulative noise condition. This impact would be significant.

Contribute to Cumulative Operational Noise Impacts
Cumulative impacts related to on-site operational and stationary noise sources are site specific, dissipate with distance from the source, and typically result in cumulative impacts only when projectgenerated noise is located close to other off-site noise sources. The project would result in residential mixed-use land uses that include stationary noise sources such as HVAC units. Although at the project level, the specific locations of new stationary equipment are unknown and could exceed the City’s threshold for stationary sources, stationary noise sources are generally limited to the vicinity of individual project sites and would generally not combine with other stationary equipment in the overall area to result in a cumulative effect. Therefore, the project would not contribute substantially to a cumulative impact related to stationary noise and this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure 3.7-3: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.7-3 requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy ERC10.1 (Exterior Noise Standards), which requires mitigation at the project level for development which would exceed the General Plan’s Noise Compatibility standards; Policy ERC-10.3 (Interior Noise Standards), which requires new development to attenuate interior noise levels to appropriate levels; and Policy ERC-10.8, which encourages the use of alternative pavement materials which would reduce vehicular noise generation. Although the implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.7-3 would reduce traffic noise to the extent feasible, it is not possible to guarantee that long-term traffic noise associated with development under the Specific Plan would be reduced below the applicable thresholds.

Therefore, cumulative impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-1

3.8 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
This section provides an overview of existing public services in the City of Sacramento and evaluates the effects of implementation of the proposed Specific Plan to affect availability, service level, and/or capacity of public services, including fire protection services, police protection services, schools, library facilities, and parks and recreation and, if such an effect is determined to occur, whether new or expanded facilities would be required that could result in a potentially significant impact to the environment.

No comments related to public services or recreation were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP). A copy of the NOP along with comments received is included in Appendix A.

3.8.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws regarding public services and recreation are relevant to the Specific Plan.

STATE
California Fire Code
The 2022 California Fire Code, which incorporates by adoption the 2021 International Fire Code, contains regulations related to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises. The California Fire Code contains specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety.

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

California Building Standards Code (Title 24)
The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) represents Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code under California Code of Regulations Title 24. CALGreen is intended to promote sustainable construction practices by reducing negative impacts associated with construction, applying design and methodology to encourage positive environmental impacts. The code is the State of California’s first green building code, and applies to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure on a statewide basis (unless otherwise indicated).

Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) In accordance with California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 8 Section 1270, “Fire Prevention,” and Section 6773, “Fire Protection and Fire Equipment,” the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (referred to as Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.

Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act
The Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 established a state program to provide per-pupil funding for new construction and modernization of existing school facilities. The act limits the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities as a condition of approving new development and authorizes school districts to assess fees (at various levels) to directly offset the costs associated with increased capacity as a result of new development.

California Government Code Section 66477
California Government Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act) allows local governments to impose land dedications or fees in lieu, or combination of both, for Neighborhood and Community Park purposes from new residential subdivisions. The land dedication or in lieu fees are placed as a condition on the tentative or subdivision map. The law prescribes a standard consistent with the circumstances of each park district based on a minimum of 3 acres and a maximum of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. The City of Sacramento oversees these requirements in the city under City Code Chapter 17.512.

LOCAL
City of Sacramento General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is the City’s policy guide for future development.

City of Sacramento Department of Youth, Parks, & Community Enrichment Parks Plan 2040 The Department of Youth, Parks, & Community Enrichment (YPCE)’s Park Planning and Development Services division of the City is responsible for park planning, parkland acquisition, park master planning, and the design and development of new - or renovation of existing - neighborhood, community and regional parks. Park Planning and Development Services maintains and implements park design and development documents, including park design guidelines, recreation facility development standards, and the City of Sacramento Parks Plan 2040. The Landscape Architecture Section of the Department of YPCE is responsible for the design, renovation and construction of new or existing City of Sacramento parks, parkways, and off-street bikeways.

YPCE is currently preparing the Parks Plan 2040, as a subsequent project under the 2040 General Plan, which will update and replace the existing Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2005-2010 Technical Update. The Parks Plan 2040 proposes a Level of Service goal of 8.5 acre/1,000 residents for the 2040 General Plan population, which includes neighborhood, community, regional, parkway and open space parks. Based on the priorities and vision of residents, the Parks Plan 2040 will recommend policies to guide in the equitable acquisition, development, and maintenance of existing and future parks for the next 20 years.

Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-3
Sacramento City Code
Chapter 2.20 of the Sacramento City Code sets forth the guidelines for Sacramento Police Department (SPD) and includes regulations regarding the powers and duties of the Chief of Police and the Police Department.

Chapter 2.24 of the Sacramento City Code sets forth guidelines for Sacramento Fire Department (SFD) and includes regulations associated with the powers and duties of the fire chief and the general organization of SFD, tampering with fire alarm systems, false alarms, and interference with fire alarm systems. In addition, this chapter establishes SFD rates and fees for associated services.

Chapter 15.36 of the Sacramento City Code adopts the 2022 California Fire Code with such deletions, amendments, and additions thereof as set forth in the chapter. Chapter 15.36 includes numerous codes relating to the inspection and general enforcement of the City of Sacramento fire code, control of emergency scenes, permits, general provisions for safety, fire department access, equipment, and protection systems, and many standards for fire alarm systems, fire extinguisher systems, commercial cooking operations, combustible materials, heat producing appliances, exit illumination, emergency plans and procedures, and so on.

Chapter 17.512 of the Sacramento City Code requires as a condition of approval of a tentative map or parcel map, that the subdivider shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu thereof, or both, at the option of the city, for park or recreational purposes as required in this chapter. Where a recreational or park facility is designated in the general plan or a specific plan, or the subdivider proposes to locate a recreational or park facility in whole or in part within the proposed subdivision to serve the immediate and future needs of the residents of the subdivision, the subdivider shall dedicate land for a local recreation or park facility sufficient in size and topography to serve the residents of the subdivision. Land acquisition for Neighborhood and Community parks is dedicated or acquired through the City’s Quimby Ordinance (Quimby Ord. 2017-0009 § 14) (or payment of the City’s Quimby in-lieu fee) and is therefore not included in the park impact fee (PIF) program.

Chapter 18.56 of the Sacramento City Code imposes a park development impact fee on new residential and non-residential development within the city. Fees collected pursuant to Chapter 18.56 are primarily used to finance the development of Neighborhood and Community Park facilities based on a citywide level of service goal of 3.5 acres of Neighborhood and Community Parks per 1,000 persons and 1.5 acres of Citywide/Regional Parks per 1,000 persons in all areas of the city; and 1.75 acres per 1,000 for Neighborhood and Community Parks in the Central City. The park fees that are assessed upon development projects provide a portion of the park improvement funds necessary to serve new residential and non-residential development in the city. The PIF funds a portion of the development of regional parks, parkways, and citywide facilities but not land acquisition. The PIF does not fund acquisition or development of open space. The balance of the city’s level of service goal of 8.5 acres/1,000 and the PIF funded 5 acres/1,000 is funded through other means, including land dedication and grants.

3.8.2 Environmental Setting

FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
The SFD provides fire protection and emergency medical services (EMS) to the entire city and two contract areas (Pacific/Fruitridge and Natomas Fire Protection Districts) that include 47.1 square miles immediately adjacent to the city boundaries within the unincorporated county (Dyett & Bhatia 2020).

Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
The SFD operates from 24 fire stations strategically located throughout its service area. Eight stations are located north of the American River, seven stations in the central downtown and eastern sections of the city, and nine stations in the southern portions of the city. Although each fire station operates within a specific response district encompassing the immediate geographical area around the station, all of the Sacramento County fire agencies (SFD, Sacramento Metro Fire District, Sacramento International Airport Fire, Cosumnes Fire District, and the Folsom Fire Department) share an automatic aid agreement so that the closest fire unit responds regardless of jurisdiction. The nearest stations to the Specific Plan Area are Station 4 to the north of Entry to Midtown subarea, Station 6 to the west of Traditional Neighborhoods Commercial Storefronts subarea, and Station 10 to the east of Little Saigon subarea.

When SFD is fully staffed, 173 personnel are on duty for fire and EMS first responder emergencies and 34 of these personnel are on duty for emergency ambulance transportation daily (Dyett & Bhatia 2020).

The Fiscal Year 2023-2024 proposed budget for SFD includes authority to fill 760.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions, including 664 fire operations/ EMS positions (City of Sacramento 2023a).

SFD personnel respond to approximately 80,000 calls each year and provide service to approximately 480,000 residents and over 20,000 businesses located in the City of Sacramento (City of Sacramento 2023b). The City has not adopted specific, measurable, and outcome-based response time goals, either in its budget documents or its current and proposed General Plan. In the City’s 2023-2024 budget document, SFD reported that 5 minutes 30 seconds is the 2022 actual, 2023 estimate, and 2024 target average response time (City of Sacramento 2023a). The accepted national standard for response times is 5 minutes in an urban environment. Response time is defined by 4 minutes travel time plus 1 minute turnout time, which is the time from dispatch received until time leaving the station (City of Sacramento 2023a). SFD is also responsible for performing fire plan review and fire inspection.

In 2022, approximately 96.61 percent of the fire plan reviews were completed on time and 9,550 fire inspections were conducted. SFD has targets to complete 95 percent of the fire plan reviews on time and conduct 9,500 fire inspection in 2024 (City of Sacramento 2023a).

POLICE PROTECTION
Police protection services within the City of Sacramento are provided by the SPD. The SPD operates from the following four stations in the city:
• Sacramento Fire Department and Sacramento Police Department Headquarters: Public Safety Center, Chiefs Deise and Kearns Building at 5770 Freeport Boulevard • North Area: William J. Kinney Police Facility at 3550 Marysville Boulevard • South Area: Joseph E. Rooney Police Facility at 5303 Franklin Boulevard • Central and East Commands: Richards Police Facility at 300 Richards Boulevard The Specific Plan Area is served by the South Area station, which provides police protection services to the southern portion of the city, from Highway 50 on the north to the city limits on the west, south, and east. SPD also maintains mutual aid agreements as part of a statewide emergency response system.

Locally, SPD has police security contracts to provide specialized police staff to Regional Transit, area hospitals, and school districts within the city.

According to the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, the SPD is staffed with 691 full-time sworn personnel, 89 part-time personnel, and 75 dispatchers as of September 2023 (POST Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-5
2023). The Fiscal Year 2023-2024 proposed budget for SPD includes authority to fill 1,134.16 FTE positions (769 sworn and 365.16 professional staff) (City of Sacramento 2023a). Table 3.8-1 provides information on SPD performance measures.

Table 3.8-1 Sacramento Police Department Performance Measures 2021-2024 Measure Fiscal Year 2021
Actual
Fiscal Year 2022
Actual
Fiscal Year 2023
Estimate
Fiscal Year 2024
Target
Part 1 Crimes1 Reported per 1,000 Residents 37.88 43.76 46.97 42.14 Part 1 Crimes Reported per Sworn FTE Position 26.22 29.98 32.85 29.33 Median Response Time for Priority 2 and 32 Calls
(mm:ss) 11:36 12:09 12:16 11:44
Percentage (%) of 911 Calls Answered within 15
Seconds 97% 91% 88% 95%

1. Part 1 crimes are reported to the US Department of Justice as part of the UCR system and include: Homicide, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated (Felony) Assault, Burglary, Larceny (Theft), Motor Vehicle Theft, and Arson.

2. Priority 2 calls are emergency situations requiring immediate police response to preserve lift or apprehend subjects. Priority 3 calls are crimes against a person occurring within 15 minutes or less; calls with potential to become violent; at-risk missing persons.

Source: City of Sacramento 2023a.

SCHOOLS
The Sacramento City Unified School District (SCUSD) is the primary provider of school services within the city. The Specific Plan Area is served by the SCUSD. The SCUSD includes elementary school, middle school, high school, charter school, and adult education. The SCUSD served approximately 43,066 students in the 2022-2023 school year (CDE 2023). Public schools within 1 mile of the Specific Plan Area and their enrollment and capacity are summarized in Table 3.8-2.

Table 3.8-2 Public Schools in the Vicinity of the Specific Plan Area School Name Enrollment Capacity Remaining Capacity
Success Academy (Grade 4-8) 21 N/A -
Father Keith B. Kenny (K-8) 388 576 188
Fortune (K-12) N/A N/A -
Total 188
Elementary School
Camellia 462 480 18
Ethel I Baker 685 456 -229
Mark Twain 319 624 308
Nicholas 651 696 45
Oak Ridge 502 624 122
Peter Burnett 565 792 227
Tahoe 358 528 170
Total 661
Middle School
Will C. Wood 693 1,008 315
Total 315
Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
School Name Enrollment Capacity Remaining Capacity
High School
American Legion 269 120 -149
Hiram W. Johnson 1,497 2,184 687
West Campus 862 744 -118
Total 420
Note: Based on 2018 enrollment data.

N/A = Not Available. Information is currently not available online.

Source: Dyett & Bhatia 2020.

LIBRARIES
The Sacramento Public Library (SPL) is a joint powers agency between the cities of Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Galt, Isleton, Rancho Cordova, and the County of Sacramento (SPL 2023). SPL operates a total of 28 branches, including 12 branches within the city and 16 branches outside the city.

Residents of the city have access to all library branches both inside and outside of the city. The closest libraries to the Specific Plan Area are Colonial Heights at 4799 Stockton Boulevard, Southgate at 6132 66th Avenue, and Valley Hi-North Laguna at 7400 Imagination Parkway.

PARKS AND RECREATION
YPCE maintains over 4,300 acres of parkland, and over 230 parks, recreation, parkway and open space sites, 21 lakes, ponds or beaches, over 17 aquatic facilities, about 88 miles of off-street shared paths, and provides park and recreation services at City-owned facilities within the city (Dyett & Bhatia 2020). The City generally categorizes parks according to three distinct park types: (1) neighborhood, (2) community, and (3) regional/citywide (which includes parkways and open space). Each of the park types is described below.

Neighborhood Parks
Neighborhood parks are generally less than 10 acres in size and are intended to be used primarily by residents within a half-mile radius. Neighborhood parks contribute to a sense of community by providing gathering places for recreation, entertainment, sports, or quiet relaxation. Some neighborhood parks are co-located adjacent to elementary schools or with detention basins, and improvements are generally oriented toward the recreation needs of children. In addition to landscaping, improvements might include a tot lot, or unlighted sport fields or tennis courts. Pocket Parks and Play Lots generally fall under the category of neighborhood-serving parks and tend to be less than 5 acres in size. These parks are more appropriate for areas of denser urban and mixed-use development. Neighborhood parks within 1 mile of the Specific Plan Area include Fourth Avenue Park, Colonial Park, Lawrence Park, and Artivio Guerrero Park.

Community Parks
Community parks are generally more than 10 acres in size and have a service area of approximately 3 miles, which encompasses several neighborhoods and meets the requirements of a large portion of the city. In addition to neighborhood park elements, a community park might also have restrooms, onsite parking, a community center, a swimming pool, lighted sports fields or courts, and other specialized facilities not found in a neighborhood park. Some of the smaller community parks may be dedicated to one use, and some elements of the park and its facilities might be leased to community groups.

Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-7
Community parks within 1 mile of the Specific Plan Area include Coloma Park, C.K. McClatchy Park, Oak Park, and Tahoe Park.

Citywide/Regional Parks
Citywide/Regional Parks are larger sites developed with a wide range of improvements usually not found in local neighborhood or community facilities to meet the needs of the entire city population.

Regional parks can protect unique natural or cultural features and/or provide major recreation facilities that attract visitors from across the entire city and beyond. Designed for more intensive recreational use, these parks include on-site parking, restrooms, and similar support amenities for longer visits.

They may include concessions or other revenue-generating activities and infrastructure, including facilities managed by other City Departments or leased to community groups. In addition to neighborhood and community park type improvements, regional parks may include a golf course, aquatic centers, marina, amusement area, zoo, nature area, shared-use trails, and other amenities.

Some elements in the park may be under lease to community groups or non-profit organizations.

Parkways are linear parks designed primarily for trail use and secondarily for passive recreation, open space, wildlife habitat, and flood control. Most include hard-surfaced trails for pedestrians and bicyclists, linking residential areas to schools, parks, and trail systems. Parkways are typically linear and narrow, may be situated along an existing corridor such as an abandoned railroad line, roadway, waterway, or other common corridors. The closest regional parks to the Specific Plan Area are Sutter’s Landing Regional Park, William Land Regional Park, and Granite Regional Park located approximately

1.5 miles to the north, 2.3 miles to the west, and 2.6 miles to the east, respectively.

Park Service Level Standards
The 2040 General Plan and Parks Plan 2040 establish a level of service goal for the city’s public parkland at 8.5 acres per 1,000 residents. The level of service includes all neighborhood, community, regional, parkway, and open space acres parks within the city’s jurisdiction. The City’s PIF service standard of 3.5 acres of neighborhood/community parks per 1,000 residents and regional parks at 1.5 acres/1,000 (City of Sacramento 2009) for new development remains. Land acquisition and dedications to reach the level of service goal for remaining regional, parkway, and open space parks is expected to be funded through other means, such as grants or dedication.

Neighborhood/Community Parks
The City’s PRMP has established a service standard of 5 acres of neighborhood/community parks per 1,000 residents (City of Sacramento 2009). In 2017, the City approved the City of Sacramento Park Development Impact Fee 2017 Nexus Study Update (the Nexus Study). Park impact fees (PIF) are fees required by new development for the purpose of funding park and facilities improvements required to serve that development. The Nexus Study determined that there is a lack of funding for citywide park facilities (such as linear parks, parkways, open spaces, community centers, pools/aquatic complexes).

The Nexus Study determined that the city is lacking in available land in dense urban areas. The Nexus Study resulted in a fair share burden for neighborhood and community parks for new developments set at 1.75 acres per 1,000 population within the Central City Community Plan Area, and 3.5 acres per 1,000 population within the remainder of the city (“Remaining City”) which includes Arden Arcade, East Sacramento, Fruitridge Broadway, Land Park, North Natomas, North Sacramento, Pocket, South Area, and South Natomas. This standard is set forth in City Code Chapter 17.512, the City’s Quimby Ordinance.

According to the City’s parks inventory taken in 2018, neighborhood- and community-serving park acreage comprises approximately 1,355.76 acres (35.77 percent of the total parks inventory). The Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Central City contains 105.79 acres of existing neighborhood and community-serving parks while the Remaining City contains approximately 1,249.97 acres. The 2018 population estimate for the Central City is 35,547, which provides approximately 2.98 acres per 1,000 residents. This meets the PIF service level goal of 1.75 acres per 1,000 residents in the Central City. The 2018 population estimate for the Remaining City is 452,385, which provides approximately 2.76 acres per 1,000 residents. This does not meet the PIF service level goal of 3.5 acres of neighborhood and community-serving parks per 1,000 residents for the Remaining City.

Citywide/Regional Parks
The City’s updated 2040 Parks Plan has established a regional parks service level standard of 2.75 acres per 1,000 persons and a parkways service goal of 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents. The City’s existing service levels are approximately 3.44 acres of regional parks per 1,000 residents and 1.81 acres of parkways per 1,000 residents (City of Sacramento 2024).

Other Recreation Facilities
The City also has standards for 1 outdoor pool facility per 30,000 residents and 1 community center per 50,000 residents (New Economics & Advisory 2016). Currently, the City has 14 outdoor pool facilities and 18 community centers (City of Sacramento 2023c). With an estimated population of 685,694 residents in 2018, the City provides 0.61 outdoor pool facilities per 30,000 residents and 1.31 community centers per 50,000 residents (City of Sacramento 2021). The City currently meets the standard for community centers but does not meet the standard for outdoor pool facilities.

3.8.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
The evaluation of potential impacts to public services was based on applicable City standards and policies and a review of relevant documents. Impacts to public services and recreation were identified by comparing existing service capacity and facilities against future demand associated with implementation of the Specific Plan, based on forecast growth through 2040.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The thresholds of significance were developed in consideration of the State CEQA Guidelines and other applicable policies and regulations. The Stockton Boulevard Plan would have a significant effect on public services and recreation if it would:

Public Services
• result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
▪ fire,
▪ police protection,
▪ schools,
Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-9
▪ parks, and
▪ other public facilities.

Recreation
• increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, or • include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
There are no issues not discussed further with respect to public services and recreation.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.8 -1: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of Fire Protection and Emergency Services
Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon, including the development of residential housing, would increase the population in the area. The increase in population would increase the demand for fire protection and emergency services. However, the SFP has identified potential new fire stations to be constructed in the City and potential reopening of Station 99. Station 99 would provide additional services to the Specific Plan Area. In addition, future development within the Specific Plan Area would be required to comply with existing regulations related to fire protection, which would decrease the demand for SFP services. This impact would be less than significant.

As discussed in Section 2.7.3, “Growth and Buildout Projections,” the 2040 General Plan assumes development of 2,007 dwelling units within the Specific Plan Area. Based on 2.56 persons per household, 2,007 dwelling units could accommodate approximately 5,138 residents within the Specific Plan Area (DOF 2023a). The increased population in the Specific Plan Area would be expected to result in an incremental increase in the number of emergency fire and medical calls. To maintain or achieve targeted response time, fire plan review, and fire inspection performance measures for fire protection, it is reasonably foreseeable that new or expanded fire stations would be needed.

The SFP has indicated that new fire stations planned for Delta Shores, the Railyards, and Metro Air Park, as well as a possible re-opening of Station 99 (formerly Station 9) (Dyett & Bhatia. 2020). In addition, SFP is planning additional administrative, logistics and training facilities when funding is available. Although no planned fire stations are located within the Specific Plan Area, development of fire stations in Delta Shores, the Railyards, and Metro Air Park would provide additional facilities to respond to calls and free up staff in the fire stations (Stations 4, 6, and 10) in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area to concentrate on their areas of operation. Station 99 is located approximately 2.6 miles east of the Little Saigon subarea. If Station 99 is re-opened, it would provide an additional facility to respond to calls for service in relative proximity to the Specific Plan Area and improve the response time throughout the SFD service area.

Future development associated with the Specific Plan would be required to meet SFD standards to ensure adequate capacity for meeting fire protection and suppression requirements, particularly those related to water supply, fire flow, fire hydrant system placement, and other design standards established in the California Fire Code and California Building Standards Code. SFD would review Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-10 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
project design plans and would be able to suggest appropriate fire prevention and protection measures for development allowed under the Specific Plan to comply with relevant fire protection and safety measures addressed in the California Fire Code, the California Building Standards Code, and other applicable regulations. SFP would also review construction plans and inspect ongoing construction work relevant to the Specific Plan to ensure compliance with the aforementioned requirements.

The potential population increase (5,138 residents) within the Specific Plan Area would occur incrementally throughout the General Plan horizon of approximately 20 years. It is anticipated new fire stations would be developed as development in the city occurs (including development in the Specific Plan Area). Development of new fire stations in combination with the California Fire Code, California Building Standards, SFP design plan review and inspection requirements would decrease the demand for SFD services in the Specific Plan Area. Therefore, impacts related to facility construction or operation of new fire protection facilities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.8 -2: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of Police Protection
Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon, including the development of residential housing, would increase the population in the area. The increase in population would increase the demand for police protection services. The SPD has identified new police facilities to be constructed in the city, including the South Area Police Facility. The South Area Police Facility would have the potential to house 200 total staff, which would provide sufficient services to the Specific Plan Area. In addition, the Specific Plan includes policies E-1 and E-2 to improve public safety in the Specific Plan Area. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would not require the construction of additional police facilities beyond those identified by the SPD. This impact would be less than significant.

The Specific Plan would result in approximately 2,007 housing units, which would provide housing for an estimated 5,138 residents within the Specific Plan Area based on 2.56 persons per household (DOF 2023a), as well as non-residential users of the public/quasi-public land use area. This would increase demand for police protection services within the Specific Plan Area. Without additional staffing and facilities, the projected increase in population would decrease the existing level of service of the SFD.

The Specific Plan Area is served by the SPD South Area station. One of the new facilities identified by the SPD in the South Area is the South Area Police Facility. This facility is projected to house 200 total staff members and to include a public counter, offices, workstations, interview rooms, locker rooms, break rooms, gym, parking lot, and conference rooms. The City has not adopted a rate of sworn officers per 1,000 residents. Nationwide, the average rate of sworn officers was 2.4 per 1,000 residents and 3.4 law enforcement employees (civilian and sworn) per 1,000 residents in 2017 (FBI 2018). A population of 5,138 residents would require 17.5 law enforcement employees to meet the nationwide average rate of 3.4 employees per 1,000 residents. The South Area Police Facility’s 200 staff members along with the South Area substation staff would provide sufficient police protection services to the Specific Plan Area. In addition, the Specific Plan includes implementation of Environment, Public Health, and Safety Policy E-1 to encourage installation of additional lighting along Stockton Boulevard to improve safety and Policy E-2 to promote coordination among various agencies, organizations, and individuals to address criminal activities in the Specific Plan Area. Implementation of the Specific Plan policies would improve safety and decrease the demand for police services. Development of the South Area Police Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-11
Facility in combination of the Specific Plan policies (Policy E-1 and Policy E-2) would provide adequate police protection to serve the Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan does not anticipate a need for additional police facilities to serve the Specific Plan Area beyond the South Area Police Facility identified by SPD. Therefore, impacts related to facility construction or operation of new police protection facilities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.8 -3: Result in Substantial Adversely Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of Schools
Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon, including the development of housing, would increase the student population in the area. Implementation of the Specific Plan would generate approximately 524 students over the long-term buildout of the 2040 General Plan. The students would likely attend schools in the SCUSD. As indicated in Table 3.8 -2, public schools in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area would have sufficient remaining capacity to accommodate the new students generated from the Specific Plan implementation. This impact would be less than significant.

Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon would increase the local student population. Based on student generation rates provided by SCUSD, growth through the 2040 planning horizon would result in approximately 524 students, with 382 elementary school students, 61 middle school students, and 81 high school students.

Table 3.8-3 Estimated Student Generation
Type of School Multifamily
Generation Rate
Number of Multifamily
Dwelling Units
Number of Students
Generated
Public School
Capacity1
Elementary 0.19
2,007
382 661
Middle 0.03 61 315
High 0.04 81 420
Total 524 1,396
Notes:
1 within 1 mile of the Specific Plan Area
Source: SCUSD 2012.

The increase in the number of students would take place over the 2040 General Plan horizon (approximately 20 years). As indicated in Table 3.8-2, public schools (including elementary, middle, and high schools) in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area would have remaining capacity to accommodate the students generated in the Specific Plan Area. In addition, students in the SCUSD may apply to attend a neighborhood school outside of their residence area, allowing for the redistribution of enrollment within SCUSD, as needed. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would not require the provision of new school facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-12 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Impact 3.8 -4: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of Libraires Implementation of the Specific Plan would have the potential to increase the level of development within the Specific Plan Area, including the development of housing that would increase the population in the area. The increased population would result in an increased demand for library facilities.

Implementation of the SPLA Facility Master Plan would result in adequate library facilities to serve the potential population increase resulting from the Specific Plan. Implementation of the Specific Plan would not require construction of new or expanded library facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

Future residents of the Specific Plan Area would increase the demand for library services provided by SPL. The Sacramento Public Library Authority (SPLA) has established a threshold and a target of 0.40 and 0.50 square feet of library facilities per capita, respectively, in its Facility Master Plan 2007-2025 (SPLA 2007). In 2019, the SPL maintained approximately 0.57 square feet of library space per capita overall (Dyett & Bhatia 2020). SPL has planned for additional facilities in Citrus Heights (one), Rancho Cordova (three), Elk Grove (three), and Galt (one). Although these planned facilities are not located within the Specific Plan Area, residents in the Specific Plan Area could use any of these new facilities.

Sacramento County is projected to have a population of 1,708,461 in 2040 (DOF 2023b). Using a service ratio of 0.4 square feet per resident, cumulative or buildout conditions would require 683,385 square feet of library space within the county (the SPLA service area). Based on the SPLA Facility Master Plan, SPL is expected to provide 1,007,274 square feet of library spaces in Sacramento County by 2025, which include the Specific Plan Area (SPLA 2007). This would result in a service ratio of 0.59 square feet per capita, which is above the targeted ratio of 0.5 square feet per resident. Additional library projects would likely occur beyond 2025. The increase in population in the Specific Plan Area is anticipated to be well-served by SPLA, since facilities located in the county would also serve City of Sacramento residents. Therefore, there would be adequate library facilities to serve the residents within the Specific Plan Area, and construction of new or expanded facilities would not be required as a result of Specific Plan implementation. Impacts of the project related to construction or expansion of libraries would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.8 -5: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Demand for or Provision of New Parks and Other Recreational Facilities Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon, including the development of housing, would increase the population in the area. The increased population would result in an increased demand for parks and recreation facilities, which would exacerbate the City’s current deficiency in parks and recreation facilities and would create a need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Implementation of the Mitigation Measures 3.8 -5a and 3.8 -5b, and contribution to PIF, would ensure that adequate parks and recreation facilities would be available to serve the Specific Plan Area as development occurs. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

As Sacramento grows to a population of approximately 651,480 by 2040, new neighborhood and community parks would be needed to ensure the applicable standards for these facilities are met. City Code requires that new residential developments either dedicate land for new park facilities or pay a Quimby in-lieu fee that can be used for acquisition of parkland. Additionally, new development would be subject to a PIF, which can be used to finance the development of new neighborhood and community Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-13
parks in the vicinity of the project site. Land dedicated to the City for new parks as part of the development process contributes toward meeting the minimum service level goals for neighborhood and community parkland; however, to achieve the level of service goal for all parkland, which includes regional parks, open space, parkways, the City would need to seek sources of funding in addition to the development process. Guidance on location and planning for future neighborhood and community parks and improvements would be determined as part of the update to the YPCE Parks Plan 2040.

With over 22 acres of vacant sites and many underutilized parcels, opportunities along the corridor may include creation of community spaces and neighborhood parks. The City is committed to expanding public gathering spaces in and around the Specific Plan Area through a range of policies and programs, in alignment with the 2040 General Plan. A key objective of both the 2040 General Plan and the Parks Plan 2040 is to ensure that accessible public parks and open spaces are conveniently located within a 10-minute walk from all residences. The Parks Plan 2040 will introduce policies aimed at promoting equitable acquisition, development, and maintenance of parks, as well as recreational programming, in accordance with the priorities and visions of Sacramento residents.

Growth anticipated in the Specific Plan Area through the 2040 planning horizon would have the potential to increase the population in the Specific Plan Area by 5,138 residents. The Specific Plan does not include new parks or other recreational facilities. Therefore, the increased population would incrementally increase the use of existing area parks and recreational facilities. As discussed in Section

3.8.2, “Environmental Setting,” the City is not meeting the service level standards for neighborhood/community parks, and outdoor pool facilities. The increased demand for parks and recreation facilities resulting from the Specific Plan implementation would exacerbate the City’s current deficiency in neighborhood and community parks and recreation facilities. Not meeting the level of service Goals is not considered a CEQA impact, but it suggests the need for new or expanded parks so that physical deterioration of existing parks and recreational facilities would not be accelerated. The impacts would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.8 -5a: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Parkland Dedication Requirements. The City shall continue to require that new residential development projects contribute toward the provision of adequate parks and recreational facilities to serve the new residents, either through the dedication of parkland, the construction of public and/or private recreation facilities, or the payment of parkland in-lieu fees, consistent with the Quimby Ordinance. To achieve the level of service for all parkland in all areas of the city, the City shall seek other funding resources to prioritize park needs in park deficit areas. (2040 General Plan Policy YPRO-1.4)
• Incentivizing Onsite Public Facilities. The City shall continue to provide Park Impact Fee (PIF) credit for development projects that provide publicly accessible parks, plazas, and parkways onsite that promote active or passive recreational opportunities and serve as neighborhood gathering points. (2040 General Plan Policy YPRO-1.5)
• Non-Conventional Park Solutions. In densely built out urban areas of the city where the provision of large park spaces is not feasible, the City shall explore creative solutions to provide neighborhood park and recreation facilities that serve the needs of local residents and employees. Such solutions may include the following:
▪ Publicly accessible, privately-owned open spaces and plazas; ▪ Rooftop play courts and gardens;
Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-14 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
▪ Freeway underpass, utility corridor, and wide landscape medians; ▪ Conversion of rails to rails with trails;
▪ Pocket parks and pedestrian areas in the public right-of-way; and ▪ The provision of neighborhood and community-serving recreational facilities in regional parks. (2040 General Plan Policy YPRO-1.8)
Mitigation Measure 3.8 -5b: Identify Park and Recreation Facilities Through implementation of the 2040 Parks Plan, the City shall evaluate the equitable increase in public parkland and recreation facilities to serve the needs of the current and new residents within the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan Area, that shall be developed as neighborhood parks or other nonconventional park solutions to be accessible within a 10-minute walk of residential land uses.

Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.8 -5a requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy YPRO-1.4 (Parkland Dedication Requirements), which requires new residential development to dedicate land or pay in-lieu fees for parks or recreation facilities; Policy YPRO-1.5 (Incentivizing OnSite Public Facilities), which requires the City to provide incentives such as public impact fee credit for development of projects that provide publicly accessible parks, plazas, and other accessible active or passive elements onsite which promote recreational opportunities and serve as neighborhood gathering points; and Policy YPRO-1.8 (Non-Conventional Park Solutions), which represent unique ways to provide for future parkland needs, including exploring creative solutions such as rooftop play areas or freeway underpasses in developed areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8 -5a would ensure that the park and recreational facilities level of service standards can be met through the dedication of parks and open space, the payment of in-lieu fees, and incorporation of privately-owned open spaces and facilities in the design of future development in the Specific Plan Area. Furthermore, future development within the Specific Plan Area would be required to comply with the City’s Quimby and PIF city codes, the City would use any funds collected to develop parks in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area and acquire new land, as needed. Dedicated land or the payment of in-lieu fees in such a manner is only to be used to develop new or refurbish existing neighborhood and community parks or recreation facilities. PIF payments would be reflective of the types and intensity of development anticipated by the future development in the Specific Plan Area and would mitigate impacts caused by the need for construction or expansion of recreation facilities resulting from anticipated growth in the Specific Plan Area.

The population growth in the Specific Plan Area is anticipated to be consistent with the rate of growth forecast for the city in the 2040 General Plan, which serves as the basis for facility improvements in the Parks Plan 2040. For this reason, the Specific Plan is not anticipated to increase demand for park facilities beyond those programmed for development in the City’s planning documents. In addition, fees assessed through implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.8 -5a would be used to fund new and improved facilities identified in the 2040 Parks Plan in accordance with the City’s established standards for park development.

Mitigation Measure 3.8 -5b would require the City to evaluate the equitable increase in public parkland and recreation facilities to serve the needs of the current and new residents within the Specific Plan Area, that would be developed as neighborhood parks or other non-conventional park solutions to be accessible within a 10-minute walk of residential land uses. Physical changes associated with the improvements to facilities located on vacant and underutilized parcels within the Specific Plan Area Ascent Public Services and Recreation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.8-15
would be within the scope of the development evaluated throughout this EIR. Therefore, impacts associated with parks and recreation facilities would be less than significant with mitigation.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.8 -6: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Public Services and Recreation Implementation of the Specific Plan, in combination with other cumulative development in the area, could increase demand for public services and recreation in the area. However, through the contribution to impact fees in accordance with applicable ordinances (e.g., Quimby and PIF ordinances) and implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8 -5a and 3.8 -5b, the contributions of the Specific Plan within the cumulative context would be less than cumulatively considerable. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The cumulative context for fire protection, police protection, and emergency services is the city of Sacramento, which is the service area for both SFD and SPD. The cumulative context for school services is the SCUSD; the cumulative context for library facilities is Sacramento County, which is the service area of SPLA; and the cumulative context for parks and recreational facilities is recreational facilities within the city and within 2 miles of the Specific Plan Area. Cumulative development in the region, including development within the Specific Plan Area, would result in the concentration of persons and structures within these local public service jurisdictions, and could increase demands for such services and recreation/park facilities. As discussed in Impact 3.8 -1 through Impact 3.8 -5 above, implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts related to fire protection, police protection, schools, and library facilities, but would result in potentially significant impacts related to parks and other recreational facilities. As discussed in Section 3.8.2, “Environmental Setting” and Impact 3.8 -5 above, the City is currently not meeting the service level standards for neighborhood/community parks, citywide/regional parks, and outdoor pool facilities. The increased demand for parks and recreation facilities resulting from the Specific Plan implementation would result in additional demand for park and recreation amenities that would result in a considerable contribution to the existing significant cumulative impact associated with the provision of parks and other recreation facilities. The impacts would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures 3.8 -5a and 3.8 -5b described above.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8 -5a and 3.8 -5b would ensure that there would be parks/recreational facilities available to serve the Specific Plan Area and would not result in demand for construction or expansion of these facilities. In addition, the contribution of impact fees for the provision of services to the City would further reduce the Specific Plan’s incremental contribution to the need for public services and recreation/park facilities within the cumulative context. Therefore, the Specific Plan would not result in a considerable contribution to the existing significant cumulative impacts associated with the provision of parks and other recreation facilities and the impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Public Services and Recreation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.8-16 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-1

3.9 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
This section describes the existing transportation system in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area and evaluates the potential impacts on the system associated with implementation of the Specific Plan.

Roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian components of the overall transportation system and traffic safety considerations are included in the analysis. Impacts are evaluated under near-term (present-day) conditions with and without the Specific Plan, and cumulative (year 2036) conditions with Specific Plan.

3.9.1 Regulatory Setting
This section summarizes key federal, state, and regional and local regulations, laws, and policies relevant to evaluating the Specific Plan’s potential impacts on transportation and circulation in the Specific Plan Area.

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws regarding transportation are relevant to the Specific Plan transportation impact analysis. Federal regulations relating to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VI, and Environmental Justice will apply to the Specific Plan with respect to any modifications to public roadways, intersections, and transit service.

STATE
Senate Bill 743
Senate Bill (SB) 743, passed in 2013, required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop new State CEQA guidelines that address transportation impact metrics under CEQA. On December 28, 2018, the CEQA Guidelines were amended to add Section 15064.3, “Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts,” which states that generally, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. In addition to making VMT the preferred metric, Section 15064.3(a) also prohibited the use of delay from being used to determine environmental impacts stating, “Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) (regarding roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact.” This prohibition is reinforced by the Public Resources Code section 21099(b)(2), “Upon certification of the guidelines by the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency pursuant to this section, automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the guidelines, if any.” Beginning on July 1, 2020, the provisions of 15064.3 and 21099 applied statewide.

Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA To aid in SB 743 implementation, OPR released the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) (OPR 2018). The Technical Advisory provides advice and recommendations to CEQA lead agencies on how to implement SB 743 changes. This includes technical recommendations regarding the assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, VMT mitigation measures, and screening thresholds for certain land use projects. Lead agencies may consider and use these recommendations at their discretion.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-2 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
The Technical Advisory also provides guidance on impacts on transit. Specifically, the Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies generally should not treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. As an example, the Technical Advisory suggests that “an infill development may add riders to transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.” VMT is used to identify the project’s potentially significant transportation impacts for the purposes of this EIR.

California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is responsible for planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the State Highway System (SHS). As part of these responsibilities, Caltrans reviews local development projects subject to CEQA to assess potential impacts on the SHS based on the following technical guidance. • Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (VMT TISG) (Caltrans 2020a)
• Traffic Safety Bulletin 20-02-R1: Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioners Guidance (Caltrans Safety Impact Guidance) (Caltrans 2020b) Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide The VMT TISG outlines how Caltrans will review land use projects with a focus on supporting state land use goals, state planning priorities, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals. The VMT TISG endorses OPR’s Technical Advisory as the basis for transportation impact analysis methodology and thresholds, including the use of screening to streamline qualified projects because they help achieve the state’s VMT reduction and mode shift goals.

Caltrans Safety Impact Guidance
The Caltrans Safety Impact Guidance provides technical instructions on how to evaluate potential safety impacts on the SHS. This guidance largely focuses on the actions of Caltrans district staff in performing the analysis and providing relevant impact information to lead agencies. The interim guidance recommends that safety analyses include a review of three primary elements related to transportation safety—design standard compliance, collision history, and collision risk (consistent with the Federal Highway Administration’s Systemic Approach to Safety). The interim guidance does not establish specific analysis methods or significance thresholds for determining safety impacts under CEQA. Additionally, Caltrans notes that local agencies may use the interim guidance at their own discretion as a guide for review of local facilities.

California Department of Transportation Plans
Caltrans has developed the following plans and reports that set expectations for the performance of US Route 50 (US 50) and State Route 99 (SR 99) within the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area:
• SR 99 & Interstate 5 Corridor System Management Plan (Caltrans 2009) • District System Management and Development Plan, Caltrans District 3 (Caltrans 2013). • United States Route 50 Transportation Concept Report and Corridor System Management Plan, District 3 (Caltrans 2014)
Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-3
• Transportation Concept Report, State Route 99, District 3 (Caltrans 2017) Any improvements or modifications to the US 50 or SR 99 within and near the Specific Plan would need to be approved by Caltrans.

LOCAL
SACOG Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) governing the six-county Sacramento region consisting of El Dorado, Placer, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba Counties and their 22 cities. SACOG is responsible for the preparation of, and updates to, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) and the associated Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) for the six-county region.

Adopted in November 2019, the SACOG 2020 MTP/SCS provides a 20-year transportation vision and corresponding list of transportation projects. The MTIP identifies short-term projects (i.e., projects with a 7-year horizon) in more detail.

The SACOG 2020 MTP/SCS provides the basis for air quality conformity findings related to the national Clean Air Act and determinations of whether the region is complying with GHG reduction targets for automobiles and light trucks established under SB 375. Major projects that are inconsistent with the 2020 MTP/SCS could jeopardize the plan’s effectiveness for air pollution and GHG reduction.

Consequently, consistency with the MTP/SCS is a potential basis for determining adverse impacts related to these environmental topics.

The SACOG 2020 MTP/SCS acknowledges the following:

A more compact land development pattern and providing alternatives to driving alone are critical strategies for reducing the amount of driving we do in our daily lives. Location within the region is likely the most important variable in determining how much time people spend in their vehicles. Communities within existing urban areas, and with a mix and density of uses, tend to produce less VMT per resident than places that are farther away and spread out. These “lower VMT” areas also tend to have the density and mix of uses to support better transit service and are friendlier to biking and walking for some trips. (SACOG 2019) City of Sacramento General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is the City’s policy guide for future development.

Sacramento City Code
Title 10 of the Sacramento City Code sets forth guidelines for vehicles and traffic within the City, including regulations regarding traffic control, parking, and vehicle operators.

Title 12 of the Sacramento City Code sets forth guidelines for streets, sidewalks, and public spaces, including regulations associated with intersection and sidewalk visibility, special events, and airports/air travel.

Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code sets forth guidelines for planning and development within the City, including regulations regarding zoning districts, land use regulations, design and improvements standards, and other special districts.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-4 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
City of Sacramento Bicycle Master Plan
The City of Sacramento Bicycle Master Plan (City of Sacramento 2016) establishes bicycle related investments, policies, programs, and strategies to establish a complete bicycle system throughout the City. The plan envisions a safe, comfortable, and continuous network of bikeways attracting and serving bicyclists of all ages and abilities from all neighborhoods and thereby integrating bicycling as a fundamental part of Sacramento’s everyday transportation system. The plan includes the goals of increasing bicycle ridership, safety, connectivity, and equity. The plan additionally includes guidance on the selection of bicycle facility types based on vehicle volume and speed thresholds.

The plan includes a map which illustrates the location and type of existing and planned bicycle facilities throughout the city. The map identifies the following planned bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area:
• Separated bikeway on Stockton Boulevard from T Street to Broadway • Bike route on 8
th Avenue from MLK Jr Parkway to 65th Street
• Bike lane on 14th Street from Stockton Boulevard to 71st Street • Bike route on Pierry Avenue from 44th Street to Stockton Boulevard • Separated bikeway on Fruitridge Road from Franklin Road to 65th Street • Bike lane on Lemon Hill Avenue from Lucero Drive to Stockton Boulevard • Morrison Creek bikeway trail
City of Sacramento Vision Zero Action Plan
On August 14, 2018, Sacramento City Council adopted the Vision Zero Action Plan (City of Sacramento 2021a) as the City's action plan for traffic safety and achieving Resolution No. 2017-0032 to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 2027. By adopting the Vision Zero Action Plan, the City rejects the notion that traffic crashes are simply accidents but are instead preventable incidents that can and must be systematically addressed. According to the City’s Vision Zero Action Plan, Stockton Boulevard, Broadway, 14th Avenue, Fruitridge Road, Lawrence Drive, Lemon Hill Avenue, and 47th Avenue within the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area are part of the City’s High Injury Network, which are corridors with the highest levels of fatal and serious crashes for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. According to the plan, 79 percent of crashes in the city occur on City’s High Injury Network, despite those roadways comprising only 14 percent of all roadway miles in the city, meaning collision rates on these roadways are disproportionately high.

The following policies from the Sacramento Vision Zero Action Plan are applicable to the Specific Plan:
• Action 1.6 Incorporate Vision Zero safety principles into all future City plans and design documents.
• Action 4.2 Improve safe pedestrian and bicycle access to transit stops along key bus routes and near light rail stations.
• Action 5.6 Continue building the enhanced bikeway network consistent with the Bicycle Master Plan
Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-5
Sacramento Regional Transit District Service Standards
The Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) operates fixed-route bus, light rail, and ADA paratransit services throughout Sacramento County, including the cities of Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Folsom, and Rancho Cordova. Per Federal Transit Administration (FTA) requirements, the SacRT Service Standards (SacRT 2013) establishes the following service standards and policies:
• Vehicle Loading Standards
▪ SacRT considers a bus route to be overloaded if 25 percent or more of one-way vehicle trips are regularly overloaded.
▪ Load factors (i.e., the ratio of total passenger capacity to total seats) generally range from a load factor of 1.0 to 2.0 based upon the number of seats and interior floor space of the vehicle.
▪ For 40-foot low-floor buses (with a load factor of 1.4) have a maximum load of 22 people. ▪ For light rail vehicles (with a load factor of 2.0) have a maximum load of 128-134 passengers per light rail car based on type.
• Productivity / Headway Standards
▪ Regular headways should not exceed 60 minutes on any trunk or branch line. ▪ Headway adjustments are based primarily upon productivity. Bus routes exceeding SacRT’s maximum productivity standards are recommended for service increases while corrective action is recommended for routes that fail to meet SacRT’s minimum productivity standards. ▪ For regular weekday bus service, the minimum productivity standard is 20 boardings per hour and the maximum is 40 boardings per hour.
▪ For weekend/holiday bus service, the minimum productivity standard is 15 boardings per hour and the maximum is 35 boardings per hour.
▪ For weekday light rail service, the minimum productivity standard is 85 boardings per train hour and the maximum is a load of 400 passengers per train. ▪ For weekend light rail service, the minimum productivity standard is 65 boardings per train hour and the maximum is a load of 400 passengers per train. • On-Time Performance Standard
▪ SacRT’s target is for the bus system to be 85 percent on-time or better. Individual routes are expected to be within one standard deviation of 85 percent on-time or better. ▪ A bus is considered on-time if it leaves its time point between 0 and 5 minutes late. ▪ On-time performance for RT’s light rail system is measured at the starting point of each trip.

Trains are considered on-time if they depart 0 to 5 minutes late. ▪ SacRT’s target is for the light rail system to be 97 percent on-time or better. • Service Area Coverage Standard
▪ Within 0.75 mile from bus routes and rail stations, basic local service should cover 85 percent of the population and high frequency service (15 minutes or better) should cover 20 percent of the population.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-6 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
▪ Within 0.25 mile from bus routes and .05 mile from rail stations, basic local service should cover 50 percent of the population and high frequency service (15 minutes or better) should cover 10 percent of the population.
• Transit Amenity Distribution Policy
▪ SacRT’s Title VI goal is for the percent of bus stops in minority areas equipped with benches to equal or exceed that for RT’s overall service area.

Sacramento Regional Transit District Stockton Boulevard Implementation Plan The Stockton Boulevard Implementation Plan was released in July 2023. The Stockton Boulevard Implementation Plan identifies and prioritizes near-term opportunities for isolated improvements to existing bus stops that may be implemented as funding becomes available or in conjunction with nearby development projects and City/County street improvements. It incorporates review of existing conditions and community coordination to identify improvements and prioritization for transit service and amenities along the Stockton Boulevard corridor.

With the plan, SacRT hopes to identify major capital and operational improvements along Stockton Boulevard to support existing ridership and encourage new ridership by making transit service along the corridor more accessible and equitable, and by providing greater mobility to underserved communities.

Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan
The Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan was adopted September 21, 2021. The Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan incorporates technical analysis, community input, and best practices in roadway safety and design to identify improvements and cost estimates for the Stockton Boulevard corridor.

The plan divides the Stockton Boulevard corridor into five key cross sections:

1. From Alhambra Boulevard to 33rd Street, 2 to 3 travel lanes with a two way left turn center lane and buffered bike lane are suggested.

2. From T Street to 2nd Avenue, 4 travel lanes (removing the existing center turn lane) with a shared use path on the east side of the roadway are suggested.

3. From 2nd Avenue to Broadway, 4 travel lanes with a bike lane on the west side and cycle track on the east side of the roadway on UC Davis property are suggested.

4. From Broadway to 21st Avenue, 3 travel lanes and an additional bus bike lane in either direction are suggested.

5. From 21st Avenue to 47th Avenue, 5 travel lanes with a two way left turn lane, bike lanes, shared use path and street trees on both sides are suggested.

Other major design suggestions in the Corridor Plan included more and upgraded pedestrian crossings, continuous bike facilities, faster transit, maintaining access, reliable vehicle operations, pedestrianscale lighting, and landscaping.

3.9.2 Environmental Setting
This section describes the existing environmental setting, which is the baseline scenario upon which project-specific impacts are evaluated. The baseline for transportation and circulation represents conditions based on data collection and field observations conducted in 2023. The environmental Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-7
setting for transportation includes baseline descriptions for roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.

ROADWAY SYSTEM
A network of local roadways and freeway facilities form the roadway system in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area. Key roadways in the vicinity of Specific Plan Area are described below.

Regional
• United States Route 50 (US 50) is a cross-country east-west highway that provides regional access in the Sacramento region. Locally, US 50 connects the Specific Plan Area to Yolo County to the west and Rancho Cordova, Folsom, and El Dorado County to the east. In the Specific Plan Area, US 50 is a limited-access freeway and generally consists of four general traffic lanes in each direction.
• State Route 99 (SR 99) is a north-south state highway that connects the Specific Plan Area to south Sacramento and Elk Grove to the south. In the Specific Plan Area, SR 99 is a is a limitedaccess freeway and generally consists of four general traffic lanes in each direction. • Capital City Freeway, also known as Business 80, is an east-west special route that consists of two distinct segments. West of the US 50/SR 99 Oak Park interchange, it shares right-of-way with US 50. East of the US 50/SR 99 Oak Park interchange, it extends northeasterly toward the unincorporated Arden-Arcade and Carmichael communities in Sacramento County, eventually connecting to Interstate 80 (I-80).

Local
• Stockton Boulevard is a major arterial that runs from Alhambra Boulevard in the north to Power Inn Road in south Sacramento. West of Alhambra Boulevard, Stockton Boulevard becomes P Street, which extends through the grid of central Sacramento. It is a four-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 30 to 40 miles per hour (mph) in the Specific Plan Area. • Alhambra Boulevard is a minor arterial that runs from B Street in the east to 3rd Avenue in the west. It connects East Sacramento to the northern part of the Specific Plan Area where it is a two-lane roadway with on street parking on either side and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. • 34th Street is a minor collector that runs from J Street in the east to 32nd Street in the west. It serves the East Sacramento and Oak Park communities to the east and west of Stockton Boulevard corridor respectively. Near the Specific Plan Area, it is a two-lane roadway with street parking on either side and a posted speed limit of 25 mph. • T Street is a major collector that serves the Elmhurst Neighborhood northeast of the Specific Plan Area. It extends from Alhambra Boulevard to Kroy Way just west of 65th Street. It also serves as the primary connection from the US 50 34th Street off-ramp to Stockton Boulevard. It is a two-lane roadway with street parking on either side and a posted speed limit of 30 mph in the Specific Plan Area.
• X Street is an east-west roadway that serves as one of the main accesses to the UC Davis Medical Center campus from Stockton Boulevard.
• 2
nd Avenue is an east-west major collector that extends from Franklin Boulevard to the UC Davis Medical Center campus, connecting the Curtis Park and Oak Park neighborhoods and the campus. It is a two-lane roadway with bike lanes and street parking, and a posted speed limit of 25 mph in the Specific Plan Area.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-8 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
• Broadway is an east-west arterial that extends from Interstate 5 south of Downtown Sacramento to 65th Street. East of Stockton Boulevard, Broadway is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 30 mph that serves both commercial and residential uses. West of Stockton Boulevard, Broadway is a four-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph. • 14th Avenue is an east-west minor collector that serves the Oak Park and Tahoe Park communities to the west and east of Stockton Boulevard respectively. It is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 30 mph in the project area. • 21st Avenue is a major collector that serves residential communities like Tahoe Park east of Stockton Boulevard. It is a two-lane roadway with bike lanes and street parking in both directions. It has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. To the west of Stockton Boulevard, it becomes Perry Avenue that serves residential communities like Fruitridge Oaks. • Fruitridge Road is a major arterial that runs from Mayhew Road in the east to South Land Park drive in the west. It serves as a connection to SR 16 to the east and SR 99 to the west of the Specific Plan Area. It is a four-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph in the Specific Plan Area.
• Lemon Hill Avenue is a minor collector that runs from Power Inn Road in the east to 44th Street in the west. It serves residential communities on either side of the Stockton Boulevard corridor.

It is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph in the Specific Plan Area. • 47th Avenue is a major arterial that extends to 24th streets in the west and Stockton Boulevard in the east. It serves as a connection to SR 99 in the west and connects residential communities in south Sacramento to the Specific Plan Area. To the east of Stockton Boulevard, it becomes Elder Creek Road and extends to Excelsior Road. It is a four-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 mph in the Specific Plan Area.

Vehicle Miles Traveled
Use of the roadway system is relevant for transportation impact analysis because the amount of VMT generated contributes to the understanding of how much fuel is consumed and how much air pollutant and GHG emissions are generated from vehicle use as well as the amount of walking, biking, and transit. In addition, VMT is correlated to the number and severity of collisions. To evaluate potential project impacts on VMT, VMT metrics are evaluated and compared against baseline conditions. These metrics generally involve traffic modelling to estimate vehicle trips and their length within a specific study boundary or from a specific trip generation source such as the project area.

VMT generation rates for households and workers in 2016 are presented in Table 3.9-1. This data compares the VMT metrics of Specific Plan Area, City of Sacramento, and the SACOG region.

Table 3.9-1 VMT Performance (2016 Baseline Conditions)
Analysis area
Household
generated VMT
per resident1
Work Tour VMT
per employee1
Passenger vehicle VMT
generated by Land Uses per
capita1,2
Total VMT
generated by Land
Uses 1,2
Specific Plan Area 14.77 16.21 14.90 63,203
City of Sacramento 17.81 17.31 41.13 23,225,271
SACOG Region 21.59 19.55 30.14 83,049,326
1 Includes trips originating or destined outside the SACOG region. 2 VMT generated from land uses within the analysis area.

Source: Modified Version of SACOG MTP/SCS SACSIM19 Model developed for the City of Sacramento General Plan.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-9
The Specific Plan Area and City of Sacramento have more concentrated development forms than the SACOG region, which generally results in lower VMT generation rates for Area residents and workers.

However, the City is a regional center for shopping, entertainment, and government land uses that attracts people from longer distances. This produces a higher total VMT per capita in personal vehicles for trips with at least one stop within the City compared to the region.

TRANSIT SYSTEM
A wide range of transit services are provided in the Specific Plan Area. Transit services include public bus service, light rail transit, and commercial bus service. According to the US Census Bureau’s 2017- 2021 American Community Survey (ACS), 2.9 percent of commuters take transit to work in Sacramento, which is lower than the state average of 5.1 percent. The previous ACS transit commute estimate for Sacramento from 2007-2011 was 3.7 percent. In general, transit ridership has been declining nationally and in Sacramento since 2009 (SacRT 2018). Causes range from greater competition from ride sharing and micro-mobility (e.g., bike and scooter sharing), relatively low costs of purchasing and driving cars, and increasing distances between jobs and housing. COVID-19 responses exacerbated ridership declines as public health risk influenced the mode choices of travelers.

SacRT bus routes, including the 38, 51, 61 and the 109 Express, operate near or along Stockton Boulevard (Figure 3.9-1). Bus Route 51 has the highest ridership in the SacRT system, with over 2,000 daily riders. Route 51 is the most frequent route serving Stockton Boulevard, with 12- to 15-minute headways during peak travel times. Route 38, which travels along 39th Street, Stockton Boulevard, and Broadway in the Specific Plan Area, has 60-minute headways throughout the day. The busiest bus stops along Stockton Boulevard are those at Broadway, serving Routes 51 and 38, and Fruitridge Road, serving Routes 51 and 61. Of the 42 stops within the Specific Plan Area, almost half are equipped with benches and a bus shelter.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-10 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
Source: Image produced and provided by Fehr & Peers.

Figure 3.9-1 Transit Facilities in the Vicinity of Specific Plan Area Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-11
SacRT’s Gold Line Light Rail Transit, which runs parallel to US 50 near the Specific Plan Area, has 15- minute headways. The Gold Line light rail crosses Stockton Boulevard at grade level at 34th Avenue.

The 39th Street/UC Davis Health Station is roughly a third of a mile north of the Stockton Boulevard/39th Street intersection.

BICYCLE SYSTEM
The City of Sacramento Bicycle Master Plan identifies existing and planned bicycle facilities within the Specific Plan Area (City of Sacramento 2016). The primary purpose of the Bicycle Master Plan is to identify the recreational and commute needs of bicyclists and to promote bicycling as an active form of transportation to reduce VMT and GHGs. The primary goal of the bikeway improvements proposed in the City’s Bicycle Master Plan is to increase bicycle ridership for work and non-work trips. According to the 2021 ACS, about 1.6 percent of commuters bike to work, which is 60% higher than the state average of 1.0 percent. Bicycling trends in Sacramento show that total bicycle trips were declining through 2019 and then increasing through the COVID-19 period of limited driving activity.

Stockton Boulevard is a key route in the city’s bicycle network, with bike lanes present on the 5.4 miles from Broadway to Mack Road (Figure 3.9-2). No bike facilities are present on Stockton Boulevard from Alhambra Boulevard to Broadway. A few bicycle lanes, including those along Broadway, 47th Avenue, and Lemon Hill Avenue support east-west travel; however, they span just a few blocks and do not connect to other bicycle facilities east of the corridor. Streets with more than one lane per direction, speed limits above 25 mph, and traffic volumes greater than 6,000 ADT — all of which apply to Stockton Boulevard — generally require some level of physical separation for riders of all ages and abilities to feel comfortable bicycling. These facilities offer a greater level of physical protection from automobile traffic and may attract more riders to the area.

Sacramento’s Bicycle Master Plan proposes adding separated bikeways along Stockton Boulevard from T Street to Broadway near the UC Davis Medical Center and along Fruitridge Road. The Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan suggests bike lanes from Alhambra Boulevard to 33rd Street, shared use path from T Street to 2nd Avenue, cycle track from 2nd Avenue to Broadway, mixed bus/bike lane from Broadway to 21st Avenue, and shared use path from 21st Avenue to 47th Avenue.

PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM
In California, 2.4 percent of commuters walk to work; in Sacramento, the percentage of walkers is 2.9 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2021). The City has implemented several programs and adopted policies to improve the pedestrian environment, including the Pedestrian Master Plan, Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines, Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines Treatment Applications Guide, Traffic Calming Guidelines, Pedestrian Safety Guidelines, and Pedestrian Friendly Street Standards. Pedestrian facilities, such as enhanced crosswalks, pedestrian count-down signals, new sidewalks, traffic calming measures, and streetscape enhancements are being installed throughout the city.

While people walk throughout the corridor, the intersection with the highest volume of pedestrian traffic is 2nd Avenue, according to traffic count data collected in May 2019. Roughly 60 to 100 people cross 2nd Avenue east of Stockton Boulevard during peak hours. Alhambra Boulevard, X Street, Broadway, and Fruitridge Road all saw pedestrian counts in the 20-30 range per peak hour.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-12 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
Source: Image produced and provided by Fehr & Peers.

Figure 3.9-2 Bike Facilities in the Vicinity of the Specific Plan Area Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-13
Sidewalks & Crosswalks
Sidewalks are continuous throughout the corridor except for one stretch of approximately 80 feet, located along the west side of Stockton at 4th Avenue. Sidewalk width varies from less than 6 feet up to 13 feet. Landscape buffers between the street and the sidewalk are not consistently present throughout the corridor.

The spacing between marked crosswalks varies, with areas on the northern “Traditional Grid” section having shorter spacings and suburban areas having longer spacings.

EMERGING TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGY AND TRAVEL OPTIONS
Technology and sharing have contributed to new options for moving people and goods around Sacramento, including the Specific Plan Area. Examples are listed below. • Commercial Ride-sharing services (e.g., Uber, Lyft)
• Food delivery services (e.g., Grubhub, Uber Eats, DoorDash; or independent restaurants and grocery stores offering their own delivery services)
• Car-sharing services (e.g., Zipcar)
• Micromobility (e.g., shared bikes and scooters offered by Bird, Lime) • Parking-space finding and reservation applications (e.g., SacPark, ParkMobile) • Microtransit (e.g., Sacramento Regional Transit SmaRT Ride service, Waze Carpool) Uber and Lyft are active in the region, and food delivery services have grown substantially due to COVID-19, expanding services to grocery stores, convenience stores, and alcohol delivery. Zipcar, for example, offers services focused on the California State University Sacramento campus, Downtown Sacramento, and University of California Davis campuses, and provides services in parts of Sacramento central city and adjoining neighborhoods. Micro-mobility services are concentrated in the central City and less utilized in the vicinity of the Specific Plan.

SAFETY
The City has approved the Vision Zero Action Plan that seeks to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 2027. The Vision Zero Action Plan identified Stockton Boulevard as part of its high-injury network, which are corridors with the highest levels of fatal and serious crashes for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The segment of Stockton Boulevard between Broadway and 13th Avenue was also identified for additional analysis as part of the Vision Zero Top Five Corridors Plan, adopted in 2021. This plan recommended a road diet separated or buffered bikeways bus boarding islands and advanced dilemma zone detection to improve safety outcomes.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-14 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR

3.9.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures
This section describes the analysis techniques, assumptions, and results used to identify potential significant impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan on the transportation system.

Transportation/traffic impacts are described and assessed, and mitigation measures are recommended for impacts identified as significant or potentially significant.

METHODOLOGY
The transportation impact analysis focuses on how implementation of the Specific Plan could change baseline transportation conditions and whether those changes are aligned with environmental outcome expectations established by the City. The Specific Plan would concentrate population and employment growth along Stockton Boulevard to better accommodate trips by walking, bicycling, and transit.

The Specific Plan’s transportation impact analysis consists of quantitative and qualitative evaluations.

Potential VMT impacts are evaluated using quantitative forecasts derived from a modified version of the SACSIM19 activity-based model. This information is intended to help determine whether the implementation of the Specific Plan would generate VMT at rates that exceed levels necessary to achieve state of California GHG reduction goals. The screening methodology, thresholds, and VMT generation rate expectations are based on the recommendations contained in the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, California Governor’s OPR, December 2018.

For the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian components of the transportation system, the analysis focuses on whether the implementation of the Specific Plan would disrupt baseline facilities or services or interfere with the implementation of planned improvements.

The safety evaluation also considers whether the potential modifications to these facilities that could result from implementation of the Specific Plan are consistent with applicable design standards.

Analysis Scenarios
The transportation modeling and analysis were conducted for the following scenarios, consistent with the scenarios developed for the 2040 General Plan Master EIR, using a modified version of the SACSIM19 model developed for the City of Sacramento General Plan update. • Baseline conditions represent the existing setting based on transportation data collected primarily in April and May 2019, and travel demand forecasts generated from the 2016 base year SACSIM19 model. This scenario serves as the baseline or point of comparison for environmental impact significance determinations related to the implementation of the Specific Plan.
• 2040 No Project conditions reflect 2040 land use forecasts and transportation infrastructure inputs for Sacramento based on the 2035 General Plan as represented in the SACSIM19 model developed for the 2020 MTP/SCS. For areas outside the City, the 2020 MTP/SCS control totals for land use related growth for 2040 conditions were also used, but a reallocation of the growth was applied to recognize new specific plans not accounted for in the 2020 MTP/SCS. • 2040 Plus Project conditions reflect 2040 land use forecasts and transportation infrastructure inputs for Sacramento based on the 2040 General Plan. For areas outside the City, the 2040 No Project conditions were held constant.

The SACSIM19 model is an activity-based model that predicts the travel demand and travel patterns for residents, workers, students, visitors, and commercial vehicles throughout the SACOG region (SACOG Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-15
2019). The model requires inputs such as population and employment to represent the general plan land use element as well as a detailed transportation network to represent the circulation element and circulation diagram associated with each scenario. The Specific Plan identifies where new population and employment growth may occur in the Specific Plan Area based on the land use designations associated with each development parcel. The Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan identifies the lane configuration for each segment of Stockton Boulevard and is complemented by the City’s bikeway and pedestrian plans and the Sacramento Regional Transit system plans, as reflected in the 2020 MTP/SCS.

Modifications in the Specific Plan (2040 Plus Project) would include both lane reductions and additions to baseline conditions. The transit networks contained in the 2020 MTP/SCS were not modified meaning that the same future networks would be developed under 2040 No Project or 2040 Plus Project conditions.

VMT
For purposes of transportation impacts, passenger vehicle VMT per capita generated by land uses in the city is used. The passenger vehicle VMT metric represents total VMT generated by trips in personal automobiles and light-duty trucks with at least one trip end (i.e., location of departure or arrival) in the Specific Plan Area. All automobile (i.e., passenger cars and light-duty trucks) vehicle-trips that have at least one trip end in the Specific Plan Area are traced from their origin to their destination. The cumulative total of VMT from these trips is divided by the resident population of the Specific Plan Area to create the per capita metric (2040 Plus Project scenario). The VMT per capita under the 2040 Plus Project is then compared to the Baseline conditions (citywide VMT per capita in 2016) to determine the significance of environmental impacts associated with VMT. This metric is directly related to how the Specific Plan would influence future personal vehicle travel through land use. This metric does not include commercial vehicle (e.g., truck) trips that may be generated by residential or commercial land uses (i.e., internet shopping deliveries).

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
For the pedestrian and bicycle systems, the impact analysis focuses on whether implementation of the Specific Plan would disrupt existing facilities, interfere with the implementation of planned facilities, or fail to adequately provide access to facilities.

The Specific Plan would generate new demand for pedestrian and bicycle use. Any modifications to these transportation system components will conform to applicable design standards and city expectations for modifications to contribute towards Vision Zero goals.

Transit Service and Facilities
For transit facilities and service, the impact analysis considers whether implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would disrupt existing service or facilities, interfere with the implementation of planned service or facilities, or fail to adequately provide access to service or facilities. The analysis also considers whether the Specific Plan could conflict with transit performance standards established by the SacRT.

Future transit demand in the Specific Plan Area was estimated based on longitudinal employerhousehold dynamics data, Journey-to-Work Census data, and estimates of growth that would result from the Specific Plan. Generally, transit demand is linked to the availability and quality of transit service in combination with travel distance and the cost of travel. The estimated increase in transit demand presumes that future background travel conditions remain relatively constant and do not Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-16 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
account for potential changes associated with emerging travel technologies and trends. As noted earlier, these emerging travel trends are already contributing to changes in typical travel demand relationships, as exemplified in a 19 percent decline in bus and rail ridership on SacRT between 2015 and 2018, even before the COVID-19 pandemic.

Existing transit performance and anticipated transit performance under implementation of the Specific Plan is compared to the SacRT Service Standards (SacRT 2013). The performance standards used in this analysis include vehicle loading standards, productivity standards (headway standard), and on-time performance standards.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A significant impact would occur if implementation of the Specific Plan would result in any of the following outcomes.
• Result in less than a 16.8 percent reduction of passenger vehicle VMT per capita compared to the citywide baseline.1
• Adversely affect existing and planned public transit facilities or services or fail to adequately provide access to transit.
• Adversely affect existing and planned bicycle facilities or fail to adequately provide access by bicycle.
• Adversely affect existing pedestrian facilities or fail to adequately provide access for pedestrians.
• Result in a geometric design feature that is inconsistent with applicable design standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.9-1: Result in VMT Impacts on the Roadway System Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less than a 16.8-percent reduction of passenger vehicle VMT per capita compared to the citywide baseline. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, it cannot be guaranteed that a 16.8-percent VMT reduction would occur. This impact would therefore be significant and unavoidable.

The impact assessment for VMT considers whether implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a 16.8-percent per capita VMT reduction as compared to the citywide baseline. An efficiency metric, VMT per capita, is used to evaluate VMT impact. The SACSIM19 model that uses the 2040 General Plan land use and mobility elements as inputs to predict travel demand and patterns is used to estimate the VMT per capita associated with the Specific Plan.

As shown in Table 3.9-2, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in 38.85 VMT per capita for 2040 Plus Project conditions (cumulative analysis), which represents a 5.5-percent reduction in passenger vehicle VMT per capita compared to the citywide baseline. This is less than the 16.8 percent reduction established as the VMT impact threshold. This is a potentially significant cumulative impact. 1 This threshold is recommended in the California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals, California Air Resources Board, January 2019 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/ default/files/2019-01/2017_sp_vmt_reductions_jan19.pdf
Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-17
Typically, the comparison of baseline conditions and Baseline Plus Project conditions would result in an evaluation of the worst-case scenario. This is a result of the fact that future-year analysis (cumulative analysis) includes additional development, which generally have the effect of shortening trips as the proximity of complementary land uses improves with increasing densities (e.g., houses are closer to stores and offices). As such, it can be presumed that a project would have a significant impact with respect to baseline conditions if it were determined to have a significant cumulative impact under the cumulative conditions. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that implementation of the Specific Plan would result in potentially significant VMT impact.

Table 3.9-2 Passenger Vehicle VMT Impact Evaluation
Type of VMT1
City of Sacramento - Baseline
(2016)
Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan –
Cumulative
(2040 Plus Project)
Passenger Vehicle VMT 19,442,920 2,143,399
Population 472,692 55,174
Passenger Vehicle VMT per capita 41.13 38.85
Passenger Vehicle VMT per capita reduction
compared to baseline — -5.5 Percent
1 Represents VMT generated by land uses in the city.

Source: Modified SACSIM19, provided by Fehr & Peers in 2023.

While SACSIM19 represents state of the practice or advanced practice, travel behavior and the transportation systems are changing quickly in response to emerging trends, new technologies, and different preferences, as noted in Section 3.9.2, “Environmental Setting.” These changes combined with the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic increase uncertainty about how VMT generation rates may change by the time the Specific Plan would be implemented.

When making a final VMT impact determination, other available evidence related to VMT trends in California should be considered. This analysis identified the following relevant studies. • 2018 Progress Report, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (“2018 Progress Report”) (California Air Resources Board [CARB] 2018). • Draft 2022 Progress Report, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (“2022 Progress Report”) (CARB 2022a).
• California Air Resources Board Improved Program Measurement Would Help California Work More Strategically to Meet Its Climate Change Goals (“Audit Report”) (Auditor of the State of California 2021).
• Final 2022 Scoping Plan Update (“Scoping Plan”) (CARB 2022b).

The 2018 and Draft 2022 Progress Reports measure the effect of SB 375, revealing that VMT and GHG per capita increased in California between 2010 and 2019 and are trending upward (Figure 3.9-3).

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-18 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
Source: California Air Resources Board 2022.

Figure 3.9-3 Draft 2022 Progress Report, Light-Duty VMT and GHG Per Capita Relative to 2005 (California’s 18 MPO Regions Aggregated)
The Audit Report is a recent assessment of California Air Resources Board’s GHG reduction programs, which also found that VMT and associated GHG emissions were trending upward through 2018. Per the audit, the state is not on track to achieve 2030 GHG reduction goals, and emissions from transportation have not been declining. The 2020 Mobile Source Strategy (CARB 2021) also acknowledges the challenge of VMT reduction and states, “[w]ithout additional policy intervention, VMT may continue to rise.”
The Scoping Plan reviews California’s progress for meeting GHG reduction goals and sets forth strategies to achieve those goals based on past performance. The plan acknowledges that the state is not meeting its VMT reduction objectives and that VMT growth is returning after COVID-19 pandemic effects diminish.

After a significant pandemic-induced reduction in VMT during 2020, passenger VMT has steadily climbed back up and is now closing in on pre-pandemic levels. Driving alone with no passengers remains the primary mode of travel in California, amounting to 75 percent of the mode share for daily commute trips. Conversely, transit ridership, which was also heavily affected during the lockdown months, has not recovered at the same pace as VMT, and roughly averages two-thirds of pre-pandemic levels of ridership.

This evidence demonstrates the challenge of reducing VMT when background macro-level conditions are contributing to higher VMT generation rates.

A Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan was developed as part of the Stockton Boulevard Plan (see Appendix F of the Stockton Boulevard Plan. The Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan includes a conceptual design for the layout of Stockton Boulevard based on input from the community members.

The conceptual design for Stockton Boulevard would include mechanisms that would provide Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-19
opportunities to active transportation, including improving crossings for more pedestrians, creating shared-use path for walking and bicycling, widening roadway to include bike lanes, and adding bus shelters. Implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Corridor would be expected to further reduce VMT per capita within the Specific Plan Area. In addition, the Specific Plan contributes to meeting the basic objectives of SB 743 by adding development in land use efficient areas. However, based on the quantitative analysis, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a less than 16.8-percent reduction of passenger vehicle VMT per capita compared to the citywide baseline. Therefore, the VMT impact would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.9-1a: Project applicants shall prepare and implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to guide implementation of TDM strategies for development, as outlined below.

Prior to issuance of building permits, future projects shall submit to the City either a project-specific transportation analysis that demonstrates that the project would obtain the City’s VMT reduction target or a TDM Plan. Both documents shall be subject to review and approval by the City of Sacramento Department of Public Works. The TDM Plan shall be designed to reduce passenger vehicle VMT per capita to 34.22 (a 16.8-percent reduction from baseline passenger vehicle VMT per capita) or as close as deemed feasible by the City. The TDM Plan shall contain VMT reduction strategies identified in the Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association [CAPCOA] 2021) or an equivalent reference where the effectiveness of strategies is supported by substantial evidence.

The TDM Plan may include, but would not be limited to, the CAPCOA strategies listed in Table 3.9-3.

Table 3.9-3 Applicable CAPCOA Strategies
Category Measure Strategy Description VMT Mitigation Reduction Potential Land Use
T-1 Increase Residential Density
0 – 30.0 percent of GHG emissions from project VMT in
Specific Plan Area, based upon how much the residential density of project exceeds 9.1 DU/acre
T-2 Increase Job Density
0 – 30.0 percent of GHG emissions from project VMT in the Specific Plan Area, based upon job density of project
development
T-3
Provide Transit Oriented
Development

6.9 – 31.0 percent of GHG emissions from project VMT in Specific Plan Area, based upon existing transit mode share in the city
T-4
Integrate Affordable and Below
Market Rate Housing
0 – 28.6% of GHG emissions from project multifamily
residential VMT, based upon percent of multifamily units dedicated as affordable
Neighborhood
Design
T-19A Construct or Improve Bike
Facility
0 – 0.8 percent of GHG emissions from vehicles on parallel roadways, based upon percent of plan VMT that occurs on the parallel roadway, number of key destinations near
project, and facility type
T-20 Expand Bikeway Network 0 – 0.5 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based on trip lengths and mode share
T-21-A/B Implement Carshare Program
(Conventional or Electric)
0 – 0.18 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon number and type of vehicles
deployed and project VMT
Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-20 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
Category Measure Strategy Description VMT Mitigation Reduction Potential T-22-A/B/C
Implement Bikeshare or
Scootershare Program
(Pedal or Electric)
0 – 0.07 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon proximity to share stations
Trip Reduction
Programs T-23 Provide Community-Based Travel Planning
0 – 2.3 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon residences in community
Parking or Road
Pricing/
Management
T-24 Implement Market Price Public
Parking (On-Street)
0 – 30 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon VMT in the area without the
measure, parking prices, and trips parking on the street Transit
T-25 Extend Network Coverage or
Hours
0 – 4.6 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon transit service miles or hours in community before expansion
T-26 Increase Transit Service
Frequency
0 – 11.3 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon increase in transit frequency, level of implementation, and mode share
T-27 Implement Transit-Supportive
Roadway Treatments
0 – 0.6 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon percent of transit routes that receive treatments
T-28 Provide Bus Rapid Transit
0 – 13.8 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon increase in transit frequency due to BRT and level of implementation
T-29 Reduce Transit Fares
0 – 1.2 percent of GHG emissions from vehicle travel in the community, based upon reduction in fare and percent of
routes with reduced fares
Sources: Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity CAPCOA 2021, provided by Fehr & Peers in 2023.

Mitigation Measure 3.9-1b: Project applicants shall contribute to the City of Sacramento’s development impact fee program an amount determined by City, subject to the following conditions:
• The contribution will only apply towards improvement projects that demonstrate VMT reduction potential per CAPCOA.
• The contribution, when combined with the other fee revenue and city revenues, shall be sufficient to construct the applicable improvements prior to build-out of the proposed Specific Plan.

Significance after Mitigation
Compliance with Mitigation Measures 3.9-1a and 3.9-1b would reduce project generated VMT by instituting a TDM plan and contributing to the construction of infrastructure and facilitation of programs associated with the reduction of vehicle trips generated by the Specific Plan. However, the effectiveness of TDM strategies is uncertain over time. Existing evidence indicates that the effectiveness of TDM strategies with regards to vehicle trip reduction can vary based on a variety of factors, including the context of the surrounding built environment (e.g., urban versus suburban/rural), individual travel behavior, and the aggregated effect of multiple TDM strategies deployed together.

Moreover, many TDM strategies rely on implementation and/or adoption by private entities and by residents to use non-automobile modes to travel outside the project.

Implementation of a TDM Plan and contribution to the construction of applicable improvements would reduce project related VMT. However, even with TDM strategy implementation, the Specific Plan’s passenger vehicle VMT would likely exceed the threshold of 34.22 personal vehicle VMT per capita.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-21
Due to uncertainties regarding the ability for the mitigation measure to reduce VMT to a less-thansignificant level, as well as TDM being dependent on individual property owners and tenants, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.9-2: Impacts to Transit Facilities, Services, or Access The Specific Plan does not include goals, policies, and implementing actions that could adversely affect existing and planned public transit facilities or services or fail to adequately provide access to transit.

However, implementation of the Specific Plan would have the potential to increase transit demand to exceed SacRT service and performance standards. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, it cannot be guaranteed that the impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. This impact would therefore be significant and unavoidable.

The impact assessment for transit considers existing and planned transit facilities and reviews the Specific Plan to determine whether it would physically disrupt an existing facility, prevent the implementation of a planned facility or service, or fail to adequately provide access to transit. This assessment also considers whether the Specific Plan would cause transit demand to exceed SacRT service standards for system performance.

Growth resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan would increase demand for transit serving the corridor. An estimated 5,138 additional residents and 5,819 employees would utilize transit to commute to and from destinations in the Specific Plan Area. As a land use plan, the Specific Plan does not propose new or expanded transit service, thus, new transit passenger demand generated by the Specific Plan would rely on existing or planned transit serving the Specific Plan Area. Implementation of the Specific Plan would increase peak hour delays on Stockton Boulevard and surrounding roadways used by existing fixed-route bus service. These potential increases in overall travel time could adversely affect bus transit operations (i.e., on-time performance). Potentially degraded service quality could lead to losses of ridership if commuters decide to utilize other modes of travel (e.g., automobiles).

This could result in environmental effects such as increased emissions.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would not interfere with the implementation of planned transit service or facilities identified in the Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan (City of Sacramento 2021b), Stockton Boulevard Implementation Plan (Sacramento Regional Transit District 2023), City of Sacramento General Plan, or the SacRT Short Range Transit Plan. The Specific Plan would also not interfere with planned regional transit projects identified in the SACOG 2020 MTP/SCS. The Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan contains policies supporting efficient, high-quality services to meet the needs of residents and businesses. The land use goals in the Plan have been designed to complement high levels of transit accessibility and mobility and create an interconnected neighborhood that supports and facilitates travel by transit. The Plan does not directly include policies or goals related to public transit facilities or services; rather, transit facility recommendations are included in the associated Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan.

The SacRT Service Standards establish vehicle loading standards for SacRT bus and light rail service based on maximum load factors (i.e., the ratio of total passenger capacity to total seats) for each vehicle type. The load factor standard for standard 40-foot fixed-route buses with a seated capacity of 34 passengers is 1.8 (equal to a maximum load of 60 passengers per bus) and the load factor standard for light-rail vehicles is 2.0 (equal to a maximum load of 128 passengers per light rail car). SacRT considers a route to be overloaded if 25 percent or more of one-way vehicle trips are regularly overloaded.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-22 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
The SacRT Service Standards establish productivity standards for each service type, where routes exceeding SacRT’s maximum productivity standards are recommended for service increases while corrective action is recommended for routes that fail to meet SacRT’s minimum productivity standards.

The three primary SacRT services that serve the Specific Plan Area currently meet the established SacRT productivity standards.

SacRT ridership and service levels have experienced substantial changes in recent years. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, between 2015 and 2018, combined SacRT bus and light rail ridership decreased by 19 percent2, similar to ridership declines experienced by transit operators around the country. In March 2020, the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic caused SacRT to substantially reduce service levels and ridership plummeted. As of Fall 2023, service levels have been partially restored to pre-COVID-19 levels while ridership is slowly rebounding. Additionally, emerging disruptive transportation trends (e.g., commercial Ride-sharing services, car-sharing services, parking-space finding and reservation applications) have not developed to a level of maturity to understand their effects on future transit ridership and service levels. Altogether, these factors introduce uncertainties regarding future SacRT ridership and service levels over the course of the Specific Plan planning horizon, regardless of the implementation of the Specific Plan. Therefore, it is not possible to accurately determine the extent to which transit passenger demand generated by the Specific Plan, together with background SacRT ridership and service levels, would affect SacRT performance with respect to established loading and productivity standards. Thus, it is unknown if the Specific Plan would cause Route 38, Route 51, the Gold Line, or other potential future SacRT services to fail to meet established loading or productivity standards, or exacerbate performance for routes that already fail to meet these standards, over the course of the Specific Plan planning horizon.

An exceedance of established transit service standards would cause transit services to operate below acceptable service level, quality, and/or performance targets, which could be deleterious to the transit passenger experience (i.e., poor reliability, long travel times, crowding on buses, etc.). For passengers who are sensitive to these factors, a degradation of service quality could cause them to choose other modes of transportation that generally cause greater adverse effects on the environment (e.g., driving).

Passengers choose to use transit due to a variety of factors and personal preferences, including community context (e.g., urban versus suburban), accessibility, convenience, travel time, and costs of options. Because transit passenger expectations regarding service quality will vary, the extent to which a degradation of service quality would affect existing and prospective transit ridership, as well as associated adverse environmental effects, is uncertain.

SacRT receives funding from local sources (RydeFreeRT), regional sources, state sources (Transit Development Act [TDA] funds), federal sources (Federal Transportation Administration), and through fare collection. State and federal funds are generally allocated based on population, with a portion of TDA funds derived from a ¼-cent general sales tax and a sales tax on diesel fuel. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would increase funding for transit through these sources because of population growth. This impact would be potentially significant. 2 Based on 2015 and 2018 annual agency profile data for SacRT from the Federal Transit Administration’s National Transit Database. From https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/transit-agency-profiles/sacramento-regional-transit-district. 2015 Annual Ridership = 25,768,473. 2018 Annual Ridership = 20,890,308. 2015 to 2018 Ridership Decline = 1 – (20,890,308/25,768,473) = -18.9% Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-23
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.9-2a: Monitor transit service performance and implement strategies to minimize delays to transit service.

The City of Sacramento shall coordinate with SacRT and other relevant transit operators to establish baseline on-time performance metrics for routes operating on Stockton Boulevard in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area consistent with established standards and methods.

Mitigation Measure 3.9-2b: Monitor transit service performance and implement transit service and/or facility improvements.

The City of Sacramento shall coordinate with SacRT and other relevant transit operators to establish baseline transit performance (i.e., loading, productivity, and on-time performance) and safety metrics for routes operating within the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area consistent with established standards and methods.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.9-2a and 3.9-2b would reduce the significance of this impact.

However, the improvements that are necessary to improve transit performance identified in Mitigation Measure 3.9-2a would require implementation by SacRT. Moreover, the effectiveness of the TDM strategies identified in Mitigation Measure 3.9-2a are not known and subsequent vehicle trip reduction effects and, in turn, reductions to delays to transit, cannot be guaranteed. Since the City of Sacramento cannot guarantee that these improvements would be implemented and/or effective, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Impact 3.9-3: Impacts to Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities or Access The Specific Plan would not adversely affect existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities or fail to adequately provide access for bicycles and pedestrians. This impact would therefore be less than significant.

The impact assessment for bicycle and pedestrian travel considers existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities and reviews the Specific Plan to determine whether it would physically disrupt an existing facility or prevent the implementation of a planned facility. This assessment also considers whether the Specific Plan would fail to adequately provide access by active travel modes.

The Specific Plan contains policies supporting streetscape beautification, efficient land use, and lighting to improve safety. Implementation of the Specific Plan would not physically disrupt an existing bicycle facility or interfere with implementation of a planned bicycle facility identified in the City of Sacramento Bicycle Master Plan (City of Sacramento 2016) and Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan (City of Sacramento 2021b). Policies within the Specific Plan support the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan, including continuous bike facilities (with a combination of bike lanes buffered bike lanes cycle tracks and shared use paths), and additional pedestrian crossing opportunities.

Based on this information, the Specific Plan’s bicycle and pedestrian impact would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-24 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
Impact 3.9-4: Result in Geometric Design Features Inconsistent with Applicable Design Standards
The Specific Plan would not modify the baseline transportation system in a manner inconsistent with applicable design standards. This impact would therefore be less than significant.

The impact assessment for physical hazards considers whether the Specific Plan would modify the baseline transportation system in a manner that is not consistent with applicable design standards.

While the Specific Plan would have the potential to add new vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian trips to the network transportation system, modifications to transportation system, if required, would be required to comply with applicable city design standards. The mix and speed of traffic is expected to remain similar to baseline conditions although speeds may decline, and delay may increase during peak periods (this issue is not within the purview of CEQA).

The City Code and Street Design Standards include design criteria to ensure that development-related public right-of-way and private street improvements are designed to meet or exceed uniform levels of sound engineering practice. The design criteria address speed, sight distance, minimum and maximum roadway grade, minimum curve radius, and lighting. As part of general engineering practice, all roadway facilities would also be designed to meet applicable industry standards from the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM), the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Each development application would be subject to review and approval by the City. The City’s Fire Department would review the project’s consistency with the City’s design criteria to accommodate vehicle access, including for emergency vehicles.

Further, the planning and design of the transportation network associated with the Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan anticipate a mix of traffic types and would include facilities to accommodate changes in travel demand over time.

Based on this information, the Specific Plan’s bicycle and pedestrian impact would be considered less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.9-5: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Transportation and Circulation System
The incremental contribution from cumulative development along with the Specific Plan would result in significant cumulative impacts to VMT and transit facilities, services and access. The Specific Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to VMT and transit facilities, services and access. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, the impacts would not be reduced to a lessthan-significant level. The cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable.

The cumulative context for transportation and circulation system is SACOG region. Past, present and future development in the region, including the buildout of the Specific Plan has the potential to impact the transportation and circulation system in the region.

Ascent Transportation and Circulation
City of Sacramento
Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR 3.9-25
The 2040 Plus Project conditions reflect buildout of the Specific Plan Area which includes cumulative conditions. As discussed in Impact 3.9-1, the cumulative VMT impact resulting from the Specific Plan would be significant and unavoidable.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable impact on public transit facilities as discussed in Impact 3.9-1. The Specific Plan, in combination with the cumulative development in the region, would have the potential to increase demand for public transit services.

Because future public transit services are provided by regional and local transit agencies outside the jurisdiction of the City of Sacramento, the potential exists that the Specific Plan along with cumulative development would increase public transit demand to exceed regional and local transit services and performance standards (e.g., SacRT). Therefore, the Specific Plan together with the cumulative development would result in a significant cumulative impact.

There are existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area.

The Specific Plan would not adversely affect existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The Specific Plan contains policies that support the proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan, including continuous bike facilities (with a combination of bike lanes buffered bike lanes cycle tracks and shared use paths) and additional pedestrian crossing opportunities. Cumulative development in the region would be required to be consistent with applicable bicycle and/or pedestrian plans. In addition, future discretionary projects would be subject to CEQA review. Impacts to bicycle and pedestrian facilities would be identified and mitigation measures would be developed to reduce impacts. As such, the Specific Plan together with the cumulative projects would not result in a substantial incremental effect that would result in a significant cumulative impact related to bicycle and pedestrian facilities and access.

As discussed in Impact 3.9-4 above, the Specific Plan would result in less-than-significant impacts related to geometric design features inconsistent with applicable design standards. Cumulative development would be required to comply with the same regulations discussed in Impact 3.9-4 above to ensure that project designs would meet state and local regulations related to emergency access and design. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan together with the cumulative development would not result in a substantial incremental effect that would result in a significant cumulative impact related to geometric design features inconsistent with applicable design standards.

Based on the discussion above, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts related to VMT and transit facilities, services and access.

The cumulative impact would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures 3.9-1a, 3.9-1b, 3.9-2a, and 3.9-2b described above.

Significance after Mitigation
As described above in Impacts 3.9-1 and 3.9-2, mitigation measures, including implementation of TDM Plan and monitoring transit services performance, and would reduce impacts related to VMT and transit facilities, services and access but not to a less-than-significant level. The cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Transportation and Circulation Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.9-26 Stockton Boulevard Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-1

3.10 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
This section evaluates the potential impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan on known and unknown (undiscovered or unidentified) tribal cultural resources. Tribal cultural resources (TCRs), as defined by Assembly Bill (AB) 52, Statutes of 2014, in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21074, are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe. A tribal cultural landscape is defined as a geographic area (including both cultural and natural resources and the wildlife therein) associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values.

One comment letter regarding TCRs was received in response to the Notice of Preparation (see Appendix A). The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) requested AB 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 compliance information. SB 18 is not a CEQA requirement and therefore is not discussed in this section. AB 52 compliance is described below.

3.10.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations that apply.

STATE
California Register of Historical Resources
All properties in California that are listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) are also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The CRHR is a listing of State of California resources that are significant in the context of California’s history. It is a Statewide program with a scope and with criteria for inclusion similar to those used for the NRHP. In addition, properties designated under municipal or county ordinances are also eligible for listing in the CRHR.

A historical resource must be significant at the local, State, or national level under one or more of the criteria defined in the California Code of Regulations Title 15, Chapter 11.5, Section 4850 to be included in the CRHR. The CRHR criteria are tied to CEQA because any resource that meets the criteria below is considered a significant historical resource under CEQA. As noted above, all resources listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR.

The CRHR uses four evaluation criteria:

Criterion 1. Is 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. Is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history.

Criterion 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction; represents the work of a master; or possesses high artistic values.

Criterion 4. Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation.

Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Similar to the NRHP, a historical resource must meet one of the above criteria and retain integrity to be listed in the CRHR. The CRHR uses the same seven aspects of integrity used by the NRHP: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and associations.

California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires public agencies to consider the effects of their actions on “tribal cultural resources.” PRC Section 21084.2 establishes that “[a] project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” PRC Section 21074 states:
a) “Tribal cultural resources” are either of the following:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:

A) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR.

B) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1.
2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
b) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape. c) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a “nonunique archaeological resource” as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).

AB 52, signed by the California Governor in September of 2014, established a new class of resources under CEQA: “tribal cultural resources,” defined in PRC Section 21074. Pursuant to CEQA requirements, lead agencies undertaking CEQA review must, upon written request of a California Native American tribe, begin consultation before the release of an EIR, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration.

Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5
Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code requires that construction or excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If they are determined to be those of a Native American, the coroner must contact NAHC.

California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act The California Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act (PRC Section 5097.9) applies to both State and private lands. The act requires, upon discovery of human remains, that construction or excavation activity cease and that the county coroner be notified. If the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must notify the NAHC, which notifies (and has the authority to designate) the Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-3
most likely descendants (MLD) of the deceased. The act stipulates the procedures the descendants may follow for treating or disposing of the remains and associated grave goods.

Public Resource Code Section 5097
PRC Section 5097 specifies the procedures to be followed in the event of the unexpected discovery of human remains on nonfederal land. The disposition of Native American human burials falls within the jurisdiction of the NAHC. Section 5097.5 of the Code states the following:

No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure, or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.

LOCAL
City of Sacramento General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is the City’s policy guide for future development.

3.10.2 Environmental Setting

TRIBE(S)
The following is an excerpt from the Technical Background Report from the 2040 General Plan (Dyett & Bhatia 2020):

The first settlements in the Sacramento Valley likely occurred during the late Pleistocene and early Holocene (14,000 to 8,000 B.P.) period. Sacramento’s location within a great valley and at the confluence of two rivers, the Sacramento River and the American River, shaped its early and modern settlements. However, the archaeological record of such use is sparse. It is likely that Paleo- Indian populations occupied the area with villages located near watercourses. The Sacramento Delta was one of the first regions in California to attract intensive archeological fieldwork. Between 1893 and 1901, a vocational archeologist, J.A. Barr, excavated many prehistoric mounds in the Stockton area. He collected nearly 2,000 artifacts during the course of his investigations. H.C.

Meredith was another vocational archeologist of the period who pursued collecting in the same Stockton locality. Meredith (1899, 1900) published a compilation of his own and Barr's findings, and these appear to constitute the earliest accounts of archeology within the Delta. Holmes (1902), from the Smithsonian Institution, further elaborated on the delta or "Stockton District" archeology, presenting illustrations of artifacts collected by Meredith and Barr.

For thousands of years, the Sacramento area has been occupied by Native American groups. Tribal cultural resources, including human burials, have been found throughout the city. Areas of high sensitivity for tribal cultural resources are located within close proximity to the Sacramento and American rivers and other watercourses.

Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This section analyzes and evaluates the potential impacts of the project on Tribal cultural resources, both identified and undiscovered. Tribal cultural resources, as defined by Assembly Bill (AB) 52, Statutes of 2014, in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21074, are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places and objects, with cultural value to a Tribe. A Tribal cultural landscape is defined as a geographic area (including both cultural and natural resources and the wildlife therein), associated with a historic event, activity, or person or exhibiting other cultural or aesthetic values. The unanticipated find of Native American human remains would also be considered a Tribal cultural resource, and are therefore analyzed in this section.

The proposed project area is situated within the lands traditionally occupied by the Valley Nisenan, or Southern Maidu. Many descendants of Valley Nisenan throughout the larger Sacramento region belong to the United Auburn Indian Community, Shingle Springs, Ione Band, Colfax-Todds Valley, and Wilton Rancheria Tribes. The Tribes actively participate in the identification, evaluation, preservation, and restoration of Tribal Cultural Resources.

KNOWN ETHNOGRAPHIC VILLAGES NEAR PROJECT SITE
Villages along the Sacramento and American rivers include Pujune, Momol, Sahmah, Demba, Yamahepu, and Sa’cum. Pujune is located on the north side of the American River, about 0.25 mile east of its confluence with the Sacramento River. Momol is located on the south side of the American River, opposite the village of Pujune. Sahmah is located the east side of the Sacramento River, south of its confluence with the American River. Demba is located on the south side of the Sacramento River about one-half mile east of the Interstate 80 bridge crossing over the river. Yamahepu is located on the north side of the American River near the Highway 160 bridge crossing over the river. Sa’cum is located at Cesar Chavez Park in Sacramento.

In addition, tribes have identified lake Wanoho Pakan as culturally important. A lake, originally named Wanoho Pakan by Native American tribes, formerly extended from 3rd Street to 5th Street and north of I Street; the area is now occupied by the Southern Pacific railroad depot. Wanoho Pakan was and continues to be a place of cultural significance and value to tribes. Subsequent to Euroamerican settlement and development of Sacramento, Wanoho Pakan became known as Sutter Lake and later as China Slough (JCC 2020:4.4).

The presence and distribution of the six villages and Wanoho Pakan indicate that the area encompassed by modern Sacramento was a landscape occupied and successfully used by Native Americans. Indeed, beyond any physical presence (e.g., archaeological sites and artifacts) of Native American occupation, the landscape is part of the history of Native Americans in the Sacramento area.

The development and change of the landscape over time tells a story important to and valued by the Native American community and also the history of Sacramento and the Central Valley (JCC 2020:6.5,6.7).

CONTEMPORARY NATIVE AMERICAN SETTING
Defining TCRs involves the knowledge and expertise of living California Native Americans. As the embodiment of a continuous connection between tribal history and the landscape, they are uniquely qualified to act as the interpreters and stewards of their culture, including the ability to define the significance of the material remains and landscapes of their ancestor’s lifeways.

The Specific Plan is located on land traditionally inhabited by the Valley Nisenan. Although boundaries with neighboring tribes were often fluid and overlapping, traditional Valley Nisenan lands are generally Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-5
described as extending from present-day Old Sacramento, up the American River and its tributaries to the crest of the Sierras. Today, many descendants of Valley Nisenan still reside on lands once inhabited by their ancestors or on lands set aside for tribal communities by the federal government in California which may or may not be traditionally inhabited by their ancestors. Contemporary Californian Native American tribes with ancestral connections to the Specific Plan Area and Valley Nisenan heritage include the United Auburn Indian Community (UAIC), Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians (SSBMI), Ione Band of Miwok, and Wilton Rancheria.

These tribes today maintain connection to their history and culture in a multitude of ways, including through ceremony, language and traditional knowledge instruction, community service, and tribal governance. For example, a “Big Time” is typically celebrated every September to mark the start of autumn and acorn gathering time at Chaw’se Grinding Rock State Park in Pine Grove. This celebration includes serving traditional foods, traditional dancing, healing rituals, and worship in the roundhouse.

Language and traditional skill classes are offered by most of the tribes, including by the SSBMI which has a Traditional Ecological Knowledge department to assist members with learning about respectful and traditional uses of plants and animals, and the UAIC who has a Pre-K through 8th grade school where key aspects of Indian culture and critical thinking are taught to prepare tribal members to face future challenges (Private School Review 2022; SSBMI 2022a).

Tribal community service departments provide family support services to adults and children in order to promote the health and well-being of tribal community members and their families as well as connection to their heritage. Common services offered by all tribes include Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) advocacy and intervention, housing assistance, health care assistance, Elder programs, and grants and scholarships for higher education (Ione Band of Miwok Indians 2022; SSBMI 2022a; UAIC 2022; Wilton Rancheria 2022a). Governance on tribal lands is typically outlined by tribally prepared constitutions, codes and/or ordinances, and are carried out by tribal departments which are in turn typically overseen by the tribal council. This includes the office of Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. Because tribes retain inherent sovereign powers over their members and territory, SSBMI and the Wilton Rancheria also have tribal Courts which serve as culturally- sensitive, independent judicial forums where tribal cultural values are held at the forefront of dispute resolutions (SSBMI 2022b; Wilton Rancheria 2022b).

The United Auburn Indian Community (UAIC) is a federally recognized Tribe comprised of both Miwok and Maidu (Nisenan) Tribal members who are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area.

The Tribe has a deep spiritual, cultural, and physical ties to their ancestral land and are contemporary stewards of their culture and landscapes. The Tribal community represents a continuity and endurance of their ancestors by maintaining their connection to their history and culture. It is the Tribe’s goal to ensure the preservation and continuance of their cultural heritage for current and future generations.

RECORDS SEARCHES AND CONSULTATION
Records Search
On September 7, 2023, a records search of the Specific Plan Area and a 0.25-mile buffer was conducted at the North Central Information Center, at California State University, Sacramento. The following information was reviewed as part of the records search:
• NRHP and CRHR,
• California Office of Historic Preservation Historic Property Directory, • California Inventory of Historic Resources,
Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
• California State Historic Landmarks,
• California Points of Historical Interest, and
• Historic properties reference map.

Sacred Lands File Search
A search of the NAHC Sacred Lands File returned as positive for the presence of Native American resources within the project area. A list of Native American individuals and tribes to contact for more information was also provided with the results.

Tribal Consultation
On March 18, 2021, in compliance with AB 52 requirements, the City of Sacramento sent letters to the Buena Vista Rancheria, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria (UAIC), and Wilton Rancheria; a response was only received from the UAIC.

Because tribal consultation involves the locations and details of sites, the specific details of the consultations are confidential pursuant to California law. A summary of events related to communication between the tribes and the City is provided below:
• March 19, 2021: UAIC responded on March 19, 2023, and officially request consultation on March 23, 2023.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
No TCRs have been identified within the study area; however, the entire region encompassing the plan alignment is considered to be highly sensitive for the presence of TCRs, including human remains, based on tribal oral traditions, tribal knowledge, and the results of past investigations contained in the NCIC record search results.

3.10.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
Information related to TCRs is based on findings reported in the NAHC Sacred Lands File database search, the records search results (NCIC File Number File no. SAC-23-168) and the results of Native American consultation under AB 52. The analysis is also informed by the provisions and requirements of State and local laws and regulations that apply to cultural resources.

PRC Section 21074 defines “tribal cultural resources” as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” that are listed or determined eligible for listing in the CRHR, listed in a local register of historical resources, or otherwise determined by the lead agency to be a TCR.

UAIC conducted a records search for the identification of Tribal Cultural Resources for this project which included a review of pertinent literature and historic maps, and a records search using UAIC’s Tribal Historic Information System (THRIS). UAIC’s THRIS database is composed of UAIC’s areas of oral history, ethnographic history, and places of cultural and religious significance, including UAIC Sacred Lands that are submitted to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The THRIS resources shown in this region also include previously recorded indigenous resources identified through Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-7
the California Historic Resources Information System Center (CHRIS) as well as historic resources and survey data.

For the purposes of this impact discussion, “historical resource” is used to describe historic-era, builtenvironment resources while the term “unique archaeological resource” is used to describe archaeological sites. TCRs, which may qualify as “historical resources” pursuant to CEQA, are analyzed separately from built-environment historical resources and unique archaeological resources, which are analyzed in Section 3.5, “Cultural Resources,” of this EIR.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the project would result in a potentially significant impact on TCRs if it would:
• cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR, defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
All potential TCRs impacts are evaluated below.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.10-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a TCR Future development under the Specific Plan could result in adverse impacts to resources with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts but not to a less-than-significant level. The impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Future development that would occur under the Specific Plan could result in substantial adverse changes in the significance of a TCR (site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object) with cultural value to a California Native American tribe. The Specific Plan Area has been occupied both historically and during prehistoric times by Native American inhabitants and due to this prior habitation, it is probable that TCRs could be present and may be disturbed or inadvertently destroyed during construction associated with future development.

Consistent with AB 52 requirements, the City has engaged in consultation with one Native American tribe (UAIC) and consultation is continuing. In addition, future development projects for which the City prepares a mitigated negative declaration or environmental impact report would be subject to AB 52 consultation requirements that could lessen the potential for impacts through the identification of TCRs and potential solutions to avoid or otherwise remain unmodified/unaltered.

Through adherence with required tribal notification and consultation requirements and the identification of mitigation measures on a project-specific basis, potential impacts associated with future development under the Specific Plan would be reduced. However, the protection of all TCRs including unanticipated TCRs that have yet to be identified, would not be known in advance, and could be discovered and/or destroyed during construction could not be assured. Therefore, because the loss of every known or unanticipated TCR in the Specific Plan Area could not be prevented, this impact would be considered significant.

Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.10-1a: Protect Discovered Cultural Resources If cultural resources (such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, or human remains) are encountered at the project site during construction, work shall be suspended within 100 feet of the find (based on the apparent distribution of cultural materials), and the construction contractor shall immediately notify the project’s City representative. Avoidance and preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to cultural resources. This will be accomplished, if feasible, by several alternative means, including:
• Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites and/or other cultural resources; incorporating cultural resources within parks, green-space or other open space; covering archaeological resources; deeding a cultural resource to a permanent conservation easement; or other preservation and protection methods agreeable to consulting parties and regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over the activity.
• Recommendations for avoidance of cultural resources will be reviewed by the City representative and other appropriate agencies, in light of factors such as costs, logistics, feasibility, design, technology and social, cultural and environmental considerations, and the extent to which avoidance is consistent with project objectives. Avoidance and design alternatives may include realignment within the project site to avoid cultural resources, modification of the design to eliminate or reduce impacts to cultural resources or modification or realignment to avoid highly significant features within a cultural resource. • If the discovered cultural resource can be avoided, the construction contractor(s), will install protective fencing outside the site boundary, including a 100-foot buffer area, before construction restarts. Use of temporary and permanent forms of protective fencing will be determined in consultation with Native American representatives from interested culturally affiliated Native American tribes.
• The construction contractor(s) will maintain the protective fencing throughout construction to avoid the site during all remaining phases of construction. The area will be demarcated as an “Environmentally Sensitive Area.”
If a cultural resource cannot be avoided, the following performance standard shall be met prior to continuance of construction and associated activities that may result in damage to or destruction of cultural resources:
• Each resource will be evaluated for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility through application of established eligibility criteria (California Code of Regulations 15064.636), in consultation with consulting Native American Tribes, as applicable. • If a cultural resource is determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, the City will avoid damaging effects to the resource in accordance with California PRC Section 21084.3, if feasible. The City shall coordinate the investigation of the find with a qualified archaeologist (meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archeology) approved by the City. As part of the site investigation and resource assessment, the City and the archaeologist shall c assess the significance of the find, make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary and provide proper management recommendations should potential impacts to the resources be determined by the City to be significant. A written report detailing the site assessment, coordination activities, and management recommendations shall be provided to the City representative by the qualified archaeologist. These recommendations will be documented in the project record.

Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-9
Mitigation Measure 3.10-1b: Protect Discovered Human Remains If an inadvertent discovery of human remains is made at any time during project-related construction activities or project planning, the City the following performance standards shall be met prior to implementing or continuing actions such as construction, which may result in damage to or destruction of human remains. In accordance with the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), if human remains are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, the City shall immediately halt potentially damaging excavation in the area of the remains and notify the Sacramento County Coroner and a professional archaeologist to determine the nature of the remains. The Coroner is required to examine all discoveries of human remains within 48 hours of receiving notice of a discovery on private or State lands (HSC Section 7050.5[b]).

If the human remains are of historic age and are determined to be not of Native American origin, the City will follow the provisions of the HSC Section 7000 (et seq.) regarding the disinterment and removal of non-Native American human remains.

If the Coroner determines that the remains are those of a Native American, he or she must contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by phone within 24 hours of making that determination (HSC Section 7050[c]). After the Coroner’s findings have been made, the archaeologist and the NAHCdesignated Most Likely Descendant (MLD), in consultation with the landowner, shall determine the ultimate treatment and disposition of the remains. The responsibilities of the City for acting upon notification of a discovery of Native American human remains are identified in California PRC Section 5097.9 et seq.

Mitigation Measure 3.10-1c: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Early Project Consultation. The City will continue to strive to minimize impacts to historic and cultural resources by consulting with property owners, land developers, tribal representatives, and the building industry early in the development review process as needed. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.6)
• Indigenous Cultures. The City shall seek ways to recognize the peoples who first lived in, traveled, and traded in what is now the Sacramento area, by working with tribal representatives to preserve their identity, culture, and artifacts. Methods for recognizing tribal history and imagery may include, but are not limited to, the following:
▪ Public art that provides a Native American perspective including works by Native artists; ▪ Naming of parks and places that reflects local Native American heritage and/or restores tribal names;
▪ Parks and recreation programming that increases awareness of tribal heritage and culture (including through interpretive displays) and allows opportunities for craft sharing; ▪ Incorporation of traditional native plants into landscape design palettes. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.13)
• Archaeological, Tribal, and Cultural Resources. The City shall continue to comply with federal and State regulations and best practices aimed at protecting and mitigating impacts to archaeological resources and the broader range of cultural resources as well as tribal cultural resources. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.14)
• Treatment of Native American Human Remains. The City shall treat Native American human remains with sensitivity and dignity and ensure compliance with the associated provisions of California Health and Safety Code and the California Public Resources Code. The City shall Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-10 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
collaborate with the most likely descendants identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.15)
• Endemic Traditions. The City shall seek ways to recognize the endemic traditions of various communities in Sacramento, including African American, Hispanic, Native, and Asian American communities, to promote the retention of Sacramento’s intangible cultural heritage, which may include oral traditions, performing arts, social practices and festive events, legacy businesses, knowledge and practices concerning nature and the universe, and traditional craftsmanship. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.16)
• Evaluation of Archeological Resources. The City shall work in good faith with interested communities to evaluate proposed development sites for the presence of sub-surface historic, archaeological, and tribal cultural resources that may be present at the site. These efforts may include the following:
▪ Consideration of existing reports and studies,
▪ Consultation with Native American tribes as required by State law, ▪ Appropriate site-specific investigative actions, and
▪ Onsite monitoring during excavation if appropriate. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.17) Significance after Mitigation
Compliance with the required tribal notification and consultation requirements and the implementing action aimed at protecting TCRs in Mitigation Measures 3.10-1a through 3.10-1c would help reduce the significance of the impact. However, because there is no feasible mitigation available to ensure damage or destruction of a TCR would not occur, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.10-2: Potential for the Project, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impact to Tribal Cultural Resources Future development under the Specific Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to TCRs. Even with implementation of mitigation measures, the impacts would not be reduced to a lessthan-significant level. The incremental contribution from future development under the Specific Plan to the cumulative loss of TCRs is considerable. The cumulative impact is significant and unavoidable.

Future development in the city of Sacramento, along with past and present development including that which would occur under the Specific Plan has the potential impact TCRs. The cumulative effect this future development is the continued loss of TCRs including artifacts and landscapes with significant cultural meaning to Native American tribes. All significant cultural resources including TCRs are unique and non-renewable; therefore, all adverse effects or negative impacts contribute to a dwindling resource base resulting in a significant cumulative impact. Should unanticipated TCRs be encountered, direct impacts would be required to be addressed, to the extent feasible, by mitigation consistent with the legal requirements of CEQA.

Future projects occurring in the Specific Plan Area would be subject to the state requirements and regulations, including stopping work, contacting appropriate agencies, and coordinating with the County Coroner in the event a TCR or Native American remains are unearthed. Future development in the Specific Plan Area would also be required to comply with applicable general plan goals, policies, and implementation actions concerning the protection and preservation of TCRs. Please refer to Impact 3.10- Ascent Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.10-11
1 for a description of applicable mitigation measures intended to protect and preserve TCRs and ensure that Native American perspectives are known and considered during the development review process.

Future development within the city of Sacramento (including within the Specific Plan Area) could potentially impact TCRs through direct modification of sites and structures, landscaping and trees, and open space areas that are significant to Native American tribes. The cumulative effect of this future development is the continued loss of TCRs. Therefore, while the potential to impact TCRs within the Specific Plan Area is reduced through adherence with existing laws and regulations as well as Mitigation Measures 3.10-1a through 3.10-1c, the potential for significant impacts remains. In addition, due to the broad geographic scope of the cumulative analysis, it is reasonable to assume that the incremental contribution from future development under the Specific Plan to the cumulative loss of TCRs is considerable. The cumulative TCRs impact would be significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures 3.10-1a through 3.10-1c.

Significance after Mitigation
Compliance with the required tribal notification and consultation requirements, and implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.10-1a through 3.10-1c would help reduce the significance of the impact.

However, because there is no feasible mitigation available to ensure damage or destruction of a TCR would not occur, the cumulative impact would remain significant and unavoidable.

Tribal Cultural Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.10-12 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-1

3.11 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This section evaluates the availability of existing utility and infrastructure systems (including water, wastewater, stormwater, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications) to serve future development in the Specific Plan Area and the impact of the proposed Specific Plan on these systems. The analysis is based on documents obtained from the City of Sacramento and technical reports prepared to address water supply and sewer conveyance adequacy related to implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. Please refer to Section 3.3, “Energy,” for a discussion of energy demand.

Comments related to utilities and service systems were received in response to the Notice of Preparation from the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (Regional San). The letters expressed concerns related to new utilities infrastructure, overhead and underground transmission and distribution line easements, utility line routing, electrical load needs/requirements, energy efficiency, climate change, cumulative impacts related to increased electrical delivery, and the needs to relocate or remove SMUD infrastructure.

Comments regarding energy efficiency are addressed in Section 3.3, “Energy.” Comments regarding climate change are addressed in Section 3.8, “Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change.” A copy of the Notice of Preparation along with comments received is included in Appendix A.

3.11.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
Safe Drinking Water Act
As mandated by the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public Law 93‐523), passed in 1974, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates contaminants of concern to domestic water supply.

Such contaminants are defined as those that pose a public health threat or that alter the aesthetic acceptability of the water. These types of contaminants are regulated by EPA primary and secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). MCLs and the process for setting these standards are reviewed triennially. Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act enacted in 1986 established an accelerated schedule for setting drinking water MCLs. EPA has delegated responsibility for California’s drinking water program to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Division of Drinking Water.

SWRCB Division of Drinking Water is accountable to EPA for program implementation and for adoption of standards and regulations that are at least as stringent as those developed by EPA.

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

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was established under the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the US. NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges including point source waste discharges and nonpoint sources (nonpoint source discharges are further discussed in Section 4.10, “Hydrology and Water Quality”). Each NPDES permit identifies limits on allowable concentrations and Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
mass loadings of pollutants contained in the discharge. Sections 401 and 402 of the CWA contain general requirements regarding NPDES permits. Section 307 of the CWA describes the factors that EPA must consider in setting effluent limits for priority pollutants.

NPDES permits cover various industrial and municipal discharges, including discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, stormwater generated by industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than 1 acre, and mining operations. Point source dischargers must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority (usually a state, sometimes EPA, a tribe, or a territory). So-called “indirect” point source dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. “Indirect” dischargers send their wastewater into a public sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering any surface water.

The CWA was amended in 1987 with Section 402(p) requiring NPDES permits for nonpoint source (i.e., stormwater) pollutants in discharges. Stormwater sources are diffuse and originate over a wide area rather than from a definable point. The goal of the NPDES stormwater regulations is to improve the water quality of stormwater discharged to receiving waters to the “maximum extent practicable” using structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs). BMPs can include educational measures (e.g., workshops informing the public of what impacts can result when household chemicals are dumped into storm drains), regulatory measures (e.g., local authority of drainage-facility design), public-policy measures (e.g., labeling storm-drain inlets as to impacts of dumping on receiving waters), and structural measures (e.g., filter strips, grass swales, and detention ponds).

Environmental Protection Agency’s National Combined Sewer Overflow Control Policy The EPA initiated its Combined Sewer Outflow (CSO) Control Policy (40 CFR 122) in April 1994. The CSO Control Policy provides a national level framework for the control and management of CSOs. The CSO Control Policy provides guidance regarding how to achieve CWA goals and requirements when faced with management of a CSO. Key components of the CSO Control Policy that are relevant to the project include a requirement for Nine Minimum Controls (NMCs), which apply to every combined sewer system (CSS) in the nation. The NMCs are minimum technology-based actions or measures that are designed to reduce CSOs and their effects on receiving water quality. The intent of the NMCs is to be implementable without extensive engineering studies or major construction. The policy requires that at least 85 percent of the average annual CSS storm flow must be captured and routed to at least primary treatment with disinfection before discharge.

STATE
Safe Drinking Water Quality Regulations
The California Department of Public Health (DPH) establishes “primary” and “secondary” Domestic Water Quality Standards for drinking water supplied by public water systems such as the city. The standards are required by state law to meet or exceed standards adopted by EPA. The concentrations of specified constituents are limited to maximum contaminant levels and are established on a constituent basis for bacteriological contaminants (such as coliform), organic chemicals (such as benzene), inorganic chemicals (such as total dissolved solids), and radioactivity (such as gross alpha particle activity). Primary standards are set at levels necessary to protect public health and may not be exceeded. Secondary standards are based on aesthetic criteria, such as taste and odor, and are composed of (1) recommended limits that may be exceeded but are not recommended to be exceeded; (2) upper limits that may be exceeded for a limited duration with prior DPH approval; and (3) short term limits that may not be exceeded. Public water systems also must obtain a domestic water supply permit from DPH that must be amended to reflect changes to the water supply system.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-3
Urban Water Management Planning Act
The Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code [CWC] Sections 10610-10610.4) requires urban water suppliers that provide water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers, or more than 3,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water, to prepare an urban water management plan (UWMP). UWMPs assist water supply agencies in water resource planning given existing and anticipated future demands and must include a water supply and demand assessment comparing total water supply available to the water supplier with the total projected water use over a 20-year period. The Act requires that the plans be updated every 5 years and submitted to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The purpose of the plans is to support long-term resource planning and ensure adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water demands. The City’s 2020 UWMP is discussed below.

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

Pursuant to SGMA, any local agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within a groundwater basin may elect to be a groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) for that basin (Water Code Section 10723). SGMA requires GSAs in high- and medium-priority basins to develop and implement groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) or to develop Alternatives to GSPs.

The GSP must outline how the GSA will implement, manage, and measure specific actions for the health and viability of the basin. DWR will evaluate the GSP and provide the GSA with an assessment of the plan and any necessary recommendations within 2 years for initial establishment. The DWR will also review plans as updated by GSAs every 5 years.

Water Supply Assessment
PRC Section 21151.9 requires that a water supply assessment (WSA) be prepared for proposed projects as defined in the statute to ensure that long term water supplies are sufficient to meet the project’s demands in normal, single dry, and multiple dry years for a period of 20 years. Preparation of a WSA is required if a proposed action meets the statutory definition of a “water-demand project,” which means (CWC Section 20912[a]):
• a proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units; • a proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of floor space; • a proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 sq. ft. of floor space;
• a proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 sq. ft. of floor area;
• a mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in the above bullets; or Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
• a project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project.

Completion of a WSA requires collection of proposed water supply data and information relevant to the project in question, an evaluation of existing/current use, a projection of anticipated demand sufficient to serve the project for a period of at least 20 years, delineation of proposed water supply sources, and an evaluation of water supply sufficiency under normal, single-dry year and multiple-dry year conditions.

A WSA is required to be prepared by the public water system that will serve the project, unless there is no public water system, in which case the WSA is prepared by the CEQA lead agency. A “public water system” is defined in Section 15155 as a system that provides piped water for human consumption and has at least 3,000 connections.

NPDES Permit for the Sacramento Regional Water Treatment Plant In April 2016, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) Order No. R5-2016-0020 (NPDES No. CA 0077682) to the Regional San for its Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP), which treats wastewater from its service area before discharging it to the Sacramento River. The original permit for the SRWTP was issued in October 1974. This is a NPDES self-monitoring permit that outlines performance standards for the effluent into the Sacramento River. The water quality objectives established in the Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan are protected, in part, by NPDES Permit No. CA 0077682.

The quality of the effluent that can be discharged to waterways within the Sacramento area is established by the Central Valley RWQCB through WDRs that implement the NPDES permit. WDRs are updated at least every 5 years. A new permit must be issued in the event of a major change or expansion of the facility.

NPDES Permit for the Combined Sewer System
In April 2015, the Central Valley RWQCB issued WDR Order No. R5-2015-0045 (NPDES No. CA 0079111) to the City of Sacramento for its Combined Wastewater Collection and Treatment System.

The system was previously regulated by Order R5-2010-0004, which expired on January 1, 2010.

Depending on flow volumes, wastewater and stormwater flows in this system are conveyed to the SRWTP, Combined Wastewater Treatment Plant (CWTP) at South Land Park Drive and 35th Avenue, and Pioneer Reservoir at Front and V streets near the Sacramento River. The Order does not apply to operations at SRWTP.

This Order implements the EPA CSO Control Policy, which establishes a consistent national approach for controlling discharges from CSOs to the nation's water through the NPDES permit program. This policy requires implementation of a long-term control plan (LTCP) to comply with water quality-based requirements of the CWA. The City of Sacramento adopted their LTCP, also known as the Combined Sewer System Improvement Plan (CSSIP), in 1995, which contained the infrastructure improvement portion of the LTCP.

WDR Order No. R5-2015-0045 identifies effluent limitations and discharge specifications for discharges from the CWTP and Pioneer Reservoir to the Sacramento River. Discharge from the system to surface waters or surface water drainage courses is prohibited during non-storm events. However, in the event that the capacity of the system is exceeded during a storm event, this Order allows for the discharge of overflows into the Sacramento River. The City is required to implement pollution prevention programs to reduce contaminants in CSOs.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-5
NPDES Permit for Dewatering Activities
In May 2013, the Central Valley RWQCB issued WDR Order No. R5-2013-0074 (NPDES No.

CAG995001) for short-term discharges of small volumes of wastewater from certain constructionrelated activities (General Dewatering Permit). Where groundwater levels tend to be shallow, dewatering during construction is sometimes necessary to keep trenches or excavations free of standing water when improvements or foundations/footings are installed. Clean or relatively pollutantfree water that poses little or no risk to water quality may be discharged directly to surface water under certain conditions. Permit conditions for the discharge of these types of wastewaters to surface waters are specified in “General Order for Dewatering and Other Low-Threat Discharges to Surface Waters” (Order No. R5-2013-0074, NPDES No. CAG995001). Discharges may be covered by the General Dewatering Permit provided they are (1) either 4 months or less in duration or (2) the average dry weather discharge does not exceed 0.25 million gallons per day (mgd) and meet the effluent limitations provided in the order for pH, turbidity, total suspended solids, and biological oxygen demand.

Construction dewatering, well development water, pump/well testing, and miscellaneous dewatering/low-threat discharges are among the types of discharges that may be covered by the General Dewatering Permit. The General Dewatering Permit also specifies standards for testing, monitoring, and reporting, receiving water limitations, and discharge prohibitions. When project construction would exceed 4 months in duration or 0.25 mgd, a project-specific permit from the Central Valley Water Board is required.

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne Act) is California’s statutory authority for the protection of water quality. Under the Porter-Cologne Act, the state must adopt water quality plans, policies, and objectives that will provide protection to the state’s waters for the use and enjoyment of the people of California. In California, the SWRCB has authority and responsibility for establishing policy for water quality control issues for the state. Regional authority for planning, permitting, and enforcement is delegated to the nine RWQCBs. The Porter-Cologne Act authorizes the SWRCB and RWQCB to issue NPDES permits containing WDRs, and to enforce these permits. SWRCB and RWQCB regulations implementing the Porter-Cologne Act are in Title 27 of the CCR.

General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems The General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems (SWRCB Order No 2006- 0003-DWQ) apply to sanitary sewer systems that are greater than 1 mile long and collect or convey untreated or partially treated wastewater to a publicly owned treatment facility. The goal of Order No. 2006-0003 is to provide a consistent statewide approach for reducing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs), accidental releases of untreated or partially treated wastewater from sanitary sewer systems, by requiring that:

1. In the event of an SSO, all feasible steps be taken to control the released volume and prevent untreated wastewater from entering storm drains, creeks, etc.

2. If an SSO occurs, it must be reported to the SWRCB using an online reporting system developed by the SWRCB.

3. All publicly owned collection system agencies with more than 1 mile of sewer pipe in the state must develop a sewer system management plan, which must be updated every 5 years.

California’s Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989
The California Integrated Waste Management Act (CIWMA) of 1989 created the California Integrated Waste Management Board, now known as the California Department of Resources Recycling and Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Recovery (CalRecycle). CalRecycle is the agency designated to oversee, manage, and track California’s 92 million tons of waste generated each year. CalRecycle provides grants and loans to help cities, counties, businesses, and organizations meet the state’s waste reduction, reuse, and recycling goals. CalRecycle promotes a sustainable environment in which these resources are not wasted but can be reused or recycled. In addition to many programs and incentives, CalRecycle promotes the use of new technologies to divert resources away from landfills. CalRecycle is responsible for ensuring that waste management programs are carried out primarily through local enforcement agencies.

The CIWMA is the result of two pieces of legislation: AB 939 and SB 1322. The CIWMA was intended to minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of through transformation and land disposal by requiring all cities and counties to divert 25 percent of all solid waste from landfill facilities by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by January 1, 2000.

The 50 percent diversion requirement is measured in terms of per capita disposal expressed as pounds per day per resident and per employee. The per capita disposal and goal measurement system uses an actual disposal measurement based on population and disposal rates reported by disposal facilities, and it evaluates program implementation efforts.

Mandatory Recycling Requirements
AB 341 (2011) amended the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 to include a provision declaring that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source-reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020, and annually thereafter. In addition, AB 341 required CalRecycle to develop strategies to achieve the state’s policy goal.

Mandatory Commercial Organics Recycling Requirements
In October 2014, AB 1826 Chesbro (Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014) was signed into law, requiring businesses to recycle their organic waste on and after April 1, 2016, depending on the amount of waste they generate per week. This law also requires that on and after January 1, 2016, local jurisdictions across the state implement an organic waste recycling program to divert organic waste generated by businesses, including multifamily residential dwellings of five or more units (multifamily dwellings are not required to have a food waste diversion program, however). Organic waste means food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food-soiled paper waste that is mixed in with food waste.

Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements SB 1374, Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements, requires that jurisdictions summarize their progress realized in diverting construction and demolition waste from the waste stream in their annual AB 939 reports. SB 1374 required CalRecycle to adopt a model construction and demolition ordinance for voluntary implementation by local jurisdictions.

Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy
In September 2016, SB 1383 (Lara, Chapter 395, Statutes of 2016) was signed into law, establishing methane emissions reduction targets in a statewide effort to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants in various sectors of California's economy. Actions to reduce short-lived climate pollutants are essential to address the many impacts of climate change on human health, especially in California's most at-risk communities, and on the environment.

As it pertains to solid waste, SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50-percent reduction in the volume of statewide disposal of organic waste from 2014 levels by 2020 and a 75-percent reduction by 2025. The law grants CalRecycle the regulatory authority required to achieve the organic waste Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-7
disposal reduction targets and establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. SB 1383 requires that, by January 1, 2022, every jurisdiction provide organic waste collection services to residents and businesses.

California Code of Regulations, Energy Efficiency Standards Energy consumption in new buildings in California is regulated by the state’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards, part of the California Building Standards Code, contained in the CCR, Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 2-53. Title 24 applies to all new construction of both residential and nonresidential buildings, and regulates energy consumed for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting. Updated every 3 years, the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards were most recently approved and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission in 2022 and became effective in January 2023 and have improved efficiency requirements from previous codes.

PG&E Gas Rules
PG&E’s Gas Rules 15 and 16 provide policies and procedures for the extension of gas services and distribution mains necessary to furnish permanent services to customers. It outlines responsibilities for installation and extension of gas lines, as well as financial contributions by project applicants.

LOCAL
City of Sacramento General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is the City’s policy guide for future development.

City of Sacramento Municipal Code
Chapter 15.92, “Water Efficient Landscape Requirements,” is based on the State’s Model Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The Ordinance requires more efficient irrigation systems, including meters on parcels over a certain size, restrictions on overhead water use, and flow sensors on landscaped areas over 5,000 square feet. The Ordinance also limits the area that can be planted with high water use plants to 55 percent for residential landscape projects and 45 percent for non-residential landscapes.

The City requires project applicants to submit a landscape documentation package for review and approval by the City. The landscape documentation package must contain project information that demonstrates compliance with the Ordinance, including a water-efficient landscape worksheet, a soil management report, a landscape design plan, an irrigation design plan, and a grading design plan.

City of Sacramento Urban Water Management Plan
The City’s 2020 UWMP was adopted in 2021, as required by the California Urban Water Management Planning Act, which requires all urban water suppliers with more than 3,000 connections or distributing more than 3,000 acre-feet of water to complete an UWMP every 5 years. As of the close of the 2020 calendar year, the City had over 142,946 residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional water service connections and produced nearly 100,483 acre-feet (af) of water. The City submitted the adopted UWMP to DWR, as required.

Wastewater Impact Fees
The City adopted the Combined Sewer Development Fee (City Code 13.08.490) which is an impact mitigation fee that requires mitigation of any significant increase in wastewater flows over the present level. If a proposed development project is determined to have a significant impact on the CSS, an acceptable mitigation plan is required by the City. The current CSS Development Fee is $175.53 per equivalent single-family dwelling (ESD) for up to 25 ESD and $4,380.30 per ESD for more than 25 Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
ESDs (fees subject to change every July 1st). The payment of the fees mitigates the project’s sewer impacts.

Dewatering
All new groundwater discharges to CSS or separated sewer system are regulated and monitored by the City's Utilities Department pursuant to Department of Utilities Engineering Services Policy No. 0001, adopted as Resolution No. 92-439 by the Sacramento City Council. Groundwater discharges to the City's sewer system are defined as construction dewatering discharges, foundation or basement dewatering discharges, treated or untreated contaminated groundwater cleanup, discharges, and uncontaminated groundwater discharges.

The City requires that any short-term discharge be permitted, or an approved Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for long-term discharges be established, between the discharger and the City.

Short-term limited discharges of 7 days duration or less must be approved through the City Department of Utilities by acceptance letter. Long-term discharges of greater duration than seven days must be approved through the City Department of Utilities and the Director of the Department of Utilities through an MOU process. The MOU must specify the type of groundwater discharge, flow rates, discharge system design, a City-approved contaminant assessment of the proposed groundwater discharge indicating tested levels of constituents, and a City-approved effluent monitoring plan to ensure contaminant levels remain in compliance with State standards or the Sacramento County Regional Sanitation District (Regional San) and Central Valley Water Board-approved levels. All groundwater discharges to the sewer must be granted a Regional San discharge permit. If the discharge is part of a groundwater cleanup or contains excessive contaminants, Central Valley Water Board approval is also required.

Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Code
The Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Code (Chapter 13.16 of the Sacramento Municipal Code) protects and promotes the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City by controlling non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater conveyance system, by eliminating discharges to the stormwater conveyance system from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater, and by reducing pollutants in urban stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. The code is intended to assist in the protection and enhancement of the water quality of watercourses, water bodies, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq.), Porter-Cologne Act (Water Code Section 13000 et seq.) and NPDES Permit No. CAS082597, as such permit is amended and/or renewed.

The Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Code requires prior written approval from the City’s Department of Utilities for discharges of pumped groundwater not subject to a NPDES permit, provides measures to reduce pollutants in stormwater, requires compliance with best management practices, and requires containment and notification of spills.

Sacramento Regional Solid Waste Authority
The Sacramento Regional Solid Waste Authority (SWA) was initially formed in 1992 to oversee solid waste, recycling, and disposal needs in the greater Sacramento area. The SWA is a Joint Powers Authority that is funded by franchise fees. The SWA is overseen by a Board of Directors, which is composed of elected officials from member cities (currently the City of Sacramento) and Sacramento County. The SWA regulates commercial solid waste collection by franchised haulers through Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-9
ordinances. SWA ordinances include the requirement that franchised haulers achieve a 30 percent recycling rate and to offer recycling services to businesses and multi-family dwelling units.

3.11.2 Environmental Setting
Public utilities in the Specific Plan Area are provided by various entities, as identified in Table 3.11-1 and discussed in detail below.

Table 3.11-1 Utilities Providers for the Project Area
Utility Agency/Provider
Water Supply City of Sacramento Department of Utilities Wastewater Collection and Conveyance City of Sacramento Department of Utilities (Combined and Non-combined Sewer Systems)
Wastewater Treatment Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (SRCSD) Stormwater Conveyance City of Sacramento Department of Utilities (Combined Sewer System) and Sacramento Area Sewer District (SASD)
Solid Waste Collection City of Sacramento Recycling and Solid Waste Division Sacramento Regional Solid Waste Authority
Electrical Service Sacramento Municipal Utility District Natural Gas Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Source: Data compiled by Ascent Environmental in 2023.

WATER SUPPLY
The City provides domestic water to the Specific Plan Area and utilizes both surface water and groundwater to meet water demands. The City treats surface water diverted from the Sacramento River and American River through SRWTP and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant (FWTP), respectively. Additionally, the City extracts groundwater from both the North Sacramento and Central Sacramento basins. The current reliable water production capacity is approximately 280 mgd (City of Sacramento 2023).

Along with supplying domestic water to retail customers, the City also has agreements in place to supply water on a wholesale and wheeling basis to other districts and water purveyors including Sacramento Suburban Water District, California-American Water Company, Fruitridge Vista Water Company, and the Sacramento County Water Agency. To comply with the State’s Urban Water Planning Management Act, the City of Sacramento has developed an UWMP to pursue the conservation and efficient use of available water supplies and to ensure an appropriate level of reliability in its water service sufficient to meet the needs of its customers (City of Sacramento 2021).

Surface Water Supply and Water Treatment Plants
SRWTP began operation in 1924 with an initial capacity of 32 mgd and treats water diverted from the Sacramento River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of the confluence of the American River. A new water intake structure, located approximately 700 feet downstream of the old intake structure, was completed in 2003. Other expansions and modifications completed by the City since the 1920s increased the treatment plant design capacity to 160 mgd. The most recent project was completed in 2016, which replaced many of the older facilities at the SRWTP in order to maintain the 160 mgd capacity into the foreseeable future.

Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-10 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
The FWTP is located adjacent the American River approximately 7 miles upstream with the Sacramento River. The FWTP began operation in 1964 and has a current diversion limit of 200 mgd following an expansion completed in 2005. Currently, the California Department of Public Health has permitted a capacity of 160 mgd. However, the amount of water diverted is further limited by the socalled Hodge Flow Criteria which restricts diversions from the FWTP under certain low river flow conditions. Hodge conditions have historically occurred about 50 percent of the time and can be present in any month of the year. During the time of peak demand, most often in June, July, or August, the Hodge Flow Criteria could limit the diversion rate at the FWTP to 100 mgd. As a result of this constraint, sufficient pipe capacity to move the 160 mgd into the distribution system has not been constructed. The current facility is physically constrained to approximately 130 mgd when Hodge is not triggered.

City of Sacramento and US Bureau of Reclamation Agreement The City also has a water rights settlement contract entered into in 1957 by the City and the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), following the USBR’s construction of Folsom Dam which provided improved flood control to downstream communities. The essence of the City/USBR settlement contract is that the City agreed to (1) limit its combined rate of diversion under its American River water rights permits to a maximum of 675 cubic feet per second (cfs), up to a maximum amount of 245,000 AFY in the year 2030, and (2) limit its rate of diversion under its Sacramento River water rights permit to a maximum of 225 cfs and a maximum amount of 81,800 AFY. This limits the City’s total diversions of Sacramento and American River water to 326,800 AFY in the year 2030. The contract also specifies an annual build-up schedule to this maximum amount.

In return, the contract requires USBR to make available at all times enough water in the rivers to enable the agreed-upon diversions by the City. The City agreed to make an annual payment to USBR for Folsom Reservoir storage capacity used to meet the USBR’s obligations under the contract, beginning with payment for 8,000 acre-feet (AF) of storage capacity in 1963 and building up, more or less linearly, to payment for the use of 90,000 AF of storage capacity in 2030. The settlement contract is permanent and not subject to deficiencies. The USBR contract, in conjunction with the City’s water rights, provides the City with a reliable and secure water supply.

Extremely Dry Years (Conference Years)
The City’s diversions of American River water at the FWTP are also subject during certain time periods to limitations specified in the Water Forum Agreement (WFA). The Water Forum was started in 1993 by a group of water managers, local governments, business leaders, agricultural leaders, environmentalists, and citizen groups with two “co-equal” goals: to provide a reliable and safe water supply through the year 2030, and to preserve the wildlife, fishery, recreational, and aesthetic values of the Lower American River. After 6 years of intense interest-based negotiations, the Water Forum participants approved the 2000 WFA.

As part of the WFA, each water purveyor signed a purveyor specific agreement (PSA) that specified that purveyor’s Water Forum commitments. The City’s PSA limits the quantity of water diverted from the American River at the FWTP during two hydrologic conditions: extremely dry years (i.e., “Conference Years”) and periods when river flows are below the so-called “Hodge Flow Criteria.” The Hodge Flow Criteria are based on the case of EDF v. East Bay Municipal Utility District (Superior Court, Alameda County, 1990, No. 425955), where the court (Judge Hodge) established minimum flow levels that would have to be met in the American River in order for East Bay Municipal Utility District to divert water into the Folsom South Canal. These flow levels have come to be known as “Hodge” flows.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-11
The City’s PSA defines extremely dry years (i.e., “Conference Years”) as years in which DWR projects an annual unimpaired flow into Folsom Reservoir of 550,000 AFY or less, or the projected March through November unimpaired flow into Folsom Reservoir is less than 400,000 AFY. During Conference Years, the City has agreed to limit its diversions for water treated at the FWTP to 155 cfs and 50,000 AFY. Conference Years have occurred on the American River only twice during the 72-year period of record historical hydrology.

In addition to Conference Years, the City’s PSA specifies limitations on the City’s diversion rate at the FWTP when American River flows bypassing the FWTP are less than the Hodge Flow Criteria as follows: 2,000 cfs from October 15 through February; 3,000 cfs from March through June; and 1,750 cfs from July through October 14.

Based on CALSIM-II9 analysis of the 1922 to 1994 climate data, in 59 percent of years the American River is predicted to experience flows that are less than Hodge flow conditions at some time during the peak months of June through August. When flows passing the FWTP are greater than the Hodge Flow Criteria and Conference Year conditions do not exist, the PSA allows diversions of American River water up to the FWTP’s current maximum rate of 310 cfs (200 mgd).

It is important to note that the WFA does not restrict diversion under the City’s American River entitlements from a Sacramento River diversion point (which leaves the water in the American River throughout its reaches); therefore, during a Conference Year condition the City’s annual surface water diversion amounts are limited only by the FWTP Conference Year condition and the diversion and treatment capacity at the SRWTP. Assuming a maximum treatment capacity of 50,000 AFY at the Fairbairn WTP and 180,000 AFY at the Sacramento WTP, the current drought limiting scenario allows a surface water production of 230,000 AFY.

Groundwater Supply
The City currently operates 28 permitted municipal groundwater supply wells within the City limits that pump from the North American and South American Groundwater Subbasins. The City wells supply the city with about 20 mgd of reliable water for municipal use. The actual total capacity is larger, but varies due to maintenance activities, water quality of produced groundwater and other factors. The City’s average groundwater deliveries from 2006 to 2017 were approximately 17,932 AFA or 16 mgd. The City also operates 22 non-potable wells that are primarily used for parks irrigation.

Recycled Water
In 2015, the City collaborated with Regional San and the Sacramento Power Authority (SPA), a significant City water customer, on recycled water planning which was used for the Recycled Water Feasibility Study to determine the feasibility of providing recycled water to the southwest portion of the City and to SPA’s cogeneration plant (Cogen Facility). In April 2016, following completion of this study, the City and Regional San executed a Principles of Agreement for a Water Recycling Program which serves as an interim document that describes the proposed institutional structure for Regional San and the City Water Recycling Program. Regional San and SPA, in coordination with the City, cooperated in the development of a Phase 1 water recycling project that delivers recycled water via a new transmission pipeline from the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant to the Cogen Facility.

This transmission pipeline was upsized to provide additional capacity to serve potential future recycled water users within the City. Construction of the SPA Cogen Facility is now complete and operations testing of the pipeline was conducted in 2020.

In 2017, the City conducted a Recycled Water Program Cost Analysis in an effort to better understand costs and benefits of a recycled water program. This effort would assist the City when considering Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-12 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
participation in future phases of a recycled water program. One of the conclusions of the report was that per unit of water, a recycled water program is not cost-competitive for the City compared to potable water costs.

Water Demand
Existing water demand within the City is primarily residential, but also includes commercial, institutional, and landscape irrigation. Generally, water demand decreased from 2000 to 2010, because of a combination of factors, including increased conservation efforts, deployment of water conserving fixtures, replacement of leaky pipelines, increased public awareness over drought conditions, the City’s meter retrofit program, and the effects of the recent recession. At present, almost all of City water connections are on water meters. The City also sells water to other regional agencies including Sacramento International Airport, Sacramento Suburban Water District, California American Water Company, and Sacramento County Water Agency.

Table 3.11-2 provides a projection of total water demand by the City for 2025 through 2045. Table

3.11-3 presents a summary of water demands and available supply during multiple dry years as outlined in the City’s UWMP.

Table 3.11-2 City Maximum Total Water Demand through 2045 (AFY) 2025 2030 2035 2045
Potable and Raw Water 177,265 197,468 206,799 219,615
Recycled Water 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
Total 178,265 198,468 207,799 220,615
Note: AFY = acre-feet per year
Source: City of Sacramento 2021.

Table 3.11-3 City Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison, 2025 through 2045 (AFY) Year Scenario Water Supply or
Demand 2025 2030 2035 2045
1 st Year, Multiple Dry Year Scenario Supply Total 288,288 294,419 294,419 294,419 Demand Total 130,548 139,882 149,213 162,029
Excess Supply 157,740 154,537 145,206 132,390
2nd Year, Multiple Dry Year Scenario Supply Total 288,288 294,419 294,419 294,419 Demand Total 130,548 139,882 149,213 162,029
Excess Supply 157,740 154,537 145,206 132,390
3rd Year, Multiple Dry Year Scenario Supply Total 288,288 294,419 294,419 294,419 Demand Total 130,548 139,882 149,213 162,029
Excess Supply 157,740 154,537 145,206 132,390
Note: AFY = acre-feet per year
Source: City of Sacramento 2021.

Water Storage and Distribution
Water storage is used to meet water demand for periods when peak hour demand exceeds maximum daily supply rates. These high demand periods usually occur for 4 to 6 hours during hot summer days, and for potentially longer periods during large fire events. The City of Sacramento has ten aboveground storage reservoirs; each with a capacity of 3 million gallons (mg) and one underground reservoir Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-13
with a capacity of 15 mg for a total capacity of 45 mg. The reservoirs are at different locations throughout the City's water distribution system. In addition, 44 mg of on-site storage exists at the water treatment plants (NV5 2022).

The City operates pumping facilities throughout the City. There are 18 high lift service pumps at SRWTP and FWTP. The City also maintains pumping facilities at ten of the City’s storage reservoirs, and each of the groundwater wells. These pump stations are of varying sizes and capacities.

The City differentiates the water mains into two distinct categories: water distribution mains and water transmission mains. Water distribution mains are smaller pipelines located in the streets and alleys utilized for water services. Water transmission mains are larger pipelines utilized to convey water to the distribution mains (NV5 2022).

It is City policy to only utilize the water distribution mains for water services, fire services, and fire hydrants. These pipes are typically 4-inches to 12-inches in diameter. If no smaller pipe is available, existing water mains 14-inches and 16-inches in diameter may be considered distribution mains. These pipes may be tapped only with the approval of the City Department of Utilities. Considering each service tap is a potential weakening of the water main, the City currently has the policy to restrict the installation of service taps until after a project has been reviewed and approved by the City. This is to restrict the number of taps to the mains to those that are in the ultimate location per an approved development plan. This reduces the number of service taps that are abandoned because of changes in the development plans (NV5 2022).

WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER
The Specific Plan Area is served by CSS north of 14th Avenue. The southern half of the Specific Plan Area is served by collection systems that convey storm drainage and sanitary sewer flows separately (NV5 2022).

CSS is the legacy storm drain and sanitary sewer system that conveys both stormwater and sanitary sewer flows. It encompasses approximately 7,500 acres of the Downtown, East Sacramento, and Land Park areas. Another 3,700 acres including the River Park, California State University, and eastern Sacramento areas utilize the system for sanitary sewer only. The City discontinued constructing combined sewer and storm systems in 1946, although continued connections to the existing CSS are allowed (NV5 2022).

Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Wastewater flows collected from the Specific Plan Area are ultimately transported into SRWTP, which is located in Elk Grove and is owned and managed by Regional San. Currently, SRWTP has a NPDES permit issued by the Central Valley RWQCB for discharge of up to 181 mgd of treated effluent into the Sacramento River.

In Spring 2023, Regional San completed the EchoWater Project, a major upgrade to SRWTP. The EchoWater Project was carried out to meet new water quality requirements that were issued by the Central Valley RWQCB as part of Regional San’s 2010 discharge permit. The requirements are designed primarily to help protect the Delta ecosystem downstream by removing most of the ammonia and nitrates and improving the removal of pathogens from wastewater discharge. The upgrade includes deployment of new treatment technologies and facilities that have increased the quality of effluent discharged into the Sacramento River and ensure that the SRWTP discharge constituents are below permitted discharge limits specified in the NPDES permit. Flows to SRWTP have decreased as a result Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-14 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
of water conservation efforts over the last 10 years. Further, adequate capacity for wastewater is anticipated well into the future. Flows in 2014 were approximately 141 mgd, compared to the capacity of 181 mgd stated above. It is not anticipated that Regional San would need to consider further improvements to SRWTP until after 2050.

Combined Sewer System
The CSS is a collection system of pipes that convey both sanitary sewage and stormwater in a single pipeline. The piping system is greatly oversized for the sanitary sewer component, but inadequate for the City’s current storm drainage design standard of 10-year capacity.

Currently all flows into the CSS are conveyed west to two pumping stations (Sump 2 and 1/1A) located adjacent to the Sacramento River. For secondary treatment and disinfection of the flow, the City has a MOU with the SRWTP to convey 60 mgd. This treatment capacity is currently sufficient for dry weather flows and small storm events.

During heavy storms where the capacity is exceeded, the CWTP at South Land Park Drive and 35th Avenue is utilized to provide primary treatment of an additional 130 mgd. Excess flows from SRWTP and CWTP are diverted to Pioneer which can provide primary treatment of 250 mgd and flow capacity of up to 500 mgd depending on the river stage. When all three treatment facilities (SRWTP, CWTP, and Pioneer) have exceeded their treatment capacity of 440 mgd, excess flows may be directly discharged into the Sacramento River without treatment via Sump 2. Sump 1 also has the ability to discharge flows directly to the river.

Combined Sewer System Improvement Plan
The CSS service area is currently regulated by the Central Valley RWQCB per Cease and Desist Order No. 85-342 (Order). The Order, including its amendments, requires the City to make operational improvements to reduce combined sewer and runoff overflows and to ultimately provide 10-year capacity for the CSS.

In 2014, the CSSIP Update Report was completed which identified several storage improvement projects that would help alleviate outflows and flooding in the CSS area during a 10-year storm event and prevent structure flooding (as well as outflows) during the 100-year event. Outflows happen when surcharges to the CSS flow onto the streets. Outflows can occur during a heavy rain event, such as a 10-year storm event, when the collection system has reached maximum capacity.

The City has developed an improvement program to reduce CSO events. These improvements include rehabilitating and expanding Sumps 1/1A and 2, rehabilitating and converting Pioneer Reservoir into a treatment facility, rehabilitating and up-sizing of the sewer mains in the CSS, and rehabilitating the CWTP. Many of these projects have been completed. This CSSIP Update Report is an ongoing, multiyear project intended to evaluate and provide recommendations for projects to alleviate flooding in the CSS area during a 10-year event and to prevent structure flooding during the 100-year event. The CSSIP Update Report analysis of the system improvements includes an allowance of increased sewer flows from future development.

Recommendations for specific project improvements that provide localized or system-wide reductions to flooding have been identified. The projects are prioritized based on considerations such as flood reduction benefits, cost-effectiveness, ensuring no increase in untreated discharges, sewer condition/age, cost-sharing opportunities, and City/community interests.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-15
The CSSIP has identified three projects within or directly adjacent to the Specific Plan Area. These include:

1. WA2-3: 4th Avenue Park Storage

2. WA4-3: P Street Linear Storage

3. WA4-4: Casita Way Linear Storage
Wastewater Treatment Infrastructure within the Specific Plan Area In the Specific Plan Area north of US 50, the CSS collection system generally flows west towards downtown, with a large, 66-inch pipeline located in Alhambra Boulevard that flows to the south out of the Specific Plan Area. Caltrans owns and operates a storm drainage collection system in the area of the US 50 interchange, with a 48-inch storm drainage pipeline along the south edge of the highway.

South of US 50, the CSS generally collects the drainage and sewer flows in smaller 8-inch to 12-inch pipelines located in the street which then increase in size to larger collector pipelines (15-inch to as large as 30-inch) and connect to larger diameter pipelines that generally convey the combined flows to the west out of the Specific Plan Area. There is a 63-inch pipeline at Sherman Way, a 45-inch and a 66- inch pipelines at Broadway, and a 48-inch pipeline at 13th Avenue (NV5 2022).

South of 14th Avenue, the Specific Plan Area is served by a separated sanitary sewer system served by SASD. This storm drain system flows into the CSS. There are several small drainage basins in the separated southerly half of the SBP area including Basins 5, 8, 19, 96, 147, G258, and G263. The area between Fruitridge Road and 47th Avenue is collected and discharged into the County of Sacramento system to the west. Sump 19 gravity flows to Sump 96, but pumps to the CSS during large storm events (NV5 2022).

The collection pipelines in the separated storm drainage system generally range in size from 8-inch to 15- inch with larger collector pipelines ranging in size from 18-inch to 36-inch. The pipelines generally follow the roadway alignment, sometimes on both sides of Stockton Boulevard (NV5 2022).

The collection pipelines in the separated sanitary sewer system generally range in size from 6 inches to 12 inches with larger trunk pipelines ranging in size from 15 inches to 42 inches. The pipelines generally follow the roadway, alignment sometimes on both sides of the road (NV5 2022).

There is a 24-inch sewer pipeline located in Fruitridge Road. The collection system has numerous locations where the pipelines enter and leave the Specific Plan Area along the alignment of Stockton Boulevard (NV5 2022)

SOLID WASTE
The City collects all single-family residential solid waste for customers within the City. Refuse from the south region of the City is transported to the Sacramento Recycling and Transfer Station (SRTS) at 8491 Fruitridge Road; refuse collected in the north region is transported to the Sacramento County North Area Recovery Station. Refuse is then hauled from both locations to the Sacramento County Kiefer Landfill.

In 2022, the total reported amount of solid waste produced by the City of Sacramento was approximately 647,239 tons of solid waste. Approximately 50 percent of the waste is recycled and the other 50 percent is disposed of in a landfill (CalRecycle 2023a). Several facilities provide solid waste Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-16 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
disposal services to the City of Sacramento. Commercial and multifamily residential solid waste collection and recycling is administered by the Sacramento Regional Solid Waste Authority and collection is provided by 15 different private franchised haulers. Commercial solid waste is disposed of at various facilities including the Sacramento County Kiefer Landfill, the Yolo County Landfill, L and D Landfill, and Florin Perkins Landfill. As of 2023, these 4 sites have approximately 188 million cubic yards of remaining capacity (CalRecycle 2023b). This is enough to continue provide service through the next 400 years. General contractors and industrial solid waste generators often haul solid waste directly to disposal facilities.

In addition to collecting municipal refuse every week, the City collects garden refuse (green waste) on a weekly basis, expanded recently to include residential organic waste, and curbside recycling every other week.

ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS
SMUD is responsible for the acquisition, generation, transmission and distribution of electrical service to customers for the City of Sacramento including the Specific Plan Area. SMUD’s 900 square mile service territory also includes most of Sacramento County and a portion of Placer County.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Telecommunication service to the Specific Plan Area is provided by AT&T Inc., Central Valley Broadband LLC, Comcast, Consolidated Communications Inc., Digital Path Inc., Encore Business Systems Inc., Frontier Communications Corporation, Integra Telecom Holdings Inc., Internet Free Planet, Level 3 Communications LLC, MetroPCS Wireless, New Edge Holding Company, Platinum Equity LLC, Ruralnet Wireless LLC, Sonic Telecom LLC, Sprint, Succeed.Net, T-Mobile, and Verizon Communications Inc.

3.11.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Water Supply and Water Treatment
The analysis of water supply and treatment is based on information included in the SB 610/SB 221 Water Supply Assessment (City of Sacramento 2023). The methodology is intended to identify increases in water demand and the capacity of existing and proposed water sources to accommodate that demand. To do this, the Water Supply Assessment specifically used the full buildout conditions of the Specific Plan to assess the full future demand for water under the proposed plan to determine whether utility capacity would hinder redevelopment in the Specific Plan Area. The water conveyance adequacy analysis is based on information included in the Stockton Boulevard Plan Infrastructure Utility Report (NV5 2022).

Wastewater and Stormwater Infrastructure
The wastewater analysis is conducted based on the wastewater generation rates identified in the Stockton Boulevard Plan Infrastructure Utility Report (NV5 2022). Future wastewater generation from proposed plan land uses is calculated utilizing the identified wastewater generation rates for residential and non-residential land uses and compared to the capacity of the existing wastewater treatment plant.

To do this, the full buildout conditions of the Specific Plan were used to determine whether wastewater Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-17
treatment capacity would hinder redevelopment in the Specific Plan Area. Because the majority of the Specific Plan Area is developed with impervious surfaces (i.e., roof tops, roadways, and sidewalks), the stormwater runoff flows resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan would not be anticipated to increase substantially.

Solid Waste
The potential for increased waste generation was based on generation rates as reported by Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates (CalRecycle 2023b).

Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
Impacts related to electricity, natural gas and telecommunications were based on information included in the Stockton Boulevard Plan Infrastructure Utility Report (City of Sacramento 2023). Future energy demand resulting from full buildout in the Specific Plan Area was analyzed by assessing existing facilities servicing in the area and determining increased demand on services. The need for additional infrastructure and its effects on the environment was also evaluated.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
A utilities and service systems impact would be significant if implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would:
• require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects; • have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years; • result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;
• generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals; or • fail to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
All the issues identified in the thresholds of significance are addressed in the following analysis.

Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-18 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.11-1: Require or Result in the Relocation or Construction of New or Expanded Water Infrastructure or Have Insufficient Water Supplies
Existing water supplies would be adequate to serve the short-term and long-term needs of the project.

Project-generated water demands would not exceed water supplies available during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The existing water transmission and distribution system within the Specific Plan Area is adequate to serve the anticipated demand for water with the redevelopment of the area.

Therefore, impacts related to water supply and infrastructure would be less than significant.

The types of future development envisioned in the Specific Plan Area are high-density urban infill type projects, with residential units consisting of townhomes, midrise multifamily/mixed use, urban walk-up mixed use, and garden-style apartments. The redevelopment of existing land uses within the Specific Plan Area under the Specific Plan is anticipated to result in an additional 4,007 residential dwelling units and 372,116 square feet of non-residential development at full buildout (NV5 2022). Based on the City’s Water Study Design Manual, which provides a table of gross unit water use factors for various residential and non-residential land uses, and assuming that the dwelling units anticipated under the Specific Plan would qualify as Residential High units, the anticipated increase in residential water demand is 489.2 afy (= 4,007 DUs x 0.12 afy/du) (NV5 2022). Assuming an average of 340 square feet per employee, the anticipated 372,116 square feet of non-residential development would equate to approximately 1,094 employees. The anticipated increase in the non-residential average water is 98.5 afy (= 1,094 Employees x 0.09 afy/employee) (NV5 2022). The small increase of public/park/recreation building uses is offset by the anticipated reduction commercial/industrial uses and is considered negligible compared to the increase in residential uses (an increase of less than 1 AFY). Therefore, at full buildout, the total anticipated increase in the average water demand is estimated to be 587.7 acrefeet per year (NV5 2022).

As shown in Tables 3.11-2 and 3.01-3, above, the City’s projected water supply is anticipated to exceed demand by 293,831.3 AFY in 2030 and 2045. The City’s 2020 UWMP determined the City’s multiple dry-year supplies are adequate to meet projected demands. Based on the City’s 2020 UMWP projections, the project-generated water demand increase of 587.7 AFY would not exceed City water supplies, and existing water supply would be adequate to serve the development envisioned under the Specific Plan.

Of note, implementation of water conservation efforts, such as compliance with the State Water Conservation Act and the City’s water efficient landscape ordinance, would further reduce water demand. In addition, the City’s ongoing efforts to improve water supply would continue to increase the City’s reliable water supply. As a result, adequate water supplies are available to serve the projected demands of the City, including the Specific Plan Area.

Water Infrastructure and Conveyance
The Specific Plan Area is generally well served by the existing water transmission and distribution system. Implementation of the Specific Plan would include improvements to water infrastructure as discussed in Section 2.8.1, “Infrastructure Needs and Recommended Improvements.” These include upsizing 6-inch water mains, and extending mains within Stockton Boulevard and Young Street. As explained therein, construction and operation of this infrastructure is a component of the plan evaluated in this analysis. In addition, new developments associated with the Specific Plan that are not located near an existing City water main would require connection to the existing water distribution system.

Water main improvements could include upsizing the water mains and extending the dead-end water Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-19
mains to individual project locations within the Specific Plan Area. The water main improvements would be sized according to the capacity necessary for individual structures/development. All projects would be subject to impact fees as deemed applicable by the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities.

Impact fees would be used to fund water infrastructure improvements that are evaluated in this EIR. All upgrades would be designed and implemented in a manner consistent with the City’s adopted General Plan, which establishes policies that address potential concerns related to ground disturbance, as well as applicable regulations. All improvements within the Specific Plan Area would also be subject to the Specific Plan policies and mitigation measures established in this SEIR, which address and reduce potential impacts. The Stockton Boulevard Plan would not require or result in the construction or relocation of new or expanded water facilities with the potential to result in environmental effects beyond those disclosed throughout this EIR.

Conclusion
As discussed above, the City’s existing water supply would be sufficient to serve project-generated water demands during normal, dry, and multiple-dry years. Implementation of the Specific Plan may require improvements to the exiting water distribution system depending on the location of the projects.

Any necessary utility connections would be provided as part of individual project design and construction. Projects would be subject to impact fees as deemed applicable the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities. Water system upgrades identified in the Specific Plan have been evaluated for environmental effects as part of the analysis in this EIR. Potential environmental impacts from these minor improvements are evaluated throughout this EIR. No additional environmental effects would occur. Therefore, impacts related to water supplies and facilities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.11-2: Require or Result in the Relocation or Construction of New or Expanded Wastewater Treatment and Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in increased wastewater generation in areas. SRWTP would have adequate capacity to treat wastewater generated from development within the Specific Plan Area. However, development within the Specific Plan Area may require improvements to existing wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure. Improvements to wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure would be implemented in accordance with the City’s Design and Procedure Manual and would be required to pay CSS impact fees. Individual project compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts associated with infrastructure improvement would be less than significant.

The Specific Plan Area is largely developed with a variety of land uses including office, commercial, and residential and served by the City’s CSS. The Specific Plan would result in a net increase of 4,007 dwelling units and 372,116 square feet of non-residential development square feet of non-residential development (NV5 2022).

Wastewater Treatment Capacity
Sanitary sewer flows are expected to increase because of the future increased density of the residential land uses. The anticipated future development in the Specific Plan Area is expected to increase the sanitary sewer flows primarily due to the increase in residential uses. The small increase of public/park/recreation building uses is offset by the anticipated reduction commercial uses and is Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-20 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
considered negligible compared to the increase in residential uses for this report. The addition of new residences would affect the existing sewer system.

The City of Sacramento Design Standards for sewer generation rates contain average daily flow rates and factors for residential and non-residential uses. The recently adopted standard for sewer generation is 310 gallons per day (gpd) per ESD.

A factor of 0.75 ESD per residential unit was selected based on the nature of the high-density, urban infill residential. The factor is consistent with other recent planning studies for the Central City Specific Plan and the River District Specific Plan. This factor, when multiplied by 310 gpd per ESD yields a sewer generation rate of 232.5 gpd per residential unit. For the non-residential land uses, a factor of 0.5 ESD per 1,000 gross square feet is used as an average for anticipated uses. Given the anticipated development of 4,007 dwellings units and 372,116 square feet of non-residential use in the Specific Plan Area, the anticipated increase in the residential average dry weather flow is estimated to be approximately 0.95 mgd (4,007 DUs x 0.75 ESDs x 310 gpd/ESD) and the non-residential average dry weather flow is estimated to be approximately 0.06 mgd (0.5 ESD/1,000 square feet x 372,116 square feet x 310 gpd/ESD) (NV5 2022). Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would generate approximately 1.01 mgd of dry weather flow in total. Wastewater flows to SRWTP in 2014 were approximately 141 mgd, compared to the capacity of 181 mgd. Therefore, it is anticipated that SRWTP would have available capacity to serve the development associated with the Specific Plan.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would not necessitate the expansion of SRWTP to accommodate the additional wastewater flows requiring treatment.

Wastewater Conveyance and Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure The majority of the Specific Plan Area is developed with impervious surfaces (i.e., roof tops, parking lots, sidewalks). As described above, most development under the plan would consist of infill and redevelopment projects that would intensify development without substantially increasing the amount of impervious surfaces or potential to generate stormwater runoff. As a result, the stormwater runoff flows from buildout of the Specific Plan are not anticipated to increase substantially with the potential development anticipated under the Specific Plan. In addition, future development within the Specific Plan Area would need to be evaluated on an individual basis to ensure there is no increase in stormwater runoff. Redevelopment of properties within the Specific Plan Area with increased densities would increase the amount of wastewater requiring collection within the Specific Plan Area. CSS and SASD have insufficient infrastructure capacity to serve wet weather flows and combined sewer outflows and overflows occur during heavy rainfall storm events.

Future development within the Specific Plan Area would be required to prepare project-specific sanitary sewer and storm drainage studies on an individual basis. If the studies indicate that the existing sanitary sewer and/or storm drainage systems are sufficient to meet the proposed development needs and are not deficient and meet current City standards, no infrastructure upgrades would be necessary.

If the studies indicate that existing infrastructure would be insufficient or deficient or does not meet current City standards for the proposed development needs, the developer would be required to construct necessary infrastructure improvements.

Projects contributing increased sewer flows of more than 5 ESDs to CSS are required to evaluate the available sewage only capacity of existing CSS Mains from the project’s point of connection to the nearest 18-inch or larger main including all tributary sewage flows. If any portion of the mains to the nearest 18-inch main is determined to have insufficient capacity to accommodate the increased sewer flow, the Design and Procedure Manual requires development to improve the undersized mains to the nearest 18-inch main. Wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure improvements Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-21
would be implemented in accordance with the practices described in the City’s Design and Procedure Manual or project developers would be required to pay the established CSS sewer and drainage systems impact fees to participate in a City-sponsored project that improves the system in the area.

Individual project compliance with the City’s Design and Procedures Manual and payment of the impact fees would adequately address impacts associated with infrastructure improvements.

Conclusion
Based on the discussion above, implementation of the Specific Plan would not necessitate the expansion of the existing wastewater treatment plant. However, future development within the Specific Plan Area may require improvements to the existing wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure. Wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure improvements would be implemented in accordance with the City’s Design and Procedure Manual. Water main improvements would occur in public rights of way, typically beneath roadways and are not anticipated to result in environmental effects beyond those described for implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Plan throughout this EIR. Therefore, impacts related to wastewater and stormwater infrastructure would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.11-3: Generate Solid Waste that Exceed the Capacity of Local Infrastructure and/or Reduction Goals
Implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in a substantial increase in solid waste and would, therefore, not result in the need to expand or construct new solid waste facilities. In addition, implementation of the Specific Plan would not conflict with any solid waste reduction goal and would comply with all state and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.

Construction-generated Solid Waste
Construction of new uses within the Specific Plan Area would generate various construction waste including scrap lumber, scrap finishing materials, various scrap metals, and other recyclable and nonrecyclable construction related wastes. Construction waste would be managed in accordance with ordinances promulgated by the SWA. Recyclable construction materials, including concrete, metals, wood, and various other recyclable materials would be diverted to recycling facilities. Project construction would also comply with City requirements to divert a minimum of 50 percent of construction wastes to a certified recycling processor.

Adhering to these requirements would minimize the total volume of demolition and construction waste that would be landfilled but would not avoid disposal of all construction waste in local landfills.

Construction waste would be delivered to one or more of the following facilities: Kiefer Landfill, L and D Landfill, Yolo County Central Landfill, or Forward Landfill. Across these four facilities, there is approximately 188 million cubic yards of remaining capacity left (CalRecycle 2023b). Taking this into account, sufficient landfill capacity would be available to serve projects constructed under the Specific Plan into the foreseeable future. Because new or expanded solid waste management or disposal facilities would not be required to accommodate project-related construction, no adverse physical environmental effects would result.

Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-22 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Solid Waste Generated During Project Operation
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a net increase of 4,007 dwelling units and 372,116 square feet of non-residential development square feet of non-residential development at full buildout (NV5 2022). The increase in dwelling units would generate additional amounts of solid waste above existing conditions.

Based on the City’s 2022 calculated disposal rate of 6.90 pounds per person per day (CalRecycle 2023b), implementation of the Specific Plan would generate approximately 72,015 pounds of additional solid waste per day. This is assuming that there will be 2.56 people per each DU added under the Specific Plan (Department of Finance 2023), in which case implementation of the plan would result in a projected population increase of approximately 10,437 persons. This would result in 13,143 additional tons per year. Approximately 50 percent of the waste is diverted from landfills through recycling programs. The project would comply with City waste diversion requirements. Therefore, the project would require landfill capacity for approximately 36,007 additional pounds (18 tons) of waste per day.

This amount would be minimal in comparison to the region’s landfill capacity and allowable daily throughput. Therefore, existing landfill facilities would be adequate to serve the project, and no additional facilities or expansion of facilities would be required.

Conclusion
Because the project would not require additional facilities or the expansion of existing solid waste facilities, would comply with management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and would not impair solid waste reduction goals, project impacts related to solid waste would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Impact 3.11-4: Require Construction of New/Expanded Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunication Services and Facilities
Development proposed in the proposed Specific Plan may require expansion of electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication services and facilities within the Specific Plan Area. However, project applicants would coordinate with utility providers, and would comply with all laws and regulations related to utility improvements. Therefore, impacts related to electrical, gas, and telecommunication improvements would be less than significant.

Electricity
Electrical service is provided to the Specific Plan Area by overhead and underground transmission lines from SMUD’s 21 kilovolt distribution system. Utility improvements may be required depending on load.

Project applicants would coordinate with SMUD to ensure existing electrical facilities are sufficient and would perform any necessary improvements.

Natural Gas
PG&E is undertaking improvements to their system in accordance with a number of projects and initiatives in and near the Specific Plan Area, which may negate the need for future improvements when or if the new developments are constructed (NV5 2022). These improvements, initiated by PG&E, are subject to separate environmental review and are not included in the project. PG&E would expand/upgrade the natural gas system to extend service to the new development on a case-by-case basis as additional information is received on the actual development square footage and maximum Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-23
and minimum gas loads. Individual project applicant(s) for development within the Specific Plan Area would be required to coordinate with PG&E to ensure necessary improvements are constructed and adequate service is provided.

Telecommunications
Telecommunications providers (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, City of Sacramento) have indicated the existing system within the Specific Plan Area would likely be sufficient to serve the proposed projects and opportunity sites with relatively minor additions. In general, service to new sites would be coordinated with the main electrical service in a common joint trench. Typically, a few 2-inch conduits would be added to the joint utility trench for service to the projects.

Conclusion
There are existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities within the Specific Plan Area that would serve the anticipated buildout of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan Area is mostly developed with existing commercial and residential uses and is served by existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication infrastructure networks. The need to expand the existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication infrastructure networks would be limited to previously undeveloped areas within the Specific Plan Area. Utilities providers would routinely review their systems capacities and operation of distribution networks. Additional improvements are generally made as the need arises to meet customer demands. If required, the construction of new or expansion of existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication infrastructure would be the responsibility of the respective utility providers (e.g., SMUD, PG&E, and AT&T) and would be subject to CEQA review. The physical effects of constructing and extending infrastructure would be analyzed on a project-by-project basis and mitigation measures would be required to reduce impacts. Further, as required by law, all utility connections would be constructed in accordance with all applicable building codes and applicable standards to ensure an adequately sized and properly constructed energy transmission and conveyance system. Because the Specific Plan Area is currently served by existing utilities providers and the need to expand the existing infrastructure to accommodate new development would be expected to be limited, the potential impacts related to the need to construct new or expand existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities would be expected to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.11-5: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impact to Utilities and Service Systems Implementation of the Specific Plan, in combination with other cumulative development in the area, could increase demand for utilities and service systems in the area. However, as discussed above under Impact 3.11-1 through 3.11-4, implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. Therefore, the Specific Plan’s contribution to impacts related to utilities and service systems would be less than cumulatively considerable. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-24 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Water Supply and Water Infrastructure
The cumulative context for water supply, treatment, and conveyance includes the water service area for the City of Sacramento, including reasonably foreseeable increases in water demand as identified in the Stockton Boulevard Plan Utility Infrastructure Report and Water Supply Assessment.

The 2020 UWMP does not identify specific development projects that were included in the City’s water demand calculations. Instead, the UWMP proposes various categories of development within the City’s service area for water supply. The UWMP considers water supply needed for future development.

Buildout within the Specific Plan Area is anticipated to be a mix of commercial and residential development. Based on the proposed development categories set forth in the Specific Plan, the proposed plan would be consistent with development anticipated in the City under the 2020 UWMP.

As discussed under Impact 3.11-1 and in the 2020 UMWP, the City has sufficient water supplies to meet anticipated demands for normal, single dry, and multiple dry years through 2040. The projectgenerated increase in water demand would not be substantial and existing water supplies would be adequate. However, development associated with the Specific Plan may require improvements to the existing water distribution system depending on the location of the projects. Improvements to the water distribution system would be sized according to the capacity necessary for individual development and would be subject to impact fees as deemed appliable by the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities.

The Specific Plan’s contribution to water supply and water infrastructure would not be cumulatively considerable. The cumulative impact would be less than significant.

Wastewater and Stormwater Infrastructure
The cumulative context for stormwater includes the CSS service area in the northern part of the Specific Plan Area and the Sacramento Area Sewer District in the southern part of the Specific Plan Area (i.e., Downtown Sacramento, Land Park, Curtis Park, and East Sacramento). The cumulative context for wastewater treatment includes the SRWTP service area (i.e., City of Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, West Sacramento, and select unincorporated areas of Sacramento County).

CSS is currently insufficient to serve wet weather flows and combined sewer outflows and overflows occur during heavy rainfall storm events. New project development could convert some of the limited remaining pervious areas to impervious surfaces. Therefore, new development in the Specific Plan Area would result in a net increase in wastewater and stormwater flows directed to CSS. This would result in a potentially significant cumulative impact to existing facilities. The project contribution to cumulative increases in CSS from stormwater runoff and wastewater could exacerbate the lack of capacity in the system. Therefore, the project’s contribution to wastewater flow conveyance in the CSS would be cumulatively considerable.

As discussed above under Impact 3.11-2, future development within the Specific Plan Area would require wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage infrastructure improvements. Infrastructure improvements would be implemented in accordance with the practices described in the City’s Design and Procedure Manual. Adherence to the recommendations and statutes set forth in the City’s Design and Procedure Manual would offset individual project’s contributions to the sewer and wastewater systems by requiring that the applicant construct appropriate facilities to delay discharge of wastewater and stormwater and pay the CSS sewer and drainage impact fees to make necessary localized or systemwide improvements. Compliance with existing regulations and payment of impact fees would ensure that the project’s contribution would be less than cumulatively considerable. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Ascent Utilities and Service Systems
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.11-25
Solid Waste
The cumulative context for solid waste includes all development within the SWA’s service area, including the City of Sacramento. As discussed under Impact 3.11-3, the project would generate additional solid waste during construction and operation. However, project-generated solid waste would not result in the need for new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. In addition, the project would comply with solid waste reduction efforts and would increase recycling efforts to divert solid waste from landfills. Existing solid waste facilities would be adequate to serve future development within the region. Therefore, cumulative solid waste impacts would be less than significant. The project would not be cumulatively considerable; and this cumulative impact would be less than significant.

Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunication
The cumulative context for solid waste includes the service areas of utility providers, including SMUD, PG&E, AT&T, and Comcast. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in increased demand and load on electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication services and facilities. As discussed above under Impact 3.11-4, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to the need to construct new or expand existing electrical, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities. Therefore, the Specific Plan’s contribution to construction-related effects from infrastructure improvements would be less than cumulatively considerable. Thus, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Utilities and Service Systems Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.11-26 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-1

3.12 VISUAL RESOURCES
This section provides a description of existing visual conditions, meaning the physical features that make up the visible landscape, near the Stockton Boulevard Plan Specific Plan Area and an assessment of changes to those conditions that would occur from project implementation. The effects of the project on the visual environment are generally defined in terms of the project’s physical characteristics and potential visibility, the extent to which the project’s presence would change the perceived visual character and quality of the environment, and the expected level of sensitivity that the viewing public may have where the project would alter existing views. The “Methodology” discussion below provides further detail on the approach used in this evaluation.

No comments related to visual resources were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP). A copy of the NOP along with comments received is included in Appendix A.

3.12.1 Regulatory Setting

FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, or laws regarding visual resources are relevant to the Specific Plan.

STATE
California Scenic Highway Program
California’s Scenic Highway Program (Streets and Highways Code, Section 260 et seq) was created by the Legislature in 1963 to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. The State Scenic Highway System includes a list of highways that are eligible for designation as scenic highways or have been so designated.

According to the Caltrans list of designated scenic highways under the California Scenic Highway Program, there are no highway segments within the City of Sacramento that are designated scenic.

The only officially designated state scenic highway near the City of Sacramento is California State Route 160 (SR 160), which is designated scenic highway from the Contra Costa County line to the south limit of the City of Sacramento (Caltrans 2023). The Specific Plan Area is approximately 4.3 miles northeast of the segment of SR 160 that is designated scenic. The Specific Plan Area is not visible from this portion of SR 160.

LOCAL
City of Sacramento General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is the City’s policy guide for future development.

City of Sacramento Tree Ordinance (Sacramento City Code 12.56, as amended) A permit is required to perform regulated work on “City Trees” or “Private Protected Trees” (which includes trees formerly referred to as “Heritage Trees”). City trees are characterized as trees partially or completely located in a City park, on City owned property, or on a public right-of-way, including any street, road, sidewalk, park strip, mow strip or alley. Private protected trees are defined as trees Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
designated to have special historical value, special environmental value, or significant community benefit, that are located on private property. Private protected trees are:
• All native trees at 12-inch diameter standard height (DSH). Native trees include Coast, Interior, Valley and Blue Oaks; California Sycamore; and Buckeye. • All trees at 32-inch DSH with an existing single family or duplex dwelling. • All trees at 24-inch DSH on undeveloped land or any other type of property such as commercial, industrial, and apartments.

Tree permits required for discretionary projects under Title 17, are subject to the same notice, hearing, and appeal provisions applicable to the Title 17 discretionary permit. A tree replacement plan required for a project must provide for the replacement of trees at a ratio of 1-inch DSH of tree replaced for each inch DSH of tree removed (1:1 ratio). Tree replacement options include on-site and off-site replacement; payment of an in-lieu fee; and credit for preservation of existing trees on the same property that are smaller than a private protected tree removed.

City of Sacramento Planning and Development Code (Title 17) The City of Sacramento’s Planning and Development Code (Sacramento City Code Title 17) is intended “[t]o implement the city’s general plan through the adoption and administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations” (§17.100.010(B)). To achieve this outcome the Planning and Development Code:
• regulates the use of land, buildings, or other structures; • regulates the location, height, and size of buildings or structures, yards, courts, and other open spaces, the amount of building coverage permitted in each zone, and population density; and • regulates the physical characteristics of buildings, structures, and site development, including the location, height, and size of buildings and structures; yards, courts, and other open spaces; lot coverage; land use intensity through regulation of residential density and floor area ratios; and architectural and site design.

Site Plan and Design Review
Pursuant to Chapter 17.808 of the City Code, with specific and limited exemptions described below, development in the City is subject to site plan and design review. The intent of this process is to (1) ensure that the development is consistent with applicable plans and design guidelines; (2) is high quality and compatible with surrounding development; (3) is supported by adequate circulation, utility, and related infrastructure; (4) is water and energy efficient; and (5) avoids environmental effects to the extent feasible. The aspects of design considered in the site plan and design review process include architectural design, site design, adequacy of streets and accessways for all modes of travel, energy consumption, protection of environmentally sensitive features, safety, noise, and other relevant considerations.

Pursuant to Chapter 17.808.160 of the City Code, the following development projects are exempt from the site plan and design review requirement: alterations to an existing building or structure that is not in a historic district and that does not substantially alter the exterior appearance of the building or structure, as determined by the director; an alteration to an existing site that does not significantly alter the functioning of the site with respect to traffic circulation, parking, infrastructure, and environmentally sensitive features, as determined by the director; secondary dwelling units; sidewalk cafes; convenience recycling facilities; and registered house plans (subject to site plan review, but not design Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-3
review). For development projects located in a historic district or that involve a landmark, activities exempt from site plan and design review include repainting of surfaces that were originally painted when the color scheme is not a significant character-defining feature of the historic resource; routine nonabrasive cleaning and maintenance; and site plantings when plantings and landscape elements are not significant character-defining features of the historic resource.

Through the site plan and design review process, the City has the authority to approve or require deviations from design and development standards to respond to site- and project-specific considerations. Deviations are subject to review and approval of either the City Design Director or the City Planning and Design Commission, depending on the nature of the deviation. Depending on the nature of the proposal, site plan and design review may be conducted by staff, the City Design Director, or the Planning and Design Commission. The Planning and Design Commission review is required for certain large projects (more than 150 residential units or 125,000 square feet for non-residential or mixed-use projects), projects more than 60 feet in height, or where a deviation requires Commission review and approval. City Design Director review is required where a project is not in substantial compliance with applicable design guidelines or requests a deviation. For projects taking place in a historic district or related to an historic landmark, site plan and design review is undertaken by the Preservation Commission or the City Preservation Director, as appropriate. All other projects not requiring review by the respective Commission or Director are reviewed by City staff.

City of Sacramento Design Review Code
The City of Sacramento includes 14 design review districts where developments within those districts are subject to design review as outlined within the Design Review Code (Sacramento City Code Chapter 17.132). The majority of the Specific Plan Area, excluding the Entry to Midtown Subarea and majority of the Medical Center Campus Subarea, are within the Broadway-Stockton Special Planning District (City of Sacramento Zoning Code Chapter 17.404.020).

In accordance with the code, development applications are reviewed to ensure that the desirability of adjacent and surrounding properties is enhanced; the benefits of occupancy of adjacent and surrounding properties are improved; the value of surrounding properties is increased; appropriate development of adjacent and surrounding properties is encouraged; and the maintenance and improvement of surrounding properties is encouraged, resulting in the enhancement of the health, safety, aesthetics, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the area and the inhabitants of the city at large. In addition to establishing design review guidelines for properties within design review districts, the Sacramento City Council can establish minimum design requirements applicable to development projects outside of design review districts.

3.12.2 Environmental Setting

VISUAL CHARACTER AND VIEWPOINTS OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA The Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan Area is a primarily urban environment that includes mostly commercial uses, with a mixture of small businesses, restaurants, shops, and various services. Strip malls and standalone businesses line the corridor, offering a wide variety of services. The land area of the Stockton Boulevard corridor consists of over 42 percent Commercial uses. Nearly 15 percent of the land area includes office use, 13 percent is vacant, 8 percent is residential, 7 percent is industrial, 7 percent is care/health uses, and the other remaining 8 percent is made up of other uses such as church/welfare, public/utilities, recreational, and miscellaneous uses. Due to the multiple land uses in the Specific Plan Area, the visual character is somewhat varied, but primarily dominated by commercial Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
structure. Stockton Boulevard represents the culture and ethnic diversity of a variety of communities in South Sacramento. Different cultural businesses, such as restaurants offering cuisine from areas all over the world, reflect the diversity found within the corridor and its surroundings. While the corridor is made up mostly of retail establishments, there are several significant places that represent culture and neighborhood identity along Stockton Boulevard such as Little Saigon, the Colonial Theatre, and the Colonial Heights Library.

Five viewpoints were selected that are representative of the existing visual character of the Stockton Boulevard corridor and its surroundings, as well as publicly accessible viewpoints (Figure 3.12-1).

Figure 3.12-2 through Figure 3.12-6 provide photographs of the views from these viewpoints. Each viewpoint is discussed below in terms of visual character.

Entry to Midtown Subarea
The Entry to Midtown Subarea comprises the northwestern portion of the Specific Plan Area bounded by Alhambra Boulevard and Castia Way to the north and west and US 50 to the south. The Entry to Midtown consists of one to two story buildings that make up the general commercial, heavy commercial, and mixed residential uses within the subarea. The visual character of the subarea is dominated by these urban use types, as well as streets and intersections with trees and other vegetation lining the sidewalks. Streetlights and utility poles/lines are visible along the Stockton Boulevard corridor, as well as multiple parking lots that surround the buildings within the subarea.

Medical Center Campus Subarea
The Medical Center Campus Subarea comprises a part of the northwestern portion of the Specific Plan Area, bounded by US 50 to the north and the Broadway corridor to the south. The Medical Center Campus consists of primarily one- to two-story buildings, but does include several buildings with more than three stories. These buildings heavily contribute to the visual character of this subarea, which is mostly defined by general commercial, heavy commercial, office, and medical uses. Multiple large parking lots surround and are located in between the buildings within the subarea. The subarea does include some standard single-, two-, and multi-family residential uses, but these uses do not define the overall character. The character of this subarea is also influenced by other urban facilities, including streets and intersections, trees and other landscaping, streetlights and utility lines/poles.

Structures are closely spaced, connected by landscaped walkways and streets.

Viewpoint 1, Figure 3.12-2, is taken from Cancer Survivors Park, located in front of the UC Davis Women’s Center for Health building, within the Medical Center Campus Subarea. Viewpoint 1 is directed northwest, facing the UC Davis Women’s Center for Health building, and Stockton Boulevard.

Views from the viewpoint are consistent with the Plan Area and its surroundings, typical of the area, with landscaped trees and vegetation, streetlights, multiple storied buildings, and a parking lot within the foreground, not resulting in notably unique views.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-5
Source: Prepared by Ascent 2023.

Figure 3.12-1 Viewpoint Locations
Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Source: Photograph taken by Ascent in 2020.

Figure 3.12-2 Viewpoint 1
Traditional Neighborhood Commercial Storefronts Subarea The Traditional Neighborhood Commercial Storefronts Subarea comprise a part of the northwestern and central portion of the Specific Plan Area, bounded by the Broadway corridor to the north and 21st Avenue to the south. The Traditional Neighborhood Commercial Storefronts consists of primarily oneto two-story buildings that make up the general commercial, office buildings, residential office, and standard single family and mixed residential uses within the subarea. The visual character of the subarea is dominated by these types of structures and associated parking lots, as well as by streets and intersections with trees and other vegetation lining the sidewalks. Streetlights and utility lines/poles are located along the Stockton Boulevard corridor.

Viewpoint 2, Figure 3.12-3, is taken from the northern corner of 9th Avenue and Stockton Boulevard, located within the Traditional Neighborhood Commercial Storefronts subarea. Viewpoint 2 is directed southwest onto the Stockton Boulevard corridor, facing a vacant lot, with the Colonial Theater in the far background. Street trees line the corridor, as well as streetlights and utility lines, with local businesses and residential homes seen past the vacant undeveloped lot. Views from the viewpoint are consistent with the Plan Area and its surroundings, typical of the area, additionally, not resulting in notably unique views.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-7
Source: Photograph taken by Ascent in 2020.

Figure 3.12-3 Viewpoint 2
Community Commercial Center Subarea
The Community Commercial Center Subarea comprises a part of the central portion of the Specific Plan Area, bounded by 21st Avenue and Perry Avenue to the north and Fruitridge Road to the south. The Community Commercial Center consists of primarily one- to two-story buildings that make up the general commercial use within the subarea. The visual character of the subarea is dominated by these types of structures and associated parking lots, as well as streets and intersections with trees and other vegetation lining the sidewalks. Streetlights and utility lines/poles are located along the Stockton Boulevard corridor.

Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Source: Photograph taken by Ascent 2020.

Figure 3.12-4 Viewpoint 3
Viewpoint 3, Figure 3.12-4, is taken from the southern corner of 22nd Avenue and Stockton Boulevard, located within the Community Commercial Center subarea. Viewpoint 3 is directed northwest onto the Stockton Boulevard corridor, providing long range views of the roadway and local businesses lining the corridor, as well as a vacant, undeveloped lot in the background. Viewpoint 4, Figure 3.12-5, is taken along the Stockton Boulevard corridor in between Lawrence Drive and Fruitridge Road, within the Community Commercial Center subarea. Viewpoint 4 is directed southwest onto the Stockton Boulevard corridor, providing long range views of the roadway and local businesses lining the corridor.

In both viewpoints, streetlights, utility lines, landscaped vegetation, street trees, parking lots, and local businesses line Stockton Boulevard, creating views that are consistent within the Plan Area and its surroundings, typical of the area, additionally, not resulting in notably unique views.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-9
Source: Photograph taken by Ascent in 2020.

Figure 3.12-5 Viewpoint 4
Little Saigon Subarea
The Little Saigon Subarea comprises a part of the southeastern portion of the Specific Plan Area, bounded by Fruitridge Road to the north and the City of Sacramento city limits to the south. The Little Saigon Subarea consists of primarily one- to-two story buildings that make up the general commercial and single- and multi-family residential use within the subarea. The visual character of the subarea is dominated by streets and intersections with trees and other vegetation lining the sidewalks. Utility lines and streetlights are located along the Stockton Boulevard corridor, as well as multiple parking lots that surround the buildings within the subarea.

Viewpoint 5, Figure 3.12-6, is taken along the southern corner of Fowler Avenue and Stockton Boulevard. Viewpoint 5 is directed northeast onto the Stockton Boulevard corridor, providing long range views of the roadway and local businesses that line the corridor. Streetlights, utility lines, street trees, vegetation, and local businesses line Stockon Boulevard, creating views that are consistent within the Plan Area and its surroundings, typical of the area, additionally, not resulting in notably unique views.

Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-10 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Source: Photograph taken by Ascent in 2020.

Figure 3.12-6 Viewpoint 5

VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA
The Plan Area is surrounded by primarily residential neighborhoods, and several public/quasi-public and open space land uses. The residential neighborhoods dominate the visual character in the eastern, southern, and western sides of the Plan Area. The neighborhoods north of 21st Avenue, Elmhurst, Oak Park, Tahoe Park, and Colonial Heights, contain a rich variety of single-family homes dating to their development as streetcar suburbs in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Elmhurst neighborhood, between Stockton Boulevard and approximately 53rd Street, and the Colonial Heights neighborhood on San Francisco Boulevard, both have cohesive groupings of early 20th century homes arranged around a wide landscaped boulevard. The Oak Park neighborhoods are dominated by older homes, with nearly one-third of the housing stock built before 1940. The majority of housing units in other neighborhoods were built between 1940 to 1959, with very few new housing units built after 2000. Newer housing has mostly been constructed south of Fruitridge and in Oak Park. General commercial land uses surround the northern portion of the Plan Area, adjacent to the Entry to Midtown Subarea.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-11

VIEWER GROUPS AND SENSITIVITY
Viewer sensitivity is considered in assessing the impacts of visual change. The sensitivity of the viewer or viewer concern is based on the visibility of visual resources in the landscape, proximity of the viewers to the resources, frequency and duration of the views, number of viewers, and the expectations of viewers and viewer groups. Viewer sensitivity is also affected by viewer activity, awareness, and concerns in combination with numbers of viewers and duration of views. Visual sensitivity is generally considered higher for views that are observed by people engaged in recreational activities such as hiking or camping, and by residents of an area. Sensitivity is lower for people commuting to work or engaged in work activities. Viewer response is also based on locational context. Landscape features that are common in some areas may have higher value in locations where these features are rare.

Viewer groups in the Plan Area predominantly consist of motorists traveling along the Stockton Boulevard corridor and residents within, and adjacent to, the Plan Area. Motorists traveling along the Stockton Boulevard corridor, and adjacent/interior roadways to the Plan Area, generally have moderately low viewer sensitivity due to travel speeds and driver focus, resulting in temporary and unfocused views of the Stockton Boulevard corridor. However, motorists consisting of residents and local business owners may have high viewer sensitivity due to their frequent travel along the Stockton Boulevard corridor and adjacent/interior roadways of the Plan Area. Frequent travel along the corridor and its surrounding roadways would result in familiarity with the Plan Area, leaving residential and local business owner motorists more susceptible to notice changes within the Plan Area. Residents may also be more likely to travel the Plan Area by bike or on foot, experiencing longer viewing time and greater appreciation of visual attributes due to the much slower travel speeds.

LIGHT AND GLARE CONDITIONS
Throughout the Plan Area, existing sources of light include streetlights along project roadways; lights in parking lots, along walkways, and on the exteriors of buildings; and interior lights in buildings during nighttime hours. Additional ambient lighting in the project vicinity is generated from vehicle headlights associated with the Stockton Boulevard corridor and roadways throughout the Plan Area.

Natural and artificial lights reflect off various surfaces and can create localized occurrences of daytime and nighttime glare. Buildings and structures made with glass, metal, and polished exterior roofing materials exist throughout the Specific Plan Area; however, there are no reported occurrences of excessive daytime or nighttime glare in the vicinity.

3.12.3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures

METHODOLOGY
The analysis of aesthetics is a qualitative analysis that compares the existing built and natural environment to the future built and natural environment and addresses the visual changes that would result from implementation of the proposed Specific Plan. Key view corridors were examined, and existing views to and from the Specific Plan Area were compared to those that would be expected to occur in the future with implementation of the proposed Specific Plan.

Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-12 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
An impact on aesthetics, light, and glare is considered significant if implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would do any of the following:
• have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
• damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;
• conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; and/or • create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

ISSUES NOT DISCUSSED FURTHER
Scenic Vista
A scenic vista is a view of an area that has remarkable scenery or a natural or cultural resource that is indigenous to the area. The project site is located in a developed urban setting and does not contain remarkable scenery or views of natural areas that would be considered a scenic vista. Therefore, the Specific Plan would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. This issue is not discussed further in this EIR.

Scenic Highway
The Plan Area is not visible from a designated state scenic highway or county scenic corridor. The nearest designated state scenic highway, SR 160, is approximately 4.3 miles southwest of the nearest property line of the Specific Plan Area. Therefore, the Specific Plan would not result in damage to scenic resources within view of a state scenic highway or locally designated roadways. Impacts related to state scenic highways or county scenic roads would not occur and are not discussed further in this EIR.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.12-1: Conflict with Applicable Zoning and Other Regulations Governing Scenic Quality Implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would result in development and redevelopment of urban uses consistent with local zoning and land use regulations stated in Title 17 of the City’s Planning and Design Code, as well as resulting in development and redevelopment that is consistent and complementary to existing conditions. Future development of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would implement Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 and the City’s Urban Design Guidelines to ensure the Specific Plan does not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations that govern scenic quality. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

The Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan focuses on revitalizing and redeveloping the Stockton Boulevard commercial corridor in a manner that benefits existing residents and businesses. Within the Stockton Boulevard corridor, existing development predominantly features commercial and office buildings, consisting of multiple different businesses within the subareas, as well as residential, industrial, health care, and other land uses such as churches, public utilities, and recreational spaces. (Note that some structures within the Specific Plan Area are currently unoccupied.) With implementation of the Stockon Boulevard Specific Plan, the Specific Plan Area would be designated for residential mixed-use and Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-13
public/quasi-public land uses. While the Specific Plan Area would result in new land use designations, subsequent development under the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would be both consistent with and complimentary of existing land uses in the Specific Plan Area by allowing the following land use types within the Plan Area: residential, retail, entertainment, personal services, neighborhood services, banks and financial institutions, medical, professional, and other general office, government buildings, public and private schools and colleges, hospitals, cemeteries, airports and transportation facilities, and utilities. The Specific Plan would implement Floor Area Ratios (FARs) as the regulatory standard for measuring development intensity. Building intensity standards would be established by FAR for nonresidential and mixed-use development which is determined by dividing the gross building area by the total net lot area. The Specific Plan Area allows for maximum FARs of 2.0 to 4.0, with 4.0 FAR within the northern portion of the Plan Area and 2.0 FAR within the southern portion of the Plan Area, specifically within the Little Saigon Subarea. With implementation of FARs, the Specific Plan may result in taller and larger buildings, resulting in higher intensity development within the Plan Area. However, the Specific Plan Area would abide by the City of Sacramento’s Planning and Development Code.

Additionally, development within the Specific Plan Area would be subject to site plan and design review to enhance and complement the existing visual quality of the Plan Area. The intent of the process is to ensure development is consistent with applicable plans and design guidelines, compatible with surrounding development, supported by adequate circulation, utility, and related infrastructure, is water and energy efficient, and avoids environmental effects to the extent feasible.

The Plan Area does contain several historic resources, such as the Libby, McNeil, and Libby Fruit and Vegetable Cannery, Caltrans Equipment Headquarters, and Colonial Theatre, that may be affected by development within the Plan Area, potentially affecting the scenic quality surrounding the historic resource. However, through the site plan and design review process, the Preservation Commission or the City Preservation Director would be required to undertake the site plan and design review process to ensure development is high quality and compatible with surrounding development of the historic resources.

Individual projects within the Specific Plan Area would be required to adhere to local zoning and land use requirement, the City’s site plan and design review requirements, including implementation of screening measures (e.g., landscaping and other design features, primarily along the base of the structures), the City’s Planning and Development Code, the City’s Design Review Code, and Specific Plan Policy CACC-2 which supports the visual interest of Stockton Boulevard’s walking experience.

Nonetheless, because the specific architectural design and visual attributes of projects that could be developed in the Specific Plan Area cannot be precisely known at this time, there is a potential for incompatibility with surrounding land uses that could lead to incompatibility with City regulations related to scenic quality. Impacts would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure 3.12-1: Implement 2040 General Plan Policies • Compatibility with Adjoining Uses. The City shall ensure that the introduction of higher-intensity mixed-use development along major arterial corridors is compatible with adjacent land uses, particularly residential uses, by requiring features such as the following:
▪ Buildings set back from rear or side yard property lines adjoining single-unit dwelling residential uses;
▪ Building heights stepped back from sensitive adjoining uses to maintain appropriate transitions in scale and to minimize impacts to privacy and solar access; Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-14 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
▪ Landscaped off-street parking areas, loading areas, and service areas screened from adjacent residential areas to the degree feasible; or
▪ Lighting shielded from view and directed downward to minimize impacts on adjacent residential uses. (2040 General Plan Policy LUP-4.6)
• Compatibility with Historic Context. The City shall continue to review new development, alterations, and rehabilitation/remodels for compatibility with the surrounding historic context and consistency with adopted design guidelines/standards, including the Historic District Plans.

The City shall pay special attention to the scale, massing, and relationship of proposed new development to complement surrounding historic environments. (2040 General Plan Policy HCR-1.3)
• Responsiveness to Context. The City shall require building and site design that respects and responds to the local context, including use of local materials and plant species where feasible, responsiveness to Sacramento’s climate, and consideration of cultural and historic context of Sacramento’s neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. (2040 General Plan Policy LUP-8.10) Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 requires implementation of 2040 General Plan policies, including Policy LUP-4.6 (Compatibility with Adjoining Uses), which requires the City to ensure that the introduction of higher-intensity mixed-use development along major corridors is compatible with adjacent land uses; Policy HCR-1.3 (Compatibility with Historic Context), which requires the City to continue to review new development, alterations, and rehabilitation/remodels for compatibility with the surrounding historic context and consistency with adopted design guidelines, including the Historic District Plans, which requires the City to encourage existing regional and neighborhood shopping centers to integrate amenities, events, and programming that strengthen their role as destinations for area residents to shop and gather; and Policy LUP-8.10 (Responsiveness to Context), which requires building and site design that respects and responds to the local context.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 would ensure that implementation of the Specific Plan would further coincide with and strengthen the regulations stated above regarding the scenic quality and characteristic of the City and Plan Area. Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 would ensure new development would be consistent with existing design guidelines, resulting in development that complements the scenic quality of surrounding areas. Furthermore, implementation and compliance with Specific Plan Policy CACC-2, the City’s Planning and Development Code, the City’s Design Review Code, and site plan and design review, as mentioned under “Regulatory Setting” above, would be required for future new development within the Plan Area. New development would undergo design review processes to ensure that the future development would be consistent with the visual character of the Plan Area. With implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1, Specific Plan policy CACC-2, the City’s Planning and Development Code, the City’s Design Review Code, and site plan and design review, the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations that govern scenic quality. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Ascent Visual Resources
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 3.12-15
Impact 3.12-2: Create a New Source of Substantial Light or Glare which Would Adversely Affect Day or Nighttime Views in the Area
The Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would have the potential to increase nighttime lighting within the Plan Area as a result of new light sources attributed to proposed residential and mixed-use development. The Specific Plan would be subject to site plan and design review processes addressed by the City, as well as Mitigation Measure 3.12-1. All future development in the Specific Plan Area would be subject to the review process, ensuring that the effects of glare and spillover light would be addressed. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

The Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would involve an intensification of uses within the Specific Plan Area, resulting in an increase in nighttime lighting within the Plan Area. Under Specific Plan Policy E-1, additional lighting would be provided along Stockton Boulevard to aid in safety and create continuity and a sense of place. Most of the new light sources would be attributed to residential and mixed-use development and the associated evening activity of residents and guests. Near areas of typical commercial land uses, there could be light in the evening hours. Daytime glare could be produced by an increase in surface area of commercial and residential structures that would result from implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan. However, development within the Specific Plan Area would be required to adhere to standards stated in the City’s Planning and Development Code that are designed to minimize effects from light/glare. New development can result in increases in ambient nighttime lighting that can affect nighttime views of the sky. Implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan would result in higher density of mixed-use residential development and public/quasi-public development in the Specific Plan Area, which would increase ambient light in the Specific Plan Area. However, the Specific Plan and surrounding area is already developed and generates and is affected by existing nighttime ambient light; increase in such light would not significantly alter nighttime views of the sky (ability to see the stars), because such views are already limited in city settings.

Lighting, including adverse effects of glare and light trespass or spillover light, are considerations addressed by the City through the site plan and design review process. However, the Specific Plan would result in the potential for new sources of nighttime light in proximity to new and existing residences, which are particularly sensitive to changes in views. The potential to create substantial sources of light would affect views of the area. Therefore, the impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 described above.

Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 requires implementation of 2040 General Plan Policy LUP-4.6 (Compatibility with Adjoining Uses), which requires higher-intensity mixed-use development along major corridors to shield lighting and direct light downward to minimize impacts on adjacent residential uses.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 would ensure that lighting would be directed away from adjacent residential areas within and surrounding the Plan Area, reducing impacts associated with substantial light and glare sources. Additionally, future development in the Plan Area would undergo site plan and review processes stated under the Title 17 of the City’s Planning and Development Code which require lighting to be directed away from residential areas and public streets, reducing impacts related to new substantial sources of light and glare. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Visual Resources Ascent
City of Sacramento

3.12-16 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact 3.12-3: Potential for the Implementation of the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan, in combination Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impact Related to Aesthetics Implementation of the Specific Plan, in combination with other cumulative development in the area, could alter aesthetic conditions in the area. However, through the contribution of Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code, Specific Plan Policy CACC-2, and implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.12- 1 and 3.12-2, the contributions of the Specific Plan within the cumulative context would be less than cumulatively considerable. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

The cumulative context for visual resource impacts includes areas adjacent to and visible from the Specific Plan Area, or areas that would be visible from locations that currently include views of the Specific Plan Area. Cumulative development in the region, including development within the Specific Plan Area, would result in new future development that could conflict with current regulations regarding scenic quality and create new light and glare sources. As discussed in Impact 3.12-1 and Impact 3.12-2 above, implementation of the Specific Plan would result in potentially significant impacts related to applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and new substantial light and glare sources. The Specific Plan would be required to implement and comply with Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code, and Specific Plan Policy CACC-2, to reduce potential impacts towards the scenic quality of the Plan Area and substantial light and glare sources. The Specific Plan, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable projects in the area, would result in a potentially significant cumulative impact as a result of increased lighting sources or due to development that conflicts with regulations that protect scenic quality.

Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measures 3.12-1 described above.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 would ensure that future development within the Specific Plan Area would be consistent and complement the existing visual quality and characteristics of the Plan Area and shield light sources from adjacent residential areas by directing the light downward. The Specific Plan would be required to apply policies stated in the 2040 General Plan and would not conflict with those policies related to zoning or scenic quality. While the Specific Plan, under Specific Plan Policy E-1, would introduce new light sources along the Stockton Boulevard corridor, Mitigation Measure 3.12-1 and lighting standards in Title 17 of the City’s Planning and Development Code, light sources would be directed downward and shielded away from adjacent residential properties as to not create a substantial impact related to light and glare sources. Therefore, the Specific Plan would not result in considerable contribution to the existing significant cumulative impacts associated with visual resources within and surrounding the Plan Area and the cumulative impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 4-1
4 ALTERNATIVES

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15126.6(a) (State CEQA Guidelines) requires EIRs to describe “… a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, it must consider a range of potentially feasible alternatives that will avoid or substantially lessen the significant adverse impacts of a project and foster informed decision making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives that are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives.

There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.” This section of the State CEQA Guidelines also provides guidance regarding what the alternatives analysis should consider. Subsection (b) further states the purpose of the alternatives analysis is as follows:

Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.

The State CEQA Guidelines require that the EIR include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the proposed project. If an alternative would cause one or more significant effects in addition to those that would be caused by the project as proposed, the significant effects of the alternative must be discussed, but in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed (CCR Section 15126.6[d]).

The State CEQA Guidelines further require that the “no project” alternative be considered (CCR Section 15126.6[e]). The purpose of describing and analyzing a no project alternative is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving a proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. If the no project alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that the EIR “…shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” (CCR Section 15126[e][2]).

In defining “feasibility” (e.g., “… feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project …”), CCR Section 15126.6(f) (1) states, in part:

Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent). No one of these factors establishes a fixed limit on the scope of reasonable alternatives.

Alternatives Ascent
City of Sacramento
4-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
In determining what alternatives should be considered in the EIR, it is important to consider the objectives of the project, the project’s significant effects, and unique project considerations. These factors are crucial to the development of alternatives that meet the criteria specified in Section 15126.6(a). Although, as noted above, EIRs must contain a discussion of “potentially feasible” alternatives, the ultimate determination as to whether an alternative is feasible or infeasible is made by the lead agency’s decisionmaking body, here the City Council. (See PRC Sections 21081.5, 21081[a] [3].)

4.2 CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES

4.2.1 Attainment of Project Objectives
As described above, one factor that must be considered in selection of alternatives is the ability of a specific alternative to attain most of the basic objectives of the project (CCR Section 15126.6[a]).

Chapter 2, “Project Description,” identifies the project objectives, which are also described below.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The overall goal of the Stockton Boulevard Plan is to provide for the orderly and systematic improvement and development of the Specific Plan Area in a manner that is consistent with the City and resident’s vision and maximizes opportunities afforded by the area’s proximity to diverse, culturally rich neighborhoods and transit corridors. More specifically, the objectives of the Stockton Boulevard Plan are to:
• Accommodate growth that increases the long-term economic sustainability, equity and wellbeing, and protection of people living and working in the Specific Plan Area. • Provide for the orderly and systematic integration of land uses within the Specific Plan Area. • Facilitate new mixed-use development, reuse, and redevelopment within the Specific Plan Area. • Promote new infill residential development and redevelopment within the Specific Plan Area that supports a mixed-income community and a variety of housing choices, including market-rate and affordable housing options for low-income, very low-income, and extremely low-income households.
• Promote neighborhood-serving uses, including a grocery store and venue(s) for afterschool programs and activities for area youth.
• Enhance public recreation, use, and open space access in the Specific Plan Area. • Enhance the Stockton Boulevard corridor as a gateway and bridge connection between the City of Sacramento and unincorporated areas of Sacramento County to the south of the Specific Plan Area.
• Balance new investments with proactive protection and healing of the community, especially for residents and business owners that are Black, indigenous, and people of color. • Enhance the pedestrian and bicyclist environment along the corridor with safe routes to schools, parks, businesses, and other landmarks.
• Support and promote local businesses in the Specific Plan Area.

Ascent Alternatives
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 4-3
• Protect, celebrate, and enhance the cultural and ethnic diversity, art, and community-centered character of the Stockton Boulevard corridor and its surrounding neighborhoods.

4.2.2 Environmental Impacts of the Project
Sections 3.1 through 3.11 of this Draft EIR address the environmental impacts of implementation of the proposed Stockton Boulevard Plan. Potentially feasible alternatives were developed with consideration of avoiding or lessening the significant, and potentially significant, adverse impacts of the project, as identified in Chapter 3 of this Draft EIR, and summarized below. If an environmental issue area analyzed in this Draft EIR is not addressed below, it is because no significant impacts were identified for that issue area. This Draft EIR identifies the following significant and unavoidable environmental impacts resulting from the project.
• Impact 3.1-3: Result in a Net Increase in Long-Term Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions That Exceed SMAQMD-Recommended Thresholds • Impact 3.1-4: Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations • Impact 3.1-6: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Air Quality or Odor Impact • Impact 3.3-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource • Impact 3.3-2: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources
• Impact 3.3-4: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Cultural Resources • Impact 3.7-3: Exposure of Existing Sensitive Receptors to Project-Generated Traffic Noise • Impact 3.7-5: Potential for Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Noise Impact • Impact 3.8-1: Result in VMT Impacts on the Roadway System • Impact 3.8-2: Impacts to Transit Facilities, Services, or Access • Impact 3.8-5: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Transportation and Circulation System
• Impact 3.9-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a TCR • Impact 3.9-2: Potential for the Project, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impact to Tribal Cultural Resources

4.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT EVALUATED

FURTHER
As described above, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) provides that the range of potential alternatives for the project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic Alternatives Ascent
City of Sacramento
4-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects.

Alternatives that fail to meet the fundamental project purpose need not be addressed in detail in an EIR. (In re Bay-Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1165-1167.)
In determining what alternatives should be considered in the EIR, it is important to acknowledge the objectives of the project, the project’s significant effects, and unique project considerations. These factors are crucial to the development of alternatives that meet the criteria specified in Section 15126.6(a). Although, as noted above, EIRs must contain a discussion of “potentially feasible” alternatives, the ultimate determination as to whether an alternative is feasible or infeasible is made by lead agency decision-maker(s). (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21081(a)(3).) At the time of action on the project, the decision-maker(s) may consider evidence beyond that found in this EIR in addressing such determinations. The decision-maker(s), for example, may conclude that a particular alternative is infeasible (i.e., undesirable) from a policy standpoint, and may reject an alternative on that basis provided that the decision-maker(s) adopts a finding, supported by substantial evidence, to that effect, and provided that such a finding reflects a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and other considerations supported by substantial evidence. (City of Del Mar v.

City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401, 417; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 998.)
The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected during the planning or scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.

The following alternatives were considered by the City but are not evaluated further in this Draft EIR.

4.3.1 Enhanced VMT Land Use Scenario
One of the strategies for reducing a project’s significant VMT impacts is to change the land use configuration to shorten trip lengths and reduce trip generation. This typically involves a greater focus on mixed-use development to place jobs and retail closer to residences. The proposed Specific Plan envisions mixed-use use development almost exclusively throughout the Plan Area. Because the Specific Plan already maximizes mixed use, there are no opportunities for modifying the land use scenario to better maximize VMT efficiency. Therefore, this potential alternative was dismissed from further consideration.

4.3.2 Reduced Residential
A slight reduction in transportation noise may be achieved by reducing the number of residential units allowed. To achieve meaningful reduction in transportation noise generation, a major decrease in trip generation is necessary. A Reduced Residential Alternative that could achieve the project’s objectives related to residential capacity would not likely reduce the project’s significant impact related to transportation noise to a less-than-significant level. Further, reducing the number of residential units would be contrary to basic principles of the 2040 General Plan. The general plan encourages residential development in established corridors, and Stockton Boulevard within the specific plan area is such a case. In addition, state law, including the Housing Accountability Act and the Housing Crisis Act prohibit reduction of density in particular cases; therefore, this alternative may be contrary to state law. This alternative is considered infeasible.

Ascent Alternatives
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 4-5

4.3.3 Employment-Focused Land Use Scenario
Increasing residential density and prioritizing mixed-use development in areas that are well-served by public transit generally translates to increased efficiency in terms of VMT efficiency; however, it is possible that expanding commercial uses with high employment generation potential near existing residential uses could also result in greater VMT efficiency, due to reduced trip length. Such uses could include office, light-industrial/manufacturing, or heavy industrial. An alternative was considered that included increased employment-generating uses. However, this alternative would not be consistent with the land uses identified in the 2040 General Plan. In addition, increased industrial and commercial use in the plan area could result in issues related to environmental justice, especially related to increases in heavy trucks and associated emissions. Also, although expanding employment generating uses could result VMT efficiencies, it is unlikely that the VMT efficiency would be substantially greater than the proposed project; therefore, it is unlikely that this alternative would substantially reduce or avoid the significant VMT impact associated with the project. Finally, this alternative would not achieve several project objectives related to housing. For all of these reasons, this alternative was dismissed from further evaluation.

4.3.4 Reduced Historic Resources Impacts
The project also includes a significant impact related to historic resources. An alternative was considered that would avoid these significant impacts through placing a prohibition on demolition of any structure that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National registers. However, this alternative was dismissed, as its legality is questionable. The City may not have legal authority to place a blanket prohibition on demolition of privately-owned structures across an entire plan area; typically, proposed demolition of these structures involves a discretionary approval process, not outright prohibition. Also, some structures may require demolition for public health and safety purposes. Therefore, this alternative was dismissed, due to likely infeasibility.

4.4 ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR DETAILED ANALYSIS
The proposed project involves increasing residential density, prioritizing mixed-use development, and enhancing sustainable transportation in the plan area. All of these planning priorities generally result in benefits related to GHG and energy efficiency. VMT efficiency, although considered significant, is also generally minimized through these planning priorities (i.e., other planning priorities/land use scenarios would likely result in greater VMT impacts). Because CEQA requires alternatives to be feasible and substantially reduce or avoid significant project impacts, it is challenging to identify alternatives for projects that are designed to minimize impacts. As described above, several alternatives were evaluated but dismissed from further consideration due to either infeasibility of the alternative or inability to substantially reduce or avoid the project’s significant impacts. The following alternatives are evaluated in this Draft EIR.
• Alternative 1: No Project–Planned Land Use assumes a specific plan would not be approved and development in the plan area would occur according to the 2040 General Plan. • Alternative 2: Enhanced Transit. To reduce the project’s significant impacts related to VMT, this alternative further reduces reliance on automobiles by enhancing transit facilities beyond the improvements identified in the Corridor Study.

Further details on these alternatives, and an evaluation of environmental effects relative to the proposed project, are provided below.

Alternatives Ascent
City of Sacramento
4-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR

4.4.1 Alternative 1: No Project– Planned Land Use
The State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[e][1]) states the purpose for describing and analyzing a no project alternative is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. The Guidelines suggest two typical paths for discussing the no project alternative: 1) when the project is the revision of an existing land use or regulatory plan, the no project alternative would be a continuation of the existing plan into the future, or 2) if the project is other than a land use plan, for example a development project on identifiable property, the no project alternative is the circumstance under which the project does not proceed, specifically the practical result of the project’s non-approval (not a set of artificial assumptions that would be required to preserve the existing physical environment).

Because the project is in an urban area and is currently designated and zoned for urban development a “no development” scenario would not be reasonably foreseeable; therefore, the No Project Alternative does not focus on the second category. Alternative 1, the No Project–No Development Alternative, falls under the first category, which, as CEQA describes, is appropriate for a project that involves primarily revision of an existing land use plan. Under Alternative 1, the Stockton Boulevard Plan would not be approved and the primary land use plan guiding development in the plan area would be the currently adopted 2040 General Plan. The proposed Stockton Boulevard Plan is designed to be consistent with the land use designations identified in the 2040 General Plan for the plan area; therefore, under the No Project Alternative, buildout of the project area would be identical to the project in terms of the type and arrangement of land uses.

However, development under the No Project Alternative would not receive some of the regulatory streamlining that would be available under the proposed project, including the level of discretionary review, as well as additional CEQA streamlining (i.e., under Section 15182). The No Project Alternative would also not include the same level of integrated infrastructure planning associated with the Specific Plan. It would also not include the same level of public input and coordination as the proposed specific plan. In addition, public and private funding opportunities, including grants, bonds, and incentives targeted at planned developments, would not be as likely available under the No Project Alternative.

These financial mechanisms can accelerate development by providing necessary capital up front or by making projects more economically viable from the outset. For these reasons, development would likely occur at a slightly more rapid pace under the proposed project than under the No Project Alternative.

However, the pace of development would be primarily determined by market forces, and any attempt to estimate a difference in the rate of development would be an exercise in speculation.

Both the 2040 General Plan and the proposed Specific Plan identify the same area for urban development. Therefore, impacts associated with ground disturbance would be practically identical between the No Project Alternative and the project, including impacts related to cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, biological resources, construction-related hazardous materials, constructiongenerated water pollutant emissions, and tribal cultural resources. Operational impacts would also be nearly identical because the types of land uses allowed within the 2040 General Plan and the proposed Specific Plan are essentially identical. Therefore, because the only difference in the level of impact would relate to potential timing of development due to streamlining and funding associated with the project, which would be unavailable under the No Project Alternative, overall impacts resulting from the No Project Alternative would be similar to those associated with the proposed project.

Ascent Alternatives
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 4-7

4.4.2 Alternative 2: Enhanced Transit
To reduce the project’s significant impacts related to VMT, this alternative reduces reliance on automobiles by enhancing transit facilities. The alternative includes improvements (beyond those identified in the Corridor Study) consistent with the Stockton Boulevard Multimodal Partnership and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor—a project submitted in early 2023 for SACOG’s Transformative Grant Program. This project would be a multi-agency endeavor involving the City, County, Sacramento Regional Transit, and Sacramento Transportation Authority. Specifically, the project would include transit improvements along BRT Route 51, including BRT-lite treatments, BRT station shelters and amenities, traffic signal priority, intelligent transportation system equipment, zero emission vehicle and related infrastructure needs, as well as complete streets safety and mobility improvements on Stockton Boulevard. Other than these improvements, the land use types and intensities are identical to the proposed project.

The Enhanced Transit Alternative would meet the project objectives; however, because the Stockton Boulevard Multimodal Partnership and BRT Corridor requires involvement by several separate agencies, as well as funding from a grant that has not yet been awarded, the feasibility of this alternative is currently uncertain.

Because the only difference between the alternative and the project is the further enhancement of transit facilities, the only potential project-related significant impacts that could be reduced by the alternative are those associated with VMT, specifically, air quality, noise, and transportation. (The alternative would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts.) The discussion below will focus on those environmental issue areas.

AIR QUALITY
The enhanced transit operation under the alternative would likely result in modest VMT reduction, which would likewise slightly reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants associated with automobile use.

Because all other aspects of the project are shared by the alternative, the transportation-related criteria pollutant emissions would be the only emissions sector reduced. The proposed project would result in a significant impact associated with operations-related criteria air pollutant emissions. The impact associated with the Enhanced Transit Alternative would be Slightly Less but would not be avoided.

NOISE
Construction-related noise and noise associated with buildings and other non-transportation-related noise generated during operation would be nearly identical between the alternative and the project.

However, the reduced reliance on automobile trips associated with the Enhanced Transit Alternative could result in less of an increase in roadway noise compared to the proposed project. Although, this reduction would not likely avoid the significant impact, the impact associated with the alternative would be Slightly Less.

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
The additional transit enhancements associated with this alternative would result in modest reductions in VMT compared to the project. In addition, the enhanced transit would also reduce the project’s significant impact related to transit service capacity. These reductions would not likely avoid either of these significant impacts associated with the project; however, the Enhanced Transit Alternative could result in a meaningful reduction in the impact, even if that reduction does not bring the level of impact Alternatives Ascent
City of Sacramento
4-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
below the threshold of significance. Thus, the VMT impact associated with the alternative would be Slightly Less than the project impact.

4.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
As illustrated in Table 5-1, below, the Enhanced Transit Alternative would be environmentally superior action alternative because although the environmental impacts would, overall, be similar to the proposed project, and no significant impacts would be completely avoided, the increased VMT efficiency would result in modest reductions to transportation-related impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and VMT.

Table 4-1 Summary of Environmental Effects of the Alternatives Relative to the Proposed Project Environmental Topic Proposed Project Alternative 1: No Project – Planned Land Use
Alternative 2: Enhanced
Transit
Air Quality SU Similar Slightly Less
Cultural Resources SU Similar Similar
Biological Resources LTSM Similar Similar
Climate Change LTSM Similar Slightly Less
Energy LTSM Similar Similar
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTSM Similar Similar
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS Similar Similar
Noise SU Similar Slightly Less
Public Services and Recreation LTSM Similar Similar
Transportation and Circulation SU Similar Slightly Less Tribal Cultural Resources SU Similar Similar
Utilities and Service Systems LTS Similar Similar
Visual Resources LTSM Similar Similar
Notes: SU = Significant and Unavoidable; LTSM = Less than Significant with Mitigation; LTS = Less than Significant City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 5-1
5 OTHER CEQA SECTIONS
Section 15126 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that all phases of a project must be considered when evaluating its impact on the environment, including planning, construction, and operation. Further, the evaluation of significant impacts must consider direct and reasonably foreseeable indirect effects of the project over the short-term and long-term.

Section 15126 of the State CEQA Guidelines also requires an EIR to identify (1) significant environmental effects of the proposed project, (2) significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented, (3) significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from implementation of the proposed project, (4) mitigation measures proposed to minimize significant effects, (5) growth-inducing impacts of the proposed project, and (6) alternatives to the proposed project.

Chapter 3, “Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures,” and Chapter 4, “Cumulative Impacts,” of this EIR provide a comprehensive presentation of the environmental effects of the proposed Specific Plan, proposed mitigation measures, and conclusions regarding the level of significance of each impact before and after mitigation. Chapter 4, “Alternatives,” presents a comparative analysis of alternatives to the Specific Plan. This chapter describes other CEQA-required analyses related to growth inducement and significant irreversible environmental changes and summarizes the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in Chapter 3.

5.1 GROWTH INDUCEMENT
Section 21100(b)(5) of the State CEQA Guidelines specifies that the growth-inducing impacts of a project must be addressed in an EIR. Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides the following guidance for assessing growth-inducing impacts of a project:

Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth (a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Also, discuss the characteristics of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.

It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

A project can induce growth directly, indirectly, or both. Direct growth inducement would result if a project involved construction of new housing. Indirect growth inducement would result, for instance, if implementing a project resulted in any of the following:
• substantial new permanent employment opportunities (e.g., commercial, industrial, or governmental enterprises);
• substantial short-term employment opportunities (e.g., construction employment) that indirectly stimulates the need for additional housing and services to support the new temporary employment demand; and/or
Other CEQA Sections Ascent
City of Sacramento
5-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
• removal of an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public utility or service (e.g., construction of a major sewer line with excess capacity through an undeveloped area).

Growth inducement itself is not an environmental effect but may foreseeably lead to environmental effects. If substantial growth inducement occurs, it can result in secondary environmental effects, such as increased demand for housing, demand for other community and public services and infrastructure capacity, increased traffic and noise, degradation of air or water quality, degradation or loss of plant or animal habitats, conversion of agricultural and open-space land to urban uses, and other effects. These indirect or secondary effects of growth may result in significant environmental impacts. CEQA does not require that the EIR speculate unduly about the precise location and site-specific characteristics of significant, indirect effects caused by induced growth, but a good-faith effort is required to disclose what is feasible to assess. Potential secondary effects of growth could include consequences – such as conversion of open space to developed uses, increased demand on community and public services and infrastructure, increased traffic and noise, degradation of air and water quality, or degradation or loss of plant and wildlife habitat – that are the result of growth fostered by the project.

The decision to allow those projects that result from induced growth is the subject of separate discretionary processes by the lead agency responsible for considering such projects. Because the decision to allow growth is subject to separate discretionary decision making, and such decision making is itself subject to CEQA, the analysis of growth-inducing effects is not intended to determine sitespecific environmental impacts and specific mitigation for the potentially induced growth. Rather, the discussion is intended to disclose the potential for environmental effects to occur more generally, such that decision makers are aware that additional environmental effects are a possibility if growth-inducing projects are approved. The decision of whether impacts do occur, their extent, and the ability to mitigate them is appropriately left to consideration by the agency responsible for approving such projects at such times as complete applications for development are submitted.

5.1.1 Growth Variables
The timing, magnitude, and location of land development and population growth in a community or region are based on various interrelated land use and economic variables. Key variables include regional economic trends, market demand for residential and nonresidential uses, land availability and cost, the availability and quality of transportation facilities and public services, proximity to employment centers, the supply and cost of housing, and regulatory policies or conditions. Because the General Plan of a community defines the location, type, and intensity of growth, it is the primary means of regulating development and growth in California.

5.1.2 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Project
Implementation of the Specific Plan would foster short-term and long-term economic growth as a result of new construction, increased residential housing units, and increased employment opportunities along Stockton Boulevard. Buildout in the Specific Plan Area assumes the development of 4,077 new units of housing and an estimated 372,116 square feet of commercial space. Buildout of the Specific Plan would occur over a long period of time (more than 20 years). This 2040 General Plan assumes development of 2,007 dwelling units (approximately 5,138 residents based on 2.56 persons per household) and the addition of 5,819 employment opportunities within the Specific Plan Area.

Ascent Other CEQA Sections
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 5-3
As discussed in Section 3.11, “Utilities and Service Systems,” of this EIR, the Specific Plan Area would directly connect to existing utility infrastructure (e.g., water, wastewater, natural gas, and electricity).

Infrastructure improvements to the water system, such as water main upsizing and extension, would be necessary to support the buildout of the Specific Plan. However, the infrastructure would only be improved to serve existing and planned land uses in the Specific Plan Area and would not remove barriers to growth outside of the Specific Plan Area.

The Specific Plan is growth inducing because it plans for additional population, housing, and employment opportunities. The Specific Plan does not propose to locate residential units or commercial development in areas not anticipated for urban development in the 2040 General Plan. The Specific Plan was developed based on extensive study of the Specific Plan Area and surrounding Neighborhood Study Area. Buildout capacity was calculated based on an inventory of vacant and underutilized sites and the plan was developed to be consistent with citywide planning efforts. The effects of the planned growth are discussed in Sections 3.1 through 3.12 of this EIR; indirect or secondary effects of growth are not anticipated.

5.2 SIGNIFICANT AND IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL

CHANGES
The State CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by the project. Specifically, the State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.2(c) states:

Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible, since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generation to similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.

Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of energy and material resources during construction and operation. Development under the Specific Plan would result in the densification of uses and commitment of the City of Sacramento to higher intensity, urban development of the Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan would commit future generations to the proposed uses in the Specific Plan Area as well as commit nonrenewable sources to the construction and operation of the Specific Plan Area.

Resources that would be permanently and continually consumed by Specific Plan implementation include water, electricity, natural gas, and fossil fuels; however, the amount and rate of consumption of these resources would not result in significant environmental impacts related to the unnecessary, inefficient, or wasteful use of resources as stated in Section 3.4, “Energy.” Construction activities related to development under the Specific Plan would result in the irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable energy resources, primarily in the form of fossil fuels (including fuel oil), natural gas, and gasoline for automobiles and construction equipment.

With respect to operational activities, compliance with all applicable building codes, as well as project mitigation measures or project requirements, would ensure that all natural resources are conserved or recycled to the maximum extent feasible. It is also possible that new technologies or systems would emerge, or would become more cost-effective or user-friendly, that would further reduce the Specific Plan Area’s reliance upon nonrenewable natural resources. Nonetheless, even with implementation of Other CEQA Sections Ascent
City of Sacramento
5-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
conservation measures, consumption of natural resources would generally increase with implementation of the Specific Plan, as the Specific Plan Area is currently developed with less intense residential and commercial development with lower demand for utilities.

5.3 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b) requires EIRs to include a discussion of the significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented. As documented throughout Chapter 3 of this EIR, after implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, most of the impacts associated with the Specific Plan would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. The following impacts are considered significant and unavoidable; that is, no feasible mitigation is available to reduce the project’s impacts to a less-than-significant level. • Impact 3.1-3: Result in a Net Increase in Long-Term Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions That Exceed SMAQMD-Recommended Thresholds • Impact 3.1-6: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Air Quality or Odor Impact. • Impact 3.3-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource • Impact 3.3-2: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources
• Impact 3.3-4: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Cultural Resources • Impact 3.7-3: Exposure of Existing Sensitive Receptors to Project-Generated Traffic Noise • Impact 3.7-5: Potential for Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Noise Impact • Impact 3.9-1: Result in VMT Impacts on the Roadway System • Impact 3.9-2: Impacts to Transit Facilities, Services or Access • Impact 3.9-5: Potential for the Implementation of the Specific Plan, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impacts to Transportation and Circulation System
• Impact 3.10-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a TCR • Impact 3.10-2: Potential for the Project, in Combination with Other Development, to Contribute to a Significant Cumulative Impact to Tribal Cultural Resources City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 6-1
6 REPORT PREPARERS
City of Sacramento (Lead Agency)
Elizabeth Boyd, AICP........................................................................................................Senior Planner Matt Hertel, AICP.........................................................Principal Planner/Long Range Planning Manager Tom Buford...........................................................................Manager, Environmental Planning Services Ascent, Inc. (CEQA Compliance)
Mike Parker, AICP ......................................................................................................................Principal Jessica Babcock............................................................................................................ Project Manager Yingying Cai ................................................................................................... Assistant Project Manager Amber Grady .........................................................................................................Architectural Historian Elena Savignano...................................................................................................Environmental Planner Eric Cohen............................................................................................................Environmental Planner Heidi Gen Kuong, AICP .....................................................................................................Urban Planner Jacklyn Bottomley.................................................................................................Environmental Planner Matt Brehmer...............................................................................................................Air Quality Analyst Julia Wilson ............................................................................Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist Jazmin Amini ........................................................................................................Environmental Planner Karileigh Williams .......................................................................................................................Biologist Tammie Beyerl............................................................................. Senior Botanist and Wetland Ecologist Michele Mattei .........................................................................................................Publishing Specialist Riley Smith ..............................................................................................................Publishing Specialist Fehr and Peers (Transportation)
Adrian Engel, PE CASp ..............................................................................................................Principal Sonia Anthoine ......................................................................................... Senior Transportation Planner Albie Wei, PTP.......................................................................................... Senior Transportation Planner Report Preparers Ascent
City of Sacramento
6-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-1
7 REFERENCES
Executive Summary
No references cited in this chapter.

Chapter 1 Introduction
NV5. 2022 (April). Stockton Boulevard Plan Utility Infrastructure. Prepared for City of Sacramento Community Development Department, Planning Division. Sacramento, CA.

Chapter 2 Project Description
City of Sacramento. 2024 (February 27). Sacramento 2040 General Plan.

NV5. 2022 (April). Stockton Boulevard Plan Utility Infrastructure. Prepared for City of Sacramento Community Development Department, Planning Division. Sacramento, CA.

Chapter 3 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures No references cited in this chapter.

Section 3.1 Air Quality
California Air Resources Board. 2013. California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality—2013 Edition.

Available: http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac13/almanac13.htm. Accessed January 4, 2017.
______. 2016. May 4. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Available:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. Accessed January 4, 2017. ______. 2017a Strategies to Reduce Air Pollution Exposure Near High-Volume Roadways Technical Advisory. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2017- 10/rd_technical_advisory_final.pdf. Accessed May 24, 2024. ———.2022. State Area Designation Maps. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations.

Accessed: September 5, 2023.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

EPA. See US Environmental Protection Agency.

OEHHA. See Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2021. California Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool Version 4.0. Available:
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40. Accessed: September, 2023.

SMAQMD. See Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2019a.Odor Complaints, Health Impacts and Monitoring Methods. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/research/apr/past/18rd010.pdf. Accessed:

September 5, 2023.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-2 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
———. 2019b. Friant Ranch Interim Recommendation. Available:
https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/FriantInterimRecommendation.pd f. Accessed: September, 2023.
———. 2020a (October). Guidance to Address the Friant Ranch Ruling for CEQA Projects in the Sac Metro Air District. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. Sacramento, California. Prepared by Ramboll US Corporation. San Francisco, California. ———. 2020b. Sacramento County CEQA Guide Chapter 4: Operational Criteria Air Pollutant and Precursor Emissions. Available:
https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/Ch4OperationalFinal10-2020.pdf.

Accessed March 26, 2024.
———. 2020c. Sacramento County CEQA Guide Thresholds of Significance Table. Available:
https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/CH2ThresholdsTable4-2020.pdf, Accessed March 26, 2024.

US Environmental Protection Agency. 2023a. Green Book. Available: https://www.epa.gov/greenbook/green-book-national-area-and-county-level-multi-pollutant-information. Accessed:

September 5, 2023.
———. 2023b. Criteria Air Pollutants. Available: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. Accessed:

September 5, 2023.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2016. Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Available:
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca7630. Accessed January 4, 2017.

WRCC. See Western Regional Climate Center.

Section 3.2 Biological Resources
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2019. Landcover: California Wildfire Habitat Relationships System Types. Available: https://34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdnendpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/calfire-website/what-we-do/fire-resource-assessment-program-- -frap/pdf-maps/california-landcover-vegitation2019.pdf?rev=18bb35fb61af481f8efb5a3bb5510c14&hash=6D88FC3B1D042F46827FF6D1FB D3AEC3. Accessed October 31, 2023.

City of Sacramento. 2023. Permits & Ordinances. Available: https://www.cityofsacramento.org/PublicWorks/Maintenance-Services/Trees/Permits-Ordinances. Accessed October 19, 2023.

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Inventory. 2023. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v-9.5).

Available: http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed October 19, 2023.

California Natural Diversity Database. 2023. Results of electronic records search. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, CA. Accessed October 19, 2023.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2023. Information for Planning and Conservation. Available:
http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Accessed October 19, 2023.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. Available:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959. Accessed October 19, 2023.

Ascent References
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-3
Faber-Langendoen, D., J. Nichols, L. Master, K. Snow, A. Tomaino, R. Bittman, G. Hammerson, B.

Heidel, L. Ramsay, A. Teucher, and B. Young. 2012. NatureServe Conservation Status Assessments: Methodology for Assigning Ranks. NatureServe. Arlington, VA.

Spencer, W. D., P. Beier, K. Penrod, K. Winters, C. Paulman, H. Rustigian-Romsos, J. Strittholt, M.

Parisi, and A. Pettler. 2010. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, California Department of Fish and Game, and Federal Highway Administration.

Section 3.3 Cultural Resources
Dyett & Bhatia. 2020. Sacramento 2040: Technical Background Report.

Page & Turnbull. 2023. Historic Resources Analysis Report – Final: Stockton Boulevard Strategic Neighborhood Action Plan (SNAP) and Specific Plan.

Section 3.4 Energy
AFDC. See Alternative Fuels Data Center.

Alternative Fuels Data Center. 2023. California Statewide Alternative Fueling Station Locator Tool.

Available: https://afdc.energy.gov/stations#/find/nearest. Accessed: October 11, 2023.

California Air Resources Board. 2022, November 16. Final 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf. Accessed:

December 28, 2022.

California Energy Commission. 2019. The 2019 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan. Available:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/1900. Accessed: October 26, 2022. ———. 2022a. 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2021-integrated-energy-policy-report. Accessed:

January 30, 2023.
———. 2022b (August). 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Publication Number: CEC-400- 2022-010-CMF. Available: 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (final version) (ca.gov).

Accessed: December 20, 2022.
———. 2023. California Annual Retail Fuel Outlet Report Results (CEC-A15). Available:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-04/2010-2022%20CECA15%20Results%20and%20Analysis%20ADA.xlsx. Accessed: October 13, 2023.

California Energy Commission and California Air Resources Board. 2003. Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence. Available: Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence (P600-03- 005F). Accessed: January 16, 2023.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

CEC. See California Energy Commission.

CEC and CARB. See California Energy Commission and California Air Resources Board.

EIA. See U.S. Energy Information Administration.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-4 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2022 Power Content Label. Available:
https://www.smud.org/SMUDPCL. Accessed: October 11, 2023.

SMUD. See Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2023. California State Profile and Energy Estimates. Available:
https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA#:~:text=California%20is%20the%20fourthlargest%20electricity%20producer%20in%20the,generation%20and%20about%20half%20of%2 0California%27s%20utility-scale%20generation. Accessed: October 9, 2023.

U.S. Department of Energy. n.d. Alternative Fuel Transportation Program Frequently Asked Questions.

Available: https://epact.energy.gov/faqs/?question=in-the-context-of-determining-whether-ourfleet-is-a-covered-fleet-under-the-program-how-do-i-determine-if-our-ldvs-are-quot-centrallyfueled-quot-or-quot-capable-of-being-centrally-fueled-quot.

Section 3.5 Greenhouse Gasses and Climate Change
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2023. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2022.1.1.20. Available: http://www.caleemod.com/. Accessed October 10, 2023.

California Air Resources Board. 2018. SB 375 Regional Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Targets. Approved by the California Air Resources Board March 22, 2018. Available:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/finaltargets2018.pdf. Accessed November 20, 2023. ———. 2020. Evaluation of the Sacramento Area Council Of Governments' SB 375 2020 Sustainable Communities Strategy. Available: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021- 02/Evaluation%20of%20the%20GHG%20Emissions%20Reduction%20Quantification%20for%2 0the%20SACOG%20SB%20375%20October%202020_1.pdf. Accessed: June 17, 2024.

California Energy Commission. 2021. Draft 2022 Energy Code Multifamily and Nonresidential Compliance Manual. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-andtopics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency. Accessed September 2022.

California Natural Resources Agency. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update. Available:
https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/docs/climate/safeguarding/update2018/safeguardin g-california-plan-2018-update.pdf. Accessed: June 17, 2024.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

CAPCOA. See California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

CEC. See California Energy Commission.

City of Sacramento. 2020. City of Sacramento Climate Action Plan Update Appendix A – Community Inventory and Forecast Methodology. Available: https://www.cityofsacramento.org/- /media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Major-Projects/App-A---Community-Technical-AppendixFinal-3_16_20.pdfla=en. Accessed: June 17, 2024.

Ascent References
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-5
———. 2024. City of Sacramento Draft Climate Action Plan. Available:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/cdd/Planning/General-Plan/07RedlinedVersion-of-the-revised-Draft-Climate-Action--Adaptation-Plan.pdf. Accessed: June 17, 2024.

CNRA. See California Natural Resources Agency.

European Commission Joint Research Centre. 2018 (March 16). Climate Change Promotes the Spread of Mosquito and Tick-Borne Viruses. Available:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180316111311.htm. Accessed February 13, 2020.

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, California Energy Commission, and California Natural Resources Agency. 2018 (August). California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. Chapter 6, Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. Pages 465–570 in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Available: http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf.

Accessed October 9, 2023.
———. 2014. Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report: Summary for Policymakers. Available:
https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf. Accessed October 9, 2023.

IPCC. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Lister, B. C., and A. Garcia. 2018. Climate-Driven Declines in Arthropod Abundance Restructure a Rainforest Food Web. Available: https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/44/E10397.full.pdf.

Accessed March 14, 2022.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2019. (February 6). 2018 Fourth Warmest Year in Continued Warming Trend, According to NASA, NOAA.
https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2841/2018-fourth-warmest-year-in-continued-warming-trendaccording-to-nasa-noaa/. Accessed February 13, 2020.

NOAA See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OPR. See Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

SACOG. See Sacramento Area Council of Governments.

Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2019. 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Available: https://www.sacog.org/planning/blueprint/2020-mtp-scs.

Accessed October 11, 2023.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2021. CEQA Guide -- Chapter 6:

Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available:
https://www.airquality.org/LandUseTransportation/Documents/Ch6GHG2-26-2021.pdf.

Accessed: September 15, 2023.

SMAQMD See Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-6 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
United Nations. 2015. Paris Agreement. Available:
https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf. Accessed October 11, 2023.

Wade, Samuel. Branch chief. Transportation Fuels Branch, Industrial Strategies Division, California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, CA. June 30, 2017―e-mail to Austin Kerr of Ascent regarding whether the Low Carbon Fuel Standard applies to fuels used by off-road construction equipment.

Section 3.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
CAL FIRE. See California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

California Department of Education. 2023. 2022-2023 Enrollment by Grade – Sacramento City Unified Report (34-67439). Available at
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdLevels.aspx?cds=3467439&agglevel=District& year=2022-23. Accessed September 25, 2023.

CDE. See California Department of Education.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2023. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps.

Available: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-preparedness-andmitigation/wildfire-preparedness/fire-hazard-severity-zones/fire-hazard-severity-zones-map/.

Accessed October 10, 2023.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2023. EnviroStor Data Management System.

Available: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed October 10, 2023.

DTSC. See California Department of Toxic Substances Control.

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. 2023. National Hazardous Wate Route Registry – By State. Available: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hazardous-materials/nationalhazardous-materials-route-registry-state. Access October 12, 2023.

SACOG. See Sacramento Council of Governments.

Sacramento Council of Governments. 1999 (May). Sacramento Executive Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Adopted May 1998. Amended May 1999. Available:
https://www.sacog.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/sacramento_executive_airport_clup_amend_may_1999_-_99- 013.pdf?1456339912. Accessed October 5, 2023.

State Water Resources Control Board. 2023. GeoTracker. Available:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
Section 3.7 Noise and Vibration
California Department of Transportation. 2013 (September). Technical Noise Supplement. California Department of Transportation Division of Environmental Analysis. Sacramento, CA. Prepared by ICF Jones & Stokes. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmentalanalysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf. Accessed September 8, 2023. ———. 2020 (April). Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Sacramento, CA:

Noise, Division of Environmental Analysis. Sacramento, CA. Available: https://dot.ca.gov/- Ascent References
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-7
/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf.

Accessed September 8, 2023.

Caltrans. See California Department of Transportation
EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Federal Highway Administration. 2004. Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5. Available for download at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/traffic_noise_model/purchasing_tnm/. Accessed April 4, 2017.
———. 2006 (January). Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. Washington, D.C. Prepared by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Cambridge, MA.

Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Washington, D.C. Available: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf. Accessed September 7, 2023.

FHWA. See Federal Highway Administration.

FTA. See Federal Transit Administration.

SACOG. See Sacramento Council of Governments.

Sacramento Council of Governments. 1999 (May). Sacramento Executive Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Adopted May 1998. Amended May 1999. Available: https://www.sacog.org/sites/ main/files/file-attachments/sacramento_executive_airport_clup_amend_may_1999_-_99- 013.pdf?1456339912. Accessed October 5, 2023.
———. 2023. Sacramento County. Available: https://www.sacog.org/post/sacramento-county.

Accessed October 12, 2023.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1971 (December). Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances. Washington, DC. Prepared by Bolt Baranek and Newman.

Section 3.8 Public Services and Recreation
California Department of Education. 2023. 2022-2023 Enrollment by Grade – Sacramento City Unified Report (34-67439). Available at
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdLevels.aspx?cds=3467439&agglevel=District& year=2022-23. Accessed September 5, 2023.

California Department of Finance. 2023a (January). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020-2023. Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. Available at https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimatesfor-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2023/. Accessed September 5, 2023. ______. 2023b (July 19). P-2A Total Population for California and Counties. Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/projections/t. Accessed September 14, 2023.

CDE. See California Department of Education.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-8 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
City of Sacramento. 2009 (Adopted April 21). City of Sacramento Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2005-2010.
______. 2021. Public Review Draft City of Sacramento Housing Element 2021-2029 Appendix H-1 Community Profile.
______. 2023a. Proposed City of Sacramento Fiscal Year 2023/2024 Budget. ______. 2023b. Sacramento Fire Department. Available at https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Fire/About. Accessed September 5, 2023. _______. 2023c. Community Centers. Available at
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/parksandrec/community-centers. Accessed September 6, 2023.
_______. 2024 (May). Sacramento Parks Plan 2040.

Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. 2023. Agency Statistics – Total Employment.

Available at https://post.ca.gov/Agency-Statistics. Accessed September 5, 2023.

DOF. See California Department of Finance.

Dyett & Bhatia. 2020. Sacramento 2040: Technical Background Report.

FBI. See Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2018. 2017 Crime in the United States – Police Employee Data.

Available at https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/policeemployeedata#:~:text=Nationwide%2C%20the%20rate%20of%20sworn,(Based%20on%20Table%2074.) . Accessed September 14, 2023.

New Economics & Advisory. 2016 (October 12). City of Sacramento Park Impact Fee Nexus Study Update.

Sacramento City Unified School District. 2012 (March). Developer Fee Justification Report.

Sacramento Public Library. 2023. About Us – Library Board – Authority board. Available at https://www.saclibrary.org/About/Our-Governance/Authority-Board. Accessed September 5, 2023.

Sacramento Public Library Authority. 2007 (January 23). Sacramento Public Library Authority Facility Master Plan 2007-2025.

SCUSD. See Sacramento City Unified School District.

SPL. See Sacramento Public Library.

SPLA. See Sacramento Public Library Authority.

POST. See Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training.

Ascent References
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-9
Section 3.9 Transportation and Circulation
Auditor of the State of California. 2021. California Air Resources Board: Improved Program Measurement Would Help California Work More Strategically to Meet Its Climate Change Goals.

Report 2020-114. Sacramento, CA.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2021 (December). Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Change Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.

California Air Resources Board. 2018 (November). 2018 Progress Report. California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. Sacramento, CA. ———. 2021 (October 28). 2020 Mobile Source Strategy. Sacramento, CA. ———. 2022a (June). Draft 2022 Progress Report: California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act.
———. 2022b (December). 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality.

California Department of Transportation. 2009 (May). State Route 99 & Interstate 5: Corridor System Management Plan.
———. 2013 (January). District System Management and Development Plan: Caltrans District 3. ———. 2014. Transportation Concept Report and Corridor System Management Plan: United States Route 50. District 3.
———. 2017 (July). Transportation Concept Report: State Route 99. District 3. ———. 2020a (May). Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide. ———. 2020b (December 18). Traffic Safety Bulletin 20-02-R1: Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioners Guidance. Letter of memorandum to district directors.

Caltrans. See California Department of Transportation.

CAPCOA. See California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.

CARB. See California Air Resources Board.

City of Sacramento. 2016 (August 16). Bicycle Master Plan. ———. 2021a (December). Vision Zero Action Plan.
———. 2021b (April). Stockton Boulevard Corridor Plan.

Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2018 (December). Technical Advisory: On Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.

OPR. See Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

SACOG. See Sacramento Area Council of Governments.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-10 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2019 (November 18). 2020 MTP/SCS: Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.

Sacramento Regional Transit District. 2013 (June 28). Regional Transit Service Standards. ———. 2018. SacRT Forward Network Plan: Transit Choices Report. ———. 2023 (July). Stockton Boulevard Implementation Plan. Final report.

SacRT. See Sacramento Regional Transit District.

US Census Bureau. 2021. US Census Bureau’s 2017-2021 American Community Survey (ACS), Table S0801 Commuting Characteristics by Sex. Available: Retrieved from:
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST5Y2021.S0801?q=Commuting&g=040XX00US06_160XX0 0US0664000.

Section 3.10 Tribal Cultural Resources
Dyett & Bhatia. 2020. Sacramento 2040: Technical Background Report.

Ione Band of Miwok Indians. 2022. Departments. Available: https://ionemiwok.net/departments/.

Accessed April 2022.

Judicial Council of California (JCC). 2020. Archaeological Mitigation Plan and Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment Plan for the New Sacramento Courthouse Project, City of Sacramento, Sacramento County, California. Prepared by John Nadolski,
Private School Review. 2022. United Auburn Indian Community Tribal School.

Available: https://www.privateschoolreview.com/united-auburn-indian-community-tribal-schoolprofile. Accessed April 25, 2022.

Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians (SSBMI). 2022a. Departments.

Available: https://www.shinglespringsrancheria.com/departments/. Accessed April 25, 2022. ———. 2022b. Tribal Court. Available: https://www.shinglespringsrancheria.com/tribal-court/. Accessed April 25, 2022.

United Auburn Indian Community (UAIC). 2022. About Us.

Available: https://www.auburnrancheria.com/about-us/.

Wilton Rancheria. 2022a. Wilton Rancheria. Available: https://wiltonrancheriansn.gov/Home/tabid/303/Default.aspx. Accessed April 25, 2022. ———. 2022b. Tribal Court. Available: https://wiltonrancheriansn.gov/TribalCourt/General/tabid/744/Default.aspx. Accessed April 25, 2022.

Section 3.11 Utilities and Service Systems
California Department of Finance. 2023. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State. Available: https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/estimates-e5- 2010-2021/. Accessed: October 20, 2023.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. 2023a. Jurisdiction Disposal by Facility.

Available: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/ DisposalByFacility. Accessed October 25, 2023.

Ascent References
City of Sacramento
Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR 7-11
———. 2023b. Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Detail, Sacramento 2017. Available:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/%20DiversionProgram/JurisdictionDiversionDetail/41 8/Year/2022. Accessed October 25, 2023.

CalRecycle. See California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery.

City of Sacramento. 2021 (May). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by West Yost Associates Consulting Engineers. Sacramento, CA.
———. 2023. SB610/SB221 Water Supply Assessment and Certification Form for the Stockton Boulevard Specific Plan. Prepared by NV5 and verified by Jay Radke (City of Sacramento).

NV5. 2022 (April). Stockton Boulevard Plan Infrastructure Report.

Section 3.12 Visual Resources
California Department of Transportation. 2023. California State Scenic Highway System Map.

Available:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057 116f1aacaa. Accessed: September 25, 2023.

Chapter 4 Alternatives
No references cited in this chapter.

Chapter 5 Other CEQA Sections
No references cited in this chapter.

References Ascent
City of Sacramento
7-12 Stockton Blvd Plan Draft EIR
This page intentionally left blank.

Ascent
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
ascent.inc
APPENDIX A – NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND PUBLIC COMMENTS
1 DATE: July 8, 2021
TO: Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and Interested Persons FROM: Elizabeth Boyd, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

AND SCOPING MEETING FOR THE STOCKTON BOULEVARD PLAN

COMMENT PERIOD
July 8, 2021 – August 9, 2021

SCOPING MEETING
July 20, 2021; 4:30-5:30 p.m.

By Computer: To join the meeting by computer, please register:

Zoom Meeting Registration Link: https://tinyurl.com/88yuppm8 The presentation will be recorded and available to view after July 20, 2021, at the project website: cityofsacramento.org/Stockton-Blvd-Plan
Responsible agencies and members of the public are invited to attend and provide input on the scope of the EIR. Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the scoping meeting will be conducted in a virtual open house format. Written comments regarding relevant issues may be submitted during the meeting.

INTRODUCTION
The City of Sacramento (City) is the lead agency responsible for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Stockton Boulevard Plan (Plan). The EIR will evaluate potential significant environmental effects of the proposed Stockton Boulevard Plan and associated actions. Written comments regarding the issues that should be covered in the EIR, including potential alternatives to the proposed Plan and the scope of the analysis, are invited.

The EIR for the proposed Plan is being prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under CEQA, the City, as lead agency, must issue a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to inform trustee agencies, the public, and responsible agencies of its decision to prepare an EIR. The purpose of the NOP is to provide information describing the project and its potential environmental effects to those who may wish to comment regarding the scope and content of 2 the EIR. Agencies should comment on such information as it relates to their statutory responsibilities in connection with the project.

The EIR will provide an evaluation of potential environmental impacts associated with development of the proposed Plan. The proposed Plan project description, location, and environmental issue areas that may be affected by development of the proposed project are described below. The EIR will evaluate the potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, on both a direct and cumulative basis, identify mitigation measures that may be feasible to lessen or avoid such impacts, and identify alternatives to the proposed project.

PROJECT LOCATION/SETTING
Figure 1 (Regional Location Map) shows the location of the Stockton Boulevard Plan area in the Sacramento region. The Plan area, as shown in Figure 2 includes an approximately 4.8-mile corridor along Stockton Boulevard, bounded by Alhambra Boulevard on the north and 65th Street on the south.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City, in coordination with the community, will prepare the Stockton Boulevard Plan (Plan).

The Plan, which will be a combined specific plan and neighborhood action plan, will reflect the City’s commitment to its neighborhoods and seek to promote community-driven development without displacement.

The Stockton Boulevard Plan Area
As shown in Figure 2, the Plan will be a combined Specific Plan and Neighborhood Action Plan. The Specific Plan will focus on improving the 4.5 mile stretch of Stockton Blvd. from Alhambra Blvd. to 65th Street. The Neighborhood Action Plan will focus on prioritizing the needs of the 23 neighborhoods that surround the Specific Plan Area so that residents and small businesses are able to benefit from future investments and improvements. The area covered by the Neighborhood Action Plan is shown in Figure 2 as the Neighborhood Study Area.

The overall plan process is anticipated to be finalized in the summer of 2022. The plan process includes the following 6 phases

1. Project Initiation: Begin project, identify and take stock of existing conditions.

2. Community Priorities: identify issues, challenges, opportunities, and priorities of the community.

3. Visioning: develop a shared vision for the Plan.

4. Strategies and Actions: develop strategies and actions; align strategies to the vision; identify and prioritize implementation strategies. Strategies and actions will be focused around the following topics: Housing and Anti-displacement; Inclusive Economic Development; Placemaking, Arts and Culture; Environment and Public Health; and Mobility and Transportation.

5. Draft Plan: draft and revise the Stockton Boulevard Plan and EIR. 3 6. Adopt Plan: finalize and adopt the Stockton Boulevard Plan and EIR.

The City is currently working in Phase 3,Visioning and Phase 4, Strategies and Actions.

The Plan will incorporate the analysis, recommendations, key findings, and implementation strategies from the Stockton Boulevard Corridor Study. The Study evaluates community transportation needs and presents a vision for transportation improvements along the corridor that connects and strengthens safety, mobility, and sense of community for the area. The result are conceptual designs, typically showing the roadway between the curb and sidewalk, for enhanced mobility along the corridor, along with costs estimates for next steps including environmental clearance, design, and construction. The Study Area covers the 4.2 miles of Stockton Boulevard. from Alhambra Blvd. to 47th Ave and includes. More information on the corridor study can be found on the City’s website at stocktonblvd.org The City is currently in the process of updating its General Plan (2040 General Plan), which is scheduled to be adopted before the Stockton Boulevard Plan. The 2040 General Plan is anticipated to increase the development potential within the Plan Area, particularly allowing for new housing development, along the corridor and in the Specific Plan Area. The Plan will be prepared to be consistent with allowable densities and land uses. The Plan will also identify the range of opportunity and underutilized sites along the corridor, many of which will have increased capacity under the 2040 General Plan. An infrastructure strategy is being prepared as part of the Plan, to identify more specific needs to accommodate this increased growth.

More information on the 2040 General Plan can be found on the City’s website at www.sac2040gpu.org.

Website
Additional information and materials relating to the proposed project are available on the City’s web site at cityofsacramento.org/Stockton-Blvd-Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND SCOPE OF THE EIR
The EIR will analyze potentially significant impacts that result from implementation of the proposed SBP. Pursuant to Section 15063(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study has not been prepared for the proposed project. The EIR will evaluate the full range of environmental issues contemplated for consideration under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and will focus on the following:
• Air Quality;
• Archaeological, Historic, and Tribal Cultural Resources; • Biological Resources;
• Global Climate Change and Energy;
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
• Noise and Vibration;
• Parks and Recreation;
• Public Services;
• Transportation and Circulation;
• Visual Resources; and
4 • Utilities

SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Comments and suggestions regarding the appropriate scope of analysis in the EIR are invited from all interested parties. Written comments or questions concerning the EIR for the proposed project should be directed to the City’s environmental project manager at the following address by 5:00 p.m. on August 9, 2021. Please include the commenter’s full name and address.

Scott Johnson, Senior Planner
City of Sacramento Community Development Department
300 Richards Boulevard, Third Floor, Sacramento, CA 95811 Telephone: (916) 808-5842
E-mail: [email protected]
5 Figure 1 Regional Location Map
Source: City of Sacramento 2020, County of Sacramento 2020, Ascent 2021 6 Figure 2 Stockton Boulevard Plan Area
Source: City of Sacramento 2020, Ascent 2021
Printed on Recycled Paper
July 16, 2021
Mr. Scott Johnson
City of Sacramento
300 Richards Boulevard, Third Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811
[email protected]

NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SCOPING MEETING FOR THE STOCKTON BOULEVARD PLAN – DATED JULY 8, 2021 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: 2021070139)
Dear Mr. Johnson:

The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Scoping Meeting for the Stockton Boulevard Plan (Project). The Lead Agency is receiving this notice from DTSC because the Project may include one or more of the following: groundbreaking activities, work in close proximity to a roadway, work in close proximity to mining or suspected mining or former mining activities, presence of site buildings that may require demolition or modifications, importation of backfill soil, and/or work on or in close proximity to an agricultural or former agricultural site.

DTSC recommends that the following issues be evaluated in the EIR Hazards and Hazardous Materials section:

1. The EIR should acknowledge the potential for historic or future activities on or near the project site to result in the release of hazardous wastes/substances on the project site. In instances in which releases have occurred or may occur, further studies should be carried out to delineate the nature and extent of the contamination, and the potential threat to public health and/or the environment should be evaluated. The EIR should also identify the mechanism(s) to initiate any required investigation and/or remediation and the government agency who will be responsible for providing appropriate regulatory oversight.

Mr. Scott Johnson
July 16, 2021