Sacramento City Council
October 14, 2025

City of Sacramento
City Council - 2PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
Approval of Preliminary Design and Adoption of EIR Addendum for the Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000)
File ID: 2025-01549
Location: East levee of Sacramento River between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park, District 7 Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution: 1) adopting the Addendum to the Sacramento River Parkway Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project; and 2) approving the preliminary design plan for the Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000).

Contact: Megan Johnson, Senior Engineer, (916) 808-1967, [email protected]; Jesse Gothan, Supervising Engineer, (916) 808-6897, [email protected]; Ofelia Avalos, Engineering Manager, (916) 808-5054, [email protected]; Department of Public Works Presenter: None
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Resolution
3-Resolution No. 1997-0590
4-Addendum and Initial Study for the Sacramento River Parkway Project 5-Preliminary Plans
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: In 1975, the Sacramento City Council took the first formal action to recognize recreational use along the Sacramento Riverfront by adopting a Feasibility Study and Sacramento River Parkway Master Plan (1975 Plan). The 1975 Plan introduced the concept of developing public access recreation along the Sacramento River, from Freeport to the south to the confluence with the American River, coupled with natural resource protection and enhancement.

In 1997, an update to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan was adopted by passage of Resolutions 1997-0590 through -0594, which included actions to update the City/County Bikeway Master Plan Map to include the proposed off-street multiuse trail along the Sacramento River. The 1997 Plan retained the core values of the 1975 Plan and maintained the long-range vision for a continuous levee-top multi-purpose trail, updating the Plan to reflect changes in the Sacramento River Parkway

File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
and surrounding land uses, and adding guiding policies that addressed security, privacy and design issues. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update was approved by City Council on October 21, 1997.

In 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution 2000-0464 to accept the Sacramento River Greenway Plan (Greenway Plan) as an advisory document. The Greenway Plan was prepared by the State Lands Commission, with the assistance of the cities of Sacramento and West Sacramento, and the counties of Yolo and Sacramento. The Greenway Plan complements the 1997 Plan; it is intended as a regional planning tool to coordinate resource management and public recreation access to both sides of the Sacramento River.

The American & Sacramento River Parkway Plans 2012 Implementation Program was approved by the passage of Resolution 2012-0390. This document outlines the procedures to acquire necessary easement rights to complete the Sacramento River Parkway.

Within the Pocket-Greenhaven neighborhood, there is an existing levee-top multiuse trail south of Garcia Bend Park, and north of Zacharias Park, with a 4-mile gap in the trail system between the two parks. In July 2017, the Sacramento River Parkway (K15185000) CIP was established to complete environmental documentation and acquire necessary easement rights to construct the paved levee- top trail between the two parks and close that gap in the trail network. The CIP was initially separated into smaller phases for funding purposes, and the first locally-funded phase was established as the “Central Pocket Levee Trail Segment”, located between Garcia Bend Park (the southern limit of the trail) and Arabella Way. An Addendum to the 1997 EIR was approved by City Council for the Central Pocket Levee Trail Segment in March 2019.

In 2021, the Public Works Department changed the delivery strategy for the Sacramento River Parkway, to utilize federal grant funds to the full limits of the Sacramento River Parkway project in the Pocket-Greenhaven neighborhood between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park. This change allowed for the cohesive planning, outreach, and design of the full project, rather than piecemealing separate locally-funded phases of the project. The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) awarded the City of Sacramento with funding to complete the preliminary engineering, environmental clearance, and preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates in 2021; and subsequently, a professional services agreement was awarded to Wood Rodgers for preliminary engineering and environmental clearance of the location between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park.

In addition to developing plans for the paved levee-top multiuse path, the Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000) evaluated options for locations of new neighborhood access ramps, to provide access from neighborhood streets for bicyclists and pedestrians compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Following an initial screening for feasibility, eight locations were evaluated with consideration for factors including environmental impacts, costs, comfort and safety to get to the

File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
ramp, and public safety. This preliminary evaluation was shared with the community at a public meeting on February 22, 2023, and then was included in a community survey in December 2023.

The final recommended locations were also selected to provide uniformly-spaced and convenient access for community residents. The recommended Neighborhood Access Ramp locations are located at: North Point Circle, Audubon Circle, and Country River Way. The project will also create a connection through Zacharias Park between the existing pedestrian levee access ramp in the park with the landing of the pedestrian overcrossing of Pocket Road. Finally, in consideration of community input, the project will improve the ramp at Sleepy River Way to a segment of existing trail to provide ADA accessibility. These ultimate recommendations for Neighborhood Access Ramp locations were shared with the community during a series of resident focus groups on May 13, 14, and 15, 2025, and at a public meeting on June 17, 2025. To provide comfortable and convenient access for as many community members as possible, the project will include pedestrian crossing enhancements at key locations along Riverside Boulevard/Pocket Road. In the Pocket-Greenhaven Neighborhood Transportation Plan (approved by City Council on November 14, 2023), Riverside Boulevard/Pocket Road was identified as barriers for pedestrians, and potential treatments to improve walkability were recommended. This Project proposes intersection improvements at Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, and at Country River Way/Sea Lion Court/Pocket Road to improve pedestrian and bicyclists’ access to the trail.

City staff completed a preliminary engineering plan of the proposed trail and has reviewed the existing 1997 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for adequacy. An Addendum to the existing EIR has been completed, documenting the adequacy of the original report. Council approval of preliminary engineering plans and adoption of the Addendum to the EIR is required in order to begin the right-of- way and final design phases.

Policy Considerations: The actions requested herein are consistent with the City’s goals of creating walkable and bikeable communities and enhancing overall livability. Specific goals the project addresses are as follows:

M-1.11: Increase Bicycling and Walking. The City shall strive to increase bicycling and walking citywide so that it can meet its equity, reduced vehicle miles traveled, and sustainability goals; M-1.17: Improve Bicycling Connectivity. The City shall plan and seek funding for a continuous, low-stress bikeway network consisting of bicycling-friendly facilities that connect neighborhoods with destinations and activity centers throughout the city; M-1.18: Bicycling Safety. When designing projects, the City shall prioritize designs that strengthen the protection of people bicycling such as improvements that increase visibility of bicyclists, increase bikeway widths, raise bikeways, design safer intersection crossings and turns, and separate bikeways from driving traffic wherever feasible;

File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
M-1.19: Walking Safety. When designing projects, the City shall prioritize designs that encourage walking and improve walking safety best practice designs and considerations for efficiencies in walking;
LUP-2.2 Interconnected City. The City should establish a network of interconnected activity centers, corridors, parks, and neighborhoods that promote walking, bicycling, and mass transit use as viable alternatives to private vehicles;
YPRO-1.15 Path Connections. The City shall maintain existing and pursue new connections to local and regional shared-use paths, especially when connecting to public parkland; YPRO-1.17 - Waterway Recreation and Access: The City shall work with regional partners, State agencies, non-profit and community groups, private landowners, and land developers to manage, preserve, improve, and enhance use and access to the Sacramento and American River Parkways, urban waterways and riparian corridors to increase public access for active and passive recreation and habitat values;
YPRO-1.18 Integrated Parks and Recreation System. The City shall continue to provide an integrated system of parks, open space areas, and recreational facilities that are safe, connect diverse communities, acknowledge neighborhood context, protect and provide access to nature, integrate with adjacent developments, and make efficient use of land and open space.

As part of the 2040 General Plan, the Pocket/Greenhaven Community also includes the following policies:

PG-YPRO-1 River Parkway. Concurrent with the Sacramento River Parkway Project, the City shall explore ways to add accessible pedestrian entrances from adjacent neighborhoods to the shared-use path along the river, including by formalizing existing informal access points, particularly focusing on residential areas that lack park access within a 10-minute walk.

PG-YPRO-2 Parkways/Greenways. The City shall continue to improve and maintain the parkway/ greenbelt network and public open spaces, including removing fencing and gates and adding access points where feasible, and by exploring strategies to improve connections between greenways and to the Sacramento River Parkway.

Economic Impacts: None
Environmental Considerations: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): On October 21, 1997, the City Council certified an EIR and adopted Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (M91-006) (Resolution No. 1997-0590). On April 2, 2019, the City Council approved an Addendum to

File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
the Sacramento River Parkway EIR (Resolution No. 2019-0099) and approved the preliminary design plan for the Sacramento River Parkway--Central Pocket Levee Trail project (K15185000).

The Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000) is an implementation of a portion of the multi- use trail as environmentally cleared in the 1997 EIR. The project description has been refined to include Neighborhood Access Point ramps at North Point Way, Audubon Circle, Country River Way, and Sleepy River Way; access path connections within Zacharias Park; and intersection modifications at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Country River Way/Sea Lion Court/Pocket Road. Following staff review, it was determined that the Sacramento River Parkway Project did not result in any of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and an addendum was prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. An Addendum to an EIR is appropriate to account for project changes and clarifications, if:
· No substantial changes are proposed to the project which would introduce new significant environmental effects or a significant increase in the severity of previously identified effects.
· No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which would introduce or substantially increase significant effects. · No new information of substantial importance, unknown during the previous EIR, shows unaccounted-for significant effects or feasible mitigations.

To confirm consistency with the original 1997 EIR, an Initial Study was prepared in support of the project Addendum to review for any additional significant environmental effects that were not previously evaluated, using the City’s current CEQA guidelines, and to determine whether new effects are significant and whether additional environmental review is warranted. In addition, the Initial Study reviewed the Project for consistency under the adopted 2040 General Plan and the 2040 General Plan Master EIR.

The Sacramento River Parkway Project, as described in the 2025 Addendum, is consistent with the 1997 certified EIR, and the analysis of impacts and mitigation in the EIR is adequate. The CEQA Guidelines provide that a lead agency shall not prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR in such a case unless one or more of the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 is present.

Following staff review, it was determined that the project did not result in any of the circumstances identified in CEQA Guidelines 15162. No further environmental review is required.

The findings confirm that the previously certified EIR and the previously adopted Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration have been reviewed and comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Addendum to the Sacramento River Parkway EIR, certified EIR and the Resolution No 1997- 0590 can be found at:

File ID: 2025-01549 10/14/2025
www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning/environmental/impact-reports <http://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning/environmental/impact- National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): This project is federally funded. The environmental analysis being conducted to satisfy NEPA requirements is a Categorical Exclusion with technical studies in coordination with Caltrans Local Assistance.

Sustainability: The proposed project supports City Council’s sustainability priorities. The transportation sector accounts for 57% of community-wide greenhouse gas emissions, the largest single sector in the community. The City’s Climate Action Plan includes several implementation measures to reduce vehicle trips. The project would increase active transportation, reduce vehicular trips, and help ensure more efficient vehicular flow. These actions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help improve local air quality.

Commission/Committee Action: The Sacramento River Parkway Project was presented as a discussion item to the Active Transportation Commission on June 15, 2023. The project was presented to the Disabilities Advisory Commission (DAC) as a discussion item on September 4, 2024.

Rationale for Recommendation: To complete this phase of the Sacramento River Parkway and proceed with final design and right of way activities, City Council approval of the preliminary plans and of the Addendum to the Sacramento River Parkway EIR is required.

Financial Considerations: The recommendations in this report do not result in any financial impacts to the City. The Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000) is fully funded through the final design phase with federal and local funds.

Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.

RESOLUTION YYYY-XXXX

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council

Date [Month XX, 202X]

Approval of Preliminary Design and Adoption of EIR Addendum for the Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185000)

BACKGROUND

A. In 1997, an update to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan (“1997 Update”) was adopted by passage of Resolutions 1997-0590 through 0594. Thereafter, the City’s General Plan and Bikeway Master Plan have included plans for the off -street multi-use trail along the Sacramento River levee between Freeport and the confluence of the American River.

B. On October 21, 1997, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopted Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (M91-006).

C. On April 2, 2019, the City Council approved an Addendum to the 1997 EIR for the Central Pocket Levee Trail Segment project, located between Garcia Bend Park and Arabella Way. The strategy for delivering the Parkway improvements in the Pocket neighborhood was subsequently modified to develop an expanded Project which would close the gap in the paved trail network between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park.

D. The Sacramento River Parkway Project (the “Project”) is an implementation of the larger Parkway Plan and will pave 4.0 miles of the levee of the Sacramento River, connecting to existing paved trail segments south of Garcia Bend Park, and north of Zacharias Park.

The preliminary plans include neighborhood access ramps to provide access for pedestrians and bicyclists consistent with Americans with Disabilities Act standards, and intersection improvements at Pocket Road/Riverside Boulevard to improve walking and biking safety.

E. The requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 provide that no further environmental review of projects previously cleared with an EIR is required unless there is new information of substantial importance or changed circumstances. Environmental review of the Project for consistency with the 1997 EIR was undertaken in the form of an Initial Study. The Initial Study determined that the analysis of impacts and mitiga tion measures in the 1997 EIR is adequate to approve the Project by means of an Addendum, in accordance with Section

15164. The Initial Study also reviewed and confirmed the Project for consistency under the recent 2040 General Plan and the 2040 General Plan Master EIR.

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

SECTION 1.

The City Council finds as follows:

A. On October 21, 1997, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §21000 et seq. (“CEQA”), the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §15000 et seq.), and the City of Sacramento environmental guidelines, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (EIR) and, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR, adopted Findings of Fact and Findings of Overriding Consideration, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program, and approved Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (M91-006) (City Council Resolution No. 1997-0590).

B. The Sacramento River Parkway Project (“Project”) is consistent with the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update, and the multi-use levee trail is included in the 2040 General Plan and the Bikeway Master Plan. The Sacramento River Parkway Project proposes to modify an approximately 4.0 mile segment of the previously approved larger trail project as follows: The Project will pave 4.0 miles of the levee of the Sacramento River, connecting to existing paved trail segments south of Garcia Bend Park, and north of Zacharias Park. The required en titlements for the proposed project include the following: Addendum to a previous Environmental Impact Repor t; Mitigation Monitoring Plan.

C. The Initial Study evaluated the proposed Project for any new information of substantial importance or changed circumstances which were not previously evaluated in the 1997 EIR, and which would trigger the need for a subsequent or supplement EIR. No such new information or changed circumstances were found. The Project was also confirmed for consistency with the 2040 General Plan Master EIR.

D. Based on its review of the Sacramento River Parkway Project, City Council has determined that the proposed changes to the previous project do not require the preparation of a subsequent EIR (see CEQA Guidelines 15162). The proposed modifications do not trigger the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines 15162, thus an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document. Because the requirements under CEQA

Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 provide that no further environmental review of the Project is required unless there is new information of substantial importance or changed circumstances, an Addendum to the 1997 EIR was prepared, in accordance with Section 15164.

SECTION 2.

The City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the 1997 EIR for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update, the previously adopted Findings of Facts and Findings of Overriding Considerations , and the Initial Study and Addendum for this Project . The City Council finds that the previously certified EIR and the Addendum constitute an adequate, accurate, objective, and complete review of the proposed Project and finds that no additional environmental review is required based on the reasons set forth below:

A. No changes to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update project are required for approval of the proposed Project. No revisions of the previously certified EIR are needed because there are no new potentially significant environmental effects nor a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects associated with the proposed Project, and no changes to the previously adopted mitigation measures are required for approval of the Project.

B. No changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed Project will be undertaken, because the area surrounding the Project is fully developed with consistent land uses.

C. No new information of substantial importance has been found that shows any of the following:

1. The proposed Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previously certified EIR;

2. Significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the previously certified EIR;

3. Mitigation measures previously found to be infeasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the proposed Project; or

4. Mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previously certified EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.

SECTION 3.

Based on its review of the previously certified EIR for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update, the previously adopted Findings of Fact and Findings of Overriding Considerations, the 2019 Addendum, and the Initial Study and Addendum for the Project, the City Council finds that the EIR and Addendum reflect the City Council’s independent judgment and anal ysis, certifies the EIR and the Addendum for the proposed Project, and re -adopts the Findings of Fact and Findings of Overriding Considerations.

SECTION 4.

The mitigation monitoring program for the Sacramento River Parkway project remains in effect for the proposed Project, and the mitigation measures shall be implemented and monitored as set forth in the program, based on the following findings of fact:

A. The mitigation monitoring program has been adopted and implemented as part of the Project;

B. The Addendum to the EIR does not include any new mitigation measures, and has not eliminated or modified any of the mitigation measures included in the mitigation monitoring program;

C. The mitigation monitoring program meets the requirements of CEQA Section 21081.6 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15091.

SECTION 5.

Upon approval of the Project, the City Manager shall file or cause to be filed a Notice of Determination with the Sacramento County Clerk and, if the Project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, with the State Office of Planning and Res earch, pursuant to Section 21152(a) of the Public Resources Code and the State EIR Guidelines adopted pursuant thereto.

SECTION 6.

Pursuant to Guidelines Section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and

may be obtained from, the Office of the City Clerk at 915 I Street, S acramento, California. The City Clerk is the custodian of records for all matters before the City Council.

SECTION 7.

The preliminary engineering plan for the Sacramento River Parkway Project (K15185500) is approved.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Exhibit A – Resolution No. 1997-0590 (certify EIR & Mitigation Monitoring Program) Exhibit B – Addendum to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR for the Sacramento River Parkway Project
Exhibit C – Initial Study for the Sacramento River Parkway Project Exhibit D – Preliminary Plans

Adopted by the Sacramento City Council on Month XX, 2025, by the following vote:

RESOLUTION NO. 97 590

ADOPTED BY THE SACRAMENTOCITY COUNCIL
ON DATE OF OCT2 ^'^^^.J^
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO CITY COUNCII. CERTIFYING

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING THE ATTACHED

CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND

ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN FOR THE
THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN UPDATE (M91-006)
The City Council of the Cityof Sacramento doeshereby find,determine, and resolve as follows:

The City Council has consideredthe Final Environmental Impact Report for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (herein FEIR), which consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, the Final Environmental Impact Report ( dated September 1996) and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.

2. The City Council certifies that the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (herein FEIR) which consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, Final Environmental Impact Report, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan, constitutes an adequate, accurate, objective, and complete Final Environmental Impact Report, completed in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Sacramento Local Environmental Procedures.

3. The City Council certifies that the FEIR has been presented to it and that the City Council has reviewed it and considered the information contained therein prior to acting on the proposed project.

4. To support the approval of the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update and the FEIR, the City Council hereby adopts the attached CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan.

5. The City of Sacramento, as lead agency, caused an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") on the Project to be prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code, Section 21000 g,l =. (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, Code of California Regulations, Title XIV, Section 15000 gi M., and the City of Sacramento environmental guidelines.

FOR CITY CLERK USE ONLY
RESOLUTION NO.: 97-590
DATE ADOPTED:OCTrI"

6. The Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update and the Draft Environmental Impact Report and Final Environmental Impact Report were heard by City of Sacramento Planning Commission on November 14, 1996.

7. The Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update and the Draft Environmental Impact Report and Final Environmental Impact Report were heard by the City of Sacramento City Council on January 14, 1997, March 4, 1997, May 27, 1997, September 16, 1997 and October 21, 1997.

8. The City of Sacramento has prepared Findings as per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091.

9. The following information is incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these findings:

A. The Draft Environmental Impact Report and Final Environmental Impact Report.

B. The City Council staff report for October 21, 1997 includes a determination that removal of the Private Inholdings Area (PIA) designation from the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update does not affect the FEIR conclusions. The FEIR is adequate to support adoption of the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update as revised per Council's direction (September 16, 1997) to delete the PIA.

10. The findings, determinations, and certifications contained in theis resolution reflect the independent judgment of the City Council of the City of Sacramento.

ATTEST:

CITY CLERK

FOR CITY CLERKUSE ONLY
RESOLUTION NO.: 9.7-590
DATE ADOPTED: OCT
T

CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS OF FACT
FOR
The Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update
EIR (M91-006)
(State Clearinghouse Number 9310286)
Prepared By:

City of Sacramento Planning Services Division
October 1997
RESP 9.7--590
1^_----^--^-^!^"ICi^
®CT2
,

FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN UPDATE
The Environmental Impact Report for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update, prepared in compliance with the CaliforniaEnvironmentalQuality Act, evaluates the potentially significant and significant adverse environmental impacts which could result from adoption of the project or alternatives to the project.

Because the EIR indicates the implementation of the project (or project alternatives) would result in certain unavoidable adverse impacts,the City is required under CEQA, and the State and City guidelines adopted pursuant thereto, to make certain findingswith respect to these impacts. The required findings appear in the following sections of this document.

This document lists all identified potentially significant and significant impacts of the project. Each of the remaining potentially significant or significant impacts is considered acceptable by the City Council based on a determination that the benefits of the project (listed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, Section V) outweigh the risks of the potentially significant environmental effects of the project.

1. SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CA_N BE AVOIDED
Finding - As authorizedby Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Title 14, California Administrative Code Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental impacts listed below, as identified in the EIR.

These findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings before the City as stated below.

The "Facts in Support of Finding" are numbered consecutively for each EIR section, e.g., Land Use. The number that follows references the mitigation measure number listed in the DEIR.

AIR QUALITY
Significant Impacts

6.3-4 Construction Dmi and Parficulate Ma=
Construction activities associated with future devebpmeat in the Parkway will result in the generation of fugitive dust and particulate matter which will temporarily increase PM-10 levels in the vicinity of the project site. Dust emissions from development of the Parkway will vary depending on the type of construction project, the equipment used and its size. Additional construction impacts, if any, will be determined at the time that specific construction projects undergo environmental review. It is anticipated that construction activities will create a significant avoidable PM-10 impact.

Land use sensitivity of adjacent land uses to tempo:sry constuction impacts is greatest in the Clivenhaven Pocket area where residential uses are directly adjacent to the Parkway and a potential alignment for the multi use trail.

Due to the close proximity of a sensitive receptor population to the Parkway, careful dust control and minimization of idling or stationary combustion equipment must be practiced during Parkway construction projects.

Facts in Support of Finding
1 y'7-"590
^P^^^^^_^^^°^i^ ^^•^.^"-"-^
^CT ^ ^• ^', :.. ^
T
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

The significance threshold for PM, is 275 pounds per day. At a program level, it is not known what the total level of construction related PM-10 will be. The SMAQMD does however, suggest methods to reduce construction related PM-10 emissions. Employment of these measures should reduce impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures are however, developed at a program level of review. Further project specific analysis and mitigation may be required when design details and construction methods of the proposed project area available.
(1)
(2)
Prior to issuance of a special permit for construction of any phase of the project, a separate analysis of construction related PM-10 emissions shall be conducted.

Based on the project specific analysis (see item (1) above) the following types of mitigation measures shall be employed:
(a) Water all unpaved construction areas at least twice per day during demolition and excavation to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering should be carried out on hot or windy days.

Water twice daily or cover stockpiles of sand, soil, and similar materials with a tarp. (b)
(c)
Cover trucks hauling dirt and debris to reduce spillage onto paved surfaces.

Increase the frequency of City street cleaning along streets in the vicinity of the construction site.
(d) Work should be restricted or banned on days of high winds (> 30 mph) or when air quality violations are expected (as determined by the SMAQMD).
(e) On-site vehicle speed on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. (f) Require construction contractors to designate a person or persons to oversee the dust abatement program and to order increased watering, as necessary. (g) Revegetation of construction areas and staging areas shall take place immediately following completion of each project component.

NOISE
fi,41 Noise Generation- Pro,_ect Specific Impacts
Adoption of the Parkway Plan may increase noise levels in the area due to Parkway users. Long term noise may be created by bicyclists, equestrians and pedestrians using the public recreation access, especially off-street trails. Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Plan area are primarily residential uses. The Parkway access points and trail system will be closed from sunset to sunrise so that Parkway-related nighttime noise should not be a problem for adjacent residents.
2 9'7-5^RPSM.UTION No.- -
GOT^^.^^
1-
The location of off-street trails and public access points near residential areas is likely to generate additional hwoan activity, and therefore, additional long term noise. Although bicycles, pedestrians and equestrians are quiet modes of transportation, conmimication betweenusers could occur and annoy nearby residents. Additional noise could result from neighborhood dogs barking at the off-street trail users.

Unlawful use of the off-street trail by motorized vehicles may occur on occasion. Use of bikeways by motorized vehicles would be of particular concern in areas where bikeways intersect with surface streets which allow motorists to gain access to the trails without traffic controls. Motorized vehicles would increase noise levels on off-street trails. Barriers and signage at access pouts and patrol of the area should reduce this impact to less- than-significant.

Noise associated with Parkway users is expected to be intermittent and not violate local Noise Ordinance.

However, it is likely that any additional noise from Parkway users may be considered a muisance.

Facts in &=rt of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

1. Sound barriers ( fencing and landscaping) shall be used, where feasible, to buffer residents from Parkway user noise.

2. All access points and the off-street trail system shall be closed to the public from sunset to sunrise to reduce evening noise.

3. Site off-street trailsas far away from residentialreceivers as possible without impacting wildlife habitat value.

6.4-2 Noise Generation - Cumulative
It is expected that there will be cumulative noise impacts from the implementation of the Parkway Plan.

Although the Parkway Plan does not propose construction activities, the implementation of future construction projects within the Parkway will create a situation that increases Parkway users. The main cumulative impacts are expected to be associated with bicycle and pedestrian uses of the Parkway as the off-street trail and access points are implemented.

Vehicle traffic is not anticipated to contribute significantly to the cumulative noise impact. Access points within residential areas, with the exception of existing developed parks, will not provide access for motor vehicles.

Policies in the Parkway Plan and mitigation measures in this EIR will discourage vehicle access to the Parkway except at major access points that do not impact residential neighborhoods.

Facts in Supp= of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:
3 9-7-590
UP;"! I.1^^IO^ No......---w---
T
Refer to Mitigation Measure 6.4-1 within this section as the mitigation recommended for the proposed project and all development alternatives to reduce the magnitude of the noise impact to less-then-significant. 4 oCZ 2
T

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

6.5-3 Special Status Species - Swainson's Hawk
Implementing the Parkway Plan is not likely to result in the loss of nesting habitat given that a goal of the Parkway Plan is to retain riparian habitat. The Parkway Plan contains the following policies which addresses protection of special status species.

N8 Endangered or threatened species and their habitat shall be protected from encroachment by designating the area s Riparian Habitat Preserve or Nature Study.

Recreational activities which are hazardous or incompatible with Parkway natural habitat and uses, or detrimental to adjacent and surrounding habitat are prohibited.

Construction activities and public access related to implementation of the Plan may, however, depending on the site, result in disturbance to nesting activities. Any disturbance or loss of habitat would be considered a significant impact.

Facts in Sunoort of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

At a program level, the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to Swainson's Hawk species and habitat to a less-than-significant level:
1 Prior to approval of development plans underthe Parkway Plan policies, a determination shall be made regardingthe sensitivity and suitability of the project area for Swainson's Hawk habitat. If the project site is sensitive, California Fish and Game shall be consulted and a habitat survey prepared. Impacts to this species shall be avoided or mitigated in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.

2. Development projects in the Parkway that may impact Swainson's Hawk habitat shall be required to prepare a mitigation and operation plan for Swainson's hawk nesting habitat affected by proposed projects. The mitigation and operation plan shall be submitted to DFG for review and approval prior to construction of projects.

3. Nesting habitat lost shall be replaced in accordance with requirements imposed by DFG for mitigation for loss of nesting habitat.

NOTE: The DFG mitigation guidelines (revised 1992) for Swainson's hawk specify that no disturbance shall occur within a half-mile of an active nest betweenMarch 1 and August 15 to avoid construction of other project related activities which may cause nest abandonment or adverse disturbance to nearby active nest during the breeding season. There are known nesting sites within the Parkway. 5 RES^LJ^^ION
OCT .i.i
T

4. Prior to construction of any Parkway development, hire a qualified biologist to conduct a survey within a1fi mile radius of the site to determine the location of active nests.

5. Avoid construction of any Parkway development project during the breeding/nesting season of the Swainson's hawk of March 1 through August 15 to avoid disturbance of nesting pairs within a half-mile radius of the project site.
fi,.1=4 S*^ A t^tingSnecies - Valley ElderberrvLoyghorn Beetle (VEL•R) The Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (VELB) makes exclusive use of elderberry shrubs as host and use mature shrubswith stems having diameter greater than one inch to complete their life cycle. Elderberry bushes are abundant in many parts of the Plan area, and occurrences of the beetles have been recorded.

While specific projects are not ideatified by the Parkway Plan, implementation of Parkway Plan policies and land use designations will result in increased public access and development of facilities in the Plan area. The Plan policies propose controlled public access in areas that are sensitive to habitat issues. In addition, the plan proposes the following policies for preservation and restoration of vegetation.

Ni Although the Parkway is to be developed for humart use, the natural environment shall be protected, preserved and enhanced to the fullest extent possible, especially large aggregations of riparian vegetation and wildlife.

N4 Areas designated for habitat restoration shall be planted with native or indigenous species Iayplementation of the policies is expected to reduce potential impacts to vegetation, however, specific guidelines for implementation of these policies have not been included in the Plan. Therefore, the project could have a significant impact on the VELB.

Facts in Su=rt of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

At a program level, the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to VELB species and habitat to a less-than-significant level:

1. Prior to approval of development plans under the Parkway Plan policies, a determination shall be made regarding the sensitivity and suitability of the project area for VELB habitat. If the project site is sensitive, California Department of Fish and Game shall be consulted and a habitat survey prepared.

Impacts to this species shall be avoided or mitigated in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. fi.'M
Two potential sources for adverse impactsto SRA exist in the Parkway Plan area; these are public access to the riverbank and river&oit developmentprojects. Currently, public access is uncontrolled in most segments of the proposed Parkway Plan area This uncontrolled access often results in trampling of vegetation, loosening of soil or compaction of soils on repeatedly used areas causing soil erosion and subsequent loss of vegetation. 6 RES
.97-590
_UTION Na._..----
OC i Z 1.,wJ
11 It is the stated goal of the Plan "To preserve, protect and enhance the natural and cultural resources of the Parkway.* However, the Parkway Plan will facilitate recreational access to the river in the Plan area through impl^eotatian of its policies which provide for development of trails and public access points. Although the Plan policies recommend controlled access, there may be an increase in the numbers of anglers fishing from shore or other casual users wishing to get to the water's edge as a result of plan implementation. Such activities have the potential to result in bank trampling, branch cutting, fires and littering. At a program level of review, there is the potential for loss or degradation of SRA habitat which is a potentially significant impact.

Waterfront developments in areas of existing SRA habitat would result in direct adverse effects to this habitat type. The Parkway Plan, however, does not propose specific waterfront development projects and does not increase the potentialfor river front development over existing conditions. The previously listed Parkway Plan policies address natural resource protection, erosion control and recreational use, and provide guidance for protection of the sensitive habitat areas including the SRA habitat.

Facts in Sigma of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

The following mitigation measures will reduce program level impacts to a less-than-significant level:

1. Prior to approval and implementation of the individual Parkway Plan development projects, an assessment of SRA habitat shall be made to determine if such habitat is on site or would be affected by development. Facilities which could directly or indirectly affected SRA habitat shall minimize impacts in accordance with guidelines established by the State Lands Commission and other trustee agencies. Actions to minimize impacts shall include, but are not limited to:
a) design modifications to avoid direct impacts and disturbance to SRA habitat. b) retention or replanting of canopied, multi-story vegetation along the riverbank to maintain a shaded habitat.
c) erosion control measures on site (both during construction and long term operation) to avoid run-off, debris and turbidity in the identified SRA area. (See also Water Quality Mitigation Measure 6.6-1).
16 1 V:1 *I drc F, ^.:41--4r1V: T177,'r4 ir , i1 ; 71 ^.Y^^^^^'<.'^Ji^7i^if^TM►3:CY^^^:rfi^n ^ i ^ ^^Ta:^'I^^1`.fST Water pollution from siltation in the lower Sacramento River can potentially adversely affect aquatic biota through acute or chronic toxicity, through effects on behavior, or smothering or choking by siltation.

The Parkway Plan will facilitate recreational access to the river in the Plan area through implementation of its policies which provide for development of trails and public access points. Increased public access could result in trampling of vegetation and subsequent exposure of the riverbank to the erosive processes of rainfall runoff, and wave action. This in tarn can lead to increased run-off, siltation and turbidity which can affect aquatic habitats. Policies are however, included in the Parkway Plan that reduce the potential for water quality impacts (See discussion of polices under Impact 6.5-1). These policies will reduce impacts, but, may not reduce them to a less-tben significant level. As such, the potential exists for significant impacts to aquatic habitats resulting from increased erosion from implementation of individual Parkway projects. As such, program level 7 TMDN No•"MrAr 90
OCT 2U:ii
mitigationsare proposed to reduce program level impacts and guide project specific development. Each project specific development will also be subject to separate project level environmental review which may result in additional mitigation measures.

Facts in Support of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

At a program level, no direct impacts can be determined, however, implementation of individual Parkway development projects may result in impacts. To reduce impacts to the aquatic environment, implement Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 of the Water Quality Chapter. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to less than significant.

IMPACT 6.5-7 - Special Status Species (Delta Smelt and Winter Run Chinook Salmon) The adoption of the Parkway Plan will not result in direct mortality or the loss of occupied habitat. Impacts to special status species and their habitat are most likely to occur as a result of construction and operations of recreational facilities along or near the river. Siltation and loss of habitat would adversely effect these species.

As such, the potential exists for significant impacts to aquatic habitats resulting from increased erosion from implementation of individual Parkway projects. As such, program level mitigations are proposed to reduce program level inipacts and guide project specific development. Each project specific development will also be subject to separate project level environmental review which may result in additional mitigation measures.

Facts in 514=rt of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

At a program level, no direct impacts can be determined, however, implemantation of individual Parkway development projects may result in impacts. To reduce impacts to the aquatic environment, implement Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 of the Water Quality Chapter. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to less than significant.

WATER QUALITY
Significant Impacts

6.6-1 Run-off and Erosion from Public Ac= Routes and Parking The proposed project is a policy document which, in and of itself, does not directly result in physical devekptnent acxivities. The Plan does propose however, limited trails, accessways and parking areas along the river. Although the precise design of time accessways and facilities is not known, some potential program level impacts may be identified. More specific environmental review prior to facility development may identify additional impacts. At a program level, runoff from paved road surfaces, such as parking areas for recreation areas, may include hydrocarbons, rubber, metals, and sediments which are washed directly into storm drains and drainage channels. Clearing and grading could increase erosion potential in the area by channelizing surface flow and exposing soil. Sediments from erosion would be carried through drainage channels to the river. Run- 8 RF
r N. 0.

OCT I.,^-^a,^t.:,i.;
4'7-590
T
off, erosion and sedimentation are considered significant adverse water quality impacts. The Proposed Plan includes the following policies to reduce erosion:

El Reduce indiserimnratefoot and bicycle traffic on levee slopes by providing trails, fencing and signage to channel traffic to key points.

E2 Avoid use of soil sterilents or herbieides over large areas as this would encourage surface erosion.

E3 Indigenous grasses and other native vegetation should be used to stabilize the soil and reduce rain water runoff.

E4 Close portions of the Parkway as needed to restore eroded areas.

The proposed policies will reduce impacts of plan adoption, however, additional site specific mitigation measures may be required for individual developments. At a program level, there may be potential significant erosion and run-off impacts from imple^ntstion of facilities included in the Plan.

Facts in Support of Fiudin¢
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

The following program level mitigation measures are standard procedures for reducing run-off and erosion which may be applied as appropriate to most facility developments. Once designs are developed for each facility, detailed project specific environmental review may identify refinements or additions to these mitigations based on the specifics of the project. These mitigation measures will reduce potential program level impacts to less- than-significant.

1. To the extent possible, use indigenous plants to landscape new and/or enlarged parking facilities and create a vegetation buffer to collect and treat such parking lot runoff before it enters the river.

2. For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, incorporate into the drainage plan inlet catch basins containing grease/sediment traps.

3. For now parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, implement a parking lot cleaning and maintenance program designed to minimized the introduction of toxic materials into the Sacramento River from parking lot runoff. Instruct maintenance personnel to promptly clean any oil/grease or other toxic deposits discovered on the premises.

4. Require erosion control and on-going maintenance in order to prevent and repair damage and erosion caused by use. Implement trail maintenance and erosion control measures and monitor for effectiveness.

5. Implement landscape maintenance program to integrate Best Management Practices which eliminate, reduce and minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides which contribute to non point source pollution.

IMPACT 6.6-2 Construction Silt and Erosion
9 RES
.97"'590N®.

W 'J
T
The Parkway Plan adoption, in and of itself, will not directly result in construction activities. The Plan does, however, include policies and concepts for riverfront access and use which may result in future development projects. Each of these potential development projects will be subjected to individual site specific environmental review prior to implementation. At a program level, however, mitigation measures are proposed to guide the design and implementation of such projects. The primary construction impact on water quality would result from site grading activities. Construction activities may require either removal, or scarification and recompaction of surface soils in several areas. These activities could disturb existing vegetation and enable erosion to occur to exposed soil surfaces. Several factors could affect the amount and severity of soil eroded, including the time of year, weather conditions, and construction practices utilized for the project. If the eroded soils are allowed to enter the Sacramemto River, a negative impact on water quality due to increased turbidity levels could occur.

However, if this would occur it would likely be during storm events when the turbidity level of the Sacramento River is already high due to upstream erosion.

The parkway Plan recomn=ds some public facility developmeflt along the river to allow for habitat appreciation and recreation. Facilities include parking areas, and trails. The disturbed areas adjacent to new parking lots and trails, and exposed and disturbed soil associated with new and rehabilitated trails would contribute to siltation for the first one or two rainy seasons subsequent to construction, and could adversely affect the water quality of onsite drainage. This could generate significant impacts, however these impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels by mitigation proposed.

Facts in StgMrt of Finding
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

The following mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to a less-that-significant level:

1. Restrict any construction grading to the dry season between May 1 and September 30.

2. All construction activities shall be done in accordance with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control (GESC) Ordinance 93-068 and shall include grading techniqueswhich control excessive runoff during construction.

3. Dust and soil erosion control measures shall be implemented during the construction phase of the proposed project. These measures are intended to minimize soil erosion and fugitive dust emissions.

Suggested measures include:
a. watering exposed soils;
b. covering exposed soils with straw or other materials; c. Adopting measures to prevent construction vehicles from tracking mud onto adjacent roadways;
d. Covering trucks containing loose and dry soil;
e. Providing interim drainage measures during the construction period.

4. In non-pavement areas, any vegetation covered or removed during construction (including slope protection) should be replanted following construction.

5. Depending upon the magnitude and location of individual Parkway projects, consideration should be given to installation of a silt curtain during construction of the slope protection in order to minimize increases in turbidity resulting from construction activities in the water. 10 R E S ^-^ ^ U
^ 9'7-590
®0 1 ^ ^ Io
T

6. All construction materials which have the potential to contaminate the riparian habitat- such as fuels, paints, solvents, cement additives-should be identified in advance of construction. A plan should be provided by each contractor using such materials covering storage, use and clean up for all such materials. An emergency response plan should be provided by the lead contractor or supervising agency to cover spills of such materials.

7. Post construction BNP's as approved by the Department of Utilities for the long term enhancement of stormwater nn-off shall be implemented.

IMPACT 6.6-4 Litter and Debris
Litter from boats and from land-based activities can impact the Sacramento River's water quality. This is an existing problem, and the proposed project and all of the alternatives (except AA, no project) could exacerbate the impact. Litter resulting from land-based uses of the project site that is improperly disposed of can end up in the river either directly, or by wind or rain action. The more intensive the use of the project site, the greater potential of the impact due to litter.

Facts in Suenort of Fio<ling
The significant effect listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level with the following mitigation measures:

The following mitigation measures must be implemented in order to lessen project impacts from litter to a less than significant level for the proposed project, and alternatives.

1. Trash receptacles sufficient to handle waste generated by users of the project shall be placed in convenient locations in order to facilitate their use. Consistent maintenance to dispose of overflowing trash containers should be undertaken particularly during peak use season.

2. In public use areas, require education and signage as part of the development to inform users of the importance of proper litter disposal.
11 :^7`rJ9Q
^RESOL^JTI^^^OCT ^®._-------
^21 i Zi.ill
I
H. SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED
Impact 6.7-3 Public Safetv - Flood Risks
The Project is located in the FEMA designated Zone AE of the 100 year flood plain. Occupation of buildings, restaurant or marina by employees or patrons during flood conditions would expose the occupants to risk of injury or death. According to CEQA, a project will have a significant impact if it will "create a potential public health ha78rd...." Additionally, the City of Sacramento Land Use Planning Policy Draft EIR states that "a significant impact would occur if, as the result of the project, any deaths and/or property damage occurred during a 100-year or lesser flood...."
The proposed project and alternatives are located in an area of the City determined to have less than 100-year flood protection resulting in exposure to flood hazards. Implementation of the project will therefore, expose people and/or property to the risk of injury and damage in the event of a 100-year or lesser flood. These risks are considered significant adverse impacts under CEQA.

The adoption of the Parkway Plan will encourage the public to visit the Sacramento River which would potentially increase the risk to public safety during a flood event. The Plan does contain policies that would reduce the risk to public safety. In addition, emergency flood measures, including patrols of the levees, already implemented by the California State Reclamation Board,in conjunction with the mitigation measure listed below, would reduce the public safety impact. Risla will be reduced, however, since Sacramento is a high flood risk area, risks will remain a significant impact.

Facts in J =rt of Finding
Development under the Proposed Plan and Alternatives will be required to comply with all requirements of the "City/County Land Use Policy within the 100 Year Flood Plain". The City Council has evaluated these impacts in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared in connection with the Land Use Planning Policy Within the 100-Year Fbodplain (M89-054) adopted by the City Council on February 6, 1990. A Program EIR addressing the flood related risks to people and property created by new development in the 100-year floodplain in the City was prepared for and certified by the City. The flood-related risks created by the proposed project fall within the scope of the Program EIR. Accordingly, the findings adopted by the Council in connection with its certification of the Program EIR and its adoption of the Policy are applicable to the proposed project. These findings are forth in the Findings of Fact/St r . Considerations for the I^ncl Use PlenninP 3M M Eloodnlain in the City of Sacramentc
For the Proposed Project which include non-residential uses, the applicable provisions of the Sacramento City Code permit development on the project site provided applicants, by agreement with the City, assume the risk of all flood-related damage to any permitted new construction, agree to notify subsequent purchasers of the flood risk, and ensure that any new construction complies with City-imposed design restrictions aimed at reducing the risk of flood-related property damage and personal injury. 12 T
97-590
^-^ ^ ^. ..• ^
^^V7,I., )T^^^^^ 'i^®•---.....^'
acT21^^;^^
Impact 6.9-1 Public Safety: 4ecn ' of Private Propalv
The safety of trail neighbors is an area of concern for the Parkway. Potential impacts of parkway and trail construction would be use of the trail to gain unlawful access to adjacent properties. Trail neighbors have concerns regarding increased trespass and loss of privacy for adjacent property owners. The Parkway Plan includes the following policy measures which address potential safety and use conflicts:

General Policies
G6 The Parkway shall be protected finm injurious or incompatible elements associated with adjacent land uses.

G7 Land adjacent to the Parkway shall be protected from injurious or inconpatible elements associated with Parkway land uses.

Recreational Use Policies
R2 °Reenaliorial Arm 'activities and facilities shall be accommodated only at designated locations which afford minimal conflict with adjacent land uses, natural and cultural resources.

R3 Recreational activities which are hazardous or incompatible with Parkway natural habitat and uses, or detrimental to adjacent and surrounding habitat are prohibited.

Trail Policies
78 Trail segments should be implemented with sufficientfunds to provide for operations, mizintenance and security of that segment of the Parkway.

Public Access Policies
P4 Boundaries between public and private land within the Parkway shall be identified with signage and appropriate barriers.

PS Public access to the Parkway shall be limited to daylight hours (dawn to dusk). Hours of operation for the Parkway shall be posted at all access points.

P6 All access points shall have gates to control and prevent vehicle access. The gate design shall conform to board of Reclamation requirements. The Board and local law enforcement shall have keys to all public access gates.

P7 Motorized vehicles, with the exception of maintenanee and emergency vehieles, shall not be allowed within the Parkway except at established parking lots, boat ramps and other designated areas.

P8 Access points and associated improvements shall be designed to minimize impact upon adjacent land uses.

Security Policies
13 RES
:47-590_...._.-..,.^' .^^TKCNNo
OCT21,dk
T
•^-
The Parkway Plan recognizes that residential property owners along the Parkway are concerned about privacy and security as the Parkway is developed. To that end, the Qty of Sacramento will not contest applications to the State Department of Water Re sourrcaesfor primte fences in the Parkway provided that. 1) the fence is located on private property; 2) the fence request is in an area for which recreation easements are not planned for acquisition in the short term; and 3) the fence does not extend below the mean high water mark below which is the jurisdiction of State Lands Commission (SLC). In addition the following polieies are designed to minimize the impact of Parkway development on the security and privacy of residential property owners within and adjacent to the Parkway.

SE1 All public access points will be closed at sunset.

SE2 The Parkway shall be patrolled on a regular basis. Patrols should be increased during the summer when the Parkway gets the most use.

SE3 In order to minimize poteraial seeurityand privacy problems for land owners adjacent to the Parkway, vegetative screening, fencing or other security measures should be implemented in tandem with Parkway development.

SE4 The boundary between private and public property within the Parkway boundaries shall be clearly identified with fencing and signage.
7n^pl^ation of the proposed Parkway policies will provide neighbors with some level of security, however, whether funding will always be available for public safety officers to patrol the Parkway is uncertain. A recent ballot measure (Measure B) to provide additionalfunding for Park Rangers in the American River Parkway was not successful and the County was recently forced to eliminate Sheriffs Department patrols in the American River Parkway due to budget constraints. Due to the timited amount of patrol presence proposed in the Draft Parkway Plan and the current uncertainty of funding for patrols, implementation of the Parkway Plan is considered a potentially significant impact to public safety.

Facts Ln &WOOit of Find inQS:

The following mitigation measure will reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

Prior to implementation of new portions of the trail or bikeway, the policies and mitigation measures of the recently adopted 2010 Bikeway Master Plan shall be incorporated into the design.

However, funding for finplementation of identified security measures is uncertain at this time. The City is not able, from a legal and financial standpoint, to commit at this time to future funding of security measures. The City intends to implement such measures to the extent legally and financially feasible, and while the City anticipates efforts will be made to that end, implementation of Mitigation Measure 6.9-1 is infeasible at this time because of the constraints identified above. Therefore, impact 6.9-1 is considered significant and unavoidable.

Impact 6.9-2 Conflict of JAnd Uses
The proposed Parkway Plan give policy direckion to develop additional 'access points along the Sacramento River including both lateral access (river trail and length of levee), where feasible, and vertical accessways at selected locations. Although the Parkway Plan builds on many of the existing developed access and recreation points along the river, the Plan also introduces a few new accessways. Introduction of new land uses in existing developed areas has the potential to result in land use conflicts. Areas where residents have commented during 14 ,QNo`'^.-7-.:.=O
OCT 2 1
the NOP process regarding possible land use conflicts include: Little Pocket area and the Pocket area north of Pocket Canal. In this area residential uses back-up or immediately face the levee. In other sections of this area, private property lines extend to the river high water mark and private docks, boathouses, picnic areas or shade structures have been developed on or immediately adjacent to the levee and river. Residents in these area are concerned that the multi-use trail proposed by the Parkway plan will conflict with existing private residential uses. Introduction of new public trails and park areas in existing developed areas have raised public concern regarding crime, nuisances, litter, safety, vandalism, loitering and loss of privacy. In general, development of park open space and recreational facilities is compatible with residential uses. However, design criteria and use controls are necessary to ensure that the boundary (physical or visual) between public areas and private areas is clear.

Intermediate and Neighborhood access points located adjacent to or in residential areas have the potential to increase traffic and parking conflicts between residents and Parkway users. Intermediate access points are proposed at Seymour park (northern extension), Shore Park, the Pocket Drainage Canal, the property adjacent to the Elks Lodge at Northpointe Way and Arabella Way next to the Garcia Bend Marina. Potential Neighborhood access points are proposed fo and Sleepy River Drive.

Facts In Stim=rt of Finclingsj
The following mitigation measures will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 1) Prior to Parkway development, the following conditions shall be met prior to the off-street trail being developed in the area:
a) The trail will not significantly impact native riparian habitat. b) All feasible security and privacy measures will be implemented, 2) Where access points are near or adjacent to residential areas, residential street parking shall be monitored and if warranted, resident preferential parking system restrictions shall be instituted and enforced.

However, funding for implementation of identified security and parking monitoring and enforcement measures is uncertain at this time. The City is not able, from a legal and financial standpoint, to commit at this time to future funding of security and parking monitoring and enforcement measures. The City intends to implement such measures to the extent legally and financially feasible, and while the City anticipates efforts will be made to that end, implementation of Mitigation Measure 6.9-2 is infeasible at this time because of the constraints identified above. Therfore, impact 6.9-2 is considered significant and unavoidable.
15 9'7"590®•-.---------
OCT 2 1^,;.^
M. AI.TEBNATMS
A range of alternatives were reviewed by the EIR inchWing the required "Alternative Al: Existing Conditions "(No change in the existing environment - no project); "Alternative A2: Existing Plan" (Development would occur in accordance with existing plans and policies such as the 1975 Parkway Plan); "Alternative B" which reroutes the bike trail from the levee to an alternative route between Captain's Table (25th Avenue) on the north and the Pocket Canal on the south; and "Alternative C" which prohibits public access and the construction of new public facilities on the waterfront side of the levee crown.

CEQA Guidelines require that an environmentally superior development alternative be identified if the No Project is the environmentally superior alternative. In this case, the No-Project Alternative - Alternative Al may be argued to be the environmentally superior alternative. Therefore, the environmentally superior development alternative is Alternative C which restricts development to the landward side of the levee, inclusive of the levee crown.

1. No-Project Alternative - Alternative Al
Under Alternative Al, a Sacramento River Parkway Plan would not be adopted and no further change in the existing environment would occur. Therefore, this alternative, while not impacting the environment, would not achieve any of the goals of the Parkway Plan.

Finding
Alternative A-1 would not achieve any of the habitat preservation/restoration or controlled public access goals of the Parkway Plan. The environmentally superior development alternative is the Alternative C - "Restrict Parkway Development Between the Levee Crown and the River's Edge" Alternative.

2. No-J^rQject Alternative - Alternative A2
Under Alternative A2, development would occur according to adopted plans and policies, including the 1975 Sacramento River Parkway Plan. This alternative would achieve the goals of the Plan, but would not provide updated policies to support the goals of the Plan, nor would it include the South Natomas area in its boundaries.

Finding

3. Alternative A-2 would achieve the goals of the Parkway Plan, but without the advantage of updated policies contained in the proposed project.

Alternative B- Remove Off-Street River Trail from Cantain's Table to the Pockel Under Alternative B, the on-river trail segment from Captain's Table on the north to the Pocket Canal on the south would be rerouted to follow the existing Riverside Boulevard on-street trail and existing off-street trails south to the Seymour Parkway and then to the Pocket Canal trail to reconnect with the on-river trail north of River Village Drive and Garcia Bend Park. All other aspects of the proposed Parkway Plan would be incorporated into this alternative. 16 ..7 `"`SJl)
r-^•-.; ^^+?* p
1 O•
0 T
Finding
Alternative B would achieve the habitat restoration/preservation and public access goals of the Parkway Plan except in the PIA segment of the Pocket area. Potential impacts to noise, plant/animal life, noise and cultural resources would be reduced under this alternative.

4. Alternative C - Restrict Parkway Development Between the Levee Crown aM the River's-WO AlternativeC proposes to remove all proposedParkway development that is located between the crown of the levee and the river's edge, not inclusive of the levee crown. Existing and adopted development would not be affected. This alternative would eliminate development of the Riverside Rest Area and potentially portions of the mulit-use trail from the Parkway.

Finding
The habitat restoration/preservation goal would be achieved, but the public access goal would not be fully achieved. Potential impacts to plant/animal life, noise, cultural resources and air quality would be significantly reduced in comparison to the other alternatives, making this the environmentally superior alternative.
17 OCT ^ 1. ^;4
9^®.'7 -^90^►^^^^ ^^ ^ ^^^^
T
IV. FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH INDUCING AND CIMMATUE IMPACTS As requiredby CEQA, the EIR evaluates the growth inducing impacts of the proposed project and the cumulative impacts of the proposed project (See, CEQA Guidelines §§15126 and 15130). These growth inducing and cumulative impacts, together with appropriate mitigation measures and findings, are set forth in Section IV.

A. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS.

The growth inducing potential of a project is generally considered to have a significant impact if the project has the potential to either induce growth or create the capacity for growth above and beyond the levels permitted by the public planning policies or anticipated by public or independent projects. However, a project's growth inducing potential does not automatically result in growth. Growth at the local level is fundamentally controlled by the land use policies of local jurisdictions. Accordingly, the growth pressure is transformed into actual growth only by the actions of elected decision makers.

Under CEQA, growth inducement may not be considered necessarily a detrimental, beneficial or insignificant consequence (CEQA Guidelines §15126). Induced growth is considered a significant impact only if it directly or indirectly affects theability of local agencies to provide needed public services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth in some other way significantly effects the environment.

The proposed Sacramento River Parkway Master Plan Update would not foster any economic or population growth or the construction of new housing. Land uses under the Parkway Plan are the same as the City of Sacramento General Plan. The Parkway Plan does not change planned land uses, require public service expansion (water, sewer and other infrastntcture) or induce new growth.

B. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
lul' ' e 1 2,11 ' El mo 1; \/ ; 1 ►1 C
The Sacramento River may be subjected to a variety of cumulative adverse environmental effects. The majority of these effects result from uses already planned in existing General Plans or Community Plans. The Parkway Plan does not change the underlying General Plan designation, but does provide additional policies to protect river resources. The Plan does not propose new public marinas. The Plan does propose increased public access to the river. Policies and mitigation measures are included in the Plan and this EIR which mitigate adverse effects to water quality and riparian and other river habitats. As such, the Parkway Plan itself assists in the mitigation of cumulative effects to the area.
18 ^-^ ^'^a^,10 .2 7 --90
,

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant impacts and their mitigation described,the City has determined pursuant to Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines that the benefits of the Project outweigh the adverse impacts, and the Project should be approved.

With reference to the above findings and in recognition of those facts which are included in the record, the City has determined that the Project would contribute to noise, plant and animal life, water quality, hydrology, cultural resources, and potential conflicts between uses and safety impacts which are considered significant adverse impacts, as disclosed in the Final EIR prepared for the Project.

The City, specifically finds and makes this Statement of Overriding Considerations that, as part of the approval provisions, the Project has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible, and has determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to overriding considerations as described below:

1. The Project will support the City's long-term goal of a continuous parkway along the Sacramento River.

2. The Project will support and implement the goals of the City General Plan to:
• Conserve and protect the planned open space areas along the American and Sacramento Rivers, floodways and undevelopable floodplains to the extent feasible. (Goal C, Sec. 6-14) • Retain the habitat areas where known endangered wildlife exists to the extent feasible. (Policy 1, Sec. 6-14)
• Conserve and protect the Sacramento and American Rivers, their shorelines and parkways. (Goal A, Sec. 6-16)
• Implemot the goals and policies of the Sacramento River Parkway Plan, and amend the Plan to include updated information and recommendations from the Sacramento River Can=: Capacity Studv. (Policy 2, Sec. 6-16)
• Continue to work toward providing a levee system which protects the community from flood related hazards and makes uses of its open space areas where appropriate. (Goal A, Sec. 6-18)

3. The Project will support and implement the goals and objectives of the 1989 Parks Master Plan Update:
• Complete acquisitions and easements for the SacramentoRiver Parkway as funding permits. (Objective D, page 57)

4. The Project will support the adopted 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan. 19 ^ - - ^ - ^ - 9 7-500
4Gi I a.! A.S

MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN (MMP)
FOR

THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN

PROGRAM LEVEL

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Prepared By:

PLANNING DYNAMICS GROUP
Prepared For:

City of Sacramento, Office of Environmental Affairs
September 1997
Adopted By:

City of Sacramento, City Council
Date: October 21, 1997
" " k "7^ .97-590
R, 8_
^I^°'
S^a. ^ ....! Y i ^ ^^ ® 6...w ►.r^r
OG T 2^ ^^^ ^

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN PROGRAM EIR

MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 : PROJECT IDENTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Applicant: ............................................... 4 Project Description Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Planning Area and Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Plan Purpose and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Goals of the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Required Discretionary Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 SECTION 2: GENERAL INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 SECTION 3: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Mitigation 6.2-2 Bikeway and Trail Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . 11 Mitigation 6.3-4 Construction Dust and Particulate Matter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Mitigation 6.4-1 Noise Generation - Project Specific Environment . . . . . . . . . 13 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Mitigation 6.5-3 Special Status Species - Swainson's Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Mitigation 6.5-4 Special Status Species (VELB) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Mitigation 6.5-5 Impacts to Shaded Riverine Aquatic (SRA) Habitat ........ 15 Mitigation 6.5-6 Loss of Aquatic Habitat and Fisheries
Due to Water Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Mitigation 6.5-7 Special Status Species - Delta Smelt and Winter Run Chinook Salmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Mitigation 6.6-1 Run-off and Erosion Control for Public Access Routes and Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Mitigation 6.6-2 Construction Water Quality Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Mitigation 6.6-4 Litter ..................................... 20 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
RES E
PAGE 2
^`^'
:^d ^ ^ 0
OCT 2 ^^^^ x.

HYDROLOGY MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Mitigation 6.7-3 Flood Risk and Public Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Mitigation 6.8-1 Prehistoric Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Mitigation 6.8-2 Historic/Cultural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN USES AND SAFETY MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation 6.9-1 Public Safety and Security of Private Property ..... 25 Mitigation 6.9-2 Conflict of Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 3
97-59"Cre .a c^ f r r .^
OCT 2 1l

CITY OF SACRAMENTO

MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN PROGRAM EIR
This Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been required by and prepared for the Department of Planning and Development, Office of Environmental Affairs, 12311 Street, Room 300, Sacramento, CA 95814, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 21081.

SECTION 1 : PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
Project Name/File Number: Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update Applicant: City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services
Planning Division
Address: 12311 Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, California
Project Description Summary
The project is the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update (Plan). The Plan updates City of Sacramento's 1975 Parkway Plan in order to reflect changes in the Parkway, and the scope of the Parkway. Specifically, the South Natomas area of the City was added to the Plan. This area was not included in the original 1975 Plan. Some of the issues to be addressed in the update include:
the South Natomas Community Area; proposed redevelopment projects along the River; clarifying Parkway policy; and adding Parkway land use designations to be applied to publicly owned lands.

The Sacramento River Parkway Plan is a twenty year policy guide for habitat preservation and restoration and recreational development for lands adjacent to the River. The Plan identifies existing conditions in the Parkway, a vision for the future, and land use goals, policies and implementation measures to achieve the vision. The Plan recognizes the multiple use aspect of the Parkway.

Recreation uses allowed in the Parkway include walking, bicycling, nature study, and equestrian use.

A general policy to allow equestrian use in the Parkway is included in the Plan. Specific policies to guide equestrian use will be developed at a later date.

A general trail corridor along the Sacramento River is identified in the Plan, but a specific alignment for the trail system has not been developed. A portion of the adopted bikeway system is located in the Sacramento River Parkway. This Class I (off-street) bikeway will be paved per City of Sacramento standards and will accommodate pedestrian use. A separate multi use trail which would accommodate equestrians and pedestrians is proposed, but further study is required to determine the alignment. The State Reclamation Board would prefer that the multi use trail should be located on Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 4
",; ?'_r IT 7^ {^,..^, . _.z d 4 . ..^0C , a,: wd
the waterside berm of the river levee instead of the levee crown in order to reduce impacts to the levee structure. Using the landside berm of the levee would increase conflict with adjacent private residential uses in the area. The Plan strives to reduce as much as possible conflicts with residential uses.

Planning Area and Location
The Plan area is located along the easterly bank of the Sacramento River within the City limits of the City of Sacramento. It is 17 miles in length and encompasses approximately 820 acres. The boundaries of the area generally are the City limits inclusive of South Natomas to the north; the Sacramento River on the west; the City limits at Freeport to the south. The east boundary is either the Interstate 5 Freeway; 10 feet landside of the landward toe of the Sacramento River levee or the inland boundary of public land along the River, whichever is most appropriate for land use issues.

The Sacramento River Parkway is divided into planning areas within the Plan. These planning areas were determined by several factors including: Community Plan Area boundaries; existing land use; and land ownership patterns. The Area Plans describe the application of Plan goals and policies to the planning areas and are accompanied by maps which show the application of land use designations and Parkway facilities.

South Natomas. The northern boundary of the City to and including Discovery Park.

Downtown/Land Park. Jibboom Street Bridge to Captain's Table at 25th Avenue.

Pocket. 25th Avenue to the Freeport Reservoir at the south end of the Pocket near Freeport.

Freeport. South of the Freeport Reservoir to the Freeport Bridge.

Plan Purpose and Objectives
The Sacramento River Parkway Plan is a policy document for the management of the Sacramento River Parkway. The Sacramento River Parkway Plan is a twenty year policy guide for habitat preservation and restoration and recreational development for lands adjacent to the River. The Plan identifies existing conditions in the Parkway, a vision for the future, and land use goals, policies and implementation measures to achieve the vision. The Plan is proposed to be adopted as part of the City's General Plan to guide land use decisions regarding public lands near the Sacramento River. . The objectives of the.Plan are:
1) To develop a 20-year policy guide for habitat preservation and restoration and recreational development for lands adjacent to the Sacramento River. 2) To describe existing conditions, develop a vision for the future, and identify programs and actions to achieve the vision.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
. ^ ^-.^..,:.^
PAGE 5
3) Revise and update the 1975 Parkway Plan to reflect current conditions.

Goals of the Plan
The Draft Sacramento River Parkway Plan goals are as follows:
► To recognize the multiple use aspect of the Sacramento River Parkway for recreation, habitat preservation and flood control.
► To preserve, protect and enhance the natural and cultural resources of the Parkway. ► To provide appropriate access and facilities for the enjoyment of the Parkway by present and future generations.
► To create a continuous, lineal Parkway with bicycle and pedestrian access along the Sacramento River from the City limits at 1-80 and Garden Highway in South Natomas to the City limits at Freeport.

Natural resource protection and enhancement is the main goal of the Parkway and will take precedence over public access recreation in the Parkway. Trails and other facilities will be developed so as not to significantly impact native riparian habitat. Prime habitat area will be protected from human encroachment.

The Parkway is envisioned as a major recreational and public access resource, linking the American River Parkway with the Sacramento River Parkway and eventually connecting with the Laguna area.

The Plan promotes as much access to the River as possible, while maintaining sensitivity to the private residential inholdings in the Parkway. The Plan strives to improve public access by developing proposed public access points, building trails, and by directing people to public areas.

Required Discretionary Actions
The Plan and associated EIR represent the first program level series of actions necessary to adopt the policy and land use framework for publicly owned lands (or lands which are acquired for public use) along the river. Although conceptual development proposals are recommended in the plan, these proposals will be subject to further project specific design development and public and environmental review. At this early policy and program phase the following actions are necessary:

1. Certification of the Environmental Impact Report. The document must be completed in compliance with CEQA and CEQA guidelines, Section 15050.

2. Adoption of the 1993 Update to the Parkway Plan by the City of Sacramento.

3. General Plan Amendment to add the 1993 Update to the Parkway Plan to the General Plan.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 6
6^9.7___-- 5530
T

4. Amendment of the 2010 City/County Bikeway Plan and Circulation Element of the General Plan to show the final alignment of the Pocket Area trail in accordance with the City Council's final action on the Parkway Plan.

Once the plan is adopted, the implementation of specific projects will require additional phases of design and project specific environmental review.

A full description of the proposed plan is included in the Draft Program Level Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Sacramento River Parkway Plan Update dated February 6, 1996 (State Clearinghouse Number 93102086).

SECTION 2: GENERAL INFORMATION
The project as approved includes the mitigation measures adopted as part of the Findings of Fact for this project. The intent of this Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) is to prescribe and enforce a means for properly and successfully implementing the mitigation measures as identified within the Environmental Impact Report for this project.

The following mitigation measures are based on a program level of environmental analysis. The analysis is based on the level of detail provided in the proposed Parkway Plan Update. The Plan Update, is a policy level document, and does not include detailed design information. As such, the EIR and the mitigation measures address the reasonable impacts which might occur as a result of the adoption of the policies of the plan. Additional project level review will be necessary to develop more specific mitigation measures as individual development projects are identified and detailed project designs becomes available.

Prior to implementation of a Parkway development project. a proposed project must be reviewed for compliance with the Parkway Plan policies. these program level mitigation measures and any additional project specific mitigation measures identified specifically for the individual develonment r' c. For example, the program level EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce impacts to shaded riverine habitats through proper site design which avoids disruption of such habitats to the maximum extent possible, and through replanting of canopied trees to recreate habitat. Individual project specific developments will be required to comply with the program level mitigation as well as project specific mitigation which might for instance, delineate a specific change to the project's design, or a site specific habitat restoration plan for the project site.

It is also important to note that the Parkway Plan itself includes policies which assist in mitigation of impacts. Although these policies minimize effects, they are not considered mitigation measures, since they are part of the project. For many program level effects, adherence to the Plan's policies regarding resource protection avoids potential program level impacts. Future site specific projects, therefore, must be reviewed not only for consistency the program level EIR mitigation measures, and any additional project level mitigation measures, but also for consistency with the Parkway Plan policies.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR PAGE 7 97-590Mitigation Monitoring Plan -. -r-r' +.e..;..F
^- 0a
T
SECTION 3: MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
This section describes all adopted mitigation measures, identifies the entity responsible for monitoring the implementation of the measures and the procedures for monitoring the mitigation measure. The measures are identified in accordance with their number in the associated Draft and Final EIR to allow easy reference to the impact discussion for which the mitigation measure has been developed.

The following acronyms are used in this MMP to refer to agencies who will be responsible for implementation of the measures:

NPDSD City of Sacramento Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services (NPDSD). This Department includes planning, building, and parks and landscape architecture. This Department will bear primary responsibility for ensuring implementation of these mitigation measures.

PWD City of Sacramento PublicWorks Department
OEA City of Sacramento Office of Environmental Affairs. This Office is responsible for monitoring the City's compliance with these measures and for determining if additional project specific mitigation measures are required for future Parkway development projects.

CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR PAGE 8
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
4 .97-590
.....^^^....^.

OCT2.^^*i

TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.2-2 Bikeway and Trail Safety
Off-street Bike Trail Sections: Implement mitigation measure 6.9 of this EIR to reduce risks to bicycle safety. Implementation of these measures should reduce trail safety impacts to a less than significant level. Also implementation of the adopted 2010 City County Bikeways Master Plan mitigation measures further reduces impacts.

Multi-use (Equestrian) Designation: There are no standards of significance for the impact of equestrian use on river trailways. However, the potential impact of equestrian use on the trail system may be reduced by developing standards for safe multi-use of trails. It is recommended that prior to designation of equestrian trail sections that the City establish a Task Force comprised of equestrian users, other trail users, maintenance and regulatory representatives such as the Reclamation District, park and recreation specialists and adjacent property owners to develop standards for equestrian use. Consideration should be given to identification of trail segments which lend themselves to multi-use; providing separation between the bikeway and the multi use trail wherever possible, identification of staging areas, and minimization of impacts to the integrity of the levee and natural riparian habitat areas. Depending on the standards developed, subsequent and more detailed environmental review may be necessary.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services, Planning Division and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division n The City of Sacramento, Public Works Technical Services Division (site plans), and Traffic Engineering Section
Monitoring Program for Off-street Trails:

Proiect Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of any design plans for construction or alteration of off-street biketrails, the proposed design shall be reviewed for consistency with the adopted Parkway Plan policies, and the policies of the adopted 2010 City County Bikeways Master Plan by NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and PWD Technical Services Section.

The Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall determine if additional project specific mitigation measures may be required.

Construction Phase: All mitigation measures shall be reflected in the final project design prior to the City Council authorizing bidding or construction of the project. The trail shall constructed in accordance with the adopted standards and designations of the adopted 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan and approved by City of Sacramento PWD Technical Services Section. The OEA shall Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 9
97-590
OCT 2
T
7 verify that these steps have been undertaken.

Monitoring Program for Multi-use (Equestrian) Trails Mitigation:

Within a year of the adoption of the Parkway Plan, the City of Sacramento Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development (NPDSD) shall establish a Task Force comprised of equestrian users, other trail users, maintenance and regulatory representatives such as the Reclamation District, park and recreation specialists and adjacent property owners to develop standards for equestrian use. As an initial phase of work the Task Force shall consider the appropriateness of equestrian use on existing trails. Consideration should be given to identification of trail segments which lend themselves to multi-use; providing separation between the bikeway and the multi use trail wherever possible, identification of staging areas, and minimization of impacts to the integrity of the levee and natural riparian habitat areas. Depending on the standards developed, subsequent and more detailed environmental review may be necessary.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR PAGE 10
Mitigation Monitoring Plan rz i 97-5 2 0
Qc 1 2 1 °....
7 AIR QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.3-4 Construction Dust and Particulate Matter The significance threshold for PM,, is 275 pounds per day. At a program level, it is not known what the total level of construction related PM-10 will be. The SMAQMD does however, suggest methods to reduce construction related PM-10 emissions. Employment of these measures should reduce impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures are however, developed at a program level of review. Fur ther project specific analysis and mitigation may be required when design details and construction methods of the proposed project area available. (1) Prior to issuance of a permit for construction of any phase of the project, a separate analysis of construction related PM-10 emissions shall be conducted. (2) Based on the project specific analysis (see item (1) above) the following types of mitigation measures shall be employed:
a. Water all unpaved construction areas at least twice per day during demolition and excavation to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering should be carried out on hot or windy days. Water twice daily or cover stockpiles of sand, soil, and similar materials with a tarp.
b. Cover trucks hauling dirt and debris to reduce spillage onto paved surfaces. c. Increase the frequency of City street cleaning along streets in the vicinity of the construction site.
d. Work should be restricted or banned on days of high winds (> 30 mph) or when air quality violations are expected (as determined by the SMAQMD). e. On-site vehicle speed on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. f. Require construction contractors to designate a person or persons to oversee the dust abatement program and to order increased watering, as necessary. g. Revegetation of construction areas and staging areas shall take place immediately following completion of each project component.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan ,^ C ^-^ 11-1`^^F ^..^^ - ',^;^"`_ J ^
PAGE 11
4'7^5 19 (lUe
OCT2""1 i
'7
Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs, and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.

Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to City Council approval of new public access or open space development in the Parkway area, the Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall ensure that a project specific analysis of PM 10 and construction dust has been undertaken. Prior to bidding and construction of each phase of Parkway Plan implementation, the NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for ensuring that appropriate dust control measures are applied to the project as mitigation measures and included in the specifications for the construction documents.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 12
(^9N0: 7 5
W 2t
T

NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.4-1 Noise Generation - Project Specific Environment

1. Sound barriers (fencing and landscaping) shall be used, where feasible, to buffer residents from Parkway user noise.

2. All access points and the off-street trail system shall be closed to the public from sunset to sunrise to reduce evening noise.

3. Site off-street trails as far away from residential receivers as possible without impacting wildlife habitat value.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:

The City of Sacramento, NPDSD Planning Division, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and the Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA)
Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: The NPDSD Planning Division and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for ensuring that new proposed public recreation, access and open space development projects include feasible noise buffer and attenuation features as part of the project design. The Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall be responsible for reviewing the project and determining if any additional project specific mitigation measures to reduce operational and construction period noise impacts to sensitive receptors are required. Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall ensure that project specific mitigation measures are implemented.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 13 97,..590w,t ,.

OCT^
T

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures address impacts identified at a program or concept plan level of review. Additional project specific environmental review may be required which would identify that additional project mitigation measures are required. Implementation of the following measures will be required to reduce significant program level impacts. However, these measures are not intended to preclude the necessity for detailed environmental analysis at the specific project design and approval phase.

Mitigation 6.5-3 Special Status Species - Swainson's Hawk At a program level, the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to Swainson's Hawk species and habitat to a less-than-significant level:

1. Prior to approval of development plans under the Parkway Plan policies, a determination shall be made regarding the sensitivity and suitability of the project area for Swainson's Hawk habitat. If the project site is sensitive, California Fish and Game Department shall be consulted and a habitat survey prepared. Impacts to this species shall be avoided or mitigated in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).

2. Development projects in the Parkway that may impact Swainson's Hawk habitat shall be required to prepare a mitigation and operation plan for Swainson's hawk nesting habitat affected by proposed projects. The mitigation and operation plan shall be submitted to CDFG for review and approval prior to construction of projects.

3. Nesting habitat lost shall be replaced in accordance with requirements imposed by CDFG for mitigation for loss of nesting habitat.

NOTE: The CDFG mitigation guidelines (revised 1992) for Swainson's hawk specify that no disturbance shall occur within a half-mile of an active nest between March 1 and August 15 to avoid construction of other project related activities which may cause nest abandonment or adverse disturbance to nearby active nest during the breeding season.

There are known nesting sites within the Parkway.

4. Prior to construction of any Parkway development, hire a qualified biologist to conduct a survey within a lh mile radius of the site to determine the location of active nests.

5. Avoid construction of any Parkway development project during the breeding/nestirg season of the Swainson's hawk of March 1 through August 15 to avoid disturbance of nesting pairs within a half-mile radius of the project site.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 14
OCT 2, T i.-
11 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan ^^ 7 S, R
R C:_..

PAGE 15
:-; =S ^'^,^'70
OCT2,
T
Entity Responsible for Ensuring Compliance
The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of development plans for any Parkway Plan project, the Office of Environmental Affairs shall be responsible for ensuring that a biological investigation of the site is conducted and that coordination with the USFWS and CDFG have occurred to implement the above mitigation measures and any additional site specific mitigation measures that result from site specific environmental review.

Mitigation 6.5-4 Special Status Species (VELB)
At a program level, the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to VELB species and habitat to a less-than-significant level:

Prior to approval of development plans under the Parkway Plan policies, a determination shall be made regarding the sensitivity and suitability of the project area for VELB habitat.

If the project site is sensitive, California Fish and Game shall be consulted and a habitat survey prepared. Impacts to this species shall be avoided or mitigated in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.

Entity Responsible for Ensuring Compliance
The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of development plans for any Parkway Plan project, the NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs shall be responsible for ensuring that a biological investigation of the site is conducted and that coordination with the USFWS and CDFG have occurred to implement the above mitigation measures and any additional site specific mitigation measures that result from site specific environmental review.

Mitigation 6.5-5 Imp-acts to Shaded Riverine Aquatic (SRA) Habitat The following mitigation measures will reduce program level impacts to a less-than-significantlevel:

1. Prior to approval and implementation of the individual Parkway Plan development projects, an assessment of SRA habitat shall be made to determine if such habitat is on site or would be affected by development. Facilities which could directly or indirectly affected SRA habitat shall minimize impacts in accordance with guidelines established by the State Lands Commission and other trustee agencies. Actions to minimize impacts shall include, but are not limited to:

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 16
...^:^.=-
^^--q-qt)
0'CT2 1;
a) design modifications to avoid direct impacts and disturbance to SRA habitat. b) retention or replanting of canopied, multi-story vegetation along the riverbank to maintain a shaded habitat.
c) erosion control measures on site (both during construction and long term operation) to avoid run-off, debris and turbidity in the identified SRA area. (See also Water Quality Mitigation Measure 6.6-1).

Entity Responsible for Ensuring Compliance
The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of development plans for any Parkway Plan project, the NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs shall be responsible for ensuring that a biological investigation of the site is conducted and that coordination with the USFWS and CDFG have occurred to implement the above mitigation measures and any additional site specific mitigation measures that result from site specific environmental review. (See also Water Quality Mitigation Measure 6.6-1).

Mitigation 6.5-6 - Loss of Aquatic Habitat and Fisheries Due to Water Pollution At a program level, no direct impacts can be determined, however, implementation of individual Parkway development projects may result in impacts. To reduce impacts to the aquatic environment, implement Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 of the Water Quality Chapter. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to less than significant.

Entity Responsible for Ensuring Compliance
n The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs, and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.
n The City of Sacramento, Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 17 f
97}C^0
^ r^ 1^ ^ •^-^°.r
OCT
--'=a^

2.L
T
Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of development plans for any Parkway Plan project, the NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs shall be responsible for ensuring that a biological investigation of the site is conducted and that coordination with the USFWS and CDFG have occurred to implement the above mitigation measures and any additional site specific mitigation measures that result from site specific environmental review. Additional water quality mitigation measures shall be the responsibility of the Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division. (See also Water Quality Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program.) Mitigation 6.5-7 Special Status Species - Delta Smelt and Winter Run Chinook Salmon At a program level, no direct impacts can be determined, however, implementation of individual Parkway development projects may result in impacts. To reduce impacts to the aquatic environment, implement Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 of the Water Quality Chapter. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to less than significant.

Entity Responsible for Ensuring Compliance
n The City of Sacramento, NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs, and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.
n The City of Sacramento, Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division.

Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of development plans for any Parkway Plan project, the NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs shall be responsible for ensuring that a biological investigation of the site is conducted and that coordination with the USFWS and CDFG have occurred to implement the above mitigation measures and any additional site specific mitigation measures that result from site specific environmental review. Additional water quality mitigation measures shall be the responsibility of the Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division. (See also Water Quality Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Program.) Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 4.7- -590-;-' J 16 ^^®•_-------
OCT2t
T

WATER QUALITY MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.6-1 Run-off and Erosion Control for Public Access Routes and Parking The following program level mitigation measures are standard procedures for reducing run-off and erosion which may be applied as appropriate to most facility developments. Once designs are developed for each facility, detailed project specific environmental review may identify refinements or additions to these mitigation measures based on the specifics of the project. These mitigation measures will reduce potential program level impacts to less-than-significant.

1. To the extent possible, use indigenous plants to landscape new and/or enlarged parking facilities and create a vegetation buffer to collect and treat such parking lot runoff before it enters the river.

2. For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, incorporate into the drainage plan inlet catch basins containing grease/sediment traps and other on-site stormwater quality control measures (per September 1996 Final EIR).

3. For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, implement a parking lot cleaning and maintenance program designed to minimized the introduction of toxic materials into the Sacramento River from parking lot runoff. Instruct maintenance personnel to promptly clean any oil/grease or other toxic deposits discovered on the premises.

4. Require erosion control and on-going maintenance in order to prevent and repair damage and erosion caused by use. Implement trail maintenance and erosion control measures and monitor for effectiveness.

5. Implement landscape maintenance program to integrate Best Management Practices which eliminate, reduce and minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides which contribute to non point source pollution.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services (NPDSD), Office of Environmental Affairs and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division
n The City of Sacramento, Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 19
97--590^
.,^1.^ t'
T
Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Level: At the project specific level, the City NPDSD and Office of Environmental Affairs shall ensure that project specific environmental review is completed, which includes an assessment of potential water quality impacts, and where appropriate the incorporation of the above mitigation measures.

During Construction: The NPDSD and City Department of Utilities, Water and Sewer Division shall be responsible for ensuring that the construction plans and specifications include any required mitigation measures, and shall assign a construction inspector to monitor the construction site including monitoring for required practices to reduce erosion and run-off.

Post Construction: The NPDSD, Parks Division, shall be responsible for ensuring that operating and maintenance program for any proposed public access site, trail, parking lot or other facility includes best management practices to reduce run-off, erosion and pesticides and herbicide non-point source pollution.

Mitigation 6.6-2 Construction Water Quality Impacts
The following mitigation measures will reduce program level impacts to less than significant.

1. Restrict any construction grading to the dry season between May 1 and September 30.

2. All construction activities shall be done in accordance with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control (GESC) Ordinance 93-068 and shall include grading techniques which control excessive runoff (erosion, sediment and pollution) during construction. (Per September 1996 Final EIR)

3. Dust and soil erosion control measures shall be implemented during the construction phase of the proposed project. These measures are intended to minimize soil erosion and fugitive dust emissions. Suggested measures include:
a. watering exposed soils;
b. covering exposed soils with straw or other materials; c. Adopting measures to prevent construction vehicles from tracking mud onto adjacent roadways;
d. Covering trucks containing loose and dry soil;
e. Providing interim drainage and sediment control measures during the construction period. (Per September 1996 Final EIR)

4. In non-pavement areas, any vegetation covered or removed during construction (including slope protection) should be replanted following construction.

5. Depending upon the magnitude and location of individual Parkway projects, consideration should be given to installation of a silt curtain during construction of the slope protection in Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 20
197-590. -.

Lk 1
i
T
order to minimize increases in turbidity resulting from construction activities in the water.

All construction materials which have the potential to contaminate the riparian habitat-- such as fuels, paints, solvents, cement additives--shouldbe identified in advance of construction.

A plan should be provided by each contractor using such materials covering storage, use and clean up for all such materials. An emergency response plan should be provided by the lead contractor or supervising agency to cover spills of such materials.

7. Post construction BMP's as approved by the Department of Utilities for the long term enhancement of stormwater run-off shall be implemented.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services (NPDSD), Planning Division, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA)
n The City of Sacramento, Utilities Department, Water and Sewer Division.

Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Design Level: At the project specific level, the City NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA), and the Department of Utilities, Water and Sewer Division shall ensure that project specific environmental review is completed, which includes an assessment of potential water quality impacts, and where appropriate the incorporation of the above mitigation measures.

During Construction: The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for ensuring that the construction plans and specifications include any required water quality mitigation measures, and shall assign a construction inspector to monitor the construction site including monitoring for required practices to reduce erosion and run-off.

Post Construction: The NPDSD, the Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division, shall be responsible for ensuring that operating and maintenance program for any proposed public access site, trail, parking lot or other facility includes best management practices to reduce run-off, erosion and pesticides and herbicide non-point source pollution.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGEl^(,,,,'....s9O
^ ^ ^^^._..^..^...e.r
i
I
Mitigation 6.6-4 Litter .

The following mitigation measures must be implemented in order to lessen project impacts from litter to a less than significant level for the proposed project:

1. Trash receptacles sufficient to handle waste generated by users of the project shall be placed in convenient locations in order to facilitate their use. Consistent maintenance to dispose of overflowing trash containers should be undertaken particularly during peak use season.

2. In public use areas, require education and signage as part of the development to inform users of the importance of proper litter disposal.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento NPDSD, Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.

Monitoring Program:

Project Specific Desian Level: At the project specific level, the City NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA), shall ensure that project specific environmental review is completed, which includes an assessment of potential litter and debris impacts, and that, where appropriate, the above mitigation measures are included in the project design.

During Construction: The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for ensuring that the constructionplans and specifications include any required mitigation measures, and shall assign a construction inspector to monitor the construction site including monitoring for required practices to litter and construction debris.

Post Construction: The NPDSD, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for ensuring that operating and maintenance program for any proposed public access site, trail; parking lot or other facility includes best management practices to collect and dispose of litter and to educate the public.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 22
, ^^--s^o^^ ^^^•^
^^^^^# :

HYDROLOGY MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.7-3 Flood Risk and Public Safety
Development under the Proposed Plan will be required to comply with all requirements of the "City/County Land Use Policy within the 100 Year Flood Plain". The City Council has evaluated these impacts in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared in connection with the Land Use Planning Policy Within the 100-Year Floodplain (M89-054) adopted by the City Council on February 6, 1990. A Program EIR addressing the flood-related risks to people and property created by new development in the 100-year floodplain in the City was prepared for and certified by the City. The flood-related risks created by the proposed project fall within the scope of the Program EIR. Accordingly, the findings adopted by the Council in connection with its certification of the Program EIR and its adoption of the Policy are applicable to the proposed project. These findings are forth in the Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Land Use Planning Policy Within the 100-Year Floodplain in the City of Sacramento.

For the Proposed Project, which include non-residential uses, the applicable provisions of the Sacramento City Code permit development on the project site provided the project sponsor assumes the risk of all flood-related damage to any permitted new construction, agrees to notify subsequent purchasers of the flood risk, and ensure that any new construction complies with City-imposed design restrictions aimed at reducing the risk of flood-related property damage and personal injury.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA)
Monitoring Program for Off-street Trails:

Project Specific Design Phase: As part of the design phase of every City project, consideration is given to flood risk and prevention. Flood proof or flood tolerant uses will need to be incorporated into the design of individual development projects which are located in the 100 year flood plain.

The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall be responsible for the planning, and programming of City owned public recreation and open space in a manner which reduces flood risk. The City's OEA shall be responsible for project specific review of flood risk.

The Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division will be responsible for the incorporation of project specific mitigation as projects arise.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR PAGE ?^, 7-Ct^o Mitigation Monitoring Plan „ - 11 ..^ ^, - .. 1 7 a ^
r a
.^.. ^._ ^a ky •I
T

CULTURAL RESOURCES MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation 6.8-1 Prehistoric Resources
The following mitigation measure should be applied to all Parkway development projects at the project specific environmental review level in order to reduce the potential impact to prehistoric resources to a less-than-significant level.

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construction continues.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning & Development, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and Office of Environmental Affairs.

Monitoring Program:

Prior to Construction: At the project specific review level, the City of Sacramento NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are referenced as mitigation measures or conditions of the project prior to approval of final construction drawings.

During Construction: The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall insure that the construction inspectors assigned to the project have the telephone number of the assigned archaeologist in the project records. The archaeologist shall monitor the construction site during the excavation of the site to monitor for buried cultural resources. In the event that any artifacts are located in the excavation, the inspector shall verify that all work has ceased and that the required investigations completed prior to work re-commencing on the site.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 24
r I _.^- r, '^ -..1r-j^ op.. ^.7 -5-9
Qu 2.

T
Mitigation 6.8-2 Historic/Cultural Resources
The following mitigation measure should be applied to all Parkway development projects at the project specific environmental review level in order to reduce the potential impact to prehistoric resources to a less-than-significant level.

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construaion continues.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning & Development, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division and the Office of Environmental Affairs.

Monitoring Program:

Prior to Construction: At the project specific review level, the City of Sacramento NPDSD Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall ensure that the above mitigation measures are referenced as mitigation measures or conditions of the project prior to approval of final construction drawings.

During Construction: The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall insure that the construction inspectors assigned to the project have the telephone number of the assigned archaeologist in the project records. The archaeologist shall monitor the construction site during the excavation of the site to monitor for buried cultural resources. In the event that any artifacts are located in the excavation, the inspector shall verify that all work has ceased and that the required investigations completed prior to work re-commencing on the site.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR PAGE 25
Mitigation Monitoring Plan 9 7-5..9i0
00!
^ ^0...r---
T

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN USES AND SAFETY MITIGATION MEASURES Mitigation 6.9-1 Public Safety and Security of Private Property In accordance with the Findings of Fact for this project, the following mitigation measure has been determined to reduce program level impacts but not a less than significant level:

1. Prior to implementation of new portions of the trail or bikeway, the policies and mitigation measures of the recently adopted 2010 Bikeway Master Plan shall be incorporated into the design. These policies include:

When necessary to prevent trespassing and to protect adjacent property, trail corridors shall be fenced at the time the project is developed (Chapter 3, Page 7, 2010 Bikeway Master Plan)
Recognize private property rights and the safety of bicyclists when locating off-street bikeways (Chapter 5, Page 9, 2010 Bikeways Master Plan).

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services, Office of Environmental Affairs, and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.
n The City of Sacramento, Public Works Department, Technical Services Division.

Monitoring Program for Off-street Trails:

Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to approval of any design plans for construction or alteration of off-street trails, the proposed design shall be reviewed for consistency with the adopted Parkway Plan policies, and the policies of the adopted 2010 City County Bikeways Master Plan by NPDSD and the PWD Technical Services Division. The Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall determine if additional project specific mitigation measures may be required.

Construction Phase: All mitigation measures and project conditions shall be reflected in the final project design prior to the City Council authorizing bidding or construction of the project. The trail shall be constructed in accordance with the adopted standards and designations of the adopted 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan and approved by City of Sacramento. The NPDSD, Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall verify that these steps have been undertaken.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan PAGE 26.97-590r" k-71
^ :; ; ^ 1^^•...-^.."."'°'"" n"
OCT
T
Mitigation 6.9-2 Conflict of Land Uses
In accordance with the Findings of Fact for this project, the following mitigation measures have been determined to reduce program level impacts but not a less than significant level:
1) Prior to any Parkway Plan project specific development, the following conditions shall be met prior to the off-street trail being developed in the Area:
a. The trail will not significantly impact native riparian habitat; b. All feasible security and privacy measures will be implemented, 2) Where access points are near or adjacent to residential areas, residential street parking shall be monitored and if warranted, resident preferential parking system restrictions shall be instituted and enforced.

Entities Responsible for Ensuring Compliance:
n The City of Sacramento, Department of Neighborhoods, Planning and Development Services, Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA), and Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division.
n The City of Sacramento, Public Works Department, Technical Services Division.

Monitoring Program
Project Specific Design Phase: Prior to project specific development of any section of the proposed a riverfront trail, the Office of Environmental Affairs (OEA) shall make an environmental determination and specific findings that the proposed trail project will not significantly affect riparian habitat and that all feasible security and privacy measures will be implemented. Additionally, the OEA shall determine if additional project specific mitigation measures are be required. The NPDSD Parks, Trees and Landscape Architecture Division shall ensure that the design of the trail includes all feasible measures to reduce privacy and land use conflicts.

Construction Phase: All mitigation measures shall be reflected in the final project design prior to the City Council authorizing bidding or construction of the project. The trail shall be constructed in accordance with the adopted standards and designations of the adopted 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan, and any additional project specific mitigation measures. The PWD Technical Services Division shall verify that these steps have been undertaken.

Sacramento River Parkway Plan Program EIR
Mitigation Monitoring Plan
PAGE 27
T
O U
^ ?
^E
€ O a L) C j
c
hF
^•Z
^ LM
0- >co 0 ao:

U
CL
►+ C c w
N 0
C U cnC
O U
^
•
a Q
o
c a
Q
r. ts
0 (7
•- a)p 0 (0
fff ,
=
(D
> ' 6y lp
U e^
O .1 0
( ^ a E^
W
CW 0^+ C^_
O
Y
d..
c.:_>^►/ ^/
LL= m
_
O 0:.

W w 0^ c ^ ^a 4)WJ d ^d^F ^^^,m^ d - o mrn[
y u VE N N
avcn w w E a
LL
O>" L. 'd a 2 WM
C
a^ ^N ^^^ o ^^o^
^ ^
^
NN N ^ (D tpQ 0 n U ^ ° CU oQ/^
Q p U) (0 O C (n ^ 0 fn
c
(n Q- c 3
V /
JZ R
L
^a .
c
^
NC ^^°(D ^ ^•^o ^^m o a^' i70
C. 0 ^
o
LA Q . a E E o j Y y o^ E}, ^ d{ E -0 (0p m N UU
a Q fp fn Q c C(^ ^^ C N^ U
Q(n a N w cv 3
lG a ^ Hil Hilt UWIZ J W m d W^-a .^ N W E c.^ ^ W^ in ^.^ 0 CQ 0
-0 C/)
Q
2)
,n O U
U
U
q) (D
i
h
^ U
U^ N
> a >
E
m°- > ^
a j a ^w m m ^0 E N_
0 E o.aD aW 0. CD m.oC^Nc li= _ •- EU [•-EU »- EU ^-EiLL EU d N^ "p U U
I
-p U
N
U U ='D
CLC4
c o> o> o> > oac
Z W N N U N N P m
>
SD 'a N
^ d U) m o
fA (V
N ~
7 z
M
M
^ co
O'
t0
O>
fD o. 2:

C.) Ca '^
co
O O+
O O
CO
M
U
C 'E
N N
f0
m co)a 2 0 20)
I
T
p p U
C-
0 C U +•^•' '` C C U +-^•
a) 0 4) (D
c QNOE' c ^'^oE p U a N
` N N QI •7 ` N NCY)•^
p^ > O- pp > Q
U mv aE a ) C 1 3 nE ^
'0
(0 O U t0 O U
m a ^ •^ ^ -0 mO m ^ 00 O cu u) V O
O- C L 4) V; Q- 0O
`' ^=
N.^
N d y E ^^^
5 E - U Q+.^+p) U O U) ^ pn u p w :r N O C
W E ° E. z 0 w E c E.S c p^
N
^
C yc^ w N
^ (D
A = o V) s
O ,r Cr
O O•N..`N MN co^ w
.^n3E
O
U .E
Emfl
^
C a?
L) N U O ^ CV y d p
O ^ O c
N C m^... •- N
N N ^ O 'aE:Ocu

0. C ^ N CDp ^ • U
N Q
C =
W E Q E pN.SU
I
^ w E
N N E Co
U O O +N- C
a^^^Etf 0

O- EL N
U`p a U
C U }' `
p^•-N°CD v
W E N
0 .9-0
C
O ^O C
M Q.^
0 (e)
H
G
O V -p. . Lr-- C .,
f0 ` ('
E o.C^ E ^2 ^o^°^ a) a)co;,^EN C-)^ N ^,^-ow.w ^
75 .N .N Cn f0 y C^ V V in 07
o N m N a 0
Qv C.E Em2 a`. m^Z n
I
Jo-C.)t(0 CD co
^ ^ a O 0 ^'^
U ^ c .- ^ oCL
o E (D o ^ ^Y
p 5 U p^ 0
C ONM QC^ O
:3 ^ co 0 c 0.

U) C: rn1, Ch - %a
W^ c'v:S E:S W S Eti
'-
E
L-"a o
c0 .O f6
IT
V
^
LL v
- y
t 3C
O
c
L f=
=
W
L 7 !
°
W^ d3dO
0 0.t0 w+ y !
cca GDeoO
W Oc
+r
W c ^
E
[ c(D ig a (D
J Q CL >' mCL ''
d)3.a (D3a
a
a
_^
o
(n
°) M oD= uru^ ^w E^a w E2 n. o.

LL
>' L ^C d J
CL X fA V t^ f0 C p
D
^V- f0 C O O^ y C y
IB
C^
Z dW
O ^ a)
u) N
N 2 'L' E w 2 a)
^ 'U C (D0 U^ a a 9 0 U^ C- Q. E a 0 E ^' 0Q
J
^^
Z
^ r. .. C O .C a
o
(D ^. Vm)
^ ^
O .C C O
^o' w N O
cN C
CL
cyc
a p Q oE^ ^o ^ u^
o^^ oo o a^^ a
>-
a O d^ a O 0 0- ^ Q l6 V O VE -p
N^ ^ o ^ ^ vY w
aR
,
c^ ao ° ^0 oco° cYCa co-m^ Z J W E.S U N U a W E.^ U c0 U fl. ^ W CLco W m ^ Zo o ^.^o ^ '0o ^
°
^
U 3 0
^ >
^ 0 =
0 3 c N:.
=
c^] 3 0 3
^-- LM ^-QO vi omm
^'" ^c v) ,> u rn
^
^ n
°>
o
a>
v' o± d U ^
O t 0 ^
C
2 V ui
4 U w
O U ^
c
N V vi
U
O t 6
U
O c
^a>
^
2 ca o°o
^
2 co ° -D o
^
? oC oc
O 0. a)
^E^
cU) .

Tm^a
a^"
^E W com
CL CD
•-E
CL (D
E
d N O
•
2 N^ 0 '--fN C 4 Cp C
a) in7 C t^ 7 O O
a
^
> ' C > 'O O 'tn N
CL
C
0 C
O 'tA N
O
C > C >
3 Z W U ^ N E a M U N( 6 E' p (D U^ ^
^
_
>
d ^
U
0 U
U
n' 'Z^
0 U3
0 >
O
N
N
(6 (0w CO fn p,
0)
CO CD
g
U
o0
O tn
0^2
! p O ^
occo
y
o^^ N
0 t y >
C
.
a CZ a_ o
LO
T

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
1 ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR FOR THE

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
The City of Sacramento (City), California has prepared an Addendum to the previously certified 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the following project:

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
The Sacramento River Parkway Plan, which was first adopted in 1975, is a plan for development of a multi-use trail along the Sacramento River from its confluence with the American River to the southern city limits. The proposed continuous trail along the river is intended to provide recreational and multimodal transportation opportunities to the community. The Sacramento River Parkway Plan was updated in 1997 and portions of the trail have been developed gradually over the past 40+ years.

The proposed Sacramento River Parkway Project (project) is a segment of the planned trail within the community known as the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood. This segment would extend the existing paved trail approximately four miles from Garcia Bend Park along the Sacramento River levee to Zacharias Park. The proposed project would pave 12 feet in the center of the existing Sacramento River levee, with 2 feet of decomposed granite on each side, for bicycle and pedestrian use. Along the levee, the state and local flood control agencies have rights of access for inspection, and occasionally use the unpaved levee as a maintenance road. The paved trail would be used by these agencies to facilitate their inspections.

The purpose of the project is to create a Class I, off-street, multi-use trail for recreational use, bicycle commuter travel and to provide public access to open space and natural resources . In addition, the project would contribute to the completion of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan and the goals identified in the plan. The 1997 Sacramento Parkway Plan shows the levee trail connecting to the system of bikeways in downtown Sacramento. Permanent right of way (ROW) easements are expected to be necessary from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River levee.

The State Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB) has jurisdiction over levee improvements and a permit to construct the project would be required. Based on anticipated CVFPB permit conditions, the trail would not be lighted, only regulatory signage would be allowed to be installed on the levee, and landscaping would not be allowed on the levee.

The development of a multi -use trail along the Sacramento River through the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood was included in the State Lands Commission 1998 Greenway Plan, Sacramento Area Council of Government’s (SACOG) 2015 Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan, the 2016 City Bicycle Master Plan, the City’s 2005 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and the City’s General Plan, last updated in 2024 as the 2040 General Plan. The existing paved Sacramento River Parkway Trail in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood extends along the crown of the levee from Garcia Bend

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
2 Park south to the city limits. This paved section of the levee trail was constructed in 2000. Another existing segment of trail extends north of Zacharias Park.

The City’s Community Development Department has reviewed the proposed project as provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence from the administrative record, that no subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration is required because: (1) the project scope has not changed; (2) the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken has not changed; and (3) there is no new information of substantial importance which was not known when the Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR was prepared that shows that there are potentially new or more severe significant effects or feasible mitigation measures that were not addressed in the pr ior EIR. See Public Resources Cod e Section 21166; CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, this Addendum to the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR has been prepared pursuant to CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq); Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000-15387 of the California Code of Regulations; and the Sacramento Local Environmental Regulations (Resolution No. 1991-892) adopted by the City.

The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, the Initial Study supporting this Addendum, and the City Council resolutions adopting Sacramento River Parkway Plan and EIR, including the required findings and mitigation measures, may be reviewed at the offices of the Community Development Department, Planning Division, 300 Richards Boulevard, Sacramento, California 95811 during public counter hours and online at https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
3 INTRODUCTION
This Addendum to the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR covers the construction and operation of a segment of the Sacramento River Parkway trail within the Pocket neighborhood, also referred to as the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood, of the city of Sacramento. The project is a component of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan and was previously analyzed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The project proposes to pave a 12-foot portion of the levee crown for a four -mile section from Garcia Bend Park along the Sacramento River levee to Zacharias Park . The City is the lead agency for compliance with CEQA and implementation of the project. The project is liste d in SACOG’s 2023-2026 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) (Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2022).

PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Sacramento River Parkway is a planned recreational trail corridor that extends from Interstate 80 in South Natomas to the southern tip of the city, on the east levee of the Sacramento River. The concept of the Sacramento River Parkway was originally adopted by the City Council in the 1975 Sacramento River Parkway Plan. The 1975 Sacramento River Parkway Plan was refined and updated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan (Parkway Plan) adopted by the City Council on October 21, 1997, as well as the Sacramento River Greenway Plan adopted by the State Lands Commission. Since 1997, the Sacramento River Parkway has been included in the City’s General Plan and General Plan updates, the City’s Bicycle Master Plan, the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and SACOG’s 2015 Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan. As part of the adoption of each of these plans, CEQA documentation was prepared.

In 1997, the City Council certified the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR which was a program- level EIR covering the proposed Parkway Plan. The Parkway Plan included a series of policies and project components. The main project component of the Parkway Plan was a multi-use trail along the levee crown of the Sacramento River levee in the city of Sacramento. The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR reviewed the proposed levee crown trail segment and also considered other project components, such as recreational land uses, access points, parking areas and recreational uses in the Parkway.

The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR certification was accompanied by an adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) which outlined mitigation measures that would be applied to the Sacramento Parkway Plan projects. In addition, the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR assumed that a preliminary review of proposed parkway plan projects would occur to ensure no new or unusual impacts would occur at a project specific level.

In 2025, the City conducted an environmental screening (Initial Study) of the proposed project. The intention of the 2025 Initial Study is to address minor project changes since the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The 2025 Initial Study evaluates the environmental impacts based on current standards and utilizes the City’s current CEQA guidelines, rather than the CEQA thresholds identified in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR . This Initial Study did not identify any new impacts which were not adequately addressed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR and the adopted mitigation measures of that EIR. The adopted mitigation measures remain effective in

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
4 addressing the impacts posed by the project. The City Council adopted a M MP as part of its approval of the original project and the MMP remains applicable to the revised project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project includes construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi -use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven n eighborhood. The proposed trail segment would consist of a 12-foot-wide paved asphalt concrete path with 2-foot shoulders comprised of decomposed granite on each side of the pavement. Construction of the trail would also include resurfacing of the existing gravel levee road to meet Class I bicycle trail standards. New access ramps built along the land side of the levee are proposed at the following locations:
• At Sleepy River Way, adjacent to the levee
• At Country River Way, adjacent to the levee
• At Audubon Circle, adjacent to the levee
• On North Point Way, adjacent to the levee
• From Clipper Way, through Zacharias Park
Intersection improvements at Pocket Road/Riverside Boulevard are included to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian crossings to the proposed multi-use path at the neighborhood access ramps. Intersection improvements at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. Intersection improvements at Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard would similarly include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. A new pedestrian crossing of Pocket Road would be installed just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. This crossing would include a pedestrian activated signal, high visibility crosswalks, new curb ramps, removal of a portion of raised median on Pocket Road, and construction of bicycle facilities to the Pocket Canal trail entrances. Minor intersection grading for ADA compliance may be required.

The majority of the new trail construction would require excavations of less than two feet in depth and would average six to eight inches depending on the quality of the sub-base. In some specific locations project features such as small retaining walls or light foundations, including pedestrian improvements, would require deeper excavation not to exceed five feet in depth. Drainage modifications may be required at intersections with curb extensions, which would require excavations of less than five feet.

RECREATIONAL EASEMENT ACQUISITION
Currently, the CVFPB has maintenance easements along the levee for flood control maintenance and emergency access. Permanent ROW easements are expected to be necessary from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River levee. Temporary construction easements (TCE) for construction staging would be necessary along the project alignment, including Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
5 CONSTRUCTION PERIOD TIMING
Construction of the project is anticipated to occur for nine to 12 months.

CONSTRUCTION ACCESS, STAGING AND METHODS:

Trail access for construction equipment would be provided at Pocket Canal Sump Station #132 located off Pocket Road, and the Garcia Bend Park parking area. Construction and equipment staging would be located within the paved sections of Sump Station #132 and Garcia Bend Park and its parking lot for the duration of construction. Both staging areas are currently developed and paved areas owned by the City.

UTILITIES
At this time, no utility relocations are anticipated; however, if they are determined necessary during final design relocations would be coordinated with individual utility owners. If any utility relocations are deemed necessary, they would be relocated within the proposed project area.

TREE AND VEGETATION REMOVALS
The project footprint includes the levee crown, which is a level gravel road, from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park and improvements at both Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard and Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard intersections would include a new pedestrian beacon signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. In addition, a new pedestrian crossing on Pocket Road would be installed just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. Tree and vegetation removal would be required for the project for construction of access points.

PERMITS FROM OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT • Department of Water Resource Maintenance Area 9 (MA -9), municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 402 General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity • CVFPB, Encroachment Permit
• Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA), Construction timing coordination. • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Section 408 Permit The proposed project is covered by the Sacramento County area-wide MS4 permit to discharge storm water runoff from storm drains within the County jurisdiction; however, since the project area exceeds one acre, a NPDES 402 General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity would also be obtained prior to construction.

The proposed project is located along the Sacramento River levee within the 100-year floodplain.

Coordination with CVFPB, Department of Water Resource MA -9, USACE and SAFCA would be required prior to construction.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
6 DISCUSSION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR USE OF AN ADDENDUM
An Addendum to an adopted environmental document may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are required, and none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present. Sections 15162 and 15163 prohibits preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR unless the standards set forth in Section 15162 are met as they relate to the proposed project as follows:

1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the previously adopted EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

The1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR evaluated the implementation of a multi-use trail along the Sacramento River levee from the northern Sacramento city limits in South Natomas to the southern city limits near Freeport. The proposed project from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park would be within the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR evaluation limits.

Within the segment from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park, the project would be consistent with the project footprint and location of the proposed trail segment in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood considered in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. In 2025 , an Initial Study was completed on the Sacramento River Parkway Project to determine if any new significant impacts or any increase in the severity of impacts would result. The Initial Study determined that the proposed project did not result in any new significant impacts or change the severity of impacts previously evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR . The analysis in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR remains relevant and adequate to address the impacts of the proposed project.

2. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to circumstances under which the project is undertaken that would require major revisions of the previous environmental document due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

There have been no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed project is to be undertaken that would require revisions to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The area next to the levee in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood along the project segment was developed for single family residential use starting in the 1970s and is fully developed as a residential neighborhood.

The 2025 Initial Study for the project also reviewed the project under the City’s adopted 2040 General Plan and the 2040 General Plan Master EIR (Master EIR) . The Initial Study reviewed whether cumulative conditions have changed substantially from those addressed in the Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The Initial Study found that cumulative conditions in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood of the City have not changed significantly since the preparation of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. According to the United States ( U.S.) Census counts for the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood zip code (95831), the total population in year 2000 was 42,821 with a small decline to 41,321 persons in 2010. The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 estimate for the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood zip code is 43,099 persons (United States Census Bureau, 2020) .

Population and housing counts in the project area remain relatively unchanged from the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. No new major subdivisions or roadways have been developed

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
7 in the project area which would change the cumulative environment where the project is located. The proposed project is expected to serve the recreational needs of the existing residents. Given that the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood population remains relatively unchanged, the number of local trail users is expected to be consistent with what was analyzed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

From a policy perspective, although the City has updated the City’s General Plan since certification of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, the most recent General Plan continues to include the multi-use trail along the Sacramento River in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood, as does the most recent update of the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. Land use designations in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood have not changed substantially since the certification of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR; the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood was at that time and continues to be a developed and urbanized area. The adoption of the 2040 General Plan does not result in a change of or any new significant effects relating to the proposed project (City of Sacramento, 2024).

The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood was subject to flood risks. Levee improvements have been completed in the meantime to meet USACE levee certification requirements and maintain the area’s eligibility for the National Flood Insurance Program. The project would not affect the flood risk in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood and would not impact levee inspections during high river periods. Recreational trails may be closed when needed by the flood control agencies.

3. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous environmental document;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or;
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The impacts associated with paving of a segment of the existing gravel maintenance road on the levee crown from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park and the addition of access points along the trail were evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. However, the pedestrian improvements at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal, were not evaluated as part of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. As discussed in the Initial Study, the project does not result in any new or increased

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
8 potentially significant environmental impacts that were not previously identified in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The proposed project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the EIR and for which mitigation measures were adopted.

The adopted mitigation measures remain effective in addressing the impacts posed by the project. The City Council adopted a Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) as part of its approval of the original project and the MMP remains applicable to the revised project.

CONCLUSION
The proposed project does not require any revisions to the prior 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR because no new or substantially more intense or severe significant environmental impacts or potentially significant environmental impacts would result from the proposed project. Within this segment from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park, the proposed project has the same alignment along the levee crown as the trail segment analyzed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

Based on the 2025 Initial Study for the project, none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR have been identified. In summary, the proposed project would not:
• result in any new significant or potentially significant environmental effects, • substantially increase the intensity or severity of previously identified significant effects, • result in mitigation measures or alternatives previously found to be infeasible becoming feasible, or
• result in availability/implementation of mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the prior EIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant or potentially significant effects on the physical environment.

These conclusions confirm that a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not warranted, and this Addendum to the prior EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 is the appropriate CEQA document for the project. No changes are needed to the certified EIR or the adopted MM P for the project.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. 2025 Initial Study for the Sacramento River Parkway Project

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
9 ATTACHMENT A: INITIAL STUDY FOR THE SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY

PROJECT
This Initial Study has been prepared for the City of Sacramento’s (City) Community Development Department, 300 Richards Boulevard, Third Floor, Sacramento, CA 95811, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations) and the Sacramento Local Environmental Regulations (Resolution 91-892) adopted by the City.

ORGANIZATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study is organized into the following sections:

SECTION I - BACKGROUND: Provides summary background information about the project name, location, sponsor, and the date this Initial Study was completed.

SECTION II - PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Includes a detailed description of the proposed project.

SECTION III - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION: Reviews proposed project and states whether the project would have additional significant environmental effects (project- specific effects) that were not evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan environmental impact report (EIR). The analysis utilizes the City’s current CEQA guidelines.

SECTION IV - ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: I dentifies which environmental factors were determined to have additional significant environmental effects.

SECTION V - D ETERMINATION: States whether environmental effects associated with development of the proposed project are significant, and what, if any, added environmental documentation may be required.

REFERENCES CITED: Identifies source materials that have been consulted in the preparation of the Initial Study.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
10 SECTION I – BACKGROUND
Project Name and File Number: Sacramento River Parkway Project Project Location: From Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park. “Phase 1” of the project is located along the levee crown of the Sacramento River from Garcia Bend Park to Audubon Circle, and “Phase 2” from Audubon Circle to Zacharias Park. The project would also include pedestrian improvements at three intersections on Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road just south of Country River Way.

Project Sponsor: Public Works Department of the City of Sacramento Project Manager: Megan Johnson, Senior Engineer
City of Sacramento, Department of Public Works
915 I Street, 2
nd Floor,
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 808-1967
E-mail: [email protected]
Environmental Planner: Ron Bess, Associate Planner
City of Sacramento, Community Development Department
Environmental Planning Services Division
300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor,
Sacramento, CA 95811
Phone: (916) 808-8272
E-mail: [email protected]
Date Initial Study Completed: March 11, 2025

This Initial Study was prepared in accordance with CEQA (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). The CEQA Lead Agency is the City.

The City’s Community Development Department has reviewed the proposed project and, on the basis of the whole record before it, has determined that the proposed project has been adequately analyzed as a program component of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The project is also consistent with the 2040 General Plan.

The City has prepared the attached Initial Study to review the potential project impacts, cumulative impacts, growth inducing impacts, and irreversible significant effects in accordance with the information and analysis contained in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR to determine its adequacy for the proposed project (see CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15178(b), (c)).

The Master EIR was also reviewed to determine if there are changed circumstances or cumulative effects that would be relevant to evaluation of the proposed project with the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The purpose of the analysis was to determine whether any potential new or additional project-specific potentially significant environmental effects that were not

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
11 analyzed in the prior EIR’s could be caused by the proposed project and if so, whether there are any feasible mitigation measures that may avoid or reduce such effects.

This analysis incorporates by reference the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR and the general discussion portions of the Master EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15150(a)). The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR and the Master EIR are available for public review at the City’s Community Development Department, 300 Richards Boulevard, 3rd Floor, Sacramento, CA 9581. The Master EIR is available on the City’s website at:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR (SCH# 93-10216, certified by Resolution No. 97- 590) considered the environmental effects of a riverfront trail along the Sacramento River levee in the city of Sacramento. The trail segment of the proposed project from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park was included in the analysis in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR assumed that in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood, the trail would be constructed on the levee crown. The project location and footprint within the project area are the same as those analyzed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. This Initial Study has been prepared to determine if there are any new project specific impacts, changed circumstances, or mitigation approaches that were not discussed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
12 SECTION II - PROJECT DESCRIPTION

INTRODUCTION
The City, in cooperation with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), proposes to construct a segment of the Sacramento River Parkway multi -use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood (project). The project limits are comprised of two sub-segments: “Phase 1” from Garcia Bend Park to Audubon Circle, and “Phase 2” from Audubon Circle to Zacharias Park. The project will also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park (project area) ( see Figure 1, Regional Location and Figure 2, Project Location). I n order to provide more universal access to the new trail, pedestrian improvements at three intersections are proposed to provide better pedestrian and bicycle access across Riverside Boulevard/Pocket Road. These intersections include Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk, pedestrian signal, and bike facilities across Pocket Road just south of Country River Way. Permanent right of way (ROW) easements are expected to be necessary from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River l evee. Temporary construction easements ( TCEs) for construction staging would be necessary along the project alignment, including Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park (see Figure 3, Project Footprint). The project is listed in Sacramento Area Council of Government’s (SACOG’s) 2023-2026 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) (Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2022).

The City will be the lead agency pursuant to CEQA. The City is pursuing federal transportation funding to complete both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects; therefore, compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be required for both segments, and Caltrans will be the NEPA Lead Agency.

PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Sacramento River Parkway is a 17-mile trail corridor within the city of Sacramento. The northern terminus of the Sacramento River Parkway is generally South Natomas and the southern terminus is at the city limit near Freeport Bridge . The concept of the Sacramento River Parkway was adopted by the City Council in 1975. In 1997, the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR was updated and adopted by the City Council. T he Sacramento River Parkway has been incorporated into several planning documents such as the State Lands Commission 1998 Greenway Plan, S acramento Area Council of Governments Regional Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan, City and Sacramento County Bicycle Master Plan, the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and the City’s General Plan.

The Sacramento River Parkway Project is a multi -phase project that would close part of the existing gap and complete the levee top trail within the Pocket neighborhood. The project limits are comprised of two sub-segments: “Phase 1” from Garcia Bend Park to Audubon Circle, and “Phase 2” from Audubon Circle to Zacharias Park. In 2019, an Addendum to the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR was prepared for “Phase 1,” referred to as the Central Pocket Levee Trail Segment within the 2019 Addendum . After the 2019 Addendum to the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, "Phase 1" was further extended north to Audubon Circle, as well as updated

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
13 to incorporate neighborhood connections and intersections. Additionally, "Phase 2" has been integrated into the project, which involves extending the trail from Audubon Circle to Zacharias Park.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN GOALS
The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan Goals are as follows:
• To recognize the multiple use aspect of the Sacramento River Parkway for recreation, habitat preservation and flood control.
• To preserve, protect and enhance the natural and cultural resources of the Parkway. • To provide appropriate access and facilities for the enjoyment of the Parkway by present and future generations.

To create a continuous, lineal Parkway with bicycle and pedestrian access along the Sacramento River from the City limits at 1-80 and Garden Highway in South Natomas to the City limits at Freeport.

PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of the project is to create a Class I, off-street, multi-use trail for recreational use and bicycle commuter travel and to provide public access to open space and natural resources . The project would contribute to the completion of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan and implement the goals identified in the plan, listed above.

PROJECT NEED
The project is needed to close the gap in the levee-top multi-use trail between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park, and to establish trail connections in the Pocket/Greenhaven n eighborhood.

The proposed trail improvements would connect with the existing paved Sacramento River Parkway Trail.

PROJECT LOCATION
“Phase 1” of the project is located along the levee crown of the Sacramento River from Garcia Bend Park to Audubon Circle, and “Phase 2” from Audubon Circle to Zacharias Park. “Phase 1” would also include pedestrian improvements at three intersections on Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way.
0 5 102.5
Miles

REGIONAL LOCATION

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT

SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
JULY 2022
\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8064_040 Sacramento River Trail\GIS\Geodatabase\SacRiverTrail.gdb\F1_Vicinity Map_20211206.mxd 7/14/2022 10:06:04 AM adellas FIGURE 1
NORTH
Sacramento County
c
Project Location
Project Impact Area
0 1 20.5
Miles

PROJECT LOCATION

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT

SACRAMENTO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
JULY 2024
\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\Jobs\8064_040 Sacramento River Trail\GIS\Exhibits\Environmental\F2_Project Location_2023-05-10.mxd 7/18/2024 9:24:49 AM espokely FIGURE 2
NORTH
4 3 2 1
5 9
10 11
6 7
8 13
12 Project
Potential ROW/
Easement Area
Detail Page
Extent
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
8/23/2024 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure index v2.mxd O
1 inch equals 2,000 feet
0 500 1,000250
Meters
Basemap from ESRI World Imagery
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03003210360000
03005700010000
03005700030000
03002310080000
03002310120000
03002360170000
03002360180000
03003210250000
03003210270000
03003210280000
03003210340000
0300570002000003003210350000
Riverside Blvd
Parklin Ave
Clipper Way
Havenside
Dr
W
estview
W
ay
RivercrestDr
Quay Ct
Allenport Way
Riverton Way
Proposed Access Route
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (1 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03003210290000
03004010240000
03004010360000
03004900010000
03004900330000
03004900350000
03003210230000
03003210240000
03003210250000
03003210310000
03004010030000
03004010040000
03004010150000
03004010370000
03004010380000
03004900020000
03004900030000
03004900040000
03004900050000
03004900060000
03004900070000
03004900340000
03004900360000
03004900370000
03004900380000
03004900390000
03004900400000
03004010440000
Rivercrest Dr
Riverside Blvd
Shoreside
Dr
Riverlake
W
ay
Skysail Ct
Allenport Way
Ironwood
W
ay
Seastone Way
Spray Ct
Ripple Ct
Clipper Way
Sand Ct
Pebble Ct
Sea Ct
Brickyard Dr
S River Rd
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (2 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03000410480000
03004010330000
03004010350000
03004010410000
03006200210000
03007600230000
03007900550000
03000410460000
03004010040000
03004010070000
03004010080000
03004010090000
03004010340000
03004010370000
03004010420000
03004010430000
03004010440000
03006200180000
03006200190000
03006200200000
Grangers Dairy Dr
Faustino Way
Seastone Way
Kathy Ct
Lelandhaven Way
Reyes Ct
N Point Way
Riverlake Way
S River Rd
Proposed Access Route
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (3 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03001010020000
03001010030000
03001010050000
03001010060000
03001010070000
03002530010000
03002530020000
03007900550000
03001010010000
03001010040000
03002530020000
03002530030000
S
RiverRd
Surfside Way
Yolo Shortline RR
Gregory Ave
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (4 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03001410020000
03001410030000
03001410040000
03001410050000
03001410060000
03001410070000
03001410080000
03001410090000
03001710010000
03001710020000
03001710030000
03001710040000
03001710060000
03001710100000
03002530020000
03002530030000
03002530040000
03002530050000
03002530060000
03002530070000
03002530080000
03002610010000
03002610020000
03002610030000
03002610040000
03002610050000
03002610070000
03002610080000
03001710120000
03002530010000
03002610060000
03001410010000
03001010070000
03001010060000
Riverbrook Way
SurfsideWay
Burrows Ave
HarmonDr
BajiaCt
Benham Way
S River Rd
Bellow Rio Way
Trudy Way
Cruise Way
Yolo Shortline RR
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (5 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03001710040000
03001710050000
03001810010000
03001810020000
03001810030000
03001810040000
03001810050000
03001810060000
03005500490000
03005500500000
03005500510000
03005500520000
03005500540000
03005500550000
03005500560000
03005500570000
03005500580000
03005500590000
03103600790000
03005500530000
03103600730000
03103600750000
03103600720000
03103600760000
BobolinkWay
Brewster Ave
HarmonDr
Pocket Rd
ArabellaWay
Riverbrook Way
Antigua Way
Sandhill Ct
Garcia Ct
Yolo Shortline RR
Trudy Way
Ben
ha
m
W
ay
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (6 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03100400090000
03100400390000
03102900490000
03103000820000
03103600790000
03104200210000
03104200250000
03108300150000
03110900460000
03102900480000
03103000830000
03110900350000
03110900450000
03100400390000
RiversideBlvd
Pocket Rd
Portinao Cir
Warbler Way
BobolinkW
ay Rivertree Way
Eider Way
Delta Oaks Way
Audubon Cir
MarinaGrandeCt
Porto Santo Ct
Dumfries Ct
S River Rd
Rivercove Way
River Acres Dr
Proposed Access Route
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (7 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03100200270000
03108300150000
0310860003000003108600040000
03108600320000
03108600340000
03108600510000
03110100050000
03110100120000
03110100180000
03110100460000
03112800170000
03112800180000
03108600120000
03110100040000
03112800200000
River Isle Way
Pocket Rd
Bayview
W
ay
RiverPlace
W
ay
Portinao Cir
Marina Park Way
Axios River Ct
Zephyr Ranch Dr
Marlton
Ct
WaterCove Ct
Alstan Ct
S River Rd
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (8 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03100300010000
03100300370000
03100300630000
03100300640000
03100300650000 03100300660000
03110100180000
03110200010000
03110200040000
03110200220000
03110200230000
03113800660000
03114500420000
03114500430000
03114500470000
03110200030000
03110200050000
03110200060000
03110200070000
03110200080000
03114500120000
03114500270000
03110200020000
03110200190000
03110600420000
0311060047000003110200170000
03110200240000
03110200550000
03110200380000
03110200120000
03110200110000
03110200510000
03110200390000
03110200540000
03110200180000
03110200100000
03114500110000
PocketRd
Nasca Way
Country River Way
Salton Sea Way
Sea Lion Ct
Oceanic Way
Griggs Way
Pinios River Ct
River Village Dr
Seagull Way
S River Rd River Grove
Proposed Access Route
Proposed Bikeway
Proposed Crosswalk
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (9 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03100300280000
03100300290000
03111800200000
03111800210000
03111800320000
03111800330000
03111800400000
03111800410000
03111800430000
03111800440000
03113800660000
River Landing Dr
Park River Oak Cir
River Estates Dr
Nader Ct
Pocket Rd
SailfishW
ay
Windbridge Dr
HowertonDr
Causeway Dr
S River Rd
Proposed Access Route
Proposed Crosswalk
Proposed Trail
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (10 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03006800400000
03006900580000
03006900840000
03006800180000
Riverside Blvd
GloriaDr
Spurlock Way
Orleans Way
Frates Way
Windward Way
Topsail Ct
Galley Ct
Starboard Way
Ashore Way
Park Riviera Way
Blackbird Dr
Breakwater Way
Steamboat Way
NautilusCt
Langrell Way
Proposed Crosswalk
Proposed Curb Ramp
Proposed Sidewalk
Improvement
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (11 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03103000820000
03103110070000
03103150100000
03103000830000
03103140340000
03103150090000
03100400390000
Deer River Way
Pocket Rd
Cedar River Way
Rivergate Way
Riverside Blvd
ClaiborneW
ay
Bay River Way
Antigua Way
Black River Ct
Rivertree Way
DownRiverCt
River Acres Dr
Brewster Ave
Pebble River Cir
Slate River Way
Harmon Dr
Bliss River Ct
Buoy Way
Rivermoor Ct
Rivercove Way
Lazy
RiverW
ay
Proposed Crosswalk
Proposed Curb Ramp
Proposed Sidewalk
Improvement
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (12 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project
03104900510000
03104900730000
03104900270000
03109700480000
03109700490000
Rio Cidade Way
DutraBendDr
Greenhaven
Dr
Sleepy River Way
Grand River Dr
S Oak Way
Oak Ranch Ct
RioBarcoW
ay
Sand River Ct
River Garden Ct
del Oak Way
River Ranch Way
RioEstradaW
ay
S River Rd
Proposed Access Route
Project Area
Potential ROW/Easement
Area
County Parcel
0 50 100
Meters
0 100 200 300
Feet
3/12/2025 C:\Users\martin\Box Sync\SAC\Sac River Pkwy\Sac River Pkwy ROW figure v6.mxd Right of Way Detail (13 of 13)
O
1 inch equals 300 feet
FIGURE 3. PROJECT FOOTPRINT
Sacramento River Parkway Project

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
30 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
The project area is located predominantly on top of the east levee crown, which is currently a level gravel road used for levee maintenance and emergency vehicles. Trees and vegetation line both sides of the road. The project area is adjacent to the Sacramento River to the west and residential neighborhoods to the east.

SAFCA is implementing the Sacramento River East Levee Improvements element of the North Sacramento Streams, Sacramento River East Levee, Lower American River, and Related Flood Improvements Project, which is also known as the Levee Accreditation Project (LAP). The Sacramento River East Levee Improvements element of the LAP includes proposed improvements to approximately six miles of the Sacramento River East Levee, including the Little Pocket and Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhoods, of which the proposed Sacramento River Parkway Pocket Trail project is within the limits. The City intends to complete the project after the Sacramento River East Levee Improvements project has been completed.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The project includes construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi -use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven n eighborhood. The proposed trail segment would consist of a 12-foot-wide paved asphalt concrete path with 2-foot shoulders comprised of decomposed granite on each side of the pavement. Construction of the trail would also include resurfacing of the existing gravel levee road to meet Class I bicycle trail standards. New access ramps built along the land side of the levee are proposed at the following locations are shown on Figure 3, Project Footprint:

1. From Clipper Way, through Zacharias Park (Figure 3, page 1)

2. On North Point Way, adjacent to the levee (Figure 3, page 3)

3. At Audubon Circle, adjacent to the levee (Figure 3, page 7)

4. At Country River Way, adjacent to the levee (Figure 3, page 9)

5. At Sleepy River Way, adjacent to the levee (Figure 3, page 13) Intersection improvements at Pocket Road/Riverside Boulevard are included to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian crossings to the proposed multi -use path at the neighborhood access ramps.

Intersection improvements at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. Intersection improvements at Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard would similarly include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. A new pedestrian crossing of Pocket Road would be installed just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. This crossing would include a pedestrian activated signal, high visibility crosswalks, new curb ramps, removal of a portion of raised median on Pocket Road, and installation of bicycle facilities to the Pocket Canal Trail entrances. Minor intersection grading for ADA compliance may be required.

The majority of the new trail construction would require excavations of less than two feet in depth and would average six to eight inches depending on the quality of the sub-base. In some specific

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
31 locations project features such as small retaining walls or light foundations, including pedestrian improvements, would require deeper excavation not to exceed five feet in depth. Drainage modifications may be required at intersections with curb extensions, which would require excavations of less than five feet.

Construction Access, Staging and Methods
Trail access for construction equipment would be provided at Pocket Canal Sump Station #132 located off Pocket Road, and the Garcia Bend Park parking area. Construction and equipment staging would be within Garcia Bend Park and its parking lot for the duration of the project and the paved sections of Sump Station #132. Both staging areas are currently developed and paved areas which are owned by the City.

Right-of-Way and Temporary Construction Easements
Permanent ROW easements are expected to be necessary from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River l evee. Additionally, TCE s for construction staging would be necessary along the project alignment, including Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park (see Figure 3, Project Footprint).

Utilities
Utility services provided for the surrounding area include gas, electricity, water, sewer, and telecommunication. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) provides gas services , Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) provides electricity through overhead lines, the City provides water and wastewater collection services, Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) and City facilities provide wastewater discharge treatment, and AT&T and Comcast provide telecommunications services to the surrounding area. At this time, no utility relocations are anticipated; however, if they are determined necessary during final design they would be coordinated with individual utility owners. If any utility relocations are necessary, they would be relocated within the proposed project area.

PERMITS FROM OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT The following permits and coordination are anticipated to be required for this project:
• Department of Water Resource MA-9, MS4 permit
• Regional Water Quality Control Board, NPDES 402 General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity
• CVFPB, Encroachment Permit
• SAFCA, Construction timing coordination
• USACE, Section 408
The proposed project falls under the Sacramento County area-wide MS4 permit, which allows for the discharge of stormwater runoff from storm drains within the county's jurisdiction. However, since the project area is larger than 1 acre, it would also require the issuance of a NPDES 402 General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with C onstruction Activity before construction can begin.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
32 The project is situated along the Sacramento River levee, within the 100-year floodplain. The levee is under the jurisdiction of the CVFPB; therefore, a permit would be obtained from the CVFPB prior to construction of the project. Additional coordination would occur with the Department of Water Resources MA-9, USACE, and SAFCA.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
33 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION

LAND USE, POPULATION AND HOUSING, AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES, AND WILDFIRE

INTRODUCTION
CEQA requires the Lead Agency to examine the effects of a project on the physical conditions that exist within the area that would be affected by the project. CEQA also requires a discussion of any inconsistency between the proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans.

An inconsistency between the proposed project and an adopted plan for land use development in a community would not constitute a physical change in the environment. When a project diverges from an adopted plan, however, it may affect planning in the community regarding infrastructure and services, and the new demands generated by the project may result in later physical changes in response to the project.

In the same manner, the fact that a project brings new people or demand for housing to a community does not, by itself, change the physical conditions. An increase in population may, however, generate changes in retail demand or demand for governmental services, and the demand for housing may generate new activity in residential development. Physical environmental impacts that could result from implementing the proposed project are discussed in the appropriate technical sections.

This section of the Initial Study identifies the applicable land use designations, plans and policies, and permissible densities and intensities of use, and discusses any inconsistencies between these plans and the proposed project. This section also discusses agricultural resources and wildfire and the effect of the project on these resources.

LAND USE
According to the City’ s General Plan, t he project area land use is designated as Suburban Neighborhood Low and Parks and Open Space (City of Sacramento, 2024). The project area is zoned as Flood (F), Agriculture (A), and Standard Single Family (R-1) (City of Sacramento, n.d.).

An area zoned as F is considered an open space zone that includes conditionally permitted specified uses along the Sacramento and American Rivers and their tributaries, and other areas subject to inundation.

The project area is within the Pocket Community Plan Area which is generally urban. The Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood includes residential neighborhoods and retail centers at key intersections (Sacramento, 2015). The project area is located predominantly on top of the east levee crown, which is currently a level gravel road used for levee maintenance and emergency vehicles. The project area is adjacent to the Sacramento River to the west and residential neighborhoods to the east.

The project includes the construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi -use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood. The project would also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park and

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
34 pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk across Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way. In addition, a two- way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Land Use and Placemaking Element, Mobility Element, and Youth Parks Recreation and Open Space Element, including:
• Policy LUP-1.1 Compact Urban Footprint. The City shall promote a land- and resource- efficient development pattern and the placement of infrastructure to support efficient delivery of public services and conserve open space, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and improve air quality;
• Policy M-1.11: Increase Bicycling and Walking. The City shall strive to increase bicycling and walking citywide so that it can meet its equity, reduced vehicle miles traveled, and sustainability goals;
• Policy M-1.17: Improve Bicycling Connectivity. The City shall plan and seek funding for a continuous, low-stress bikeway network consisting of bicycling-friendly facilities that connect neighborhoods with destinations and activity centers throughout the city; • Policy M-1.18: Bicycling Safety. When designing projects, the City shall prioritize designs that strengthen the protection of people bicycling such as improvements that increase visibility of bicyclists, increase bikeway widths, raise bikeways, design safer intersection crossings and turns, and separate bikeways from driving traffic wherever feasible; and • Policy M-1.19: Walking Safety. When designing projects, the City shall prioritize designs that encourage walking and improve walking safety best practice designs and considerations for efficiencies in walking
• Policy YPRO-1.17: Waterway Recreation and Access. The City shall work with regional partners, State agencies, non-profit and community groups, private landowners, and land developers to manage, preserve, improve, and enhance use and access to the Sacramento and American River Parkways, urban waterways and riparian corridors to increase public access for active and passive recreation and habitat values (City of Sacramento, 2024).

Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2040 General Plan, 2016 Bicycle Master Plan, and the Parkway Plan.

The project would not construct a divisive physical feature (such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks) or removal of a means of access (such as a local road or bridge) that would impair mobility within the existing community or between a community and outlying areas. However, permanent ROW easements are required from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River levee and would change the land use from private to public use for these areas along the trail. Most of the easements would be acquired from property owners along the river levee. Property easements may result in changes such as intermittent noise and privacy for property owners from whom land is acquired; however, these changes were anticipated in the

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
35 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. Additionally, TCEs for construction staging would be necessary along the project alignment, including Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park. The project would not result in the demolition of any existing residential units or the displacement of any residents. The project would create three new intersection pedestrian crossings that would improve neighborhood connectivity to the multi-use trail.

No additional significant environmental impact related to land use and planning would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and it is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177. Therefore, the project would not result in significant cumulative impacts on land use and planning and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

POPULATION AND HOUSING
This Initial Study has been prepared to determine whether the project would result in any new impacts or change in circumstances that were not addressed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. T he project area is within the Pocket Community Plan Area . The Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood community includes mostly residential neighborhoods and retail centers. Vacant lots within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood are scattered with limiting potential for development (Sacramento, 2015). When the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR was prepared the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood was predominately built-out with residential development (City of Sacramento, 1996). Due to the limited number of vacant lots in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood, development has not changed significantly since the adoption of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

Permanent ROW easements are required from several parcels in the project area along the Sacramento River levee. Additionally, TCEs for construction staging would be necessary along the project alignment, including Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park . The project would not result in the demolition of any existing residential units or the displacement of any residents. In addition, no new residential uses are proposed as part of the project. The project would create new pedestrian intersection crossings that would improve neighborhood connectivity to the multi- use trail. No additional significant environmental impact related to population and housing would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and it is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177. Therefore, the project would result in no impact on population and housing in the area and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
According to the California Department of Conservation, the project area and surrounding area is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. I n addition, the project area is not within or adjacent to land contracted under the Williamson Act (California Department of Conservation, 2022) . The project area is not located on or adjacent to any parcels identified as Prime Farmland, Unique

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
36 Farmland, or Farmland of State Importance (collectively “Important Farmland”). The project area is zoned as Flood (F), Agriculture (A), and Standard Single Family (R-1) (City of Sacramento, n.d.). Although part of the project area is zoned as A, the uses on these parcels within the project limits are considered open spaces, such as the Garcia Bend Park and the Pocket Canal, and are not used for agricultural uses. The project would not impact agricultural uses within the project area. No significant environmental impact related to agricultural resources would result from the project, no new mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and it is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on important farmland, existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

The project area is not zoned for timberland production. No significant environmental impact related to forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned timberland production would result from the project, no new mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and it is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177. Therefore, the project would result in no impact on existing zoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned timberland production.

WILDFIRE
Wildfire was not discussed within the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway EIR as this topic was not a part of the CEQA Checklist at the time of analysis. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project area is not within a zone designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2024) . In addition, according to the Sacramento County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, most of the project area has no threat to wildland fires; however, there are small areas between Garcia Bend Park and River Acres Drive which have a low to moderate fire threat class (Sacramento County, 2021) . The purpose of the project is to create Class I, off-street, multi-use trail for recreational use and bicycle commuter travel. The project would also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park and pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk across Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way . In addition, a two-way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The project would not result in an increased potential for wildland fires or expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires in the area. No significant environmental impact related to wildfire would result from the project, no new mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and it is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177. Therefore, the project would result in no impact on wildfires.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
37 AESTHETICS

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area is within the Pocket Community Plan Area which is generally urban. The Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood includes residential neighborhoods and retail centers at key intersections (City of Sacramento, 2024). The project is primarily located on top of the east levee crown, which is currently a level gravel road used for levee maintenance and emergency vehicles.

The project is adjacent to the Sacramento River to the west and residential neighborhoods to the east. The Sacramento River is visible from the project area. Views of the Sacramento River from public places are considered a natural scenic resource according to the City’s General Plan (City of Sacramento, 2024) . Existing light sources within the project area include nearby residential properties and streetlights along Riverside Boulevard and Pocket Road, including at all three intersection improvement locations . In addition, existing streetlights are located near five of the proposed access points at Garcia Bend Park, Country River Way, Audubon Circle, Northpoint Way, and Clipper Way.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to aesthetics are based on Appendix G of CEQA Guidelines, thresholds of significance adopted by the City in applicable general plans and previous environmental documents prepared for this project, and professional judgment. A significant impact related to aesthetics would occur if the project would:
• substantially interfere with an important scenic resource or substantially degrade the view of an existing scenic resource; or
• create a new source of substantial light or glare that is substantially greater than typical urban sources and could cause sustained annoyance or hazard for nearby sensitive receptors.

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

1. AESTHETICS
Would the project:

A. Create a source of glare that would cause a public
hazard or annoyance?
B. Create a new source of light that would be cast onto oncoming traffic or residential uses?
C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or its surroundings?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
38 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 20 40 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR described the existing visual conditions in the City, and the potential changes to those conditions that could result from development consistent with the 2040 General Plan. See Master EIR, Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on light and glare (Impact 4.1-1), scenic resources or their visibility from visually sensitive locations (Impact 4.1-2), and cumulative visual impacts (Impact 4.1-3). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Land Use and Placemaking Element and Environmental Resources and Constraints Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• LUP-8.2 River as Signature Feature. The City shall require new development along the Sacramento and American Rivers to use the natural river environment as a key feature to guide the scale, design, and intensity of development, and to maximize visual and physical access to the rivers, subject to the public safety requirements of local, state, and federal agencies and plans, including the American River Parkway Plan, the Local Maintaining Agencies (LMA), and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB). • LUP-8.10 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. • ERC-2.3 Onsite Preservation. The City shall encourage new development to preserve and restore onsite natural elements that contribute to the community’s native plant and wildlife species value. For sites that lack existing natural elements, encourage planting of native species in preserved areas to establish or re-establish these values and aesthetic character.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts listed in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics , of the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to light and glare.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Create a source of glare that would cause a public hazard or annoyance? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The main source of existing nighttime lighting is from interior/exterior lighting from surrounding residential properties and streetlights along Riverside Boulevard and Pocket Road, at the proposed intersection improvement locations, and at a few of the proposed access point locations . The project would include the construction of a multi-use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River from Garcia Bend Park to Zacharias Park, the addition of up to six trail access points , and intersection improvements at

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
39 three locations for pedestrian crossings . The project would introduce a new source of light and glare from lighting at new access points and from three new pedestrian activated signals at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. Lighting at the trail access points would be lit at the same time as existing streetlights and would not substantially increase light and glare. During operation, cars stopped at the three new pedestrian signals would contribute to intermittent lighting and glare at night. In addition, pedestrians and bicyclists using the trail and neighborhood connections would result in new light and glare sources from the usage of bike lights, reflectors, or flashlights. However, trail hours of operation would be from dawn to dusk in accordance with City Code Section 12.72.090; thus, light and glare would be minimal, intermittent, and limited to hours of operation. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on light and glare and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Create a new source of light that would be cast onto oncoming traffic or residential uses?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or its surroundings? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project would result in the construction of trail access points and a multi-use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River.

Trail access points would be constructed between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park, as well as pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road just south of Country River Way. The multi-use trail would consist of a 12-foot-wide paved asphalt concrete path with 2-foot shoulders comprised of decomposed granite on each side of the pavement.

Construction of the access ramps are expected to result in the removal of existing trees planted on the land side of the levee. Although tree removal would be required, removal would be located in a few limited areas and only a few trees would be removed in each area. The access point at Country River Way would require the removal of approximately 17 trees. The proposed location and design of this access point was partially determined for its location relative to the limited number of mature trees that would need to be removed and also because homes along Aquafer Way and Hatteras Way do not directly face the access point. The remaining trees within the project area would be preserved. Visual quality of the surroundings would not be degraded due to the large number of trees remaining in view from the project area.

The intersection improvements would include pedestrian activated signals. Signal poles installed would be approximately 34 feet above ground level. Signal poles would be narrow and travelers would be able to see around these features. The poles would be in three locations within the project area and would not block views in the neighborhood or degrade the existing visual character of the project area and surrounding area. According to the City’s General Plan, views of the Sacramento River from public places are considered scenic (City of Sacramento, 2024).

The project would not reduce views of the Sacramento River from public places, rather, the project would increase availability of these views by creating public access along the Sacramento River.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
40 The project may include vegetative screening, fencing, and other buffers between uses to minimize potential security and privacy concerns with properties adjacent to the multi -use trail; however, specific privacy elements are still being considered in coordination with local property owners. These features were previously evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR and would not result in any additional impacts. Currently, the top of the levee consists of a gravel road; therefore, the construction of a concrete path and shoulders would blend with the existing visual character. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on existing visual character and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to aesthetic s that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to aesthetics would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies, and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
41 AIR QUALITY

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The city of Sacramento is located within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin (SVAB), which is a valley bounded by the North Coast Mountain Ranges to the west and the Northern Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east. The terrain in the valley is flat and approximately 25 feet above sea level.

Hot, dry summers and mild, rainy winters characterize the Mediterranean climate of the Sacramento Valley. Throughout the year, daily temperatures may range by 20 degrees Fahrenheit with summer highs often exceeding 100 degrees and winter lows occasionally below freezing. Average annual rainfall is about 20 inches and snowfall is very rare. Summertime temperatures are normally moderated by the presence of the “Delta breeze” that arrives through the Carquinez Strait in the evening hours.

The mountains surrounding the SVAB create a barrier to airflow, which can trap air pollutants in the valley. The highest frequency of air stagnation occurs in the autumn and early winter when large high-pressure cells lie over the valley. The lack of surface wind during these periods and the reduced vertical flow caused by less surface heating reduces the influx of outside air and Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

2. AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

A. Result in construction emissions of NO x above 85
pounds per day?
B. Result in operational emissions of NO x or ROG
above 65 pounds per day?
C. Violate any air quality standard or have a
cumulatively considerable contribution to an existing
or projected air quality violation?

D. Result in PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations that exceed
SMAQMD requirements?
E. Result in CO concentrations that exceed the 1- hour
state ambient air quality standard (i.e., 20.0 ppm) or
the 8-hour state ambient standard (i.e., 9.0 ppm)?

F. Result in exposure of sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
G. Result in TAC exposures create a risk of 10 in 1
million for stationary sources, or substantially
increase the risk of exposure to TACs from mobile
sources?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
42 allows air pollutants to become concentrated in a stable volume of air. The surface concentrations of pollutants are highest when these conditions are combined with temperature inversions that trap cooler air and pollutants near the ground.

The warmer months in the SVAB (May through October) are characterized by stagnant morning air or light winds, and the Delta breeze that arrives in the evening out of the southwest. Usually, the evening breeze transports a portion of airborne pollutants to the north and out of the Sacramento Valley. During about half of the day from July to September, however, a phenomenon called the “Schultz Eddy” prevents this from occurring. Instead of allowing the prevailing wind patterns to move north carrying the pollutants out of the valley, the Schultz Eddy causes the wind pattern to circle back south. This phenomenon exacerbates the pollution levels in the area and increases the likelihood of violating Federal or State standards. The Schultz Eddy normally dissipates around noon when the Delta breeze begins.

Criteria Air Pollutants
Concentrations of emissions from criteria air pollutants (the most prevalent air pollutants known to be harmful to human health) are used to indicate the quality of the ambient air. Criteria air pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), respirable and fine particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5), and lead. The sources of criteria air pollutants and their respective acute and chronic health impacts are described in Table 1.

Existing Air Quality
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The U.S. EPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), which was enacted in 1970 and most recently amended by Congress in 1990. The CAA required the U.S. EPA to establish the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the following criteria air pollutants: O
3, CO, NO2, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead. CAA
also requires each State to prepare a State implementation plan (SIP) for attaining and maintaining the NAAQS. The federal CAA Amendments of 1990 added requirements for states with nonattainment areas to revise their SIPs to incorporate additional control measures to reduce air pollution. Individual SIPs are modified periodically to reflect the latest emissions inventories, planning documents, and rules and regulations of the air basins as reported by their jurisdictional agencies.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing the California Clean Air Act (CCAA). The CCAA, which was adopted in 1988, required CARB to establish its own California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). CARB has established CAAQS for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, visibility-reducing particulate matter, and the above-mentioned criteria air pollutants. In most cases the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
43 Table 1 Sources and Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants

Pollutant Sources Acute1 Health Effects Chronic2 Health Effects
Ozone (O3)
Secondary pollutant resulting from
reaction of ROG and NOX in
presence of sunlight. ROG
emissions result from incomplete
combustion and evaporation of
chemical solvents and fuels; NOX
results from the combustion of fuels
Increased respiration and
pulmonary resistance; cough,
pain, shortness of breath,
lung inflammation
Permeability of
respiratory epithelia,
possibility of
permanent lung
impairment
Carbon
monoxide
(CO)
Incomplete combustion of fuels;
motor vehicle exhaust
Headache, dizziness, fatigue,
nausea, vomiting, death
Permanent heart and
brain damage
Nitrogen
dioxide
(NO2)
Combustion devices; e.g., boilers,
gas turbines, and mobile and
stationary reciprocating internal
combustion engines
Coughing, difficulty
breathing, vomiting,
headache, eye irritation,
chemical pneumonitis or
pulmonary edema; breathing
abnormalities, cough,
cyanosis, chest pain, rapid
heartbeat, death
Chronic bronchitis,
decreased lung
function
Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Coal and oil combustion, steel mills,
refineries, and pulp and paper mills
Irritation of upper respiratory
tract, increased asthma
symptoms
Insufficient evidence
linking SO2
exposure to chronic
health impacts
Respirable
particulate
matter (PM 10),
Fine
particulate
matter (PM

2.5)
Fugitive dust, soot, smoke, mobile
and stationary sources,
construction, fires and natural
windblown dust, and formation in
the Atmosphere by condensation
and/or transformation of SO2 and
ROG
Breathing and respiratory
symptoms, aggravation of
existing respiratory and
cardiovascular diseases,
Premature death
Alterations to the
immune system,
carcinogenesis
Lead Metal processing Reproductive/developmental
effects (fetuses and children)
Numerous effects
including
neurological,
endocrine, and
cardiovascular
effects
Notes: NOX = oxides of nitrogen; ROG = reactive organic gases.

1. “Acute” refers to effects of short-term exposures to criteria air pollutants, usually at fairly high concentrations.

2. “Chronic” refers to effects of long-term exposures to criteria air pollutants, usually at lower, ambient concentrations.

Source: (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2024)

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
44 The SVAB is currently designated as nonattainment for the NAAQS 8-hour ozone standard and the CAAQS for both 1-hour and 8-hour O 3 standard. The SVAB is also currently designated as nonattainment for both NAAQS and CAAQS 24-hour PM 10 standards. In addition, the SVAB is currently designated as nonattainment for the NAAQS 24-hour PM 2.5 standard. The air basin is designated as unclassified or in attainment for the remaining criteria air pollutants.

Toxic Air Contaminants
According to the California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality, the majority of the estimated health risks from toxic air contaminants (TACs) can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being diesel particulate matter (diesel PM). Diesel PM differs from other TACs in that it is not a single substance, but rather a complex mixture of hundreds of substances. Although diesel PM is emitted by diesel -fueled internal combustion engines, the composition of the emissions varies depending on engine type, operating conditions, fuel composition, lubricating oil, and whether an emissions control system is being used. In addition to diesel PM, the TACs for which data are available that pose the greatest existing ambient risk in California are benzene, 1,3-butadiene, acetaldehyde, carbon tetrachloride, hexavalent chromium, para-dichlorobenzene, formaldehyde, methylene chloride, and perchloroethylene.

Sensitive Receptors
According to CARB , sensitive receptor s include children, elderly, asthmatics, and people with heightened risk of negative health outcomes due to exposure to air pollution. Locations where sensitive receptors generally congregate include hospitals, schools, residential properties, and day care centers (California Air Resources Board, n.d.) . The nearest sensitive receptors are residential structures located approximately 10 feet east from the project area.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, air quality impacts may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the proposed project would result in the following impacts that remain significant after implementation of 2040 General Plan policies:
• Construction emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) above 85 pounds per day; • Operational emissions of NOx or reactive organic gases (ROG) above 65 pounds per day; • Violation of any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation;
• Any increase in PM 10 concentrations, unless all feasible Best Available Control Technology (BACT) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been applied, then increases above 80 pounds per day or 14.6 tons per year; • CO concentrations that exceed the 1-hour state ambient air quality standard (i.e., 20.0 parts per million [ppm]) or the 8-hour state ambient standard (i.e., 9.0 ppm); or • Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Ambient air quality standards have not been established for TAC. TAC exposure is deemed to be significant if:

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
45 • TAC exposures create a risk of 10 in 1 million for stationary sources, or substantially increase the risk of exposure to TACs from mobile sources.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR addressed the potential effects of the 2040 General Plan on ambient air quality and the potential for exposure of people, especially sensitive receptors such as children or the elderly, to unhealthful pollutant concentrations. See Master EIR, Chapter 4.3, Air Quality.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on Sacramento Valley regional air quality planning efforts (Impact 4.3-1), cumulatively considerable net increases of criteria pollutants for which the project region is in non-attainment (Impact 4.3-2), exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (Impact 4.3-3), exposure to odors (Impact 4.3-4), and cumulatively considerable impact to air quality (Impact 4.3-5). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its Environmental Resources and Constraints Element and Environmental Justice Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-4.4 Sensitive Uses. The City shall consult, as appropriate, with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) in evaluating exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants, and will impose conditions, as appropriate, on projects to protect public health and safety.
• ERC-4.5 Construction Emissions. The City shall ensure that construction and grading activities minimize short -term impacts to air quality by employing appropriate measures and best practices. Refer to Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs) recommended by the SMAQMD.
• EJ-1.4 Impact Assessment. The City shall continue to use the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) modeling tools and guidance documents, as appropriate, to identify and mitigate air quality impacts from proposed development projects.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.3, Air Quality , in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to vehicle emissions, long term (cumulative) vehicle emissions, and CO emissions. The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in temporary construction period dust and PM 10 which could result in a potentially significant impact. T he following 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR mitigation measures are applicable to the project:

Mitigation Measure 6.3-4 Construction Dust and Particulate Matter:

1. Prior to issuance of a special permit for construction of any phase of the project, a separate analysis of construction related PM
10 emissions shall be conducted. (NOTE: A project

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
46 specific analysis of construction level PM 10 emissions has been conducted which concluded that such emissions would be less-than-significant.)

2. Based on the project specific analysis (see item (1) above) the following types of mitigation measures shall be employed:
a. Water all unpaved construction areas at least twice per day during demolition and excavation to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering should be carried out on hot or windy days. Water twice daily or cover stockpiles of sand, soil, and similar materials with a tarp.
b. Cover trucks hauling dirt and debris to reduce spillage onto paved surfaces. c. Increase the frequency of City street cleaning along streets in the vicinity of the construction site.
d. Work should be restricted or banned on days of high winds (> 30 miles per hour ) or when air quality violations are expected (as determined by the SMAQMD) e. On-site vehicle speed on unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. f. Require construction contractors to designate a person or persons to oversee the dust abatement program and to order increased watering, as necessary. g. Revegetation of construction areas and staging areas shall take place immediately following completion of each project component.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Result in construction emissions of NO
x above 85 pounds per day?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Construction of the project would result in short-term emissions from construction activities and equipment for nine to 12 months. Release of particulate matter may result from excavation, grading, hauling, concrete mixing and other related activities. Construction vehicles and equipment would also emit NOx during construction.

NOx emissions for the project construction using CalEEMod Version 2022.1 were calculated to be approximately 2 pounds per day (Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2024). The small scale of the project is not anticipated to result in NOx above 85 pounds per day and the project would abide by the standard BMPs, and recommendations set forth by SMAQMD.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to construction emissions of NO
x above 85 pounds per day and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Result in operational emissions of NOx or ROG above 65 pounds per day? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project would construct a multi -use trail that would be utilized primarily by bicyclists and pedestrians, as well as pedestrian improvements at three intersections. Operation of the project would require occasional maintenance vehicles that could produce NOx and ROG emissions; however, maintenance activities would be temporary and intermittent and is not anticipated to result in large scale emissions. While most trail users would access the trail by bicycling and walking, some trail users may travel to and from the trail

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
47 in personal vehicles. The project is not anticipated to largely increase traffic volumes within or adjacent to the project area and no substantial increase in trips would result from the project.

Vehicles stopped at the pedestrian crossings would increase idling time only when crosswalks are in use. This would increase emissions a negligible amount and would not substantially impact operational emissions. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in increased operational emissions of NO
x or ROG above 65 pounds per day and the project would not result in effec ts more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

C. Violate any air quality standard or have a cumulatively considerable contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project would follow any guidelines established by SMAQMD to reduce potential impacts. It is not anticipated that the project would result in emission levels that would violate air quality standards or have a cumulatively considerable contribution to air quality. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

D. Result in PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations that exceed SMAQMD requirements? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. As discussed above, release of particulate matter may result from excavation, grading, hauling, concrete mixing and other related activities; construction vehicles and equipment would also emit PM 10 and PM 2.5 concentrations during construction. PM10 and PM2.5 emissions for project construction using CalEEMod Version 2022.1 were calculated to be approximately 0.9 pounds per day and 0.5 pounds per day, respectively (Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2024) . With application of the mitigation measures as set forth in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR and abiding by standard BMPs, and recommendations set forth by SMAQMD, concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 would be reduced even further. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

E. Result in CO concentrations that exceed the 1- hour state ambient air quality standard (i.e., 20.0 ppm) or the 8-hour state ambient standard (i.e., 9.0 ppm)? No Additional Significant Environment al Effect. As discussed in response (b) above, t he project would construct a multi -use trail that would be utilized primarily by bicyclists and pedestrians. Operation of the project would require occasional maintenance vehicles that could produce CO emissions; however, trail maintenance activities would be temporary and intermittent and is not anticipated to result in large scale emissions. While most trail users would access the trail by bicycling and walking, some trail users may travel to and from the trail in personal vehicles.

The project is not anticipated to largely increase traffic volumes within or adjacent to the project area and no substantial increase in trips would result from the project. Vehicles stopped at the pedestrian crossings would increase idling time only when crosswalks are in use. This would increase emissions a negligible amount and would not substantially impact operational emissions.

Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in increased operational emissions of CO concentrations that exceed the 1- hour state ambient air quality standard (i.e., 20.0 ppm) or the

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
48 8-hour state ambient standard (i.e., 9.0 ppm) and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

F. Result in exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project is located adjacent to a neighborhood with schools, parks, and several hundred homes with residents, which are considered sensitive receptors to the project. Construction of the project is anticipated to last nine to 12 months, and use of equipment would be temporary and intermittent. As discussed above, the project is anticipated to result in the release of various emissions; however, these emissions are not expected to generate levels that are high enough to impact human health.

During operation of the project, maintenance vehicles and equipment would release some emissions; however, maintenance activities would not result in emissions that would impact human health. Furthermore, operation of the project would not largely increase traffic into the area. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

G. Result in TAC exposures create a risk of 10 in 1 million for stationary sources, or substantially increase the risk of exposure to TACs from mobile sources? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (d) and (f) above.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to air quality that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to air quality would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
49 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The following discussion incorporates the results of the Natural Environment Study (NES) that was prepared for the project (Wood Rodgers, 2023).

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Prior to human development, the natural habitats within the region included perennial grasslands, riparian woodlands, oak woodlands, and a variety of wetlands including vernal pools, seasonal wetlands, freshwater marshes, ponds, streams, and rivers. Over the last 150 years, agriculture, irrigation, flood control, and urbanization have resulted in the loss or alteration of much of the natural habitat within the City limits. Non-native annual grasses have replaced the native perennial grasslands, many of the natural streams have been channelized, much of the riparian and oak woodlands have been cleared, and most of the marshes have been drained and converted to agricultural or urban uses.

Though the majority of the City is developed with residential, commercial, and other urban development, valuable plant and wildlife habitat still exists. These natural habitats are located primarily outside the city boundaries in the northern, southern and eastern portions of the City, but also occur along river and stream corridors and on a number of undeveloped parcels. Habitats that are present in the City include annual grasslands, riparian woodlands, oak woodlands, riverine, ponds, freshwater marshes, seasonal wetlands, and vernal pools. These habitats and their general locations are discussed briefly below.

The Biological Study Area (BSA) was established with an approximately 100 to 50-foot buffer surrounding the project impact area, including permanent and temporary impacts, proposed ROW, TCEs, cut and fill limits, and potential staging areas. The BSA follows a north to south Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

3. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

A. Create a potential health hazard, or use, production or disposal of materials that would pose a hazard to
plant or animal populations in the area affected?

B. Result in substantial degradation of the quality of the environment, reduction of the habitat, reduction of
population below self-sustaining levels of threatened
or endangered species of plant or animal species?

C. Affect other species of special concern to agencies or natural resource organizations (such as regulatory
waters and wetlands)?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
50 orientation along the Sacramento east levee crown with a northern terminus at Zacharias Park, and a southern terminus at Garcia Bend Park. The BSA encompasses approximately 164.98 acres.

The region receives an average of 18.52 inches of precipitation annually in the form of rain. The average annual high temperature is 74 degrees Fahrenheit ( ºF) and average annual low temperature is 48ºF
Hydrological Resources
The BSA contains small portions of the Sacramento River along the waterside of the Sacramento River east levee, and a short section of the Pocket Canal. No other hydrological resources are within the BSA.

Biological Conditions
The BSA is dominated by developed habitats. Dominant land cover and vegetative communities within the BSA consist of barren, urban, disturbed/ruderal, riparian, and riverine (Wood Rodgers, 2023).

Developed Habitats
Barren/Urban
Barren habitat are man-made infrastructures and are defined by the absence of any vegetation.

Any habitat with less than two percent total vegetation cover by herbaceous, desert, or non- wildland species and less than 10 percent cover by tree or shrub species would be considered barren habitat (Wood Rodgers, 2023). Barren land cover within the BSA consists of the existing gravel trail segments, sidewalks, roadways, and current conditions within USACE levee work areas. Current levee work includes full construction and moon-scaping of the Sacramento River east levee from the Pocket Canal (Country River Way) north to Benham Way. Segments that have completed construction but contain barren areas include the Sacramento River east levee from Benham Way to Zacharias Park.

Urban habitats have a variety of vegetation structure and is generally categorized as five types of vegetation areas: tree grove, street strip, shade tree/lawn, lawn, and shrub cover. Urban habitat within the BSA consists of single- and multi -family residential lots composed of ornamental planting and non-native grass lawns intermixed with City owned parks and parcels.

Disturbed/Ruderal
The disturbed/ruderal land cover type is defined as areas that have been subject to previous or ongoing disturbances such as along roadsides, roadside drainages, and other anthropogenic disturbances. Disturbed/ruderal habitat within the BSA consists of levee embankments outside of barren areas that are regularly maintained for weeds and fire protection.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
51 Natural Vegetation Communities
Open Water – Sacramento River
Open water areas are permanently or intermittently flooded waterways or other water features that may support sparse emergent or submerged vegetation or may be unvegetated. Within the BSA, open water areas include the Sacramento River channel.

Riparian Woodland
Riparian habitat is recognized as partially closed canopy or dense stands of winter -deciduous, broad-leaved species such as valley oaks ( Quercus lobata), Fremont cottonwood ( Populus fremontii), California sycamore ( Platanus racemosa), and numerus willow species ( Salix sp.) along rivers and drainages throughout the Sacramento Valley. A riparian woodland corridor occurs on the water side of the Sacramento River east levee between the Sacramento River and disturbed/ruderal areas where maintenance activity keeps the levee clear of vegetation up to the crown of the levee access road.

Special-Status Species
Plant and animal species are considered to have special status if they have been listed as such by federal or state agencies or by one or more special interest groups, such as California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Special-status species are protected under Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), C alifornia Endangered Species Act (CESA), or California Department of Fish and Wildlife ( CDFW) regulations. Prior to the field surveys, queries of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (U SFWS), California Nat ural Diversity Database (C NDDB), Biogeographic Information and Observation System , National Marine Fisheries Services West Coast Region California Species List Tool, and CNPS databases were conducted to identify species protected under the FESA, CESA or CDFW regulations with potential of occurrence in and surrounding the BSA.

A review of USFWS, CNDDB, and CNPS online databases concluded that 13 special status plant species had the potential to occur in the vicinity of the project. Based on the conducted literature research, aerial reconnaissance, and field surveys of habitat conditions within the BSA, it was determined that woolly rose-mallow (Hibiscus lasiocarpos var. occidentalis) was the only special status plant species with a low potential to occur within the BSA. However, there is no suitable habitat for the species above the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM), within riparian woodland, or within the ruderal/disturbed embankment of the Sacramento River east levee. Therefore, the wooly-rose mallow is presumed absent from the BSA and the project area. No special status plant species were identified during the survey efforts.

Preliminary literature research was conducted to determine the special status wildlife species with the potential to occur in the vicinity of the project. A review of CNDDB and USFWS online databases concluded that 28 special status wildlife species had the potential to occur within the project vicinity. Analysis of specific habitat requirements and current and historical occurrences determined the BSA was potentially suitable for following species:
• Purple Martin (Progne subis)
• Song sparrow - “Modesto” population (Melospiza melodia pop. 1)

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
52 • Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
• White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
Field surveys conducted July 8, 2022, by Wood Rodgers biologist Andrew Dellas included habitat assessments, and focused surveys for special status wildlife species. No special status wildlife species were observed during the field surveys, but there is still potential for all four species to occur within the BSA based on presence of potentially suitable habitat and recently documented regional occurrences.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For purposes of this environmental document, an impact would be significant if any of the following conditions or potential thereof, would result with implementation of the proposed project:
• Creation of a potential health hazard, or use, production or disposal of materials that would pose a hazard to plant or animal populations in the area affected; • Substantial degradation of the quality of the environment, reduction of the habitat, reduction of population below self-sustaining levels of threatened or endangered species of plant or animal; or
• Affect other species of special concern to agencies or natural resource organizations (such as regulatory waters and wetlands).

For the purposes of this doc ument, “special-status” has been defined to include those species, which are:
• Listed as endangered or threatened under the FESA (or formally proposed for, or candidates for, listing);
• Listed as endangered or threatened under the CESA (or proposed for listing); • Designated as endangered or rare, pursuant to California Fish and Game Code (Section 1901);
• Designated as fully protected, pursuant to California Fish and Game Code (Section 3511, 4700, or 5050);
• Designated as species of concern by USFWS, or as species of special concern to CDFW; • Plants or animals that meet the definition of rare or endangered under the CEQA.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.4 of the Master EIR evaluated the effects of the 2040 General Plan on biological resources within the General Plan policy area. The Master EIR identified potential impacts in terms of degradation of the quality of the environment or reduction of habitat or population below self-sustaining levels of special-status birds, through the loss of both nesting and foraging habitat.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on habitat of special-status plant species (Impact 4.4- 1), special-status invertebrate, fish, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals (Impact 4.4-2,

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
53 4.4-3, 4.4-4, 4.4-5, and 4.4-6), riparian habitat (Impact 4.4-7), state and/or federally protected wetlands (Impact 4.4-8), waters of the United States (Impact 4.4-8), and sensitive natural communities (Impact 4.4-9). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-1.1 Clean Water Programs. The City shall promote environmental stewardship and pollution prevention activities with outreach, assistance, and incentives for residents and businesses.
• ERC-1.2 Clean Watershed. The City shall continue ongoing Sacramento and American River source water protection efforts (e.g., Pups in the Park, Keep Our Waters Clean), based on watershed sanitary survey recommendations, in partnership with private watershed organizations and local, State, and federal agencies. • ERC-1.3 Runoff Contamination. The City shall protect surface water and groundwater resources from contamination from point (single location) and non-point (many diffuse locations) sources, as required by federal and State regulations. • ERC-2.1 Conservation of Water Resources in Open Space Areas. The City shall continue to preserve, protect, and provide appropriate access to designated open space areas along the American and Sacramento Rivers, floodways, and undevelopable floodplains, provided access would not disturb sensitive habitats or species, and shall support efforts to conserve and, where feasible, create or restore areas that provide important water quality and habitat benefits such as creeks, riparian corridors, buffer zones, wetlands, open space areas, levees, and drainage canals for the purpose of protecting water resources and habitats in the city’s watersheds, creeks, and the Sacramento and American Rivers
• ERC-2.2 Biological Resources. The City shall ensure that adverse impacts on sensitive biological resources, including special -status species, sensitive natural communities, sensitive habitat, and wetlands are avoided, minimized, or mitigated to the greatest extent feasible as development takes place.
• ERC-3.3 Tree Protection. The City shall encourage public agencies and require private development projects to consider alternatives to removals of healthy trees whenever feasible and to evaluate the longer-term consequences of the inability to meet tree canopy objectives when conducting project analyses and environmental documents. Ensure adequate protections during construction to protect existing tree roots and structure. • ERC-3.6 Urban Forest Maintenance. The City shall continue to plant, manage, and care for all trees on City property and within the public right-of-way to maximize their safe and useful life expectancy and continue to prioritize the selection of tree species that are adapted to future climate conditions.
• ERC-6.3 Floodway Capacity. The City shall preserve urban creeks and rivers to maintain and, where feasible, expand existing floodway capacity while enhancing environmental and habitat quality and recreational opportunities.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
54 Application of these policies would reduce Impacts 4.4-1 through 4.4-9 in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level.

It was determined that the 2040 General Plan would result in significant impacts related to cumulative contribution to regional loss of special -status plant or wildlife species or their habitat (Impact 4.4-10) and natural communities including wetlands and riparian habitat (Impact 4.4-11).

The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact on riparian habitat/riverbank vegetation . The following policies included in the Parkway Plan would limit or reduce impacts to riparian habitat and vegetation:

N1 Although the Parkway is to be developed for human use, the natural environment shall be protected, preserved and enhanced to the fullest extent possible, especially large aggregations of riparian vegetation and wildlife.

N2 Public access in Nature Study Areas may be limited if access negatively affects a habitat restoration project or a listed threatened or endangered species.

N3 Development within the Parkway, including trails and road, signs and structures, shall be designed to minimize impact to native vegetation.

E1 Reduce indiscriminate foot and bicycle traffic on levee slopes by providing trails, fencing and signage to channel traffic to key points.

E2 Avoid use of soil sterilizers or herbicides over large areas as this would encourage surface erosion.

E3 Indigenous grasses and other native vegetation should be used to stabilize the soil and reduce rain water runoff.

E4 Close portions of the Parkway as needed to restore eroded areas.

R1 Recreational activities which are hazardous or incompatible with Parkway natural habitat and uses, or detrimental to adjacent and surrounding habitat are prohibited.

The 1997 Sacramento Parkway Plan EIR determined that impacts on the Swainson’s hawk, Valley Elderberry Beetle, Shaded Riverine Habitat, and riparian heritage trees are dependent on a project’s location and scope. The following mitigation measures were included to address potential impacts and are applicable to the project.

Mitigation 6.5-3 Special Status Species Swainson’s Hawk

1. Prior to approval of development plans under the Parkway Plan policies, a determination shall be made regarding the sensitivity and suitability of the project area for Swainson’ s Hawk habitat. If the project site is sensitive, California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) shall be consulted and a habitat survey prepared. Impacts to this species shall be avoided or mitigated in consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the DFG.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
55 2. Development projects in the Parkway that may impact Swainson’ s hawk habitat shall be required to prepare a mitigation and operation plan for Swainson’ s hawk nesting habitat affected by proposed projects. The mitigation and operation plan shall be submitted to DFG for review and approval prior to construction of projects.

3. Nesting habitat lost shall be replaced in accordance with requirements imposed by DFG for mitigation for loss of nesting habitat. NOTE: The DFG mitigation guidelines (revised 1992) for Swainson’s hawk specify that no disturbance shall occur within a half-mile of an active nest between March 1 and August 15 to avoid construction of other project related activities which may cause nest abandonment or adverse disturbance to nearby active nest during the breeding season. There are known nesting sites within the Parkway.

4. Prior to construction of any Parkway development, hire a qualified biologist to conduct a survey within a 0.5 mile radius of the site to determine the location of active nests.

5. Avoid construction of any Parkway development project during the breeding/nesting season of the Swainson's hawk of March 1 through August 15 to avoid disturbance of nesting pairs within a half-mile radius of the project site.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Create a potential health hazard, or use, production or disposal of materials that would pose a hazard to plant or animal populations in the area affected? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Plant and animal species are considered to have special status if they have been listed as such by Federal or State agencies or by one or more special interest groups, such as CNPS. Analysis of specific habitat requirements and current and historical occurrences determined the BSA was potentially suitable for following special - status animal species: p urple martin, song sparrow “Modesto” population, the White-tailed kite, and Swainson’s hawk.

Project construction would be limited to the crown of the levee, proposed access points, and three intersections; however, anticipated tree removal of potentially suitable nesting trees is anticipated for the construction of proposed trail access ramps. The project is not anticipated to impact freshwater marsh habitats, riparian habitat, or potentially suitable shrubby vegetation on the land or water side of the Sacramento River east levee. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to result in direct impacts to the purple martin, the song sparrow “Modesto” population, and the White- tailed kite, or result in the loss of nesting or foraging habitat. In addition, the NES includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect special status species and their habitat; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially significant impacts to biological resources with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to the purple martin, the song sparrow “Modesto” population, and the White-tailed kite are identified in the NES.

Construction of the project would require large equipment and the presence of people, which may have the potential to disturb nesting Swainson’s hawk within the BSA, if any are present. No Swainson’s hawk nests were identified within 0.5 mile in the 2022 field survey. In addition, there has been extensive disturbance within the project area with the current USACE levee

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
56 improvements which includes a significant removal of riparian habitat and is a large source of noise. Prior to construction, pre-construction nesting surveys would be conducted, in accordance with Mitigation 6.5-3 of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, and measures would be developed, if nests are found. No direct impacts to Swainson’s hawk individuals or nests are anticipated with the implementation of species -specific measures. In addition, the NES includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect Swainson’s hawk and their habitat; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially significant impacts to biological resources with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to Swainson’s hawk are identified in the NES.

No special -status plant species were identified during the survey efforts and the wooly -rose mallow is presumed absent from the BSA. Therefore, the project would result in no impacts on special-status plant species. Trees are present within the BSA and project area. Tree removal is anticipated and would comply with the City’s Ordinance 2016-0026, Chapter 12.56 City and Private Protected Trees. Trees that would be protected include:

1. A tree that is designated by the City Council resolution to have special historical value, special environmental value, or significant community benefit, and is located on private property;

2. Any native valley oak ( Quercus lobata), blue oak ( Quercus douglasii ), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii ), coast live oak ( Quercus agrifolia), California buckeye ( Aesculus californica), or California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), that has a Diameter at Standard Height (DSH) of 12 inches or more, and is located on private property;

3. A tree that has a DSH of 24 inches or more located on private property that:
a. is an undeveloped lot; or
b. does not include any single unit or duplex dwellings; or

4. A tree that has a DSH of 32 inches or more located on private property that includes any single unit or duplex dwellings.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on plant or animal populations in the area and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Result in substantial degradation of the quality of the environment, reduction of the habitat, reduction of population below self-sustaining levels of threatened or endangered species of plant or animal species?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

C. Affect other species of special concern to agencies or natural resource organizations (such as regulatory waters and wetlands)?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any impacts on jurisdictional aquatic resources. The project impact area is approximately 75-150 feet linear feet from the Sacramento River OHWM, and no removal of riparian habitat is anticipated for the project. Project impacts would be limited to permanent and temporary effects

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
57 to barren/urban and disturbed/ruderal habitat types. No potentially significant impacts to natural communities of special concern or to jurisdictional waters are anticipated. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on regulatory waters and wetlands and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to biological resources that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to biological resources would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
58 CULTURAL RESOURCES

The following discussion incorporates the results of the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) , Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER) , Finding of No Adverse Effect (FNAE), and Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Action Plan that were prepared for the project (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a; Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025b; GPA Consulting, 2025; GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The city of Sacramento and the surrounding area are known to have been occupied by Native American groups for thousands of years prior to settlement by non-Native peoples. Archaeological materials, including human burials, have been found throughout the city of Sacramento. Human burials outside of formal cemeteries often occur in prehistoric contexts. T he General Plan policy area lies in the territory historically inhabited by the Nisenan tribe and Plains M e-Wuk tribe.

Elevated areas along the rivers, creeks and sloughs provided water and sources of food; therefore, Native Americans within the policy area would settle and use these areas. According to the 2040 General Plan, the project area is within an area with a high concentration of cultural and archaeological resources (City of Sacramento, 2024).

The overall buried site sensitivity within the project footprint varies from lowest to highest. Buried site sensitivity is mostly low for the northernmost portion of the project footprint along the Sacramento River East Levee. Buried site sensitivity quickly increases from moderate to highest sensitivity in the area around Pinios River Court. Sensitivity drops back down to low moving south where the Pocket Canal Parkway meets the Sacramento River East Levee. The small area within the project footprint to the south and east near Sleepy River Way has a buried site sensitivity level of moderate (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a).

The project footprint is located on relatively homogenous landforms and soil types of which either date to the Recent Holocene (600– 100 years BP) or are Historical -Modern (<100 years BP) in origin. Late Quaternary levee and channel deposits with two percent slope or less make up the Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

4. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in § 15064.5?

B. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource?
C. Disturb any human remains?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
59 area along the levee. Late Quaternary alluvium basin deposits with two percent slope or less make up the landform within the urban area east of the levee within the project footprint (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a).

A pedestrian survey was conducted in April 2024 by Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. and was able to access approximately 70 percent of the project footprint. The remaining 30 percent of the survey area did not have landowner permission or were in-accessible because they were between two properties without landowner permission (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a). A secondary survey may be warranted to cover these areas prior to the start of the project, if permission is granted, or these areas may be surveyed immediately prior to construction.

Record searches, which included the project footprint and a surrounding 0.25-mile radius, was conducted at the Northwest Information Center and North Central Information Center. In addition, the following sources were reviewed, National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and Office of Historic Preservation’s Historical Property Data File.

Twenty-one resources have been previously recorded within one-quarter mile of the project footprint. These include eight built environment resources, seven precontact sites, one historic - era site, one multicomponent site, one cultural landscape district and three historic -era underground resources (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a).

Archaeological Resources
The ASR prepared for this project included the results of the buried archaeological site assessment, which concluded that most of the project area has a low potential to contain subsurface precontact archaeological sites (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a). Sensitivity increases in the southern portion of the project footprint with moderate to highest sensitivity around the Pocket Canal. A high sensitivity area was also identified at the southernmost workspace off of Sleepy River Way (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a).

The records search identified four previously recorded cultural resources within the project area and 17 resources within 0.25 mile from the project area. The four previously recorded cultural resources include one historic -era site, two precontact sites , and one Tribal Cultural Landscape (TCL). The historic -era site, P-34-005258 (CA -SAC-1254H), was previously determined to be ineligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR with SHPO concurrence dated November 13, 2019, due to a lack of integrity of design, setting, workmanship, feeling, or association (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a) . The precontact site P-34 -000069 (CA-SAC-42) has not been evaluated for listing the NRHP or CRHR but presumably would meet eligibility requirements under Criterion D should intact deposits be identified (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a). The precontact site P-34-005379 (CA-SAC-1276) and the TCL P- 34-005225 were previously evaluated as eligible for listing in the NRHP/CRHR, with no record of SHPO concurrence (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a) . The two pre- contact sites and one TCL are considered eligible for inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR for the purposes of this project only.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
60 Historical Resources
The H RER prepared for this project identified seven historical resources which required evaluation for historic significance and eligibility for listing in the NRHP /CRHR. Of these resources, one had been previously been determined ineligible for the NRHR /CRHR and three resources were evaluated as part of this project and determined ineligible for the NRHR and CRHR however, one resource, P-34-002143 (Sacramento River East Levee (SREL) Unit 115), was previously determined eligible for listing in NRHP and CRHR with SHPO concurrence dated November 12, 2022, and two resources , 7140 Pocket Road and P-34 -000012 (7250 Pocket Road), are considered eligible for listing for the purposes of this project only due to restricted access to the sites, limited visibility, and limited potential effects (GPA Consulting, 2025).

The SREL Unit 115 is approximately 11-miles long and consists of an earthen levee with a gravel road at the crown. Character -defining features include its crown and sloping sidings. SREL Unit 115 is eligible for inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR at the local level of significance under Criteria A/1 with a period of significance of 1917-1969 as a contributing feature of a larger Sacramento River Flood Control Project district (GPA Consulting, 2025). The boundaries of the historic property are limited to the levee’s footprint.
7140 Pocket Road and 7250 Pocket Road are both single -family residences with c haracter- defining features including a rectangular plan, gabled roof forms, and wood siding. Additional features could not be determined due to limited visibility of the properties (GPA Consulting, 2025).

Both resources are assumed eligible for the listing in the NRHP/CRHR at the local level of significance under criteria A/1 with a period of significance of ca. 1910 for their association with the early development of the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood (GPA Consulting, 2025).

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For purposes of this Initial Study, cultural resource impacts may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the proposed project would result in one or more of the following:

1. Cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; or

2. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource; or

3. A substantial adverse change in the significance of such resources.

4. Cause a substantial change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074. For the purposes of this Initial Study, a tribal cultural resource is considered to be a significant resource if the resource is: 1) listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources; or 2) the resource has been determined by the lead agency, in its dis cretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
61 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 20 40 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR identified significant impacts on historic (Impact 4.5-1) and archaeological resources (Impact 4.5-2 and 4.5-3). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Historic and Cultural Resources Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• HCR-1.1 Preservation of Historic and Cultural Resources, Landscapes, and Site Features.

The City will continue to promote the preservation, restoration, enhancement, and recognition of historic and cultural resources throughout the city. • HCR-1.6 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.
• HCR-1.10 Demolition. Consistent with Secretary of the Interior Standards, the City shall consider demolition of historic resources as a last resort, to be permitted only if rehabilitation or adaptive reuse of the resource is not feasible; demolition is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its residents; or the public benefits outweigh the loss of the historic resource.
• HCR-1.14 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.
• HCR-1.15 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 collaborate with the most likely descendants identified by the Native American Heritage Commission.
• HCR-1.17 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:
o Consideration of existing reports and studies,
o Consultation with Native American tribes as required by State law o Appropriate site-specific investigative actions, and
o Onsite monitoring during excavation if appropriate.
• HCR-1.18 Evaluation of Potentially Eligible Built Environment Resources. The City shall continue to evaluate all buildings and structures 50 years old and older for potential historic

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
62 significance prior to approving a project that would demolish or significantly alter the resource.

Application of these policies would help reduce the significance of impacts to these resources.

However, because there is no feasible mitigation available to ensure the loss, damage or destruction of historically significant resources, cultural resources, and significant archa eological resources would not occur, the impact listed in Chapter 4.5, Cultural and Historic Resources , in the Master EIR remains significant and unavoidable. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated on prehistoric, historic, and cultural resources. The following mitigation measures were included to address potential impacts and are applicable to the project.

Mitigation Measure 6.8-1 Prehistoric Resources

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construction continues.

Mitigation Measure 6.8-2 Historic/Cultural Resources

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construction continues.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in § 15064.5?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The technical reports identified three archaeological resources and three built environment resources within the project area which were previously determined or are considered eligible for listing the NRHP or CRHR for the

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
63 purpose of this project. The three archaeological resources previously recorded include a prehistoric/historic district and two prehistoric sites. The three built environment resources include the SREL Unit 115 and two residential properties.

Improvements at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. Intersection improvements at Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions and a new pedestrian crossing of Pocket Road would be installed just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. In addition, a two-way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The cycle track would not require changes to the bridge deck or substructure above the Pocket Canal. Sidewalks on both sides would be maintained, but the sidewalk on the east side may need to be shifted or modified to accommodate the other proposed bike facility improvements . The majority of the new trail construction would require excavations of less than two feet in depth and would average six to eight inches depending on the quality of the sub-base. In some specific locations project features such as small retaining walls or light foundations, including pedestrian improvements, w ould require deeper excavation not to exceed five feet in depth.

General subsurface archaeological sensitivity is low with the exception of a few isolated locations, primarily associated with the three known archaeological resources. The low sensitivity is also due to the major construction work associated with the USACE levee improvements which are ongoing. Overall, the project area is previously disturbed or developed; therefore, it is unlikely that any existing archaeological resources would be present.

Archaeological Resources
P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42)
Project work with the potential to impact P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42) would be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee and would not impact the potentially eligible character-defining traits of the site as designed. Construction impacts to the levee include temporary access, minor grading, and the construction of the trail. Vertical ground disturbance in this area would not exceed 12 inches below the current grade (i.e., within the newly created fill prism of the levee). The proposed permanent access point along Country River Way would include a ramp installed approximately 320 feet south of the resource.

No work would occur within the boundary of P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42), but a horizontal ESA will be established for the length of the resource to include ESA fencing erected on either side of the levee pathway along the east and west edge of the Area of Direct Impact. A vertical ESA would ensure no work shall occur below depths of five feet to prevent damage to potential deposits under the levee prism. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the limited construction and excavation proposed for the levee segment adjacent to this resource would not damage or alter the character-defining features of the resource with the implementation of a horizontal and vertical ESA (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
64 P-34-005225
Resource P-34-005225 is a TCL which encompasses the entire project area and includes both state-owned and private property. The levee and surrounding infrastructure have experienced multiple episodes of development and maintenance activities. Ultimately, portions of the potential historic resource have been subjected to some form of disturbance and destruction, change in physical features and use, as well as visual impediments; however, the majority of the remaining landscape features within the narrow APE corridor, adjacent to the existing levee, appear intact.

Project work with the potential to impact P-34-005225 would primarily be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee that extend along the entire length of the project area and would not impact the character -defining traits of the resource, which are mainly plants and animals. No elements of the resource would be affected by the project activities. The broader setting of the property has already been altered by the construction of the levee and urban development. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the project would not construct substantial alterations that would compromise the resource’s integrity (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025) . In addition, the limited construction and excavations proposed for the levee segment and existing developed urban areas would not damage or alter the character-defining features of the resource.

P-34-005379 (CA-SAC-1276)
Project work with the potential to affect P -34-005379 (CA -SAC-1276) would be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee that extends above the portion of the recorded site deposit and would not impact the potentially eligible char acter-defining traits of the site. Resource P-34-005379 (CA-SAC-1276) has been identified at depths between 17.5 and 20 feet below the surface, beneath the Sacramento River East Levee, approximately 255 feet north from the intersection of Riverton Way and Clipper Way. Construction impacts to the levee include temporary access, minor grading, and the construction of the trail. Vertical ground disturbance in this area would not exceed 12 inches below the current grade. The proposed permanent access point along Clipper Way would include a ramp approximately 320 feet southeast/east of the resource.

Potential archaeological deposits and features would be avoided by limiting project work to above the established site boundaries and restricting construction to the existing engineered levee structure at this location. Ground disturbance for this undertaking would not exceed two feet below the surface within this resource. A vertical ESA will be established for the length of the resource boundary from 225–300 feet north of the intersection of Riverton Way and Clipper Way. Impacts must be limited to 10 feet below the existing ground surface within the vertical ESA. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the limited construction and excavations proposed for the levee segment adjacent to the site would not damage or alter the character -defining features of the resource with the implementation of a horizontal and vertical ESA (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
65 Historical Resources
P-34-002143 / SREL Unit 115
Project work with the potential to affect the SREL Unit 115 includes construction of a 12-foot wide paved asphalt concrete path with 2 -foot shoulders comprised of decomposed granite on either side of the pavement and constructed along the top of the crown of the existing levee.

Construction would also include up to five new access ramps along the eastern land side of the levee to connect the new trail to the existing publicly accessible roadways and parks . Existing trees along the land side of the levee around the locations of the proposed access ramps would be removed. Although tree removal would be required, removal would be located in a few limited areas and only a few trees would be removed in each area.

Construction would require a visual change to the crown and specific sections of the slopes; however, the change would not diminish the property’s significant historic features. Visual changes associated with the project would be visually differentiated so as to not convey a false sense of history and will be minimal enough so as to not diminish the integrity of setting of the SREL Unit 115. The project would not require the change of physical features within the property’s setting that contributes to its historic significance. The historic character including the distinctive materials, features, finishes and construction techniques that characterize the SREL Unit 115 would be preserved and the project would not require the change of physical features within the property’s setting that contributes to its historic significance. The proposed project would not cause physical destruction or damage to all or part of the SREL Unit 115 and following project construction, the SREL Unit 115 would continue its historic use as a levee along the Sacramento River and remain a contributing feature of a larger district comprising the Sacramento River Flood Control Project system (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).
7140 Pocket Road
Project work with the potential to affect 7140 Pocket Road would be limited to the crown of a segment of the SREL Unit 115 that extends through the rear of the parcel. Although construction would be located on the parcel, it would be limited to the footprint of the SREL Unit 115 and would not impact any buildings or structures on site. Temporary impacts to the parcel would be limited to the location of the trail and include temporary construction access, minor grading impacts, and minor ground disturbances. No permanent physical changes are proposed for the majority of the parcel or for any of the buildings on the property.
7140 Pocket Road consists of a total of three buildings, including a residence and two ancillary buildings. The closest building to the proposed trail, an ancillary building, is located roughly 29 feet west of the crown of the levee while the residence and other ancillary building are located roughly 60 feet west of the crown of the levee. Along the western edge of the parcel is a dock structure located within the Sacramento River that is roughly 50 feet east from the crown of the levee. No physical changes to the buildings or dock are proposed. Circulation within the parcel may be temporarily altered during construction activity, but permanent access to the dock and Sacramento River would be maintained.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
66 The limited construction and excavations proposed to the portion of the levee on the parcel would not damage or alter the character -defining features of 7140 Pocket Road. Construction would result in a visual change of the existing gravel path to an asphalt path; however, it would be concentrated to the crown of the levee at the rear of the parcel roughly 60 feet away from the residence. The visual change would not diminish the property’s significant historic features and would not impact any existing buildings. There would be no change to the character of the historic property’s use and no change to the physical features within the property’s setting that contribute to its historic significance (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

P-34-000012 / 7250 Pocket Road
Project work with the potential to affect P-34-000012 (7250 Pocket Road) would be limited to the crown of a segment of the SREL Unit 115 that extends through the rear of the parcel. Although construction would be located on the parcel, it would be limited to the crown of the SREL Unit 115 and would not impact any buildings or structures on site. Temporary impacts to the parcel would be limited to the location of the proposed trail and include temporary construction access, minor grading impacts, and minor ground disturbances.
7250 Pocket Road consists of one building, a residence that is located roughly 40 feet east of the crown of the levee. Aerial images suggest there may be steps leading from the rear yard to the east side of the levee. No physical changes to the building are proposed. Circulation within the parcel may be temporarily altered during construction activity, but permanent access to the Sacramento River would be maintained.

The limited construction and excavations proposed to the portion of the levee on the parcel would not damage or alter the character -defining features of 7250 Pocket Road. Construction would result in a visual change of the existing gravel path to an asphalt path; however, it would be concentrated to the crown of the levee at the rear of the parcel roughly 40 feet away from the residence. The change would not diminish the property’s significant historic features and not impact any existing buildings. There would be no change to the character of the historic property’s use and no changes to the physical features within the property’s setting that contribute to its historic significance (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

All Resources
The ASR and ESA Action Plan includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect archaeological and cultural resources; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially significant impacts to arch aeological and cultural resources with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to archaeological and cultural resources are identified in the ASR or ESA Action Plan. The project would implement mitigation measures included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR which would require monitoring during excavation and stopping all work if an archaeological resource is found. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on historic or archaeological resources and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
67 B. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect . Paleontological resources include fossils, which are the preserved remains or traces of animals, plants, and other organisms from prehistoric time (i.e., the period before written records). Fossils and traces of fossils are preserved in sedimentary rock units (formed by the deposition of material at the Earth’s surface); and are more likely to be preserved subsurface, where they have not been damaged or destroyed by previous ground disturbance or natural causes, such as erosion by wind or water. The rock types underlying the project area are from the Pleistocene-Holocene period (California Department of Conservation, n.d.). This period of rock formation is considered young and would be unlikely to carry paleontological resources. In addition, the project area has been previously disturbed.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on paleontological resources and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

C. Disturb any human remains?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. One of the pre-contact sites which intersects the project area, P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42), has been identified as a location including human burials. In addition, subsequent studies visiting this site have also identified human remains outside of the recorded site boundary. However, this resource is primarily a subsurface resource and during the site visit no artifacts were observed. Construction of the project would include ground-disturbing activities that could unearth previously undiscovered human remains interred outside of a formal cemetery, should they be present in the project area. Ground disturbing activities at this location would only be within the first two feet of the ground surface, within the existing levee, which is fill dirt and not native soil, which reduces the potential to encounter human remains. In addition, the ongoing USACE levee improvements has caused substantial disturbance within the project area and further reduces the unearthing of human remains. Overall, the project area is previously disturbed or developed.

The project would implement mitigation measures included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR which would require monitoring during excavation and stopping all work if any remains are found. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on human remains and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to cultural resources that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to cultural resources would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
68 The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
69 ENERGY
A. Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful. Inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?

B. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Structures built would be subject to Titles 20 and 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which reduce demand for electrical energy by implementing energy -efficient standards for residential and non-residential buildings. The 2040 General Plan includes policies (see 2040 General Plan Policy M-1.37) and related policies to encourage energy -efficient technology by offering rebates and other incentives to commercial and residential developers, coordination with local utility providers and recruitment of businesses that research and promote energy conservation and efficiency.

The Master EIR discussed energy conservation and relevant general plan policies in Chapter 4.6.

The discussion concluded that with implementation of the general plan policies and energy regulation (e.g., Title 24) development allowed in the general plan would not result in the inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy.

See also Section 12, below, discussing impacts related to energy. The Master EIR concluded that implementation of state regulation, coordination with energy providers and implementation of general plan policies, including employing appropriate mitigation measures and best practices established by SMAQMD during construction and grading activities (ERC -4.5) would reduce all impacts to a less than significant level.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
SMUD is a community-owned and not-for-profit utility that provides electric services to 900 square miles, including most of Sacramento County (Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2024). PG&E is an inventory-owned utility that provides electric and natural gas services to approximately 16 million people within a 70,000-square-mile service area in both northern and central California (Pacific Gas & Electric, 2024). SMUD is the primary electricity supplier, and PG&E is the primary natural gas supplier for the city of Sacramento and the project area.

Energy demand related to the proposed project would include energy directly consumed for space heating and cooling and proposed electric facilities and lighting. Indirect energy consumption Issues:

Effect Will
Be Studied
in the EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

5. ENERGY
Would the project:

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
70 would be associated with the generation of electricity at power plants. Transportation-related energy consumption includes the use of fuels and electricity to power cars, trucks, and public transportation. Energy would also be consumed by equipment and vehicles used during project construction and routine maintenance activities.

Energy Policy and Conservation Act, and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 established nationwide fuel economy standards to conserve oil. Under this act, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, is responsible for revising existing fuel economy standards and establishing new vehicle economy standards. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program was established to determine vehicle manufacturer compliance with the government’s fuel economy standards. Three Energy Policy Acts have been passed, in 1992, 2005, and 2007, to reduce dependence on foreign petroleum, provide tax incentives for alternative fuels, and support energy conservation.

Energy Policy Act of 1992 and 2005
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct) was passed to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign petroleum and improve air quality. EPAct includes several parts intended to build an inventory of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in large, centrally fueled fleets in metropolitan areas.

EPAct requires certain federal, state, and local government and private fleets to purchase a percentage of light-duty AFVs capable of running on alternative fuels each year. In addition, financial incentives are also included in EPAct. Federal tax deductions are allowed for businesses and individuals to cover the incremental cost of AFVs. States are also required by the act to consider a variety of incentive programs to help promote AFVs. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides renewed and expanded tax credits for electricity generated by qualified energy sources, such as landfill gas; provides bond financing, tax incentives, grants, and loan guarantees for clean renewable energy and rural community electrification; and establishes a federal purchase requirement for renewable energy.

State of California Energy Efficiency Action Plan
The 2021 California Energy Efficiency Action Plan identifies the next GHG reduction target to be reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent by 2030, compared to 1990 levels, and reaching carbon neutrality by 2045 (California Energy Commission, 2021a). This plan provides guiding principles and recommendations on how the state would achieve those goals. These recommendations include:
• identifying funding sources that support energy efficiency programs, • identifying opportunities to improve energy efficiency through data analysis, • using program designs as a way to encourage increased energy efficiency on the consumer end,
• improving energy efficiency through workforce education and training, and • supporting rulemaking and programs that incorporate energy demand flexibility and building decarbonization (California Energy Commission, 2021b).

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
71 California Green Building Standards
The energy consumption of new residential and nonresidential buildings in California is regulated by the state’s Title 24, Part 6, Building Energy Efficiency Standards (California Energy Code). The California Energy Code was established by the California Energy Commission ( CEC) in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to create uniform building codes to reduce California’s energy consumption and provide energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings.

CEC updates the California Energy Code every 3 years with more stringent design requirements for reduced energy consumption, which results in the generation of fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The 2022 California Energy Code was adopted by CEC on August 11, 2021 and applies to projects constructed after January 1, 2023. The California Energy Code was first adopted in 1976 by the CEC and have been updated periodically since then, as directed by statute. The 2022 California Energy Code “builds on California’s technology innovations, encouraging energy efficient approaches to encourage building decarbonization, emphasizing in particular on heat pumps for space heating and water heating. This set of Energy Codes also extends the benefits of photovoltaic and battery storage systems and other demand flexible technology to work in combinations with heat pumps to enable California buildings to be responsive to climate change.

This Energy Code also strengthens ventilation standards to improve indoor air quality. This update provides crucial steps in the state’s progress toward 100 percent clean carbon neutrality by midcentury” (California Energy Commission, 2022).

The Energy Code is enforced through the local plan check and building permit process. Local government agencies may adopt and enforce additional energy standards for new buildings as reasonably necessary due to local climatologic, geologic, or topographic conditions, provided that these standards exceed those provided in the California Energy Code.

Transportation-Related Regulations
Various regulatory and planning efforts are aimed at reducing dependency on fossil fuels, increasing the use of alternative fuels, and improving California’s vehicle fleet. Senate Bill ( SB) 375 aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. CARB, in consultation with the metropolitan planning organizations, provides each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in their respective regions for 2020 and 2035.

Pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 2076 (Chapter 936, Statutes of 2000), CEC and the CARB prepared and adopted a joint agency report in 2003, Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence. Included in this report are recommendations to increase the use of alternative fuels to 20 percent of on-road transportation fuel use by 2020 and 30 percent by 2030, significantly increase the efficiency of motor vehicles, and reduce per capita VMT (California Air Resources Board, California Energy Comission, 2003).

AB 1007 (Chapter 371, Statues of 2005) required CEC to prepare the State Alternative Fuels Plan to increase the use of alternative fuels in California.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
72 In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars program which combines the control of GHG emissions and criteria air pollutants, as well as requirements for greater numbers of zero- emission vehicles, into a single package of standards for vehicle model years 2017 through 2025.

The program’s zero-emission vehicle regulation requires battery, fuel cell, and/or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles to account for up to 15 percent of California’s new vehicle sales by 2025.

On August 2, 2018, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the U.S. EPA proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel -Efficient Vehicles Rule (SAFE Rule). Part One of the SAFE Rule revokes a waiver granted by the U.S. EPA to the State of California under Section 209 of the Clean Air Act to enforce more stringent emission standards for motor vehicles than those required by the U.S. EPA for the explicit purpose of GHG emission reduction, and indirectly, criteria air pollutant and ozone precursor emission reduction. On March 31, 2020, Part Two of the SAFE Rule was published and would amend existing CAFE and tailpipe CO2 emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish new standards covering model years 2021 through 2026.

GHG Reduction Regulations
Several regulatory measures such as AB 32 and the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Executive Order B-30-15, SB 32, and AB 197 were enacted to reduce GHGs and have the co-benefit of reducing California’s dependency on fossil fuels and making land use development and transportation systems more energy efficient.

Renewable Energy Regulations
SB X1-2 of 2011 requires all California utilities to generate 33 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2020. SB X1-2 also requires the renewable electricity standard to be met increasingly with renewable energy that is supplied to the California grid from sources within, or directly proximate to, California. SB X1-2 mandates that renewables from these sources make up at least 50 percent of the total renewable energy for the 2011-2013 compliance period, at least 65 percent for the 2014-2016 compliance period, and at least 75 percent for 2016 and beyond.

SB 100, signed in September 2018, requires that all California utilities, including independently - owned utilities, energy service providers, and community choice aggregators, supply 44 percent of retail sales from renewable resources by December 31, 2024, 50 percent of all electricity sold by December 31, 2026, 52 percent by December 31, 2027, and 60 percent by December 31, 2030. The law also requires that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100 percent of retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is designed to improve vehicle fuel economy and help reduce U.S. dependence on oil. It represents a major step forward in expanding the production of renewable fuels, reducing dependence on oil, and confronting global climate change. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 increases the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard requiring fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022, which represents a nearly five-fold increase over current

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
73 levels; and reduces U.S. demand for oil by setting a national fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020—an increase in fuel economy standards of 40 percent.

By addressing renewable fuels and the CAFE standards, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 builds upon progress made by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 in setting out a comprehensive national energy strategy for the 21st century.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 20 40 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR described the existing visual conditions in the City, and the potential changes to those conditions that could result from development consistent with the 2040 General Plan. See Master EIR, Chapter 4.6, Energy.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Impact 4.6-1 and 4.6-3) or conflict with or obstruct a state or local renewable energy plan or impede energy efficiency (Impact 4.6-2). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Element, Land Use and Placemaking Element, and Mobility Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
•
ERC-4.5 Construction Emissions. The City shall ensure that construction and grading activities minimize short -term impacts to air quality by employing appropriate measures and best practices. Refer to Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs) recommended by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD).
• ERC-8.1 Cooling Design Techniques. Through design guidelines and other means, in all new development the City shall promote the use of tree canopy, cool pavements, landscaping, building materials, and site design techniques that provide passive cooling and reduce energy demand. In particular, the City shall promote the use of voluntary measures identified in the California Green Building Code (Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations) to minimize heat island effects, including hardscape and roof materials with beneficial solar reflectance and thermal emittance values and measures for exterior wall shading.
• LUP-2.2 Interconnected City. The City should establish a network of interconnected activity centers, corridors, parks, and neighborhoods that promotes walking, bicycling, and mass transit use as viable alternatives to private vehicles.

• LUP-2.5 Design for Connectivity. The City shall require that all new development maximizes existing and new connections with surroundings and with centers, corridors, parks, and neighborhoods to enhance efficient and direct pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle movement. When feasible, grid patterns should be utilized to facilitate multiple routes. • M-1.1 Street Classification System. The City shall maintain a street classification system that considers the role of streets as corridors for movement but prioritizes a context- sensitive Complete Streets concept that enables connected, comfortable, and convenient travel for those walking, rolling, and taking transit.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
74 • M-1.3 Healthy Transportation System Options. The City shall plan and make investments to foster a transportation system that improves the health of Sacramento residents through actions that make active transportation, nonmotorized modes, high-occupancy, and zero emission vehicles viable, attractive alternatives to automobiles that use internal combustion engines
• M-1.14 Walking Facilities. The City shall work to complete the network of tree-shaded sidewalks throughout the city, to the greatest extent feasible, by building new sidewalks and crossings, especially within the high-injury network, in disadvantaged communities, near high-ridership transit stops, and near important destinations, such as schools, parks, and commercial areas. Walking facilities should incorporate shade trees.

• M-1.13 Walkability. The City shall design streets to prioritize walking by including design elements such as the following: • Grid networks that provide high levels of connectivity; • Closely spaced intersections; • Frequent and low -stress crossings; • Wide, unobstructed walkable sidewalks; • Separation from vehicle traffic; • Street trees that provide shading; and • Minimal curb cuts.

• M-4.8 Detour Facilities. The City shall design, implement, and maintain construction, work zone, or special event diversions and/ or detour facilities to provide comfortable and convenient passage, prioritizing mobility for active transportation and transi t for the duration of construction, work zones, or special events.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts listed in Chapter 4.6, Energy, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

Sacramento Climate Action & Adaption Plan
The Sacramento Climate Action & Adaption Plan (CAAP) was adopted on February 27, 2024 by the City Council and was incorporated into the 2040 General Plan. The Sacramento CA AP includes GHG emission reduction targets, strategies, and implementation measures developed to help the City reach these targets. Reduction strategies address GHG emissions associated with transportation and land use, energy, water, waste management and r ecycling, agriculture, and open space.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan and Parkway Projects would have a less than significant effect related to energy.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact is considered significant if the proposed project would:
• result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during project construction or operation; and/or
• conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
75 ANSWERS TO CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Neither federal or State law nor the State CEQA Guidelines establish thresholds that define when energy consumption is considered wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary. Compliance with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards would result in energy -efficient buildings. However, compliance with building codes does not adequately address all potential energy impacts during construction and operation. For example, energy would be required to transport people and goods to and from the project site. Energy use is discussed by anticipated use type below.

Construction
During construction, operation of construction vehicles, worker vehicles, and equipment (e.g., generators) would require the use of fuel (gasoline and diesel) and electricity; energy consumption during construction would be temporary. The project would comply with CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9 which requires all diesel powered offroad equipment and on-road vehicles to be shut off when not in use or limit idling to five minutes. Project construction would be temporary and would result in a negligible increase in regional energy consumption. At this time, no utility relocations are anticipated; however, if they are determined necessary during final design they would be coordinated with individual utility owners. If any utility relocations are necessary, they would be relocated within the proposed project area and require temporary and intermittent energy disruption within the area. All utilities would be restored following construction of the project.

Operational
Operation of the project would require utility tie-in for pedestrian signal beacons and new lights at proposed access points; however, utility usage is not anticipated to cause a strain on existing infrastructure. Pedestrian signal beacons and new streetlights would be built to be energy efficient and would be regularly maintained to ensure facilities are not wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessarily consuming energy, or wasteful of energy resources . Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on energy resources and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The City’s goal is to reduce the per capita regional GHG emissions to net zero by 2045, equal to a 100 percent decrease from 1990’s GHG emission levels(City of Sacramento, 2024). As discussed in response (a) above, fuel consumption from construction vehicles and equipment would be temporary and would represent a negligible increase in regional energy consumption. The project would support the City’s emission reduction goal through the implementation of energy standard measures, such as complying with CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9 which requires all diesel powered offroad equipment and on-road

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
76 vehicles to be shut off when not in use or limit idling to five minutes. Compliance with energy standard measures would reduce energy usage. Once operational, pedestrian signal beacons and new streetlights at proposed access points would require energy usage; however, energy usage is anticipated to be negligible and would be energy efficient. The project would support the General Plan’s goals and policies related to encouraging non-motorized vehicles by providing convenient infrastructure for bicyclists (City of Sacramento, 2024). The project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, the project would result in no potentially significant impact on state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to energy that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to energy would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
77 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Geologic Hazards
According to California Department of Conservation, no faults are located within the project area.

The nearest fault is the Midland fault located approximately 15 miles southwest of the project area (California Department of Conservation, 2010) . In addition, the project area is not within a landslide zone or liquefaction zone (California Department of Conservation, 2022). Soils The project area is located on top of the east levee crown, and extends into up to six neighborhood connections via access points, and also includes pedestrian improvements at three intersections.

The multi -use trail would be built on a n existing level gravel road currently used for levee maintenance and emergency vehicles. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Services, two soil units underlay the project area: Laugenour -Urban land complex, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes and Valpac -Urban land complex, partially drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes. Soil textures within the project area have moderate to high erosion susceptibility. In addition, soils in the project area have low to moderate shrink swell potential (Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2016).

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact is considered significant if it allows a project to be built that will either introduce geologic or seismic hazards by allowing the construction of the project on such a site without protection against those hazards.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 20 40 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.7 of the Master EIR evaluated the potential effects related to seismic hazards, underlying soil characteristics, slope stability, erosion, existing mineral resources and paleontological resources in the city.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on soil erosion (Impact 4.7-1), geologic or seismic hazards (Impact 4-7.2), mineral resources (Impact 4.7-3 and 4.7-4), and paleontological Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

A. Would the project allow a project to be built that will either introduce geologic or seismic hazards by
allowing the construction of the project on such a site without protection against those hazards?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
78 resources (Impact 4.7-5 and 4.7-7). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Element and Historic and Cultural Resources Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-1.4 Construction Site Impacts. The City shall require new development to protect the quality of water bodies and natural drainage systems through site design (e.g., cluster development), source controls, stormwater treatment, runoff reduction measures, best management practices (BMPs), Low Impact Development (LID), and hydromodification strategies to avoid or minimize disturbances of natural water bodies and natural drainage systems caused by development, implement measures to protect areas from erosion and sediment loss, and continue to require construction contractors to comply with the City’s erosion and sediment control ordinance and stormwater management and discharge control ordinance.
• ERC-7.1 Expansive Soils and Liquefaction. In areas of expansive soils and high liquefaction risk, the City shall continue to require that project proponents submit geotechnical investigation reports and demonstrate that the project conforms to all recommended mitigation measures prior to City approval. • HCR-1.1 Preservation of Historic and Cultural Resources, Landscapes, and Site Features.

The City will continue to promote the preservation, restoration, enhancement, and recognition of historic and cultural resources throughout the city Application of these policies would reduce Impacts 4.7-1 through 4.7-5 and 4.7-7 in Chapter 4.7, Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level.

Cumulative impacts contributing to the loss of a known mineral resource or of a locally-important mineral resource area would have no impact (Impact 4.7-6). The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and the Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to geology and soils. However, regarding erosion, the following mitigation measure would be implemented.

Mitigation Measure 6.6-1 Run-Off and Erosion Control for Public Access Routes and Parking
The following program level mitigation measures are standard procedures for reducing runoff and erosion which may be applied as appropriate to most facility developments. Once designs are developed for each facility, detailed project specific environmental review may identify refinements or additions to these mitigations based on the specifics of the project. • To the extent possible, use indigenous plants to landscape new and/or enlarged parking facilities and create a vegetation buffer to collect and treat such parking lot runoff before it enters the river.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
79 • For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, incorporate into the drainage plan inlet catch-basins containing grease/sediment traps. • For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, implement a parking lot cleaning and maintenance program designed to minimized the introduction of toxic materials into the Sacramento River from parking lot runoff. Instruct maintenance personnel to promptly clean any oil/grease or other toxic deposits discovered on the premises.
• Require erosion control and on-going maintenance in order to prevent and repair damage and erosion caused by use. Implement trail maintenance and erosion control measures and monitor for effectiveness.
• Implement landscape maintenance program to integrate BMPs which eliminate, reduce and minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides which contribute to non-point source pollution.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Would the project allow a project to be built that will either introduce geologic or seismic hazards by allowing the construction of the project on such a site without protection against those hazards?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project area is not within a fault, landslide zone, or liquefaction zone (California Department of Conservation, 2022) . The project area is underlain by soils with moderate to high erosion potential. The project would comply with General Plan Policy ERC-7.1 which would require a geotechnical investigation to determine geological hazards. In addition, M itigation Measure 6.6-1 included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR would be implemented to reduce erosion. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to geologic or seismic hazards and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to geology and soils that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to geology and soils would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
80 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The city of Sacramento is located within the SVAB which is part of the SMAQMD. The Sacramento Valley is bound by the North Coast Mountain Ranges to the west and the Northern Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east. The valley is relatively flat and approximately 25 feet above sea level.

The climate in the Sacramento Valley is characterized by mild, rainy winters and hot, dry summers. Annual daily temperatures may range by 20ºF with summer highs over 100ºF and winter lows are often below 32ºF. The typical annual rainfall average is about 20 inches.

Because the city of Sacramento is in a valley basin, the surrounding mountains create a barrier to airflow, which can trap air pollutants in the valley. Air stagnation generally occurs during autumn and early winter when large high-pressure cells dominate the region. During this time, the absence of surface wind and reduced vertical air flow restrict the entry of fresh air into the valley and allows pollutants to accumulate. When combined with temperature inversions that trap cooler air and pollutants near the ground, surface concentrations of pollutants reach their peak.

In the warmer months (May to October), mornings often have stagnant air or light winds. In the evening a Delta breeze usually comes in from the southwest to carry airborne pollutants northward out of the Sacramento Valley. However, from July to September, the "Schultz Eddy" phenomenon occurs for about half of the day. Instead of carrying pollutants away, the Schultz Eddy causes the wind pattern to circulate back southward, intensifying pollution levels and increasing the likelihood of violating federal or state standards. The Schultz Eddy usually dissipates around noon when the Delta breeze resumes.

Greenhouse Gases
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. GHGs are responsible for “trapping” solar radiation in the earth’s atmosphere, a phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect. Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are CO
2, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

A. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?

B. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
81 and sulfur hexafluoride. Human-caused emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are believed responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known as global climate change or global warming. Emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change are attributable, in large part, to human activities associated with on-road and off-road transportation, industrial/manufacturing, electricity generation by utilities and consumption by end users, residential and commercial on- site fuel usage, and agriculture and forestry. Emissions of CO 2 are, largely, byproducts of fossil fuel combustion.

The quantity of GHGs in the atmosphere responsible for climate change is not precisely known, but it is enormous. No single project alone would measurably contribute to an incremental change in the global average temperature or to global or local climates or microclimates. From the standpoint of CEQA, GHG impacts relative to global climate change are inherently cumulative.

Several regulations currently exist related to GHG emissions, predominantly Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Executive Order S -3-05, and Senate Bill (SB) 32. AB 32 requires that Statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Executive Order S -3-05 established the GHG emission reduction target for the State to reduce to the 2000 level by 2010, the 1990 level by 2020 (AB 32), 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030, and to 80 percent below the 1990 level by 2050 (SB 32).

To meet the statewide GHG emission targets, the City adopted the CA AP on February 14, 2012 to comply with AB 32, which was most recently updated on February 27, 2024. The CAAP identified how the City and the broader community could reduce Sacramento’s GHG emissions and included reduction targets, strategies, and specific actions. In 2024, the City adopted the 2040 General Plan Update. The update incorporated measures and actions from the CAAP, which includes citywide policies and programs that are supportive of reducing GHG emissions.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact is considered significant if it fails to satisfy the requirements of the City’s CAAP.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.8 of the Master EIR evaluated the potential effects related to Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on GHG emissions that would contribute to climate change on a cumulative basis and conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation (Impact

4.8-1). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-4.5 Construction Emissions. The City shall ensure that construction and grading activities minimize short -term impacts to air quality by employing appropriate measures and best practices. Refer to Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs) recommended by the SMAQMD.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
82 Application of this policy would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.8, Greenhouse Gasses, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR GHG emissions were not discussed within the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway EIR as this topic was not part of the CEQA Environmental Checklist at the time of analysis . CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4, effective December 28, 2018, added the analysis of GHG emissions to the CEQA process. Although the analysis of GHG emissions was added to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 in 2018, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15007, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines are only applicable prospectively. A discussion of GHG emissions has been incorporated, although it is not required in this Initial Study.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
Would the project:

A. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Construction of the project would result in short-term GHG emissions from vehicles and construction equipment use for nine to 12 months.

The small scale of the project is not anticipated to result in significant GHG emissions and the project would abide by the standard BMPs, recommendations set forth by the City’s Policies ERC-

4.3, ERC -4.5, M -1.1, M -1.2, M -1.14, M -1.17, from the Master EIR and CAAP. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to construction GHG emissions.

B. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The City ‘s CAAP is the newest regulatory document developed to mitigate and adapt to climate change in the city of Sacramento (City of Sacramento, 2024). The CAAP has structured all of its goals/measures/policies to reduce GHG emissions to net zero by 2045. Applicable plan goals, strategies and actions are as follows:
2045 Climate Action Goal: Reduce Sacramento’s per capita GHG emissions to net zero MT CO
2e per person by 2045, equal to 100 percent below 1990 levels.

Using a per capita emissions target means that regardless of unforeseen population changes, the City’s target of net zero MT CO 2e per person will remain unchanged. This approach allows the City to continue to grow, while focusing on decarbonizing systems rather than limiting growth that could compromise new housing and job opportunities and potentially increase regional emissions.

TR-1 Improve Active Transportation Infrastructure to Achieve 6% Active Transportation Mode Share by 2030 and 12% by 2045
TR-1.1 Implement the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan by constructing a comprehensive, connected network of safe and accessible (low-stress) bikeways, on- and off-street, within and across neighborhoods totaling 40 miles of bike lanes, 48 miles of bike

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
83 routes, 40 miles of buffered bike lanes, 18 miles of separated bikeways, and 127 miles of shared-used paths.

TR-1.2 Implement the improvements in the 2006 Pedestrian Master Plan by providing a connected, safe and accessible (low -stress) pedestrian network, prioritized based on High Injury Network (crash data), school access, equity and community needs.

Low-stress pedestrian network includes crossings, sidewalks, and other paths.

TR-2.11 Implement the City’s adopted plans including modal/Citywide plans and corridor/area plans (such as the Bicycle Master Plan, Broadway Complete Streets, and 65th Street Area Plan).

The project would support and comply with guidelines established in the 2040 General Plans and the CAAP for the City as well as support the city’s efforts to comply with state regulations. In addition, the project is included in the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan and implementation of the project would support measures TR -1.1 and TR-2.11. Therefore, the project would support plans, policies, and/or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
GHG emissions were not addressed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR; however, no potentially significant impacts related to greenhouse gas have been identified. In addition, no significant environmental impact related to GHG emissions would result from the project, no new mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
84 HAZARDS

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
According to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), no hazardous materials and/or hazardous waste sites are located within the project area. Four sites are located with a half-mile of the project area. One site is categorized under the Cleanup Program as open at the Riverside Plaza Shopping Center, however, no potential contaminants of concern are specified. The three other sites include two closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup sites, and one closed Cleanup Program Site (State Water Resources Control Board, 2022) . In addition, according to the California Department of Toxic Substance Control, no toxic substance sites are located within a half-mile of the project area (Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2022).

Federal regulations and regulations adopted by the SMAQMD apply to the identification and treatment of hazardous materials during demolition and construction activities. Failure to comply with these regulations respecting asbestos may result in a Notice of Violation being issued by the AQMD and civil penalties under state and/or federal law, in addition to possible action by U.S.

EPA under federal law.

Federal law covers a number of different activities involving asbestos, including demolition and renovation of structures (40 CFR § 61.145).

SMAQMD Rule 902 and Commercial Structures
The work practices and administrative requirements of Rule 902 apply to all commercial renovations and demolitions where the amount of Regulated Asbestos -Containing Material (RACM) is greater than:

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

8. HAZARDS
Would the project:

A. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians,
construction workers) to existing contaminated soil
during construction activities?

B. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians,
construction workers) to asbestos -containing
materials or other hazardous materials?

C. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians,
construction workers) to existing contaminated
groundwater during dewatering activities?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
85 • 260 lineal feet of RACM on pipes, or
• 160 square feet of RACM on other facility components, or • 35 cubic feet of RACM that could not be measured otherwise.

The administrative requirements of Rule 902 apply to any demolition of commercial structures, regardless of the amount of RACM. To determine the amount of RACM in a structure, Rule 902 requires that a survey be conducted prior to demolition or renovation unless:
• T he structure is otherwise exempt from the rule, or
• Any material that has a propensity to contain asbestos (so- called "suspect material") is treated as if it is RACM.

Surveys must be done by a licensed asbestos consultant and require laboratory analysis.

Asbestos consultants are listed in the phone book under "Asbestos Consultants." Large industrial facilities may use non-licensed employees if those employees are trained by the U.S. EPA.

Questions regarding the use of non-licensed employees should be directed to the AQMD.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact is considered significant if the proposed project would:
• expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to existing contaminated soil during construction activities;
• expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to asbestos-containing materials or other hazardous materials; or
• expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to existing contaminated groundwater during dewatering activities.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The 2040 Master EIR evaluated effects of development on hazardous materials, emergency response and aircraft crash hazards. See Chapter 4.9.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on the exposure of people to contaminated soils (Impact 4.9-1), haz ards and hazardous building materials (Impact 4.9-2), contaminated groundwater (Impact 4.9-3), obstruction of emergency response access and affect response times of emergency responders (Impact 4.9-4 and Impact 4.9-6), and exposure of people or structures to loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (Impact 4.9-5 and 4.9-7). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Justice Element and Public Facilities and Safety Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• EJ-1.5 Compatibility with Hazardous Materials Facilities. The City shall ensure that future development of treatment, storage, or disposal facilities is consistent with the County’s

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
86 Hazardous Waste Management Plan, and that land uses near these facilities, or proposed sites for the storage or use of hazardous materials, are compatible with their operation. • EJ-1.7 Transportation Routes. The City shall restrict transport of hazardous materials within Sacramento to designated routes.
• EJ-1.8 Site Contamination. The City shall ensure buildings and sites are or have been investigated for the presence of hazardous materials and/or waste contamination before development, where applicable. The City shall continue to require remediation and construction techniques for adequate protection of construction workers, future occupants, adjacent residents, and the environment, and ensure they are adequately protected from hazards associated with contamination.
• PFS-1.8 Fire Hazards. The City shall continue to require private property owners to remove excessive/overgrown vegetation (e.g., trees, shrubs, weeds) and rubbish to the satisfaction of the Fire Department to prevent and minimize fire risks to surrounding properties. The City shall continue to remove excessive/overgrown vegetation from City - owned property.
• PFS-2.1 Hazard Mitigation Planning. The City shall continue to use the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, Comprehensive Floodplain Management Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, and Operational Area Plan to guide actions and investments addressing disasters such as flooding, dam or levee failure, hazardous material spills, epidemics, fires, extreme weather, major transportation accidents, earthquakes, and terrorism • PFS-2.3 Evacuation Routes. The City shall partner with Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions on measures to protect critical evacuation routes such as I-5, I-80, Highway 50, and State Route 99 and work with local agencies to develop contingency plans for operations when these and other roads are inoperable due to flooding or wildfire.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.9, Hazards and Public Safety, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to existing contaminated soil during construction activities?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project area is not used for agricultural or adjacent to agricultural land; therefore, it is unlikely soil within the project area is contaminated with pesticides and herbicides. The project area is located in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood, the multi -use trail would be built predominantly on top of the east levee crown, which is currently a level gravel road used for levee maintenance and emergency vehicles. The gravel road has not likely served a high enough number of vehicles to result in the presence of

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
87 aerially deposited lead (ADL). The project would also create up to six neighborhood connections to the trail via access points and includes three pedestrian crossings on Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and on Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way. These improvements would be made on fully developed land and disturbed ground between homes, within parks, and on exiting roadways. While there is potential for some ADL to be present along the roadways, the addition of pedestrian crossing related improvements is not anticipated to result in contamination that would expose residents, pedestrians, or construction workers to hazardous materials. In addition, roadway paint or thermoplastic markings for pedestrian crossings wou ld meet current Caltrans Standards and would not release ADL overtime.

Therefore, the project would result in no potentially significant impact related to contaminated soil and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to asbestos- containing materials or other hazardous materials?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. According to the SWRCB, no hazardous materials and/or hazardous waste sites are located within the project area. Four sites are located within a half-mile of the project area; however, three of these sites are closed cases and the fourth site was determined to contain no potential contaminants of concern. The project would not encroach on these hazardous materials sites. At this time, no utility relocations are anticipated; however, if they are determined necessary during final design they would be coordinated with individual utility owners. If any utility relocations are necessary, they would be relocated within the proposed project area. If utility relocations would include the demolition of a structure with the potential to contain asbestos or lead based paints, such as the demolition of utility poles, debris would be handled in compliance with Caltrans Standards and would prevent the release of hazardous chemical materials and harmful exposure to people. Therefore, the project would result in no potentially significant impact related to hazardous materials and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

C. Expose people (e.g., residents, pedestrians, construction workers) to existing contaminated groundwater during dewatering activities?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project area is located on top of the east levee crown, at up to six neighborhood connections, and on Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and on Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way.

Construction of the project would not require work in the levee or disturbance of groundwater. In addition, construction would not include dewatering contaminated groundwater. Therefore, the project would result in no impact related to contaminated groundwater and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkw ay Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
88 FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to hazards that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to hazards would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
89 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Sacramento River is the primary river of northern California. The river drains approximately 26,500 square miles from Siskiyou County south to Sacramento County through the Sacramento Valley and ends in San Francisco Bay. The project area contains small portions of the Sacramento River along the waterside of the Sacramento River east levee, and a short section of the Pocket Canal. The Pocket canal collects stormwater and channels water into Sump Station #132, which then pumps the canal water into the Sacramento River.

The City utilizes two water treatment facilities, namely the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant, to treat surface water diverted from the Sacramento and American Rivers. Additionally, the City extracts water from groundwater wells located within its water service area. To distribute drinking water to its retail and wholesale customers, the City maintains an extensive network of water pipelines, tanks, and pumping facilities. The main sources of recharge to the groundwater within the Sacramento Basin are rivers and streams that drain from the Sierra Nevada and the Coast Ranges and precipitation.

Groundwater discharge occurs through pumping for and municipal water supply, evaporation in areas where the water table is shallow, and through discharge to streams (U.S. Geological Survey, 2011).

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For purposes of this Initial Study, impacts to hydrology and water quality may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the p roposed project would result in the following impacts:

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

A. Substantially degrade water quality and violate any
water quality objectives set by the State Water
Resources Control Board, due to increases in
sediments and other contaminants generated by
construction and/or development of the project?

B. Substantially increase the exposure of people and/or property to the risk of injury and damage in the event
of a 100-year flood?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
90 • substantially degrade water quality and violate any water quality objectives set by the State Water Resources Control Board, due to increases in sediments and other contaminants generated by construction and/or development of the Specific Plan or • substantially increase the exposure of people and/or property to the risk of injury and damage in the event of a 100-year flood.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.10 of the Master EIR evaluates the potential effects of the 2040 General Plan as they relate to surface water, groundwater, flooding, stormwater and water quality.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on water quality degradation due to construction and/or activities (Impacts 4.10-1 and 4.10-3), and exposure of people to flood risks (Impact 4.10- 2 and 4.10-4). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Justice Element and Public Facilities and Safety Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-1.1 Clean Water Programs. The City shall promote environmental stewardship and pollution prevention activities with outreach, assistance, and incentives for residents and businesses.
• ERC-1.2 Clean Watershed. The City shall continue ongoing Sacramento and American River source water protection efforts (e.g., Pups in the Park, Keep Our Waters Clean), based on watershed sanitary survey recommendations, in partnership with private watershed organizations and local, State, and federal agencies • ERC-1.3 Runoff Contamination. The City shall protect surface water and groundwater resources from contamination from point (single location) and non-point (many diffuse locations) sources, as required by federal and State regulations. • ERC-1.4 Construction Site Impacts. The City shall require new development to protect the quality of water bodies and natural drainage systems through site design (e.g., cluster development), source controls, stormwater treatment, runoff reduction measures, best management practices (BMPs), Low Impact Development (LID), and hydromodification strategies to avoid or minimize disturbances of natural water bodies and natural drainage systems caused by development, implement measures to protect areas from erosion and sediment loss, and continue to require construction contractors to comply with the City’s erosion and sediment control ordinance and stormwater management and discharge control ordinance.
• ERC-5.2 Reducing Storm Runoff. The City shall encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations, minimize impervious coverage, utilize pervious paving materials, utilize low impact development (LID) strategies, and utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce stormwater runoff.
• ERC-6.2 Flood Management Planning Coordination. The City shall work with local, regional, State, and federal agencies to do the following:

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
91 o Maintain an adequate information base; monitor long-term flood safety; and assess long-term flood event probabilities;
o Prepare risk assessments that account for urbanization and the effects of climate change;
o Identify strategies to mitigate flooding impacts; and o Participate in regional planning efforts.
• ERC-6.6 Flood Regulations. The City shall continue to regulate new development in accordance with State requirements for 200-year level of flood protection and federal requirements for 100-year level of flood protection.
• ERC-6.7 Flood Hazard Risk Evaluation. The City shall require evaluation of potential flood hazards prior to approval of development projects and shall require new development located within a Special Flood Hazard Area to be designed to meet federal and State regulations and minimize the risk of damage in the event of a flood. • ERC-6.8 Interagency Levee Management. The City shall coordinate with local, regional, State, and federal agencies to ensure new and existing levees are adequate in providing flood protection and coordinate to achieve local certification of levees for 200-y ear flood protection by 2025.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.10, Hydrology, Water Quality and Flooding, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level . The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and the Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that impacts related to water quality and hydrology would need to be assessed on a project by project basis. However, policies related to runoff and erosion were included in the Sacramento River Parkway Plan to reduce impacts:

E1 Reduce indiscriminate foot and bicycle traffic on levee slopes by providing trails, fencing and signage to channel traffic to key points.

E2 Avoid use of soil sterilents or herbicides over large areas as this would encourage surface erosion.

E3 Indigenous grasses and other native vegetation should be used to stabilize the soil and reduce rainwater runoff.

E4 Close portions of the Parkway as needed to restore eroded areas.

In addition, the following mitigation measures were included to address potential impacts and are applicable to the project.

6.6-1 For Mitigation Run-Off and Erosion Control for Public Access Routes and Parking The following program level mitigation measures are standard procedures for reducing runoff and erosion which may be applied as appropriate to most facility developments. Once designs

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
92 are developed for each facility, detailed project specific environmental review may identify refinements or additions to these mitigations based on the specifics of the project.

1. To the extent possible, use indigenous plants to landscape new and/or enlarged parking facilities and create a vegetation buffer to collect and treat such parking lot runoff before it enters the river.

2. For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, incorporate into the drainage plan inlet catch-basins containing grease/sediment traps.

3. For new parking lot areas or large impervious surface areas, implement a parking lot cleaning and maintenance program designed to minimized the introduction of toxic materials into the Sacramento River from parking lot runoff. Instruct maintenance personnel to promptly clean any oil/grease or other toxic deposits discovered on the premises.

4. Require erosion control and on-going maintenance in order to prevent and repair damage and erosion caused by use. Implement trail maintenance and erosion control measures and monitor for effectiveness.

5. Implement landscape maintenance program to integrate B MPs which eliminate, reduce and minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides which contribute to non-point source pollution.

6.6-2 Mitigation for Construction Water Quality Impacts The following mitigation measure will reduce program level impacts to a less -that-significant level:

1. Restrict any construction grading to the dry season between May 1 and September 30.

2. All construction activities shall be done in accordance with the City's Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control (GESC) Ordinance 93-068 and shall include grading techniques which control excessive runoff during construction.

3. Dust and soil erosion control measures shall be implemented during the construction phase of the proposed project. These measures are intended to minimize soil erosion and fugitive dust emissions. Suggested measures include: a. watering exposed soils; b. covering exposed soils with straw or other materials; c. Adopting measures to prevent construction vehicles from tracking mud onto adjacent roadways; d. Covering trucks containing loose and dry soil; e. Providing interim drainage measures during the construction period.

4. In non-pavement areas, any vegetation covered or removed during construction (including slope protection) should be replanted following construction.

5. Depending upon the magnitude and location of individual Parkway projects, consideration should be given to installation of a silt curtain during construction of the slope protection in order to minimize increases in turbidity resulting from construction activities in the water.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
93 6. All construction materials which have the potential to contaminate the riparian habitat-- such as fuels, paints, solvents, cement additives --should be identified in advance of construction. A plan should be provided by each contractor using such materials covering storage, use and clean up for all such materials. An emergency response plan should be provided by the lead contractor or supervising agency to cover spills of such materials.

7. Post construction BMPs as approved by the Department of Utilities for the long -term enhancement of stormwater run-off shall be implemented.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Substantially degrade water quality and violate any water quality objectives set by the State Water Resources Control Board, due to increases in sediments and other contaminants generated by construction and/or development of the project? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project includes the construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi-use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood. The project would also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park and pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk across Pocket Road , just south of Country River Way . In addition, a two -way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The cycle track would not require changes to the bridge deck or substructure above the Pocket Canal. Sidewalks on both sides would be maintained, but the sidewalk on the east side may need to be shifted or modified to accommodate the other proposed bike facility improvements. Improvements would be made within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood and would not require construction activities within the river or Pocket Canal. While construction of the trail would slightly increase impervious cover near the Sacramento River, existing conditions of the river levee are similar in nature and impact of imperious cover is not anticipated to change water quality. Standard BMPs would be implemented during construction to ensure protection of water quality from construction stormwater runoff. In addition, the project would implement mitigation measures included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR reducing impacts related to erosion, runoff, and degradation of water quality. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on water quality and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Substantially increase the exposure of people and/or property to the risk of injury and damage in the event of a 100-year flood?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel 06067C0170H and Panel 06067C0285H (effective August 16, 2012), the multi-use trail would be built within Zone AE, which is an area in which the floodway is the channel of a stream that must be kept free of encroachment so that one percent annual chance of flood can be carried without substantial increases in flood heights (FEMA, 2012). However, according to the FEMA flood zone map, the project is located within a reduced flood risk area. The neighborhood connections via access points and pedestrian

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
94 crossings would be constructed within Zone X, which is an area with reduced flood risk due to the levee. The project would not include the construction of structures that would impede flood flows within the project area or be placed in a 100-year flood zone. The project would not affect the flood risk in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood and would not impact levee inspections during high river periods. The paved trail would facilitate access for levee inspections. Recreational trails may be temporarily closed when needed by the flood control agencies. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to the 100-year flood zone and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to hydrology and water quality that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to hydrology and water quality would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
95 NOISE

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Noise
The project area is within the Pocket Community Plan Area which is generally urban. The nearest sensitive receptors are residential properties located between approximately 10 feet and 30 feet from the proposed project improvements . The primary sources of noise in the project area are from residential land uses and traffic along local roadways surrounding the project area.

According to the City’s General Plan, the project area is designated as Suburban Neighborhood Low and Parks and Open Space. Allowed exterior noise levels within a Suburban Neighborhood Low land use is 60 A -weighted decibels (dBA). Allowed exterior noise levels within a Parks and Open Space land use is 70 dBA (City of Sacramento, 2024).

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

10. NOISE
Would the project:

A. Result in exterior noise levels in the project area that are above the upper value of the normally acceptable
category for various land uses due to the project’s
noise level increases?

B. Result in residential interior noise levels of 45 dBA Ldn or greater caused by noise level increases due to
the project?

C. Result in construction noise levels that exceed the
standards in the City of Sacramento general plan or
Noise Ordinance?

D. Permit existing and/or planned residential and
commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak-
particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second
due to project construction?

E. Permit adjacent residential and commercial areas to
be exposed to vibration peak particle velocities
greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway
traffic and rail operations?

F. Permit historic buildings and archaeological sites to be exposed to vibration- peak-particle velocities
greater than 0.2 inches per second due to project
construction and highway traffic?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
96 Construction equipment can generate intermittent noise levels ranging from 77 to 85 dBA maximum sound level (Lmax) at a distance of 50 feet (see Table 2).

Table 2 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Vibration
The general human response to different levels of groundborne peak particle velocity (PPV) is described below in Table 3 while groundborne vibration levels that could induce potential damage to buildings are identified in Table 4. Examples of typical construction equipment related to roadway projects and their associated vibration levels are identified in Table 5.

Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration from traffic is rarely perceptible.

Construction Equipment
Noise Level (dBA at 50 feet)
Lmax Leq
Bulldozers 82 78
Concrete Pump Truck 81 74
Dump Trucks 77 73
Backhoe 78 74
Pneumatic Tools 85 82
Front End Loader 79 75
Roller 80 73
Compressors 78 74
Paver 77 74
Excavators 81 77
Grader 85 81
Scrapers 84 80

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
97 Table 3 Human Response to Levels of Groundborne Vibration Table 4 Groundborne Vibration Damage Potential Criteria Table 5 Construction Equipment-Related Groundborne Vibration Human Response
Maximum PPV in Inches per Second
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely Perceptible 0.035 0.01
Distinctly Perceptible 0.24 0.04
Strongly Perceptible 0.9 0.1
Severe 2 0.4
Source: (California Department of Transportation, 2013) Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV in Inches per Second
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely Fragile Historic
Buildings, Ruins, Ancient
Monuments

0.12 0.08
Fragile Buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and Some Old Buildings 0.5 0.25
Older Residential Structures 0.5 0.3
New Residential Structures 1 0.5
Modern Industrial/Commercial
Buildings 2 0.5
Source: (California Department of Transportation, 2013) Equipment PPV at 25 feet (inches per second)
Vibratory roller 0.21
Large bulldozer 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.019
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
Source: (California Department of Transportation, 2013)

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
98 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For purposes of this Initial Study, impacts due to noise may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the proposed project would result in the following impacts that remain significant after implementation of general plan policies:
• result in exterior noise levels in the project area that are above the upper value of the normally acceptable category for various land uses due to the project’s noise level increases;
• result in residential interior noise levels of 45 dBA L dn or greater caused by noise level
increases due to the project;
• result in construction noise levels that exceed the standards in the City’s Noise Ordinance; • permit existing and/or planned residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak-particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to project construction; • permit adjacent residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations; or • permit historic buildings and archaeological sites to be exposed to vibration-peak-particle velocities greater than 0.2 inches per second due to project construction and highway traffic.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR evaluated the potential for development under the 2040 General Plan to increase noise levels in the community. New noise sources include vehicular traffic, aircraft, railways, light rail and stationary sources.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on groundborne vibration or noise levels (Impact 4.11- 3) and airport or aircraft noise levels (Impact 4.11-4). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Environmental Justice Element and Public Facilities and Safety Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• ERC-10.1 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, to the extent feasible.
• ERC-10.2 Noise Source Control. The City should require noise impacts in new developments to be controlled at the noise source where feasible, as opposed to the receptor end, using techniques including but not limited to the following: • Site design, • Building orientation, • Building design, and • Hours of operation. • ERC-10.3 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 dBA Ldn for residential, transient lodgings, hospitals, nursing homes, and other uses where people normally sleep; and • 45 dBA Leq (peak hour with windows closed) for office buildings and similar uses.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
99 • ERC-10.4 Interior Noise Review for Multiple, Loud, Short-Term Events. In cases where new development is proposed in areas subject to frequent, high-noise events (such as aircraft over -flights, or train and truck passbys), the City shall evaluate interior n oise impacts at proposed sensitive receptors. The evaluation shall incorporate measures necessary to meet the 45 dBA Ldn standard.
• ERC-10.5 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, low -impact tools, modifying operations, increasing setback distance, vibration monitoring) to ensure acceptable interior vibration levels at nearby residential and commercial uses based on the current City or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) criteria.
• ERC-10.7 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.
• ERC-10.8 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.
• ERC-10.9 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, cons truction equipment, and sound attenuation devices.

Application of these policies would reduce Impacts 4.11-3 and 4.11-4 in Chapter 4.11, Noise and Vibration, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level.

Impacts for temporary increases in ambient noise levels (Impact 4.11-2) were found to be potentially significant; however, would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-1. NOI-1 describes construction noise levels, construction equipment regulations, construction equipment idling periods, and for major construction projects - the designation of an on-site disturbance coordinator.

Noise impacts for permanent increases in ambient noise levels (Impact 4.11-1) and cumulative impacts to the ambient noise and vibration environment (Impact 4.11-5) were found to be significant and unavoidable. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and the Master EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
100
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that impacts related to noise would need to be assessed on a project-by-project basis. The following mitigation measures were included to address potential operational noise impacts and are applicable to the project.

Mitigation Measure 6.4-1 Noise Generation Project Specific

1. Sound barriers (fencing and landscaping) shall be used, where feasible, to buffer residents from Parkway user noise. (However, note that such barriers are not permitted by CVFPB to be placed on the levee crown.)

2. All access points and the off-street trail system shall be closed to the public from sunset to sunrise to reduce evening noise.

3. Site off-street trails as far away from residential receivers as possible without impacting wildlife habitat value.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Result in exterior noise levels in the project area that are above the upper value of the normally acceptable category for various land uses due to the project’s noise level increases?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project area is located adjacent to various sensitive receptors, including single -family residential properties and schools such as Camillia Waldorf School and Brookfield Private School, which are adjacent to the project, and may be disturbed by noise from construction equipment and activities during the construction period; however, the project would not require use of construction techniques that would generate adverse construction-related noise, such as pile driving, demolition, blasting, etc. Additionally, the Sacramento City Code 8.68.200 prohibits the use of any power tools or construction equipment between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (City of Sacramento, 2021); construction-related nose would be limited to less -sensitive daytime hours. According to Table 2, construction equipment can generate intermittent noise levels ranging from 77 to 85 dBA L max at a distance of
50 feet. Project construction would be required to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance which establishes an allowable exterior noise level limit of 55 dBA sound level exceeded for 50 percent of the time of the measurement period (L 50) and 75 dBA Lmax during daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) hours and 50 dBA L50 and 70 dBA Lmax during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) for sources of noise which occur for more than 30 minutes per hour (Section 8.68.060).

The nearest residential structures are located 10 feet from the project area in various places.

Although residents would be located near construction, construction techniques that would generate adverse construction-related noise, such as pile driving, demolition, blasting, etc. are not included as part of the project. Construction noise would be temporary and intermittent during the nine to 12 months of construction. Construction noise is not anticipated to exceed acceptable noise levels for various land uses or interior noise levels. In addition, the project is not anticipated to have a quantifiable effect on long -term traffic noise levels because it would not increase long term vehicle traffic capacity in the area and would operate as a multi -use recreation trail for pedestrians and bicyclists. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
101
related to noise and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Result in residential interior noise levels of 45 dBA Ldn or greater caused by noise level increases due to the project?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

C. Result in construction noise levels that exceed the standards in the City of Sacramento general plan or Noise Ordinance?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

D. Permit existing and/or planned residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak-particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to project construction?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Examples of typical construction equipment related to roadway projects and their associated vibration levels are identified in Table 5. As shown on Table 5, vibration levels 25 feet away from equipment ranges from 0.003 PPV to 0.21 PPV. The project includes the construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi-use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood.

The project would also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park and pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk across Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way. In addition, a two-way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The cycle track would not require changes to the bridge deck or substructure above the Pocket Canal. Sidewalks on both sides would be maintained, but the sidewalk on the east side may need to be shifted or modified to accommodate the other proposed bike facility improvements. Excavation would be required for the installation of the trail access point lights and pedestrian beacons which may cause some vibration. While construction equipment would be required to build the project, the project would not include blasting, or other high vibration activities. Vibration impacts would be temporary and minimal. Vibrations levels are not anticipated to be at the levels for typical roadway construction projects as described in Table 5. In addition, modern techniques and procedures would be implemented as described in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual to further minimize any construction related vibration (California Department of Transportation, 2020) . Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to vibration at 0.5 PPV and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkw ay Plan EIR.

E. Permit adjacent residential and commercial areas to be exposed to vibration peak particle velocities greater than 0.5 inches per second due to highway traffic and rail operations?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (d) above.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
102
F. Permit historic buildings and archaeological sites to be exposed to vibration-peak- particle velocities greater than 0.2 inches per second due to project construction and highway traffic?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. There are two properties, 7140 Pocket Road and 7250 Pocket Road, which are considered eligible for the NRHP and CRHR for this project only, and three archa eological resources identified within the project area which are eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a; GPA Consulting, 2025).

Construction equipment required would include earth moving equipment, concrete trucks, and miscellaneous twin axel vehicles . As shown on Table 5, vibration levels 25 feet away from equipment ranges from 0.003 PPV to 0.21 PPV. Construction of the project would be located over 40 feet away from the historic buildings located on 7140 Pocket Road and 7250 Pocket Road and vibration levels would not reach 0.2 inches per second. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, archaeological resources located within 25 feet of the project area would not experience physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the resource due to the construction of the project.

Excavation would be required for the installation of the trail access point lights and pedestrian beacons which may cause some vibration. In addition, while construction equipment would be required to build the project, the project would not include blasting, or other high vibration activities. Vibration impacts would be temporary and minimal and would not result in continuous vibration. Vibrations levels are not anticipated to be at the levels for typical roadway construction projects as described in Table 5 . In addition, modern techniques and procedures would be implemented as described in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual to further minimize any construction-related vibration (California Department of Transportation, 2020). Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to vibration at 0.2 PPV and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to noise that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to noise would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
103

PUBLIC SERVICES

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City’s Police Department operates within the city limits and has five police facilities throughout Sacramento. The closest police facility is located 3.2 miles northeast from the project area. The City’s Fire Department serv ices Sacramento and has 24 active stations located throughout the city of Sacramento. The nearest fire station is located 0.6 mile east from the project area.

The Sacramento City Unified School District provides 88 schools throughout a majority of the city; these schools include elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, charter schools, and adult schools. The closest schools are Camillia Waldorf School, which is adjacent to the project, Brookfield Private School, which is approximately 625 feet away from the project, and Genevieve F. Didion K-8 School located 0.2 mile east from the project area (Sacramento City Unified School District, 2022).

The Sacramento Public Library system includes 28 locations throughout the city. The closest library is the Robbie Waters Pocket Greenhaven Library located 1.2 miles southeast from the project area.

The City provides recreational services through 129 neighborhood parks, 56 community parks, 25 regional/citywide specialty parks, 14 open space areas, and 115 miles of shared-use paths.

The project area includes Garcia Bend Park, Zacharias Park and North Point Way River Access, and Sump Station #132.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact would be considered significant if the project resulted in the need for new or altered services related to fire protection, police protection, school facilities, or other governmental services beyond what was anticipated in the 2040 General Plan.

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

11. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

A. Would the project result in the need for new or altered services related to fire protection, police protection, school facilities, or other governmental services
beyond what was anticipated in the 2035 General
Plan?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
104
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR evaluated the potential effects of the 2040 General Plan on various public services. These include parks , police, fire protection, schools, libraries and emergency services (Chapter 4.12).

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on police (Impact 4.12-1), fire (Impacts 4.12-2 and

4.12-7), schools (Impact 4.12-3), libraries (Impact 4.12-4), recreational facilities (Impacts 4.12-5), and parks (Impact 4.12-6). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Public Facilities and Safety Element and the Youth, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• PFS-1.1 Crime and Law Enforcement. The City shall continue to work cooperatively with the community, regional law enforcement agencies, local government agencies, and other entities to provide quality police service that protects the long-term health, • PFS-1.5 CPTED Strategies. The City shall continue to promote Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) strategies in the design of new developments, including the following:
o Provision of adequate public lighting;
o Windows overlooking streets and parking lots; and
o The creation of paths to increase pedestrian activity within both private development projects and public facilities to enhance public safety. • PFS-1.8 Fire Hazards. The City shall continue to require private property owners to remove excessive/overgrown vegetation (e.g., trees, shrubs, weeds) and rubbish to the satisfaction of the Fire Department to prevent and minimize fire risks to surrounding properties. The City shall continue to remove excessive/overgrown vegetation from City - owned property.
• PFS-1.9 Equipment, Facilities, and Staffing. The City shall locate and maintain police and fire equipment, facilities, and staffing at locations and levels that allow for effective service delivery.
• PFS-1.16 Development Review. The City shall continue to require new development projects to incorporate safety features and include the Sacramento Police Department (SPD) and the Sacramento Fire Department (SFD) in the development review process to ensure that projects are designed and operated in a manner that minimizes the potential for criminal activity and fire hazards and maximizes the potential for responsive police and fire services.
• PFS-2.2 Critical Infrastructure. The City shall protect and maintain critical infrastructure such as emergency shelters, fire stations, police stations, emergency operations centers, communications networks, and other emergency service facilities and utilities to ensure

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
105
continuity of essential operations, including, but not limited to, uninterrupted public safety services during flooding, seismic, geologic, wildfire, and other hazards. • PFS-2.3 Evacuation Routes. The City shall partner with Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions on measures to protect critical evacuation routes such as I-5, I-80, Highway 50, and State Route 99 and work with local agencies to develop contingency plans for operations when these and other roads are inoperable due to flooding or wildfire. • YPRO-1.1 Range of Experiences. The City shall provide a range of parks and recreational facilities and strive to ensure an equitable distribution of high -quality facilities throughout Sacramento.
• YPRO-1.3 Parkland Service Standard. The City shall evaluate, as needed, the equitable increase of public park acreage to serve the needs of the current and future residents with high-quality facilities. The City shall continue to strive to achieve a parkland service standard of 8.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which includes neighborhood parks, community parks, regional parks, open space, and parkways. • YPRO-1.8 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:
o Publicly accessible, privately-owned open spaces and plazas; o Rooftop play courts and gardens;
o Freeway underpass, utility corridor, and wide landscape medians; o Conversion of rails to rails with trails;
o Pocket parks and pedestrian areas in the public right-of-way; and o The provision of neighborhood and community -serving recreational facilities in regional parks.
• YPRO-1.11 Enhancing Access to Parks. The City shall pursue strategies that increase community access to parks and recreational facilities, including the following:
o Expanding joint-use agreements with schools and educational institutions; o Removing of physical barriers to access (e.g., fences); and o Providing a choice of legible and navigable routes to and from park areas through the installation of new or improved multi -use shared paths, wayfinding signage, and coordination with public transit.
• YPRO-1.13 Park Safety. The City shall continue to use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) landscaping and lighting, and efforts that support the Park Ranger program, to ensure that parks and open spaces are designed and maintained with safety as a priority without compromising accessible and inclusionary design.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
106
• YPRO-1.15 Path Connections. The City shall maintain existing and pursue new connections to local and regional shared-use paths, especially when connecting to public parkland.
• YPRO-1.16 River Parkways. The City shall collaborate with the Park Ranger program, the Sacramento County Department of Regional Parks and other agencies and organizations to secure funding to increase ranger patrols and maintain and enhance the American River and Sacramento River parkways and multi-use shared path corridors. • YPRO-1.17 Waterway Recreation and Access. The City shall work with regional partners, State agencies, non-profit and community groups, private landowners, and land developers to manage, preserve, improve, and enhance use and access to the Sacramento and American River Parkways, urban waterways and riparian corridors to increase public access for active and passive recreation and habitat values. • YPRO-1.18 Integrated Parks and Recreation System. The City shall continue to provide an integrated system of parks, open space areas, and recreational facilities that are safe, connect diverse communities, acknowledge neighborhood context, protect and prov ide access to nature, integrate with adjacent developments, and make efficient use of land and open space.
• YPRO-1.19 Sustainable Design. The City shall design and construct parks, public spaces, and recreational facilities for flexible use, energy/water efficiency, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, adaptability for long-term use, and ease and cost of maintenance.
• YPRO-1.20 Climate-Resilient Design. The City shall ensure that the design of parks and open spaces balance climate-adaptive design, such as resilient landscaping in place of impervious surfaces, climate-adaptive tree canopy, shade structures, drinking fountains, and cooling amenities, such as water spray areas, that provide respite from higher temperatures to reduce urban heat islands and overexposure to heat. • YPRO-1.21 Community Input. The City shall provide ongoing opportunities for public engagement and input into the parks and recreation planning process, including priorities for amenities, facilities, programming, and improvements. • YPRO-1.23 Welcoming Amenities. In its parks and recreational facilities, the City shall incorporate amenities that invite the use of park facilities by all community members, including benches, accessible park paths and facilities, shaded seating, pathway lighting and restrooms that make it easier for older adults and families to enjoy the facilities.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.12 , Public Services and Recreation, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level.

The Pocket/Greenhaven Community Plan also includes applicable policies, including:
• PG-YPRO -1 River Parkway. Concurrent with the Sacramento River Parkway Project, the City shall explore ways to add accessible pedestrian entrances from adjacent neighborhoods to the shared-use path along the river, including by formalizing existing

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
107
informal access points, particularly focusing on residential areas that lack park access within a 10-minute walk.
• PG-YPRO -2 Parkways/Greenways. The City shall continue to improve and maintain the parkway/ greenbelt network and public open spaces, including removing fencing and gates and adding access points where feasible, and by exploring strategies to improve connections between greenways and to the Sacramento River Parkway.

The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan, Master EIR, and the Pocket/Greenhaven Community Plan.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact on public services with the implementation of mitigation measures. Mitigation included the creation of a Park Patrol Ranger program to patrol the Sacramento River Parkway trails. The City has since implemented this program and Park Safety Rangers now oversee the safety of the Sacramento River Parkway trails. The following mitigation measures were included to address potential public service impacts and are applicable to the project.

Mitigation Measure 6.9-2 Trail User Personal Safety

1. Prior to construction of the off-street trail in the Parkway, a secure source of funding for Safety Officer Patrols, including bicycle patrol, shall be in place for off- street trails in the Parkway. The number of officers and response times shall be meet industry standards for similar recreational trails.

2. Prior to opening new sections of the parkway for public use, all reasonable steps shall be taken to prohibit unauthorized public entry into unsafe, undeveloped areas. This shall include the identification of site specific signage, fencing, security patrols to increase safety.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Would the project result in the need for new or altered services related to fire protection, police protection, school facilities, or other governmental services beyond what was anticipated in the 2035 General Plan?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project would not include residential development, and would not result in an increase in population; therefore, the project would not increase the demand for new schools or other governmental facilities. Construction of the project would not affect access to surrounding roads or emergency routes ; however, temporary and intermittent lane closures may be required to install pedestrian crossing improvements . While these lane closures may result in a temporary slowdown to traffic, through traffic would be available at all times and roadways would be completely restored following project construction.

During operation of the project, safety of the trail would be provided by the Park Safety Ranger, pursuant to mitigation from the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to public services and the project would not

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
108
result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkw ay Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to public services that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to public service would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
109

RECREATION

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City provides recreational services through 129 neighborhood parks, 56 community parks, 25 regional/citywide specialty parks, 14 open space areas, and 115 miles of shared-use paths.

The project area includes Garcia Bend Park, Zacharias Park and North Point Way River Access, and Sump Station #132.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For purposes of this Initial Study, impacts to recreational resources are considered significant if the proposed project would do either of the following:
• cause or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of existing area parks or recreational facilities; or
• create a need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities beyond what was anticipated in the 2040 General Plan.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.12 of the Master EIR considered the effects of new development from the 2040 General Plan on the City’s existing parkland, urban forest, recreational facilities and recreational services.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on parks or recreational facilities (Impact 4.12-5 and

4.12-6). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Youth, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• YPRO-1.1 Range of Experiences. The City shall provide a range of parks and recreational facilities and strive to ensure an equitable distribution of high -quality facilities throughout Sacramento.

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

12. RECREATION
Would the project:

A. Cause or accelerate substantial physical
deterioration of existing area parks or recreational
facilities?

B. Create a need for construction or expansion of
recreational facilities beyond what was anticipated in
the 2035 General Plan?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
110
• YPRO-1.3 Parkland Service Standard. The City shall evaluate, as needed, the equitable increase of public park acreage to serve the needs of the current and future residents with high-quality facilities. The City shall continue to strive to achieve a parkland service standard of 8.5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which includes neighborhood parks, community parks, regional parks, open space, and parkways. • YPRO-1.8 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:
o Publicly accessible, privately-owned open spaces and plazas; o Rooftop play courts and gardens;
o Freeway underpass, utility corridor, and wide landscape medians; o Conversion of rails to rails with trails;
o Pocket parks and pedestrian areas in the public right-of-way; and o The provision of neighborhood and community -serving recreational facilities in regional parks.
• YPRO-1.11 Enhancing Access to Parks. The City shall pursue strategies that increase community access to parks and recreational facilities, including the following:
o Expanding joint-use agreements with schools and educational institutions; o Removing of physical barriers to access (e.g., fences); and o Providing a choice of legible and navigable routes to and from park areas through the installation of new or improved multi -use shared paths, wayfinding signage, and coordination with public transit.
• YPRO-1.13 Park Safety. The City shall continue to use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) landscaping and lighting, and efforts that support the Park Ranger program, to ensure that parks and open spaces are designed and maintained with safety as a priority without compromising accessible and inclusionary design. • YPRO-1.15 Path Connections. The City shall maintain existing and pursue new connections to local and regional shared-use paths, especially when connecting to public parkland.
• YPRO-1.16 River Parkways. The City shall collaborate with the Park Ranger program, the Sacramento County Department of Regional Parks and other agencies and organizations to secure funding to increase ranger patrols and maintain and enhance the American River and Sacramento River parkways and multi-use shared path corridors. • YPRO-1.17 Waterway Recreation and Access. The City shall work with regional partners, State agencies, non-profit and community groups, private landowners, and land developers to manage, preserve, improve, and enhance use and access to the

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
111
Sacramento and American River Parkways, urban waterways and riparian corridors to increase public access for active and passive recreation and habitat values. • YPRO-1.18 Integrated Parks and Recreation System. The City shall continue to provide an integrated system of parks, open space areas, and recreational facilities that are safe, connect diverse communities, acknowledge neighborhood context, protect and prov ide access to nature, integrate with adjacent developments, and make efficient use of land and open space.
• YPRO-1.19 Sustainable Design. The City shall design and construct parks, public spaces, and recreational facilities for flexible use, energy/water efficiency, reduced greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, adaptability for long-term use, and ease and cost of maintenance.
• YPRO-1.20 Climate-Resilient Design. The City shall ensure that the design of parks and open spaces balance climate-adaptive design, such as resilient landscaping in place of impervious surfaces, climate-adaptive tree canopy, shade structures, drinking fountains, and cooling amenities, such as water spray areas, that provide respite from higher temperatures to reduce urban heat islands and overexposure to heat. • YPRO-1.21 Community Input. The City shall provide ongoing opportunities for public engagement and input into the parks and recreation planning process, including priorities for amenities, facilities, programming, and improvements. • YPRO-1.23 Welcoming Amenities. In its parks and recreational facilities, the City shall incorporate amenities that invite the use of park facilities by all community members, including benches, accessible park paths and facilities, shaded seating, pathway lighting and restrooms that make it easier for older adults and families to enjoy the facilities.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.12, Public Services and Recreation, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level.

The Pocket/Greenhaven Community Plan also includes applicable policies, including:
• PG-YPRO -1 River Parkway. Concurrent with the Sacramento River Parkway Project, the City shall explore ways to add accessible pedestrian entrances from adjacent neighborhoods to the shared-use path along the river, including by formalizing existing informal access points, particularly focusing on residential areas that lack park access within a 10-minute walk.
• PG-YPRO -2 Parkways/Greenways. The City shall continue to improve and maintain the parkway/ greenbelt network and public open spaces, including removing fencing and gates and adding access points where feasible, and by exploring strategies to improve connections between greenways and to the Sacramento River Parkway.

The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan, Master EIR, and the Pocket/Greenhaven Community Plan.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
112
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact on recreation since the plan includes the addition of a recreational trail that would enhance recreation opportunities along the Sacramento River.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Cause or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of existing area parks or recreational facilities?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project is part of a larger plan, the Parkway Plan, which would close a gap and construct a multi-use trail along the riverfront between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park. The project is also included in the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan and construction of the project is included in the Pocket/Greenhaven Community Plan, a part of the City’s 2040 General Plan. The project would require TCEs from two publicly owned and publicly accessible recreational faciliti es, Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park; however, during construction of the project, the portions of the parks that are not under a TCE would remain open to the public. Construction of the project would temporarily and intermittently result in increased noise, dust, and pollutants within the project area. The project would temporarily affect traffic circulation during the installation of pedestrian crossings at three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal, which may require temporary and intermittent detours; however, access to parks and recreational facilities would be maintained. Traffic circulation would be restored to normal after completion of project construction. Potential impacts on the recreational facilities within the project area are anticipated to be minimal and temporary.

Operation of existing parks and recreational facilities would be maintained during construction.

Following construction, TCEs on Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park would be removed and full access to the parks would be restored.

The project includes the addition of up to six access points (see Figure 3, Project Footprint). More people would be expected to use the existing sections of the Sacramento River Parkway since the project would increase through access and close a gap between multi-use trails. The condition of the existing recreational facilities (which will serve as access points to the existing segments of the Sacramento River Parkway) are not expected to deteriorate since multiple additional access points are proposed along the levee and the new users would be distributed between new and previously existing access points. Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park would be used as new access points to the trail. Existing facilities , such as the two parks and existing segments of the trail, are not anticipated to deteriorate as the facilities would be regularly maintained by the City .

In addition, the anticipated increase in users would not require the expansion of facilities to accommodate users. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to parks and recreational facilities and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
113
B. Create a need for construction or expansion of recreational facilities beyond what was anticipated in the 2035 General Plan?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to recreation that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to recreation would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
114

TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The closest freeway to the project area is Interstate 5 located 0.4 mile east from the project area.

Major Arterials within the Pocket Community, near the project area, include Riverside Boulevard, Pocket Road, and Gloria Drive. Existing segments of the Sacramento River Parkway Trail are located along the levee to the north and south of the project area, and the project would close the gap between these two sections.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines provides specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. There are no existing thresholds for recreation projects, therefore, this section evaluated the project according to Section 15064.3 for transportation projects. Pursuant to Section 15064.3, analysis of VMT attributable to a project is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts, with other relevant considerations consisting of the effects of the project on transit and non-mo torized travel. VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle trips, with one end within the project site. Based on current practices from the City, transportation impacts for CEQA purposes are considered significant if the proposed project would generate Household VMT per capita figures that exceed 85 percent of the regional average for Household VMT per capita, consistent with technical advisory guidance published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research in 2018.

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

13. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Would the project:

A. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?

B. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
C. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?

D. Result in inadequate emergency access?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
115
Several screening thresholds are used to quickly determine whether a project may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact without conducting a detailed project generated VMT analysis. For transportation projects, screening criteria includes (City of Sacramento, 2022):
• Transportation projects - absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, local transportation projects consistent with an adopted General Plan that analyzed VMT impacts would not require additional VMT analysis and would reference the General Plan EIR VMT impacts and mitigation measures.
o Road Projects - absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate and/or induce a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), or inconsistency with the adopted General Plan, local road projects that do not increase automobile capacity such as rehabilitation and repair projects, safety projects, transit only lanes, installation or removal of traffic control devices, conversion of streets to two-way operation, installation of roundabouts, and lane reduction projects may be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. o Transit Projects - absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate and/or induce a potentially significant level of VMT, passenger rail projects, bus rapid transit projects, and fixed-route bus projects with frequent service characteri stics may be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.
o Active Transportation Projects - absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate and/or induce a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), or inconsistency with the adopted General Plan, active transportation projects that do not increase automobile capacity such as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects may be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.

Lastly, for purposes of this Initial Study, impacts resulting from changes in transportation or circulation may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the proposed project would result in the following impacts that remain significant after implementation of General Plan policies or mitigation from the Master EIR:

Vehicle Miles Traveled
• Transportation projects not included in the General Plan would require a VMT assessment to determine project effect on induced travel and total VMT. Results would trigger a significant transportation impact if the project was determined to cause an increase in Total Citywide VMT when compared to horizon year Total Citywide VMT without the Project.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
116
Transit
• Adversely affect public transit operations; or
• Fail to adequately provide for access to public transit.

Bicycle Facilities
• Adversely affect bicycle travel, bicycle paths; or
• Fail to adequately provide for access by bicycle.

Pedestrian Circulation
• Adversely affect pedestrian travel, pedestrian paths; or • Fail to adequately provide for access by pedestrians.

Construction-Related Traffic Impacts
• Degrade an intersection or roadway to an unacceptable level; • Cause inconveniences to motorists due to prolonged road closures; or • Result in an increased frequency of potential conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Transportation and circulation were discussed in the Master EIR in Chapter 4.14. Various modes of travel were included in the analysis, including vehicular, transit, bicycle, pedestrian and aviation components.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on reducing passenger vehicle VMT per capita compared to the Citywide baseline by 16.8% (Impact 4.14-1), existing and planned public transit facilities or services or fail to adequately provide access to transit (Impact 4.14-2), and existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities or fail to adequately provide access for bicycle and pedestrians (impact 4.14-3). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Land Use and Placemaking Element and Mobility Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• LUP-1.1 Compact Urban Footprint. The City shall promote a land- and resource-efficient development pattern and the placement of infrastructure to support efficient delivery of public services and conserve open space, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and improve air quality.
• M-1.2 User Prioritization. The City shall prioritize mobility, comfort, health, safety, and convenience for those walking, followed by those bicycling and riding transit, ahead of design and operations for those driving.
• M-1.11 Increase Bicycling and Walking. The City shall strive to increase bicycling and walking citywide so that it can meet its equity, reduced vehicle miles traveled, and sustainability goals.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
117
• M-4.1 Application of Safety. The City shall design, plan, and operate streets using complete streets principles to ensure the safety and mobility of all users. • M-4.3 Vision Zero. The City shall utilize a datadriven, “vision zero” approach to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries by 2027, while increasing safety, health, and equitable mobility for all.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 14, Transportation, in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact on local circulation insofar as the Parkway Plan has an emphasis on bicycle and pedestrian access.

The following policies related to circulation and access were included in the Parkway Plan:

G6 The Parkway shall be protected from injurious or incompatible elements associated with adjacent land uses.

G7 Land adjacent to the Parkway shall be protected from injurious or incompatible elements associated with Parkway land uses.

R2 "Recreation Area" activities and facilities shall be accommodated only at designated locations which afford minimal conflict with adjacent land uses, natural and cultural resources.

R3 Recreational activities which are hazardous or incompatible with Parkway natural habitat and uses, or detrimental to adjacent and surrounding habitat are prohibited.

R4 All recreational development including trails, signs, structures and fences shall be constructed to prevent erosion, protect the structural integrity of the levee and to blend harmoniously with the surrounding landscape.

R5 Bicycle use shall be restricted exclusively to designated bikeways, roadways and parking lots.

T1 Off-Street trails shall be built of all weather construction of proper dimension, clearance and grade to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists and maintenance and emergency vehicles.

T2 The Bypass Route shall utilize those streets which best accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians, while providing the most direct route paralleling the Parkway.

T3 Bypass Route segments of the Parkway shall be the last segments of the Parkway to incorporate the Off-Street Trail.

T4 Bypass routes shall be signed and striped as a Class 2 and or Class 3 bicycle route and Parkway signage shall be provided. Additional Parkway signage may be appropriate.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
118
T5 Motorized vehicles, except patrol or emergency vehicles, are prohibited on Parkway trails at all times.

T6 Skateboards, rollerblades and skates of any kind are not allowed on the off-street trail.

T7 Trail segments shall be developed to terminate at public access points.

T8 Trail segments should be implemented with sufficient funds to provide for operations, maintenance and security of that segment of the Parkway.

N3 Development within the Parkway, including trails and roads, signs and structures, shall be designed to minimize impact to native vegetation.

SA1 Narrow (no berm) and steep portions of the Parkway should have safety barriers installed to protect Parkway users.

SA2 Potentially hazardous areas in the Parkway, such as old industrial areas, pumping stations, steep waterward levee slopes and dangerous swimming areas, should be clearly posted.

SA3 Where necessary, separation barriers or fences should be installed to prevent Parkway users from entering into hazardous areas.

SA4 Existing fixtures, structures and conditions on the Parkway which can reasonably be considered as attractive nuisances or hazards should be removed or such conditions rectified.

SA5 During emergency situations which may require the barring of the public from the Parkway, all access points should be closeable or controllable.

SA6 Emergency Access Points shall be designated at intervals of no less than two miles along the Parkway. All public access points may be used as emergency access points as needed.

SA7 Rules and restrictions for use of the Parkway shall be posted at all public access points.

SA8 Emergency phones (callboxes) should be installed at one mile intervals along the Parkway.

SA9 Location maps should be l ocated adjacent to emergency phones (callboxes) to facilitate police or other emergency vehicle response to the area.

SA10 Mileage markers shall be posted at one-half mile intervals.

SE1 All public access points will be closed at sunset.

SE2 The Parkway shall be patrolled on a regular basis. Patrols should be increased during the summer when the Parkway gets the most use.

In addition, the following mitigation measures were included to address potential impacts and are applicable to the project.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
119
Mitigation Measure 6.9-1 Public Safety and Security of Private Property

1. Prior to construction of the off-street trail section between Captain's Table and the Pocket Canal, a secure source of funding for Safety Officer Patrols, including bicycle patrol shall be in place for the Parkway. The number of officers and response times shall be meet industry standards for similar recreational trails.

2. Prior to implementation of new portions of the trail or bikeway, the policies and mitigation measures of the recently adopted 2010 Bikeway Master Plan 1 shall be incorporated into
the design. These policies include:
a. When necessary to prevent trespassing and to protect adjacent property, trail corridors shall be fenced at the time the project is developed (Chapter 3, Page 7, 2010 Bikeway Master Plan)
b. Recognize private property rights and the safety of bicyclists when locating off-street bikeways (Chapter 5, Page 9, 2010 Bikeways Master Plan).

Mitigation Measure 6.9.3 Trail User Exposure to Hazards

1. Prior to construction of the off-street trail section between Captain's Table and the Pocket Canal, a secure source of funding for Safety Officer Patrols, including bicycle patrol, shall be in place for the Parkway. The number of officers and response times shall be meet industry standards for similar recreational trails.

2. Prior to opening new sections of the parkway for public use, all reasonable steps shall be taken to prohibit unauthorized public entry into unsafe, undeveloped areas. This shall include the identification of site-specific signage, fencing, security patrols to increase safety.

VMT was not evaluated within the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway EIR as this topic was not part of the CEQA Environmental Checklist at the time of analysis. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, effective December 28, 2018, added the analysis of VMT to the CEQA process. Although the analysis of VMT was added to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. 3 in 2018, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15007, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines are only applicable prospectively. A discussion of VMT has been incorporated, although it is not required in this Initial Study.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project includes the addition of trail access points and construction of a multi -use trail along the top of the east levee of the

1 This measure has been included word for word from the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The 2010 Bikeway Master Plan has since been superseded by the 2016 City Bicycle Master Plan. The 2016 Bikeway Master Plan has been reviewed and the project would be consistent with the goals presented in the plan.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
120
Sacramento River, and pedestrian crossings on Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way near the Pocket Canal. The project is needed to close part of the gap in the multi -use trail between Garcia Bend Park and Zacharias Park, and to establish trail connections via access points in the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood. The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Mobility Element, including increasing bicycling and walking citywide, providing a continuous, low-stress bikeway network consisting of bicycling-friendly facilities, and prioritizing designs that strengthen the protection of people bicycling and walking (City of Sacramento, 2024). In addition, the project would implement mitigation measures included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR reducing impacts related to hazards.

The project would fall under the Active Transportation screening criteria described in the City’s Traffic Impact Guidelines and projects that do not increase automobile capacity such as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects may be assumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact (City of Sacramento, 2022).

The project would temporarily affect traffic circulation during the installation of pedestrian crossings at three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and Pocket Road, just south of Country River Way, which may require temporary and intermittent detours which would increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT) . This increase would be negligible and traffic circulation and roadway accessibility would be restored to normal after completion of project construction. In addition, the project would construct safety features and pedestrian crossings which would not increase the capacity of surrounding roadways. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to circulation system policies and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

C. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project includes the construction of the Sacramento River Parkway multi-use trail along the top of the east levee of the Sacramento River within the Pocket/Greenhaven neighborhood. The project would also include trail access points between Sleepy River Way and Zacharias Park and pedestrian improvements to three intersections at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard, Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard, and a new crosswalk across Pocket Road , just south of Country River Way . In addition, a two -way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal to connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The cycle track would not require changes to the bridge deck or substructure above the Pocket Canal, which is built to current design standards. Sidewalks on both sides would be maintained, but the sidewalk on the east side may need to be shifted or modified to accommodate the other proposed bike facility improvements. The sidewalk would still meet the current design standards and would not

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
121
introduce any hazardous design features. The multi -use trail would follow the existing alignment of the east levee, which does not contain any hazardous geometric design feature. The trail is intended for recreational uses, such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and maintenance and emergency vehicles. The pedestrian improvements are intended to be used by pedestrians and bicyclists .

Additionally, the two-way cycle track is intended to be used by bicycles only. The trail, pedestrian intersection improvements, and two -way cycle track would be constructed in compliance with applicable design standards and would be compatible with the anticipated uses of the project features. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

D. Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. The project area is not used as an emergency evacuation route (City of Sacramento, 2015) . Following construction, the project area would be used by bicyclists and pedestrians. In the event of an emergency to a pedestrian or bi cyclist on the multi -use trail, existing and/or proposed access points would be utilized for emergency vehicles. The addition of callboxes would be evaluated during the design phase for feasibility. At a minimum, signage with phone numbers for the police department and park rangers would be posted along the trail for trail users to contact in case of emergency. In addition, along the levee, the state and local flood control agencies have rights of access in case of an emergency involving the levee. The paved trail would also be used by these agencies to respond to emergencies.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on emergency access and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to transportation and circulation that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to transportation and circulation would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
122

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

The following discussion incorporates the results of the ASR, FNAE, and HRER that w ere prepared for the project (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a; Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025b; GPA Consulting, 2025; GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025).

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Plains Me-Wuk territory was located along the Sacramento River and includes much of the Sacramento River delta and adjacent plains, including the lower reaches of the Cosumnes and Mokelumne rivers and Dry Creek, a major tributary. Several early ethnographers recorded the boundary between the Plains Me-Wuk and their neighbors the Nisenan (Southern Maidu) to be the Cosumnes River itself, but more recent analyses suggest the whole drainage was held by the Me-Wuk. The Sierran Me-Wuk to the east and the Lake, Bay, and Coast Me-Wuk to the west, are affiliated with the Plains Me-Wuk due to related languages (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a).

Within 50 years of European contact, the Plains Me -Wuk population in the Sacramento vicinity was significantly reduced due to various factors. These included epidemics caused by diseases introduced by Europeans, conflicts between Native Americans and non-native groups, and the Issues:

Effect Will
Be Studied
in the EIR
Effect Can
Be Mitigated
to Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

14. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, as defined in Public Resources Code 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 and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources code section 5020.1(k) or

ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
123
impacts of Spanish and Mexican land grants and settlement in the Central Valley.

In the present day, there are several Native American tribes living on tribal lands east of Sacramento. Examples of federally recognized tribes include the United Auburn Indian Community of Auburn Rancheria and the Shingle Springs Rancheria (City of Sacramento, 2016).

The records search identified three previously recorded tribal cultural resources within the project area. The three previously recorded resources include two precontact sites and one TCL . The precontact site P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42) has not been evaluated for listing the NRHP or CRHR but presumably would meet eligibility requirements under Criterion D should intact deposits be identified (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a). The precontact site P-34- 005379 (CA-SAC-1276) and the TCL P-34-005225 were previously evaluated as eligible for listing in the NRHP/CRHR, with no record of SHPO concurrence (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a). All three resources are considered tribal cultural resources and are considered eligible for inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR for the purposes of this project only.

DATA SOURCES/METHODOLOGY
In accordance with Public Resource Code (PRC) section 21080.3.1 and 21082.3, also known as AB 52, the City is required to engage in consultation with tribes that have a traditional and cultural affiliation with the project area. This consultation is initiated upon formal notification and a response from the tribes requesting consultation. The consultation process is conducted in good faith and is considered concluded when the parties reach an agreement on measures to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on tribal cultural resources, or when it is determined that mutual agreement cannot be reached. Any agreed-upon mitigation measures during the consultation must be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document.

In response to the City’s notification of the project to the United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria (UAIC), 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 the California Historic Resources Information System Center (CHRIS) as well as historic resources and survey data.

NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
Four tribes have previously requested to be consulted for the purposes of AB 52, pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1. AB 52 notification letters were sent on June 28, 2022 to the UAIC, Wilton Rancheria, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, and Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California. A response was received from the UAIC on July 1 , 2022 requesting consultation pursuant to AB 52. The City has been regularly consulting with the UAIC on project updates and environmental documentation. On December 13, 2023, the UAIC requested to have tribal monitor present during the ground disturbing activities in areas determined to be potentially sensitive. The City acknowledged the request on December 13, 2023. No response was received from the Wilton Rancheria, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, and Buena Vista Rancheria

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
124
of Me-Wuk Indians of California as of August 8, 2024.

Consultation pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, was also conducted on behalf of Caltrans who is the NEPA lead agency. A request for a search of the Sacred Land Files and a list of interested Native American individuals or groups was sent to the Native American Heritage Commission on July 8, 2022. A response from the Commission was received on August 10, 2022 providing a list of interested parties to be contacted regarding the project. Section 106 notification letters were sent on behalf of Caltrans to nine Native American tribes were sent on April 24, 2024 with follow -up phone calls on May 13, 2024, to confirm the documents were received. Section 106 consultation was initiated with the following tribes:
• UAIC
• Wilton Rancheria
• Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians
• Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California • Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
• Ione Band of Miwok Indians
• Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe
• Tsi Akim Maidu
• Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation responded on June 12, 2024 stating the project is not in their aborigional territories and declined to comment. Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of California, Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, and UAIC all requested project information to be forwarded to additional persons or to website portals. No other requests were made as of May 13, 2024. No responses were received from the Ione Band of Miwok Indians, Nashville Enterprise Miwok-Maidu-Nishinam Tribe, Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians, or Tsi Akim Maidu as of May 13, 2024.

REGULATORY SETTING
Federal
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act does require consultation with Native Americans to identify and consider certain types of cultural resources. Cultural resources of Native American origin identified as a result of the identification efforts conducted under Section 106 may also qualify as tribal cultural resources under CEQA. Compliance with Section 106 has been completed by Caltrans as the NEPA Lead Agency.

State
CEQA requires that public agencies that finance or approve public or private projects must assess the effects of the project on tribal cultural resources. Tribal cultural resources are defined in PRC 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

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
125
Native American tribe that is (1) listed or determined eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or a local register, or (2) that are 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 PRC Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.

PRC Section 5024.1 establishes the CRHR, which is the authoritative guide for identifying the State’s historical resources to indicate what properties are to be protected, if feasible, from substantial adverse change. For a resource to be eligible for the CRHR, it must be more than 50 years old, retain its historic integrity, and satisfy one or more of the following criteria:

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, a tribal cultural resource is considered to be a significant resource if the resource is: 1) listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources; or 2) the resource has been determ ined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. For purposes of this Initial Study, impacts on tribal cultural resources may be considered significant if construction and/or implementation of the proposed project would result in the following:
• c ause a substantial change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
Chapter 4.15 of the Master EIR considered the effects of new development from the 2040 General Plan on the City’s Tribal Cultural Resources.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on tribal cultural resources (Impact 4.15 -1, 4.15-2, and 4.15-3). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Historic and Cultural Resources Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• HCR-1.6 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.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
126
• HCR-1.14 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.
• HCR-1.15 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 collaborate with the most likely descendants identified by the Native American Heritage Commission.
• HCR-1.17 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:
o Consideration of existing reports and studies,
o Consultation with Native American tribes as required by State law o Appropriate site-specific investigative actions, and
o Onsite monitoring during excavation if appropriate.
• HCR-A.8: Conditions for Resource Discovery. The City shall establish and implement procedures for the protection of historic, archaeological, and tribal cultural resources, consistent with the following:
o In the event any materials, items, or artifacts are discovered during excavation at a project site that may have historic, archeological, or tribal cultural resources, the project proponent and/or contractors should cease all work in the vicinity of the discovery, notify the City’s Preservation Director or Manager of Environmental Planning Services, and coordinate with the City to determine the appropriate response, including further efforts for discovery and treatment of potential resources.
o In the event any human remains are discovered during excavation, the project proponent and/or contractors shall comply with state law, including notifying the Sacramento County Coroner and following all procedures required by state law, including notifying the Native American Heritage Commission in the event the remains are determined to be Native American in origin.

Application of these policies would help reduce the significance of impacts to these resources.

However, because there is no feasible mitigation available to ensure the loss, damage or destruction of tribal cultural resources, the impact listed in Chapter 4.15, Tribal Cultural Resources, in the Master EIR remains significant and unavoidable.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated on prehistoric,

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
127
historic, and cultural resources. The following mitigation measures are listed in the Cultural Resources Section above.

Mitigation Measure 6.8-1 Prehistoric Resources

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construction continues.

Mitigation Measure 6.8-2 Historic/Cultural Resources

1. A qualified archeologist shall be retained by the project sponsor to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and to assess and record any subsurface artifacts or features that might be unearthed.

2. If subsurface archaeological or historical remains (including unusual amounts of bones, stones, or shells) are discovered during excavation or construction of the site, work in the affected area shall stop immediately and a qualified archaeologist and a representative of the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted to develop, if necessary, further mitigation measures to reduce any archaeological impact to a less-than-significant level before construction continues.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, as defined in Public Resources Code 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 and that is:

I. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources code section 5020.1(k) or

No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. On July 8, 2022, the consulting archaeologist submitted a records search request of the project area and a one-quarter mile buffer to two California Historical Records Information Centers: Northwest and North Central. A search of the sacred lands file was also completed by the Native American Heritage Commission on July 8, 2022. The three previously recorded resources include two precontact sites and one Tribal Cultural Landscape District were identified within the project area. The precontact site P-34- 000069 (CA-SAC-42) has not been evaluated for listing the NRHP or CRHR but presumably would meet eligibility requirements under Criterion D should intact deposits be identified (Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025a) . The precontact site P-34-005379 (CA-

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
128
SAC-1276) and the TCL P -34-005225 were previously evaluated as eligible for listing on the NRHP/CRHR, with no record of SHPO concurrence. The Native American Heritage Commission’s file search confirmed there are known sacred lands within the project area. Through consultation with the tribes, three areas were identified within the project footprint to be potentially sensitive.

UAIC requests to have a tribal monitor present during the ground disturbing activities in these areas. The City acknowledges UAIC’s request and will have tribal monitors would be present during ground disturbing activities in areas determined to be potentially sensitive.

Improvements at Ashore Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions. Intersection improvements at Rivertree Way/Riverside Boulevard would include a new pedestrian activated signal with high visibility crosswalk and curb extensions and a new pedestrian crossing of Pocket Road would be installed just south of Country River Way. In addition, a two-way cycle track would be added along Pocket Road across the Pocket Canal which would connect the proposed Country River Way access point to the existing Pocket Canal Trail entrance. The majority of the new trail construction would require excavations of less than two feet in depth and would average six to eight inches depending on the quality of the sub-base. In some specific locations project features such as small retaining walls or light foundations, including pedestrian improvements, would require deeper excavation not to exceed five feet in depth.

Overall, the project area is previously disturbed or developed; therefore, it is unlikely that any existing archaeological resources would be present.

P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42)
Project work with the potential to impact P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42) would be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee and would not impact the potentially eligible character-defining traits of the site as designed. Construction impacts to the levee include temporary access, minor grading, and the construction of the trail. Vertical ground disturbance in this area would not exceed 12 inches below the current grade. The proposed permanent access point along Country River Way would include a ramp installed approximately 320 feet south of the resource.

No work would occur within the boundary of P-34-000069 (CA-SAC-42), but a horizontal ESA will be established for the length of the resource to include ESA fencing erected on either side of the levee pathway along the east and west edge of the Area of Direct Impact. A vertical ESA would ensure no work shall occur below depths of five feet to prevent damage to potential deposits under the levee prism. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the limited construction and excavation proposed for the levee segment adjacent to this resource would not damage or alter the character-defining features of the resource with the implementation of a horizontal and vertical ESA (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025) . The project would not result in a substantial impact to the significance of a tribal cultural resource as the cultural value to a California Native American tribe would not change with implementation of the project.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
129
P-34-005225
Resource P-34-005225 is a TCL which encompasses the entire project area and includes both state-owned and private property. The levee and surrounding infrastructure have experienced multiple episodes of development and maintenance activities. Ultimately, portions of the potential historic resource have been subjected to some form of disturbance and destruction, change in physical features and use, as well as visual impediments; however, the majority of the remaining landscape features within the narrow APE corridor, adjacent to the existing levee, appear intact.

Project work with the potential to impact P -34-005225 would primarily be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee that extend along the entire length of the project area and would not impact the character -defining traits of the resource, which are mainly plants and animals. No elements of the resource would be affected by the project activities. The broader setting of the property has already been altered by the construction of the levee and urban development. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the project would not construct substantial alterations that would compromise the resource’s integrity (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025) . In addition, the limited construction and excavations proposed for the levee segment and existing developed urban areas would not damage or alter the character-defining features of the resource. The project would not result in a substantial impact to the significance of a tribal cultural resource as the cultural value to a California Native American tribe would not change with implementation of the project.

P-34-005379 (CA-SAC-1276)
Project work with the potential to affect P -34-005379 (CA -SAC-1276) would be limited to the crown of a segment of the Sacramento River East Levee that extends above the portion of the recorded site deposit and would not impact the potentially eligible char acter-defining traits of the site. Resource P-34-005379 (CA-SAC-1276) has been identified at depths between 17.5 and 20 feet below the surface, beneath the Sacramento River East Levee, approximately 255 feet north from the intersection of Riverton Way and Clipper Way. Construction impacts to the levee include temporary access, minor grading, and the construction of the trail. Vertical ground disturbance in this area would not exceed 12 inches below current grade. The proposed permanent access point along Clipper Way would include a ramp approximately 320 feet southeast/east of the resource.

Potential archaeological deposits and features would be avoided by limiting project work to above the established site boundaries and restricting construction to the existing engineered levee structure at this location. Ground disturbance for this undertaking would not exceed two feet below the surface within this resource. A vertical ESA will be established for the length of the resource boundary from 225–300 feet north of the intersection of Riverton Way and Clipper Way. Impacts must be limited to 10 feet below the surface within the vertical ESA. As described in the FNAE prepared for the project, the limited construction and excavations proposed for the levee segment adjacent to the site would not damage or alter the character-defining features of the resource with the implementation of a horizontal and vertical ESA (GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc, 2025). The project would not result in a substantial impact to the significance of a tribal cultural resource as the cultural value to a California Native American tribe would not change with implementation of the project.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
130
All Resources
The ASR and ESA Action Plan includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect tribal cultural resources; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources are identified in the ASR or ESA Action Plan. Additionally, the project would implement mitigation measures included in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR which would require a qualified archaeologist to monitor all subsurface excavations during construction and stopping all work if subsurface archaeological or historical remains are discovered during excavation or construction of the project. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources.

II. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (A.I) above.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No additional mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to tribal cultural resources that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to tribal cultural resources would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
131

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Utility services provided for the surrounding area include gas, electricity, water, sewer, and telecommunication. PG&E provides gas services, SMUD provides electricity through overhead lines, the City provides water and wastewater collection services, SRCSD provides wastewater discharge treatment, and AT&T and Comcast provide telecommunications services to the surrounding area.

The City has three approved certified construction and demolition debris sorting facilities which includes Florin-Perkins Public Disposal, L&D Landfill, and Sierra Waste. In addition, the County has two approved landfill facilities, L&D Landfill and Kiefer Landfill. All three debris sorting facilities are located approximately eight miles east of the project area. Kiefer Landfill is located 18 miles east of the project area. Florin-Perkins Public Disposal is a processing facility with a maximum processing capacity of 1,000 tons per day (CalRecycle, n.d.). L&D Landfill is a processing facility and landfill with a maximum processing capacity of 4,125 tons a day and a remaining capacity of 3,115,900 tons in the landfill (CalRecycle, 2020) . Sierra Waste is a processing facility with a maximum processing capacity of 1,000 tons a day (CalRecycle, n.d.) . Kiefer Landfill has a remaining capacity of 112,900,000 tons (CalRecycle, 2005).

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Initial Study, an impact would be considered significant if the project resulted in the need for new or altered services related to fire protection, police protection, or school facilities beyond what was anticipated in the 2040 General Plan:
• result in the determination that adequate capacity is not available to serve the project’s demand in addition to existing commitments or
• require or result in either the construction of new utilities or the expansion of existing utilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

15. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

A. Result in the determination that adequate capacity is not available to serve the project’s demand in
addition to existing commitments?

B. Require or result in either the construction of new
utilities or the expansion of existing utilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
132
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER T HE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR AND

APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The Master EIR evaluated the effects of development under the 2040 General Plan on water supply, sewer and storm drainage, solid waste, electricity, natural gas and telecommunications.

The Master EIR identified potential impacts on an increase demand for potable water (Impact

4.13-1 and 4.13-6), water supply facilities meeting water supply demand (Impact 4.13-2 and 4.13- 3), the construction of new utilities or the expansion of existing utilities (Impact 4.13-4 and 4.13- 7), and the construction of new solid waste facilities or the expansion of existing facilities (Impact

4.13-5 and 4.13-8). The project is consistent with the plans and goals adopted by the City in its General Plan Public Facilities and Safety Element. Policies in the 2040 General Plan which are applicable to the project, include:
• PFS-5.1 Solid Waste Reduction. The City shall reduce the amount of solid waste that is disposed in landfills by promoting source reduction and recycling throughout Sacramento and by expanding the range of programs and information available to local residents and businesses, consistent with State requirements.
• PFS-5.3 Mixed and Organic Recycling. The City shall increase waste diversion by requiring participation in mixed recycling and organic recycling programs, including through implementation of Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) Measure W-1 for organic waste reduction.
• PFS-5.5 Recycled Materials in New Construction. The City shall encourage the use of recycled materials in new construction. Methods shall include promoting the availability of materials at Certified Construction and Demolition (C&D) Debris Sorting Facilities and the reuse store at the Sacramento Recycling and Transfer Station.

Application of these policies would reduce all impacts in Chapter 4.13, Public Utilities , in the Master EIR to a less than significant level. The project would be consistent with the 2040 General Plan and the Master EIR.

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS UNDER THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR determined that implementation of the Parkway Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to utilities and service systems.

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. R esult in the determination that adequate capacity is not available to serve the project’s demand in addition to existing commitments?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. Construction would produce solid waste and debris. There are three c ertified construction and demolition debris sorting facilities and two landfills that service the project area. All facilities have the capacity to handle waste produced from construction. At this time, no utility relocations are anticipated; however, if they are determined necessary during final design they would be coordinated with individual utility owners.

If any utility relocations are necessary, they would be relocated within the proposed project area and require temporary and intermittent energy disruption within the area. Operation of the project

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
133
would require utility tie-in for pedestrian signal beacons; however, utility usage is n ot anticipated to cause a strain on the city’s existing infrastructure. T he project would not include residential development, would not result in an increase in population; thus , the project would not increase the demand for new utility facilities. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact related to utilities and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Require or result in either the construction of new utilities or the expansion of existing utilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. See discussion in response (a) above.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required.

FINDINGS
No additional impacts related to utilities and service systems that were not addressed or mitigated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR were identified. In addition, no additional significant environmental impact related to utilities and service systems would result from the project, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives would be required, and the project is within the scope of the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

The project is within the scope of the City’s 2040 General Plan Master EIR and the applicable policies and is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15177.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
134

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

ANSWERS TO THE CHECKLIST QUESTIONS
A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. As discussed in the Biological Resources and Cultural Resources sections of this Initial Study and the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR, the project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment. Measures from the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR would be implemented to reduce impacts on biological resources and cultural resources. The NES, ASR, FOE, and ESA Action Plan includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect biological, arch aeological, cultural, and tribal cultural resources; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially Issues:

Effect Will Be
Studied in the
EIR
Effect Can Be
Mitigated to
Less Than
Significant
No Additional
Significant
Environmental
Effect

16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

A. Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife po 6pulation to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?

B. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)

C. Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
135
significant impacts with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to biological and cultural resources are identified in the NES, ASR, FOE, or ESA Action Plan. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on the quality of the environment, fish or wildlife species habitat, fish or wildlife population, plant or animal communities, number or restricting the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

B. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. According to 14 CCR § 15355, “Cumulative impacts” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects.

The 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR analyzed the cumulative impacts of all Parkway Plan projects. The project was part of a trail segment included in the Parkway Plan and was found to have a negligible cumulative impact. Current projects within two miles of the project area are listed in Table 6.

Table 6 Projects Within Two Miles of the Project Area
Project Title Project Description Distance from
Project Area Project Schedule
Del Rio Trail Project The project would
include the construction
of a 4.8-mile multi-use
trail.

1.9 mile east of
the project
Under construction.

Sacramento River East
Levee Improvements
element of the LAP
The project would
include restoring the
structural stability of the
Sacramento River levee
and maintain public
safety.
0 miles from the
project
Under construction.

I-5 at Pocket Road (03-
0N820) Project
The project would
include the rehabilitation
of the northbound
section of roadway in
Sacramento County on I
5 at post mile 16.147.

1.6 mile east of
the project
Construction timing is
currently unknown.

Traffic Signal Safety
Project (T15215000)
The project would
include the addition of
traffic signals, pedestrian
signals, or rectangular

1.6 mile east of
the project
Construction timing is
currently unknown.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
136
flashing beacons at nine
intersections.

Pocket Rd Sidewalk and
Signalized Rt-Turn
Project
This project would
include relocating the
existing free-right turn to
the existing signalized
intersection. The project
would also construct
curb and gutter, curb
ramps, sidewalk, and
various electrical items.

0.4 mile north of
the project
Construction timing is
currently unknown.

Wrong Way Driver
Prevention Safety
Improvements Project
This project would
include restriping
existing crosswalks to a
ladder type pattern,
roadside signs would be
upgraded or installed,
and Red Reflective
Pavement Markers or L-
2 markers would be
placed at 121 locations
on the pavement on off-
ramps located
throughout the project
limits.

0.4 mile north of
the project
Construction timing is
currently unknown.

Source: (California Governor's Office of Planning and Research, 2025; City of Sacramento, n.d.; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, n.d.)
Construction of I-5 at Pocket Road (03-0N820) Project, Traffic Signal Safety Project (T15215000), Pocket Rd Sidewalk and Signalized Rt-Turn Project, and Wrong Way Driver Prevention Safety Improvements Project may occur at the same time as the project. All projects would result in temporary impacts related to air quality, noise, and traffic; however, these would be short-term.

The project would not result in impacts which would be cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future project. In addition, the Del Rio Trail Project and the Sacramento River East Levee Improvements element of the LAP are anticipated to finish prior to the start of the project.

Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impacts and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkw ay Plan EIR.

C. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Additional Significant Environmental Effect. No direct or indirect adverse effects were identified in this Initial Study or previously in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR .

Measures from the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR would be implemented to reduce impacts on biological resources and cultural resources . The NES, ASR, and ESA Action Plan includes avoidance and minimization measures to further protect biological, archa eological,

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
137
cultural, and tribal cultural resources; however, the project would not result in new or increased potentially significant impacts with or without the inclusion of these measures. No new mitigation measures to prevent potential impacts related to biological and cultural resources are identified in the NES, ASR, FOE, or ESA Action Plan. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact on the environment and the project would not result in effects more severe than what was evaluated in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR.

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
138
S ECTION IV – ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project.

Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas
E
missions
Recreation
Agricultural Resources Hazards Transportation and Circulation Air Quality Hydrology and Water
Q
uality
Tribal Cultural Resources
Biological Resources Land Use Utilities and Service Systems Cultural Resources Noise Wildfire
Energy Public Services Mandatory Findings of
S
ignificance
Geology and Soils Population & Housing

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
139
SECTION V – DETERMINATION
On the basis of the Initial Study:

The City previously prepared and certified the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR (SCH# 93-10216, certified by Resolution No. 97-590) which considered the environmental effects of a riverfront trail along the Sacramento River levee in the city of Sacramento. The proposed trail segment was included in the analysis in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. The trail segment for this project has the same alignment and general cross section as the trail segment analyzed in the 1997 Sacramento River Parkway Plan EIR. No new or substantially more intense or severe significant environmental impacts or potentially significant environmental impacts would result from the proposed trail segment.

Based on the 2025 Initial Study for the project, none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR have been identified. In summary, the proposed project would not:
• result in any new significant or potentially significant environmental effects, • substantially increase the intensity or severity of previously identified significant effects, • result in mitigation measures or alternatives previously found to be infeasible becoming feasible, or
• result in availability/implementation of mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the prior EIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant or potentially significant effects on the physical environment.

These conclusions confirm that a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not warranted, and this Addendum to the prior EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 is the appropriate CEQA document for the project. No changes are needed to the certified EIR or the adopted M MP for the project.

Signature Date

Printed Name

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
140

REFERENCES CITED
California Air Resources Board. (n.d.). Sensitive Receptor Assessment. California, United States.

Retrieved from https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/capp-resource -center/community- assessment/sensitive-receptor-
assessment#:~:text=Sensitive%20receptors%20are%20children%2C%20elderly,are%20 considered%20sensitive%20receptor%20locations.

California Air Resources Board, California Energy Comission. (2003). Reducing California's Petroleum Dependence. Retrieved from
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/isd/fuels/carefinery/ab2076final.pdf California Department of Conservation. (2010, December 31). Fault Activity Map. California, United States. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/ California Department of Conservation. (2017). State of California Williamson Act Contract Land.

California, United States. Retrieved from
https://planning.lacity.org/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial %20Study/Attachment%20B%20References/California%20Department%20of%20Conse rvation%20Williamson%20Map%202016.pdf
California Department of Conservation. (2022). California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder .

Retrieved from California Department of Conservation:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/
California Department of Conservation. (2022). Data Viewer. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/geologichazards/DataViewer/index.html California Department of Conservation. (n.d.). Geologic Map of California. California, United States. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/gmc/ California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. (2024, April 1). Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Resposbility Zone. California, Sacramento County. Retrieved from https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire- hazard-severity-zones
California Department of Transportation. (2013, September). Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. California, United States. Retrieved from https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34120/Caltrans-2013- construction-vibration-PDF
California Department of Transportation. (2020). Transporation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Caltrans.

California Energy Commission. (2021a). California Building Decarbonization Assessment.

Retrieved from
file:///C:/Users/savannah/Downloads/TN239311_20210813T140633_California%20Buildi ng%20Decarbonization%20Assessment%20-
%20Final%20Commission%20Report.pd.pdf

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
141
California Energy Commission. (2021b). Final 2021 Integrated Energy Policy Report Volume I:

Building Decarbonization. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs -and- topics/programs/energy-efficiency-existing-buildings
California Energy Commission. (2022). 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings. Retrieved from
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/CEC-400-2022-010_CMF.pdf California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. (2025). CEQAnet. Retrieved from https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/Search?City=Los+Banos
CalRecycle. (2005, September 12). Sacramento County Landfill (Kiefer) (34-AA-0001). California, United States. Retrieved from
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2070?siteID=2507 CalRecycle. (2020, July 2). L and D Landfill (34 -AA-0020). California, United States. Retrieved from https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2087?siteID=2524 CalRecycle. (n.d.). Florin Perkins Public Disposal Site -T/P (34-AA-0221). California, United States. Retrieved from
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/242?siteID=4721 CalRecycle. (n.d.). Sierra Waste Recycling & Transfer Station (34-AA-0214). California, United States. Retrieved from
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/5636?siteID=4334 CDFW. (2022). https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps -and- Data#:~:text=Maps%20and%20Data-,CNDDB%20Maps%20and%20Data,- The%20CNDDB%20is. Retrieved from CDFW: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps- and-Data#43018407-rarefind-5
City of Sacramento. (1996, September). Final Environmental Impact Report Sacramento RIver Parkway Plan Update. Sacramento, California, United States. Retrieved from http://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Environmental- Impact-Reports/Sac-River-Parkway-Plan/Final-EIR-Sacramento-River-Parkway-Plan- Update-1996.pdf?la=en
City of Sacramento. (2015, December). Evacuation Maps. Retrieved from https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/DOU/Flood- Ready/Maps/Evacuation-Maps/ARS_B19.pdf?la=en
City of Sacramento. (2016). Sacramento Railyards Specific Plan Update. Sacramento.

City of Sacramento. (2021, January 14). Sacramento City Code 8.62.200. Retrieved from Sacramento City Code:
https://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/?view=desktop&topic=8-8_68-iii-8_68_200 City of Sacramento. (2022). Traffic Impact Guidelines.

City of Sacramento. (2023). Climate Action & Adaptation Plan. Retrieved from https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Major-

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
142
Projects/generalPlan/Climate-Action-and-Adaptation-Plan---April-28--2023.pdf?la=en City of Sacramento. (2023, April). Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (Public Review Draft).

Retrieved from City of Sacramento: https://www.cityofsacramento.org/Community - Development/Planning/Major-Projects/General-Plan
City of Sacramento. (2024, February 27). Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Climate Action and Adoption Plan. California, United States. Retrieved from https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/content/dam/portal/cdd/Planning/General-Plan/2040- General-Plan/Adopted%202040%20General%20Plan_20240227.pdf City of Sacramento Department of Public Works. (2015, March 3). 2035 General Plan Background Report . California, United States. Retrieved from
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/Community-Development/Resources/Online- Library/2035--General-Plan
City of Sacramento. (n.d.). Current Projects . Retrieved from http://www.cityofsacramento.org/Public-Works/Engineering-Services/Projects City of Sacramento. (n.d.). Land Information Lookup Application. Sacramento, California, United States. Retrieved from
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6f8e021cb286482b9a649e33 ac6e67ea
Department of Toxic Substances Control. (2022). EnviroStor . Retrieved from EnviroStor:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov
Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. (2025a). Archaeological Survey Report for the Sacramento River Parkway Project, Sacramento County, California.

Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. (2025b). Environmentally Sensitive Area Action Plan for the Sacramento River Parkway Project, Sacramento County, California.

FEMA. (2012). FEMA Flood Map Service Center . Retrieved from FEMA:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
GPA Consulting & Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. (2025). Finding of No Adverse Effect for the Sacramento River Parkway Project.

GPA Consulting. (2025). Historical Resources Evaluation Report for the Sacramento River East Levee Trail Project.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. (2016). Web Soil Survey. California, United. Retrieved from https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Pacific Gas & Electric. (2024). Company Profile. Retrieved from Pacific Gas & Electric:
https://www.pge.com/en/about/company-information/company-profile.html Sacramento Area Council of Governments. (2022). 2023-2026 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program.

Sacramento City Unified School District. (2022). Our Schools. Retrieved from https://www.scusd.edu/our-schools

SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PROJECT
ADDENDUM TO THE 1997 SACRAMENTO RIVER PARKWAY PLAN EIR
143
Sacramento County. (2021). 2021 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan: Annex F, City of Sacremento.

Retrieved from
https://waterresources.saccounty.gov/stormready/Documents/LHMP%202021/Annex%2 0F%20City%20of%20Sacramento.pdf
Sacramento County. (2022, May 25). Background to the Safety Element. California, United States. Retrieved from https://planning.saccounty.net/PlansandProjectsIn - Progress/Documents/Safety.pdf
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. (2024, August). California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2022.1. Retrieved from
https://www.caleemod.com/model/results
Sacramento Municipal Utility District. (2024). Company Information. Retrieved from Sacramento Municipal Utility District: https://www.smud.org/en/Corporate/About-us/Company - Information
Sacramento, C. o. (2015, March 3). Pocket Community Plan. California, Unied States. Retrieved from https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-
/media/Corporate/Files/CDD/Planning/Community-Plans/Pocket.pdf?la=en State Water Resources Control Board. (2022). GeoTracker . Retrieved from GeoTracker:
http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (n.d.). Sacramento River Levees. Retrieved from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento Dirstrict Website:
https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Sacramento-Levee-Upgrades/Sac- River-Levees/
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, February 28). California Nonattainment/Maintenance Status for Each County by Year for All Criteria Pollutants.

California, United States. Retrieved from
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/anayo_ca.html U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, July). Criteria Air Pollutants. Retrieved from U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants U.S. Fish and Wildlife NWI. (2022). National Wetlands Inventory . Retrieved from U.S. Fish and Wildlife NWI: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (2022a). Information for Planning and Consultation. Retrieved from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/ U.S. Geological Survey. (2011). Groundwater Quality in the Southern Sacramento. U.S.

Department of the Interior.

United States Census Bureau. (2020). ZIP Code Tabulation Area ZCTA5 95831. Retrieved from United States Census Bureau:
https://data.census.gov/profile/ZCTA5_95831?g=860XX00US95831 Wood Rodgers. (2023, May). Natural Environment Study. Caifornia, United States. 4040
127)25&216758&7,21
+67
)/25,15'
65,9(55'
47+67
)5$1./,1%/9'
:$77$9(
)58,75,'*(5'
32:(5,115'$5'(1:$<+2:($9(
672&.721%/9'
47+$9(
6:$77$9(
6767
)8/721$9(
*(5%(55'
+('*($9(
5,9(56,'(%/9'
7+67;3
47+$9(
6+(/'215'
0$&.5'
32&.(75'
&$/9,1(5'
(/'(5&5((.5'
%52$':$<67
(/9$6$9(
6/$1'3$5.'5
)2/620%/9'
*/25,$'5
67$9(&(17(53.:<
(/.*529()/25,15'
)/25,13(5.,165'
6287+32573.:<
$0(5,&$15,9(5'5/$5,9,(5$'5
0($'2:9,(:5'
9$//(<+,'5
:&$3,72/$9(
/$1'3$5.'55,&+$5'6%/9'
%,*+251%/9'
)2/620%/9'
40

0

0
0
367-67,67&67

LOCATION MAP
Sacramento
Yolo County
≤ ≤

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
© 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS

XXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND:
127)25&216758&7,21
127)25&216758&7,21
NO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION A-ANOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLEGEND:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX NO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION A-ANOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLEGEND:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X

NO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION A-ANO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION B-BNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGEND:

X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
NO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION A-ANOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLEGEND:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

NO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION B-BNO SCALEACCESS POINT SECTION A-ANOT FOR CONSTRUCTION LEGEND: