Sacramento City Council
December 2, 2025

Table 4.9-2
City of Sacramento and Sacramento County Population and Household Growth
Area Year Population Households
Persons Per
Households
City of Sacramento 2010 466,488 174,624 2.67
2023 518,161 202,406 2.56
Sacramento County
Unincorporated
2010 554,554 219,621 2.53
2023 598,519 223,328 2.68
Sacramento County 2010 1,418,788 523,538 2.71
2023 1,572,453 588,934 2.67
Source:
 California Department of Finance. Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities Counties and the State, January 1, 2011-2018, with 2010 Benchmark. Released May 1, 2018.  California Department of Finance. Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities Counties and the State, January 2011-2021, with 2020 Benchmark. Released May 1, 2021.  City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento Housing Element 2021-2029 (Appendix H-1: Community Profile).

December 2021.
 Sacramento County. Sacramento County Housing Element of 2021-2019. March 8, 2022.

Average Household Size
The average size of households is a function of the number of residents living in households within a given area divided by the number of occupied housing units within the given area. As shown in Table 4.9-3, as of 2023, the average household size within the City is approximately 2.56 persons per household, which is slightly less than the household sizes within Sacramento County and the statewide average of 2.77 persons/household.

Table 4.9-3
Average Household Size (Persons Per Household)
Area 2023
California 2.77
Sacramento County 2.67
City of Sacramento 2.56
Source: California Department of Finance. Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities Counties and the State, January 2011-2021, with 2020 Benchmark. Released May 1, 2021.

Projected Population and Housing Growth
As shown in Table 4.9-4, the City of Sacramento is projected to have a 27 percent increase in population from 466,488 residents in 2010 to 640,381 residents in 2035. As of 2023, the City of Sacramento has a total of 207,274 dwelling units, consisting of a mix of densities.7 While Table

4.9-2 and Table 4.9-4 demonstrate that growth within the City has not reached the maximum growth buildout estimates, development within the City is anticipated to continue to grow as new development occurs within the undeveloped areas of the City. SACOG has anticipated growth within the six-county Sacramento region through the 2020 MTP/SCS. According to the 2020 MTP/SCS, the City is anticipated to grow to a total of 260,410 housing units by 2035 and 267,970 housing units by 2040.8
7 California Department of Finance. Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities Counties and the State, January 2011-2021, with 2020 Benchmark. Released May 1, 2021. 8 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy – Appendix C: 2020 MTP/SCS Land Use Forecast. November 18, 2019.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-4
City of Sacramento Population Growth Projections
Area 2010 2020 2035 Percent Change
(2010-2035)
Sacramento 466,488 528,866 640,381 27%
Source: City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento Housing Element 2021-2029 (Appendix H-1: Community Profile). December 2021.

Regional Housing Needs Plan
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is a minimum projection of additional housing units needed to accommodate projected household growth of all income levels by the end of the housing element’s statutory planning period. Based on SACOG’s adopted RHNA, each city and county must update the housing element of their General Plan to demonstrate how the jurisdiction will meet the expected growth in housing need over the planning period.

According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), housing is classified as “affordable” if households do not pay more than 30 percent of income for payment of rent (including utilities) or monthly homeownership costs (including mortgage payments, taxes, and insurance). SACOG adopted their current Regional Housing Needs Plan (RHNP) on March 20, 2020, which officially assigns the allocations to cities and counties in the six-county Sacramento region. SACOG’s RHNA covers the planning period from 2021 to 2029, and defines the income unit categories as follows:
 Very Low-Income Unit: is one that is affordable to a household whose combined gross household income is at or lower than 50 percent of the Sacramento County median income.
 Low-Income Unit: is one that is affordable to a household whose combined gross household income is at or between 50 and 80 percent of the Sacramento County median income.
 Moderate Income Unit: is one that is affordable to a household whose combined gross household income is at or between 81 and 120 percent of the Sacramento County median income.
 Above Moderate Income Unit: is one that is affordable to a housing whose combined gross household income is at or greater than 120 percent of the Sacramento County median income.

On November 21, 2019, the SACOG Board of Directors approved RHNA Methodology Option C for the RHNA Methodology Cycle 6 (2021 through 2029 planning period).9 This action provides the number of total housing units that each jurisdiction in the SACOG region must zone for during the eight-year period. Based on the approved RHNA Methodology Option C, the SACOG region requires a minimum of 38,999 new very low-income units and 23,503 new low-income units for the upcoming planning period.10 According to SACOG’s RHNP, the City of Sacramento’s RHNA number for combined low- and very-low-income levels is 16,769 dwelling units (see Table 4.9- 5).11
9 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Available at:
https://www.sacog.org/regional-housing-needs-allocation-rhna. Accessed June 2022. 10 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Plan 2021-2029 – Appendix D: Draft RHNA Methodology Menu. Adopted March 2020. 11 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. Regional Housing Needs Plan 2021-2029. Adopted March 2020.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-5
City of Sacramento and Sacramento County Regional Housing Needs Allocations (2021-2029)
Jurisdiction
Total
Units1
Very Low
Income
Low
Income Moderate
Above
Moderate
Combined
Low and
Very Low
# % # % # % # % # %
City of
Sacramento
Total
45,580 10,463 23 6,306 13.8 8,545 18.7 20,266 44.5 16,769 36.8 Sacramento
County
Unincorporated
Total
21,272 4,466 21 2,692 12.6 4,186 19.7 9,928 46.7 7,158 33.6

1. Total number of units based on proportion of growth in SACOG’s adopted 2020 MTP/SCS.

Source: Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Regional Housing Needs Plan. Adopted March 2020.

4.9.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT
The following is a description of environmental laws and policies that are relevant to the CEQA review process concerning land use and planning, as well as population and housing matters.

State Regulations
The following are applicable State regulations related to land use and planning/population and housing.

Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15131
Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15131 provides that economic or social information may be included in an EIR, but those economic or social effects shall not be considered significant effects on the environment. In an EIR, the lead agency is responsible for researching economic or social changes resulting from a project, which may eventually lead to physical changes in the environment. Such economic or social changes can be used to determine the significance of physical changes on the environment.

Regional Housing Needs Plan
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate a fair share of the regional housing need. The share is known as RHNA and is based on a RHNP developed by councils of government. The state-mandated RHNA process (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires SACOG to develop a methodology that determines how to divide and distribute an overall allocation that the region receives from the State.

Senate Bill 330
California Senate Bill (SB) 330, “The Housing Crisis Act of 2019,” was signed into law by Governor Newsom on October 9, 2019 and became effective January 1, 2020. The bill establishes a statewide housing emergency to be in effect until January 1, 2025. During the housing emergency period, cities and localities in urban areas, including the City of Sacramento, are generally prohibited from rezoning actions or imposing new development standards that would reduce the zoned capacity for housing, or adopting new design standards that are not objective. In such jurisdictions, the demolition of existing housing units is only permitted if replacement units are Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

provided. The demolition of existing low-income units is only permitted if certain conditions related to affordability and tenant protections are met.

Local Regulations
The following are the local regulations and standards relevant to the CEQA review process with respect to land use and planning/population and housing. Specific goals and policies from the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and the SMF ALUCP are listed in Table 4.9-7 at the end of this chapter.

City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan
Specific goals and policies from the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan related to land use and planning/population and housing are listed in Table 4.9-7 at the end of this chapter and are discussed at length.

Sacramento Area Council of Governments
SACOG is responsible for the preparation of, and updates to, the MTP/SCS for the region and the corresponding Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP). The MTIP identifies short-term projects (seven-year horizon) in more detail.

Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The 2020 MTP/SCS was adopted by the SACOG board on November 18, 2019.12 The MTP/SCS is a long-range plan for transportation improvements in the region and provides a 20-year transportation vision and corresponding list of projects. The plan is based on projections for growth in population, housing, and jobs.

SACOG determines the regional growth projections by evaluating baseline data (existing housing units and employees, jobs/housing ratio, and percent of regional growth share for housing units and employees), historic reference data (based upon five- and ten-year residential building permit averages and historic county-level employment statistics), capacity data (General Plan data for each jurisdiction), and current MTIP data about assumptions used in the most recent MTP/SCS.

SACOG staff then meets with each jurisdiction to discuss and incorporate more subjective considerations about planned growth for each area. Finally, SACOG makes a regional growth forecast for new homes and new jobs, based upon an economic analysis provided by a recognized expert in order to estimate regional growth potential based on market analysis and related economic data, which is incorporated into the MTP/SCS.

Airport Land Use Commission
The SACOG Board of Directors serves as the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba counties. The State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Sections 21670 et seq.), identifies the role and responsibilities of ALUCs in land use planning.

The Act is intended to ensure that proposed land uses in areas around public-use airports are compatible with continued airport operations.

Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan One of the ALUC’s primary functions is to develop and adopt an ALUCP for each public-use airport within its jurisdiction. The ALUCP includes land use policies focused on four compatibility 12 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. 2020 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. November 18, 2019.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

factors: safety, noise, airspace, and overflight. The Sacramento International Airport (SMF) ALUCP was adopted in December 2013.

The basic function of the SMF ALUCP is to promote compatibility between Sacramento International Airport and the surrounding land uses. The ALUCP establishes a set of compatibility criteria applicable to new development located within the Airport Influence Area established by the ALUCP. The ALUCP establishes zones regarding noise compatibility, safety compatibility, airspace protected, and overflight compatibility, and establishes criteria for land uses based on the zones that they are located in.

Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission
Sacramento LAFCo is a State-mandated boundary commission responsible for coordinating logical and timely changes in local government boundaries. In consideration of proposals, the Commission observes four basic statutory purposes: the discouragement of urban sprawl, the preservation of open space and agricultural land resources, the efficient provision of government services, and the encouragement of orderly growth boundaries based upon local conditions and circumstances. LAFCo’s powers, procedures, and functions are set forth in the Cortese-KnoxHertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, (Government Code Section 560000 et eq.).

The LAFCo is charged with applying the policies and provisions of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act to its decisions regarding annexations, incorporations, reorganizations, and other changes of government organization. These standards have been adopted pursuant to the authority contained in the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act to assist in carrying out its provisions. Specifically, these standards are designed to:

1. Give applicants, for changes of organization, guidance as to the information the LAFCo needs to make appropriate determinations concerning their applications;

2. Provide applicants, for changes of organization, with explicit guidance as to the criteria the LAFCo will utilize in approving, disapproving, amending, or conditionally approving applications for changes of organization;

3. Ensure consistency in the LAFCo's decision-making;

4. Facilitate communication among local agencies in the region;

5. Provide elected officials, governmental staff, and members of the general public information and notice as to the standards and procedures that the LAFCo will utilize in evaluating applications; and

6. Minimize adverse social, economic and environmental impacts of growth.

The Sacramento LAFCo Policy, Standards, and Procedures Manual outlines the adopted specific standards for its action to ensure that it renders fair and consistent decisions for specific actions, such as annexations and detachments, in accordance with State law. The Sacramento LAFCo uses these specific standards, as well as the applicable policies and general standards, during its decision-making process. Specific goals and policies from Chapter V, Specific Standards by Type of Action, of LAFCo’s Policy, Standards, and Procedures Manual are applicable to the proposed project are listed in Table 4.9-6.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

4.9.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The following section describes the standards of significance and methodology used to analyze and determine the proposed project’s potential impacts related to land use, planning, population, and housing. A discussion of the project’s impacts, as well as mitigation measures where necessary, is also presented.

Standards of Significance
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project would result in any of the following:
 Physically divide an established community;
 Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect;
 Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); or
 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere (see Chapter 5, Effects Not Found to be Significant, of this EIR).

As noted above, issues related to whether the proposed project would result in the following impact is discussed in Chapter 5, Effects Not Found to be Significant, of this EIR:
 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Method of Analysis
The following section analyzes the compatibility of the proposed project with surrounding land uses and compliance of the proposed project with adopted plans and policies, pursuant to Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Land Use and Planning
This chapter analyzes the compatibility of the proposed project with surrounding land uses and compliance of the proposed project with adopted plans and policies. Environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project are discussed in the respective environmental categories.

This discussion complies with Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that EIRs discuss inconsistencies with adopted local plans as part of the environmental setting. The ultimate determination of consistency will be made by the Sacramento LAFCo and the City of Sacramento City Council.

Methods Related to Evaluating Potential Division of an Established Community This EIR evaluates whether the proposed project has the potential to physically divide an established community. The evaluation considers the existing type and intensity of uses in the project vicinity and those proposed for the project site. The analysis assumes the construction and implementation of the proposed project within the existing environment to determine if the project would be compatible with the established community surrounding the project site.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Consistency with the Applicable Land Use Regulations
The proposed project is examined for consistency with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Sacramento LAFCo based on the relevant policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect contained within this EIR. The project’s consistency with the City of Sacramento Planning and Development Code and the SMF ALUCP is also discussed.

Population and Housing
The level of significance of the impacts related to population and housing is determined by evaluating whether the proposed project, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure), would induce substantial unplanned population growth in the project area.

Project-Specific Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion of land use, planning, population, and housing impacts is based on implementation of the proposed project unless otherwise noted.

4.9-1 Cause a significant environmental impact due to physically dividing an established community. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

A project risks dividing an established community if the project would introduce infrastructure or alter land uses so as to change the land use conditions in the surrounding community, or isolate an existing land use. Currently, the project site is undeveloped. Surrounding existing land uses in the project area include a Life Storage facility and the Westlake single-family residential subdivision to the east; the West Drainage Canal, vacant agricultural land, open space land, and the Paso Verde K-8 School to the south; undeveloped agricultural land to the west; the Sacramento International Airport to the northwest, across I-5; and the Metro Air Park, Amazon SMF-1 Fulfillment Center, and the under-construction Northlake (Greenbriar) subdivision to the north, across I-5.

Given that both the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels would result in the development of similar land uses on contiguous parcels, the following discussion applies to the potential for both project components to physically divide an established community. In addition, the analysis includes evaluation of the proposed off-site improvements.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
The proposed project would include development of an industrial park with up to 5,204,500 square feet (sf) of light industrial uses, approximately 98,200 sf of retail/highway commercial uses, and associated internal roadways and other improvements. In addition, the nonparticipating parcels, comprised of approximately 83 acres, would result in first tier entitlements for future industrial uses of approximately 1,404,800 sf.

As discussed in this chapter, the proposed project would be compatible with existing land uses in the project area and would not alter the existing general development trends in the area or isolate an existing land use. For example, the light industrial uses Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

are anticipated to be consistent with the distribution centers within the Metro Air Park north of I-5. Furthermore, the proposed project would not cut off any existing or proposed transportation route that provides connectivity in the area. Finally, although the proposed project would include installation of an off-site force main that would convey wastewater generated from the proposed uses to the 48-inch SacSewer North Natomas interceptor line in East Commerce Way, the force main would be sized to accommodate flows from the project site and would not change the land use conditions in the surrounding community or isolate an existing land use.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not physically divide an established community, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.9-2 Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any Sacramento LAFCo plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

The proposed project’s consistency with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization and Sacramento LAFCo policies is discussed below.

Given that the entire project site, including the industrial park portion and the nonparticipating parcels, would require LAFCo approval of a SOI Amendment and Annexation, the following discussion applies to the potential for both project components to conflict with any Sacramento LAFCo plan, policy, or regulation. In addition, the analysis considers conflicts associated with the proposed off-site improvements.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
The project site is currently located within unincorporated Sacramento County and has a Sacramento County General Plan land use designation of Agricultural Cropland and is within the County zoning district of AG-80. The proposed project includes approval of an SOI Amendment, as the project site is currently situated adjacent to, but outside of, the City of Sacramento’s SOI. The project application requires preparation of a Targeted Municipal Services Review as part of modifying the City’s SOI to be coterminous with the boundaries of the project site, to evaluate adequacy of public services and utilities for the proposed Annexation. Following approval of the proposed SOI Amendment, the proposed project would then require Annexation of the site into the City of Sacramento boundaries, as well as Annexation into the SacSewer service area.

As part of LAFCo’s review of the Annexation and SOIA requests, LAFCo is required to ensure that the proposed project would not cause a net loss of targeted housing resources on a countywide basis. Residential development does not currently exist at the project site and, based on the existing Sacramento County General Plan land use and zoning designations for the project site, residential development was not Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

anticipated at the project site. The existing land uses located east and northeast of the project site are generally developed with residential and commercial uses. The undeveloped areas surrounding the project site to the north, south, and west are designated for agricultural or industrial uses. As such, the surrounding area is not planned for additional residential uses and the proposed project would not prevent affordable housing from being developed in the project area. As outlined in Table 4.9- 5, the City of Sacramento’s RHNA number for combined low- and very-low-income levels is 16,769 dwelling units. Based on the above, the proposed project would not impact the City’s ability to meet the required RHNA numbers for affordable housing.

Table 4.9-6 below lists the proposed project’s consistency with applicable Sacramento LAFCo policies related to land use and planning. The discussion in Table 4.9-6 evaluates the proposed Annexation of the 474.4-acre project site relative to the applicable Sacramento County LAFCo policies and standards regarding annexation, reorganization, and SOI Amendments, which are found in Chapter V of the Sacramento LAFCo Policy, Standards and Procedures Manual. Ultimately, the reorganization is a discretionary action by Sacramento LAFCo.

Policy compliance is often a matter of interpretation. The LAFCo commissioners are the ultimate arbiters of LAFCo policy for this project, and their judgment regarding the project and a specific policy may be different from that set forth in this report. Thus, the following policy evaluation should be viewed as preliminary, with the ultimate decision to be made by the appropriate appointed and elected officials.

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
A. Annexations to Cities

1. LAFCo will utilize Spheres of Influence
through application of the following
standards:
a. The LAFCo will approve an
application for annexation only if
the proposal conforms to and lies
wholly within the approved
Spheres of Influence boundary
for the affected agency;
b. The LAFCo generally will not
allow Spheres of Influence to be
amended concurrently with
annexation proposals;
c. The LAFCo will favorably
consider proposals that are a
part of an orderly, phased
annexation program by an
a. As part of the Annexation application
process, a Targeted Municipal Services
Review has been prepared as part of
the proposed project to ensure the
adequacy of public services and utilities
to serve the project site. Following
approval of the SOI Amendment, the
project site would be located completely
within the City of Sacramento’s SOI,
which would then allow for Annexation.
b. The City of Sacramento SOI would be
amended prior to the application of
Annexation into the City.
c. The project site is located adjacent to
the existing City of Sacramento limits.

Following approval of the SOI
Amendment, the project site would be
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
agency for territory within its
Sphere of Influence;
d. An annexation must be
consistent with a city's Sphere of
Influence Plan; and
e. The LAFCo encourages the
annexation to each city of all
islands of unincorporated
territory and all substantially
surrounded unincorporated
areas located within the city's
Sphere of Influence.
located completely within the City of
Sacramento’s SOI.
d. A Targeted Municipal Services Review
has been prepared as part of the
Annexation application process.

Following approval of the SOI
Amendment, the project’s request for
Annexation into the City of Sacramento
would be considered. The Targeted
Municipal Services Review would allow
for Sacramento LAFCo and the City of
Sacramento to ensure the adequacy of
public services and utilities to serve the
project site.
e. The northeastern and eastern
boundaries of the project site are
located adjacent to the current City of
Sacramento limits and, following
approval of a SOI Amendment, the
project site would be located completely
within the City of Sacramento’s SOI.

The proposed project includes seven
non-participating properties to ensure
logical boundaries and would not create
unincorporated islands. The
nonparticipating properties would
receive General Plan and Prezoning
designations as part of the proposed
Annexation.

2. The LAFCo will not approve proposals in
which boundaries are not contiguous
with the existing boundaries of the City to
which the territory will be annexed,
unless the area meets all of the following
requirements:
a. Does not exceed 300 acres;
b. Is owned by the City;
c. Is used for municipal purposes;
and
d. Is located within the same county
as the city.

The project site is located immediately west
of the Sacramento City limits and is
contiguous with the existing City boundaries.

3. The LAFCo will favorably consider
proposals to annex streets where
adjacent municipal lands will generate
additional traffic and where there are
isolated sections of county road that will
result from an annexation proposal.

Cities shall annex a roadway portion
The Annexation would result in the project
site, which is located east of Power Line
Road and south of I-5, becoming part of the
City of Sacramento. In addition, the portion
of Bayou Way, which traverses the project
site would be abandoned and replaced with
a new internal roadway system that would be
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
when 50 percent of the property on either
or both sides of the street is within the
City.
maintained by the City of Sacramento.

Although an approximately 0.17-mile portion
of Metro Air Parkway extends into the
northern portion of the project site, because
50 percent of the project site is not located
on either side of Metro Air Parkway, the
roadway would not be maintained by the City
of Sacramento.

4. The LAFCo will favorably consider
annexations with boundary lines located
so that all streets and rights-of-way will
be placed within the same city as the
properties which either abut thereon or
for the benefit of which such streets and
rights-of-way are intended.

The proposed project is bordered by Power
Line Road to the west and I-5 to the north. In
addition, Bayou Way traverses the project
site and a portion of Metro Air Parkway
extends into the northern portion of the
project site. Bayou Way would be maintained
the City of Sacramento; however, as
discussed above in response to Policy A-3,
Metro Air Parkway would be maintained by
Caltrans.

5. An annexation may not result in islands
of incorporated or unincorporated
territory or otherwise cause or further the
distortion of existing boundaries unless it
is determined that the annexation as
proposed is necessary for orderly
growth, and cannot be annexed to
another city or incorporated as a new
city. Annexations of territory must be
contiguous to the annexing city. Territory
is not contiguous if its only connection is
a strip of land more than 300 feet long
and less than 200 feet wide.

The project site is located immediately west
of the existing Sacramento City limits and the
proposed project would not result in islands
of incorporated or unincorporated territory.

6. The LAFCo opposes extension of
services by a City without annexation,
unless such is by contract with another
governmental entity or a private utility or
as otherwise in compliance with
Government Code Section 56133.

The extension of services resulting from the
proposed project would be part of the
Annexation process and not involve an out of
agency services agreement as defined by
Government Code Section 56133.

B. Annexations to Districts

1. The LAFCo will favorably consider
proposals for districts to annex all
developed urban land inside their Sphere
of Influence and will ordinarily approve
such proposals unless the residents and
owners of the property being annexed
demonstrate that such areas should not
be annexed.

The proposed project would require approval
of an SOI Amendment, which would amend
the City of Sacramento’s SOI to include the
project site. The project site is currently
undeveloped. Therefore, existing residents
would not be annexed into the City of
Sacramento as part of the proposed project.

2. Updated Plan for Services, as defined in
the policies, standards and procedures
must be available before LAFCo will
approve a proposal initiated by the
district.

A Plan for Services have been prepared to
ensure adequacy of public services and
utilities to serve the project site and will be
reviewed by LAFCo and the City of
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
Sacramento as part of the Annexation
application process.

3. The LAFCo opposes extension of
services by a district without annexation,
unless such extension is by contract with
another governmental entity or a private
utility or as otherwise in compliance with
Government Code Section 56133.

The proposed project currently lies outside
the Sacramento County USB. The USB and
the City of Sacramento boundaries represent
the limit of the Sacramento County service
areas for SacSewer. As a result, the project
site has not been included as a future area to
be served in the master plans of the County
of Sacramento or the City of Sacramento.

However, following Annexation into the City,
the project site would also be annexed into
the service area for SacSewer, and service
would be made available to the project.

C. Reorganization

1. LAFCo will strive to ensure that each
separate territory included in the
proposal, as well as affected neighboring
residents, tenants, and landowners,
receive services of an acceptable quality
from the most efficient and effective
service provider after the reorganization
is complete.

As part of the project site’s Annexation into
the City of Sacramento, the project site
would also be annexed into the service area
for SacSewer, and service would be made
available to the project site. Because
SacSewer currently provides utility services
in the vicinity of the project site, SacSewer
would be able to efficiently and effectively
extend services to the proposed project upon
Annexation of the site.

2. The service quality, efficiency and
effectiveness available prior to
reorganization shall constitute a
benchmark for determining significant
adverse effects upon an interested party.

The LAFCo will approve a proposal for
reorganization which results in this type
of significant adverse effects only if
effective measures are included in the
proposal.

The City of Sacramento currently provides
sufficient services to all properties within the
existing City limits and would continue to
provide equivalent if not greater service to
the existing City and project site upon
Annexation into the City of Sacramento.

I. Amendments to Spheres of Influence

1. The LAFCo will generally treat a
proposed amendment to an agency's
Sphere of Influence similarly to an
application for approval of a Sphere of
Influence. The LAFCo's policies will be
applied to applications for amendment to
a Sphere of Influence as if it were an
annexation planned for the mid- to longrange future. For that reason, each of the following sets of policies will apply to
applications for amendments to Spheres
of Influence:
a. General policies;
As detailed herein, the proposed SOI
Amendment and Annexation would be
generally consistent with applicable
Sacramento LAFCo policies related to SOI
Amendments, as Annexation would only
occur after approval of the proposed SOI
Amendment, extension of services to the
project site would be completed only after
approval of Annexation, the proposed project
would not create an island of incorporated
territory, and the quality of service from
existing providers would not be deteriorated
by the proposed project. Please see
responses throughout Table 4.9-6 for further
details on the proposed project’s consistency
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
b. Specific policies and standards
for annexations to cities and
special districts; and
c. Specific policies and standards
for amendments to Spheres of
Influence.
with applicable Sacramento LAFCo policies
related to SOI Amendments and
Annexations.

2. The Sphere of Influence Municipal
Services Review must be current before
additions to a Sphere of Influence will be
approved by LAFCo.

As part of the Annexation application
process, a Targeted Municipal Services
Review has been prepared and would be
considered by Sacramento LAFCo and the
City of Sacramento to ensure the adequacy
of public services and utilities to serve the
project site.

3. The Sphere of Influence amendments
shall precede applications for
annexations.

Prior to Annexation of the project site into the
City of Sacramento limits, the proposed
project would require approval of a SOI
Amendment to modify the City’s SOI to
include the project site. As part of the
Annexation application process, a Targeted
Municipal Services Review has been
prepared and would be considered by
Sacramento LAFCo and the City of
Sacramento to ensure the adequacy of
public services and utilities to serve the
project site.

4. Amendment proposals must be
consistent with the updated Sphere of
Influence and/or Municipal Services
Review.

Please see response to Sacramento LAFCo
Policy I-2.

5. An applicant for an amendment to a
Sphere of Influence must demonstrate a
projected need or lack of need for
service.

As discussed further in Chapter 4.11, Public
Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of
this EIR, adequate water, wastewater,
electrical, natural gas, and solid waste
services are available to serve the project
site, including adequate water supplies,
wastewater treatment capacity, and landfill
capacity.

6. Amendment proposals involving Sphere
expansion which contain prime
agricultural land will not be approved by
the LAFCo if there is sufficient alternative
land available for annexation within the
existing Sphere of Influence.

As discussed in Chapter 4.2, Agricultural
Resources, of this EIR, Mitigation Measure

4.2-1 requires the preservation of off-site
farmland at a ratio of one Farmland acre
converted to urban land uses outside the
Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP) policy area to 0.5-acre preserved,
which, combined with the biological
resources mitigation required by Mitigation
Measure 4.4-5(b), would result in an overall
preservation at a 1:1 ratio. However, while
Mitigation Measure 4.2-1 would preserve an
equivalent acreage of Farmland elsewhere,
the proposed project would result in the
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
conversion of agricultural land to urban uses,
and would not create new agricultural land.

As such, the proposed project would lead to
an overall loss of Farmland.

However, the proposed project is sited on
land in proximity to other similar industrial
uses (the Metro Air Park and Amazon SMF1 Fulfillment Center), and would not require major extension of public services and
utilities, nor result in the deterioration of
existing service levels of providers that would
serve the project site. Furthermore, due to
the built-out nature of the City of
Sacramento, an alternate location within the
City is not currently available to serve the
proposed project. As discussed further in
Chapter 6, Alternatives Analysis, of this EIR,
the location that comes closest to feasibility
is located northwest of the intersection of
Fruitridge Road and South Watt Avenue in
the southeast portion of the City, and
contains a portion of land already designated
for Industrial use by the Sacramento General
Plan. However, in order to include a
comparable amount of acreage to the
proposed project, the alternative location
would require the demolition of several
commercial businesses, including, but not
limited to, a building materials store, furniture
store, and 7-Eleven convenience store. In
addition, approximately 117 acres of the 354
acres required of the alternative would
consist of land already set aside for L and D
Landfill. Furthermore, buildout of the
proposed project at the alternative location
would require a General Plan Amendment
(GPA) that would reduce the amount of land
designated for residential development, as a
portion of the site is currently designated
Traditional Neighborhood Medium by the
Sacramento General Plan. As such, buildout
of the proposed project at an alternative
location is infeasible. Furthermore, buildout
of the site on alternative land outside, but
adjacent to, the City’s SOI would likely result
in similar conversion of Farmland as the
proposed project, given the prevalence of
agricultural land adjacent to the City’s SOI.

Therefore, sufficient alternative land is not
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-6
Discussion of Relevant Sacramento LAFCo Policies
Policy Project Consistency
available for Annexation within the City’s SOI
to accommodate the proposed project.

7. A phased plan for annexation of Sphere
of Influence territory should be included
in the Sphere of Influence proposal.

The entire project site would be annexed into
the City of Sacramento as part of the
approved Annexation. As such, the proposed
project would not include a phased plan for
Annexation.

8. No amendments to a Sphere of Influence
Plan will be approved unless a Municipal
Services Review of the Sphere of
Influence Plan exists that has been
prepared by a local agency and adopted
by LAFCo if required.

The Municipal Services Review for the
proposed project has been completed and
complies with Sacramento LAFCo Policy I-8.

9. The LAFCo will deny proposals that
would result in significant unmitigable
adverse effects upon other service
recipients or other agencies serving the
affected area unless the approval is
conditioned to avoid such impacts.

As discussed in Chapter 4.11, Public
Services, Utilities, and Service Systems,
impacts to public services and utilities as a
result of the proposed project would be less
than significant.

10. The LAFCo will approve a proposed
amendment to a Sphere of Influence only
if the subject agency will be the most
logical and prospectively most efficient
provider of services to the subject
territory.

The project site is contiguous to the City of
Sacramento limits, which provides public
services to the properties adjacent to the
project site. Therefore, the City of
Sacramento is the most logical and
prospectively most efficient provider of
services to the project site.

The proposed project would require approval of a SOI Amendment and Annexation by Sacramento LAFCo. As discussed above, the SOI Amendment and Annexation of the project site appear to be generally consistent with the Sacramento LAFCo policies regarding land use and planning. Ultimately, the reorganization is a discretionary action by Sacramento County LAFCo. Therefore, there would be a less-thansignificant impact in relation to conflicting with a Sacramento County LAFCo plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.9-3 Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any City of Sacramento land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, including without limitation the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan. Based on the analysis
below, the impact is less than significant.

The proposed project’s consistency with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan is discussed below. The proposed project’s consistency with the Cortese-Knox- Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act and Sacramento LAFCo policies is discussed in Impact 4.9-2 above.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
Given that the entire project site, including the industrial park portion and the nonparticipating parcels, would require City of Sacramento approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Prezoning, the following discussion applies to the potential for both project components to conflict with a City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan policy or regulation. Because installation of the proposed off-site force main, including each of the three potential force main segment options, would occur either in existing roadway right-of-way (ROW) or in other previously disturbed areas, the proposed offsite force main alignment would be consistent with the City’s intended uses for existing roadways. Thus, the proposed off-site force main would be consistent with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan.

General Plan Amendment
The General Plan Guidelines published by the State Office of Planning and Research defines consistency as, “An action, program, or project is consistent with the general plan if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment.” Therefore, the standard for analysis used in this EIR is based on general agreement with the policy language and furtherance of the policy intent (as determined by a review of the policy context). The determination that the project is consistent or inconsistent with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan policies or other City plans and policies is ultimately the decision of the City Council.

Although the CEQA analysis may identify some areas of general inconsistency with City policies, the City has the ability to impose additional requirements or conditions of approval on a project, at the time of its approval, to bring a project into more complete conformance with existing policies.

A discussion of the project’s general consistency with policy language and furtherance of policy intent is discussed in further detail below. In addition, Table 4.9-7 at the end of this chapter lists the proposed project’s consistency with applicable City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan policies related to land use.

The project site is currently designated as Agricultural Cropland by the Sacramento County General Plan. The proposed project would require the amendment of the City’s existing 2040 General Plan to include the boundaries of the industrial park footprint and nonparticipating parcels (totaling 414.3 acres –not including roadways) as Employment Mixed-Use to reflect and support the proposed land uses. The 353.5- acre industrial park portion of the proposed project would include development of an industrial park with up to 5,204,500 sf of light industrial uses and approximately 98,200 sf of retail/highway commercial uses. In addition, the proposed project would include development of 1,404,800 sf of future industrial uses on 83 acres. Thus, the proposed uses would be consistent with the City Sacramento 2040 General Plan proposed land use designation of Employment Mixed-Use. Without approval of the GPA, development of the proposed project would not be an allowable use on the project site.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

The requested GPA is a policy issue under the purview of the Sacramento City Council. From a policy perspective, Table 4.9-7 at the end of this chapter demonstrates that the proposed project would be generally consistent with the policies in the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Should City Council approve the requested entitlements, the proposed project’s impacts related to compliance with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan would be less than significant.

Prezoning
The project site is currently located within unincorporated Sacramento County and is within the County zoning district of AG-80. Upon Annexation to the City, to ensure compatibility with the City Sacramento 2040 General Plan land use designations for the site and consistent with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act, the proposed project site would be Prezoned to include 317.9 acres of Industrial Planned Unit Development (M-1-PUD) zoning, 83 acres of M-1 zoning for the nonparticipating parcels, and 13.4 acres Highway Commercial PUD (HC-PUD) zoning (see California Government Code Section 56375). The proposed project would comply with all requirements in the Sacramento Planning and Development Code including, but not limited to, parking, setbacks, and landscaping.

As a result, the project’s impact related to compliance with the Sacramento Zoning Code would be less than significant.

Planned Unit Development
The development proposal includes the request for the approval of Planned Unit Development Guidelines and Schematic Plan from the City of Sacramento. As detailed in Sacramento City Code Section 17.452.010, the purpose of a PUD is to provide greater flexibility in the design of integrated developments than otherwise possible through strict application of zoning regulations. With respect to industrial development, a PUD allows for well-designed and controlled groupings of research, service, or light industrial uses within an area containing visual and operational amenities and features, such as selective occupancies, setbacks, landscaping, and bulk and building material controls.

The Airport South Industrial PUD Guidelines would modify the standards for the proposed project to allow for all uses permitted in the M-1 and HC zones with the exception of the following:
 Residential uses;
 Adult entertainment business;
 Laundromat, self-service;
 Mortuary, crematory, cemetery;
 Museum;
 Cannabis manufacturing, testing, dispensary;
 cannabis cultivation, distribution, manufacturing;
 Railroad right-of-way (ROW);
 Amusement center, outdoor;
 Bar, nightclub;
 Cardroom;
 College campus, school, K-12;
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

 Correctional facility;
 Drive-in theater;
 Golf Course, driving range;
 Gun range, rifle range;
 Veterinary clinic, veterinary hospital, kennel;
 Animal slaughter;
 Boat dock, marina;
 Heliport, helistop;
 Junk yard;
 Livestock yard;
 Solid waste landfill;
 Surface mining operations; and
 Wells, gas and oil.

The PUD Guidelines developed for the project site include design standards for site design, building design, landscaping, signage, and lighting. For example, the PUD Guidelines anticipate that the project site will be developed for tenants primarily focused on warehouse and distribution uses, light manufacturing and assembly, cold storage, and other uses as indicated in City of Sacramento Planning and Development Code Section 17.220, M-1 zone except for the non-permitted uses outlined above.

While the PUD does not establish a minimum or maximum building size, it is anticipated that the building(s) within the M-1-PUD zoning district would be 500,000- sf or larger and would have one or more tenants. The maximum building height within the M-1-PUD would be 70 feet and the maximum building height for hotels in the HCPUD zoning district would be 80 feet. Landscaping associated with development within the PUD would utilize native and drought tolerant species; vegetation would be compatible with airport overflight zones.

Conclusion
Following approval of an SOI Amendment and as part of Annexation of the project site into the City of Sacramento by the Sacramento LAFCo, the proposed project would require approval of a GPA, Prezoning, and a PUD by the City Council. As discussed further in Table 4.9-7, the proposed project would be consistent with the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Planning and Development Code. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any applicable City of Sacramento land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, including without limitation the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

4.9-4 Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure).

Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than
significant.

Growth can be induced in a number of ways, including through the elimination of obstacles to growth or through the stimulation of economic activity within the region.

Examples of projects likely to have growth-inducing impacts include extensions or expansions of infrastructure systems beyond what is needed to serve project-specific demand, and development of new residential subdivisions or office complexes in areas that are currently only sparsely developed or are undeveloped, or in areas not currently planned for development.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
Given that both the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels would, with project approval, be developed with similar land uses on contiguous parcels, the following discussion describes potential effects related to direct and indirect population growth associated with implementation of the proposed project, including the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels. In addition, the analysis includes evaluation of the proposed off-site improvements.

Direct Population Growth
The proposed project would include development of a 353.5-acre industrial park and 98,200 sf of retail/highway commercial uses. Following approval of an SOI Amendment and Annexation into the City, the proposed project would require approval of Prezoning to include 317.9 acres of M-1-PUD zoning, 83 acres of M-1 zoning for the nonparticipating parcels, and 13.4 acres of HC-PUD zoning. In addition, the project would require an amendment to the City’s existing 2040 General Plan to include 414.3 acres (not including roadways) of Employment Mixed-Use. The project site also includes several nonparticipating parcels, comprised of approximately 83 acres, which would require approval of a General Plan Amendment and Prezoning for future industrial uses of approximately 1,404,800 sf. The project site also includes 37.9 acres of Caltrans I-5 fee title ROW, which would not be developed as part of the proposed project.

Given that the proposed project would not create housing, the nature of the project would not directly induce population growth. While the project would provide space for new business, development would not necessarily induce unplanned population growth. As discussed further in Chapter 4.12, Transportation, of this EIR, based on assumptions used by DKS Associates, the transportation consultant for the proposed project, development of the project could generate a total of approximately 4,000 employees. While the project could indirectly attract residents to the area for employment opportunities, new employees would likely be drawn from current residents in the surrounding area.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Per the City’s population projections, as presented in Table 4.9-4, the population is anticipated to increase from 2020 to 2035 by 111,515 (640,381 residents - 528,866 residents). Conservatively estimating that all permanent positions associated with the project would be filled by new residents to the Sacramento region and assuming that the proposed project would be fully built out and operating at full capacity by 2035, the project’s contribution to the overall population increase by 2035 would be approximately 3.5 percent (4,000 new residents ÷ 111,515 residents). Thus, the increase in jobs would be relatively small compared to the City’s existing and anticipated population levels.

The project site is located within the vicinity of existing residential land uses to the east and south, as well as the under-construction Northlake Subdivision to the north, across I-5. Furthermore, the Natomas community is a primarily residential area of the City and has numerous completed and planned subdivisions and apartment complexes within five miles of the project site. Thus, housing opportunities are available in the project area should employees need to relocate for new employment at the proposed development.

The primary consideration regarding increased growth is not the growth itself, but the effects of such growth on the City’s infrastructure systems, with the key inquiry being whether the systems would become overburdened as a result of the additional demand created by the project. As discussed in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this EIR, adequate utility infrastructure would be available to support the proposed project.

As discussed in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this EIR, the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant (SRWTP) is permitted to treat average day weather flow (ADWF) of 181 million gallons per day (mgd). Since the opening of the SRWTP, system improvements have been made to accommodate regional growth and to add capacity to the Sacramento Area Sewer District’s (SacSewer) interceptor system. In 2014, the SRWTP’s ADWF was approximately 141 mgd.

Although future growth in the SacSewer service area will increase demands for wastewater service and use the remaining capacity of the SRWTP, regional water conservation efforts have resulted in a reduction in water use, which has in turn, increased the available capacity at the SRWTP. For instance, SacSewer anticipates per capita water consumption to decline through the continued installation of water meters and water conservation measures. As such, a substantial amount of additional water conservation is expected throughout SacSewer’s service area, and the wastewater treatment provider expects the existing 181 mgd ADWF capacity to be sufficient through 2050. Accordingly, the Targeted Municipal Services Review concludes that the SRWTP would maintain sufficient capacity to treat wastewater flows generated by the proposed project, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

The proposed project’s impacts related to sewer services, as well as other public services and utilities, are discussed in further detail in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this Draft EIR. As determined in Chapter 4.11, sewer infrastructure included as part of the proposed project would be sufficient to serve the proposed project without requiring the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, and the proposed sewer infrastructure, including the Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

off-site force main, would be sized to accommodate only the proposed project. Thus, the proposed project’s overall impacts related to public services and utilities would be less than significant.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not directly induce substantial unplanned population growth.

Indirect Population Growth
Because the proposed project would redesignate the industrial park footprint and the nonparticipating parcels (totaling 414.3 acres – not including roadways) of the project site from Agricultural Cropland to Employment Mixed-Use, new jobs related to the industrial park and commercial uses would be created at the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would result in long-term employment growth in the area.

As discussed above, the proposed project could conservatively result in an increase of the permanent population by approximately 4,000 residents who would be employed by the new industrial and/or commercial businesses. The new residential population would likely patronize local businesses and services in the area, fostering economic growth. Furthermore, cumulative development, in conjunction with the proposed project, would result in increased demand for public services and utilities.

However, as discussed in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, the project’s demand for public services could be accommodated by existing services and would not create a need for new or altered governmental facilities.

Furthermore, development of the proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities.

The project would also provide short-term employment opportunities, which would likely be filled from the local employee base, with the possible exception of a few landscape maintenance jobs. While construction of the proposed project would result in increased employment opportunities in the construction field, which could potentially result in increased permanent population and demand for housing in the vicinity of the project site, employment patterns of construction workers are such that construction workers would not likely, to any significant degree, relocate their households as a result of the construction-related employment opportunities associated with the proposed project.

In addition, following approval of Annexation into the City, the proposed project would be annexed into the service areas for SacSewer, and service would be made available to the project. Underground infrastructure improvements for the proposed project would include new on-site water lines, as well as new on-site sanitary sewer gravity system, force main, and pump station. Development of the project site would also require installation of off-site sewer infrastructure to accommodate the proposed land uses. The proposed sewer infrastructure, including the off-site force main, would be sized to accommodate only the proposed project.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not indirectly induce substantial unplanned population growth.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Conclusion
Considering the above, development of the proposed project could result in direct onsite population growth; however, population growth resulting from the proposed project would be within the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SACOG growth estimates for the project area. As a result, impacts related to the direct or indirect inducement of substantial population growth would be considered less than significant. It should be noted that potential impacts related to growth inducement are discussed further within Chapter 6, Statutorily Required Sections, of this EIR, consistent with Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures
As defined in Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, “cumulative impacts” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, compound, or increase other environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.

The cumulative setting for impacts related to land use and planning/population and housing encompasses buildout of the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan policy area, including the Northlake (Greenbriar) subdivision to the north of the project site, as well as the sites of the Metro Air Park, the Upper Westside Specific Plan, the Grandpark Specific Plan (formerly Natomas North Precinct), the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan, and the Elkhorn Boulevard Extension Project. For further details related to the cumulative setting of the proposed project, refer to Chapter 6, Statutorily Required Sections, of this EIR.

4.9-5 Cause a significant cumulative environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Based on the analysis below, the cumulative impact is less than significant.

Land use plans or policies and zoning generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. The determination of significance for impacts related to such issues is whether the project would cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Such a conflict is site-specific, and, thus, is only addressed on a project-by-project basis. As shown in Table 4.9-7 at the end of this chapter, the proposed project would be generally consistent with relevant policies in the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and the SMF ALUCP.

Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a significant cumulative environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and the cumulative impact would be less-than-significant.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.9-6 Cause a significant cumulative environmental impact due to cumulative substantial unplanned population growth. Based on the analysis below, the cumulative impact is less than significant.

As discussed in Chapter 6 of this EIR, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(4), states, “[…] the mere existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone shall not constitute substantial evidence that the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable.” Therefore, even where cumulative impacts are significant, any level of incremental contribution is not necessarily deemed cumulatively considerable.

While the developed areas in the City limits are comprised of single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, and public uses, other areas in the cumulative setting within and adjacent to the City limits are planned for development through buildout of the following projects: the Northlake (Greenbriar) subdivision to the north of the project site, as well as the sites of the Metro Air Park, the Upper Westside Specific Plan, the Grandpark Specific Plan (formerly Natomas North Precinct), the Sacramento International Airport Master Plan, and the Elkhorn Boulevard Extension Project. As shown in Table 4.9-4, the City of Sacramento, is projected to have a 27 percent increase in population from 466,488 residents in 2010 to 640,381 residents in 2035. However, such estimates do not account for the future expansion of the City through buildout of the aforementioned projects.

The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan enables residential growth and identifies the necessary infrastructure improvements needed to keep pace with that growth by providing a plan for future roads, utilities, and government services to support future growth. The new industrial uses provided by the proposed project would fall within the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SACOG’s growth estimates for the City of Sacramento and for the region. As discussed in Impact 4.9-4, the proposed project would not induce unplanned population growth, either directly or indirectly. Given that the proposed project would not create housing, the nature of the project would not directly induce population growth. While the project would provide space for new business and is anticipated to generate a total of approximately 4,000 new employees, development would not necessarily induce unplanned population growth.

It should be noted that population growth itself does not constitute a significant physical environmental effect. Rather, the determination of significance is based on whether population growth associated with a project has been previously planned for, and whether such growth could result in indirect impacts from associated development. As such, the cumulative analysis within each technical chapter of this EIR evaluates the physical environmental impacts of cumulative development.

Considering the above, implementation of the proposed project, in combination with future development occurring under buildout of the City of Sacramento 2040 General Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Plan, would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to substantial unplanned population growth.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan
Land Use and Placemaking
LUP-1.4 City Services Prior to Annexation. Prior to the provisions of City services to new development in unincorporated areas, the City shall require that the unincorporated properties be annexed into the City. Alternatively, the City may provide utility service to properties in advance of annexation only if the annexation process has been initiated and the landowner and City have executed a conditional agreement for services that stipulates minimum standards for the development of roads and urban infrastructure and criteria and conditions for annexation into the City.

Please see responses to applicable Sacramento LAFCo policies in Table 4.9-6. As discussed therein, a Targeted Municipal Services Review and Plan for Services have been prepared as part of the Annexation application process. Following approval of the SOI Amendment, the project’s request for Annexation into the City of Sacramento would be considered. The Targeted Municipal Services Review and Plan for Services would allow for Sacramento LAFCo and the City of Sacramento to ensure the adequacy of public services and utilities to serve the project site.

LUP-1.12 Development Adjacent to Agriculture. The City shall require open space or other appropriate buffers for new development abutting productive agricultural areas to protect the viability of active agricultural operations outside of the city and ensure compatibility of uses with residents in adjacent areas.

As shown in Figure 3-3, Airport South Industrial Park – Preliminary Site Plan, in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, detention/retention basins would be developed in the spaces between the proposed structures and the existing open space/agricultural areas that abut the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy LUP-1.12.

LUP-1.13 Airport Land Use Compatibility. The City shall work with the Sacramento County Airport System (SCAS) and the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) to ensure that new development near the area’s airports is compatible with airport operations, adopted ALUC policies, and applicable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans.

Please see responses to SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan policies in this table. Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter 4.10, the project site is located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. The normally acceptable noise environment for industrial uses is defined as a noise exposure level of less than 75 dBA CNEL. Therefore, noise levels related to the SMF at the project site would be within the City’s criteria for the normal acceptable noise environment. Based on the analysis presented throughout this EIR, the proposed project would be compatible with airport operations, adopted ALUC policies, and applicable ALUC Plans. As such, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy LUP-1.13.

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.

Mitigation Measure 4.12-2 of this EIR would require that the proposed project implement several new bicycle and pedestrian improvements onsite and along the project frontage, in compliance with City standards, as well as provide connections to existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy LUP-2.5.

LUP-4.7 Visual and Physical Character. Using development standards and design standards/guidelines, the City shall promote The proposed project would include approval of a PUD. As detailed in Section 17.452.010 of the City’s Municipal Code, the purpose of a PUD is Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
development patterns and streetscape improvements that transform the visual and physical character of automobile-oriented corridors to create a positive impact on the human and natural systems that interact with them. to provide greater flexibility in the design of integrated developments than otherwise possible through strict application of zoning regulations. With respect to industrial development, a PUD allows for well-designed and controlled groupings of research, service, or light industrial uses within an area containing visual and operational amenities and features, such as selective occupancies, setbacks, landscaping, and bulk and building material controls. As such, all landscaping requirements would be subject to review and approval by the City to ensure compliance with all City landscaping requirements. Therefore, the proposed project would generally comply with Policy LUP-4.7.

LUP-4.10 Multi-Modal Access. The City shall require that new development provide bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access where appropriate to reduce the need for onsite parking and to improve the pedestrian experience within corridors and centers with street trees and landscaping.

Please see response to Policy LUP-2.5, above.

LUP-7.5 Industrial Aesthetics. The City shall encourage the development and maintenance of well-designed industrial and light industrial properties and structures that meet adopted standards for visual quality and design, especially where interfacing with other uses.

Please see response to Policy LUP-4.7, above.

Historic and Cultural Resources
HCR-1.1 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.

The proposed project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure 4.5-2, which ensures that any previously unknown archeological or cultural resources encountered on-site would not be disturbed. The proposed project would also be required to comply with Mitigation Measures 4.13-1(a) through 4.13-1(c), which impose procedures to halt construction activities if previously unknown tribal cultural resources are encountered on-site. With implementation of the above Mitigation Measures, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy HCR-1.1.

HCR-1.3 Compatibility with Historic Context. The City will continue to review new development, alterations, and rehabilitation/remodels for compatibility with the surrounding historic context and consistency with design guidelines/ standards, including the Historic District Plans. The City shall pay special attention to the scale, massing, and relationship of As discussed in Chapter 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this EIR, the project site lies within two districts documented as P-34-005251 and P-34-005225. However, as discussed therein, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to cultural resources. As such, the project would not conflict with Policy HCR-1.3.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
proposed new development to complement surrounding historic environments.

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.

As part of the Cultural Resources Study prepared for the proposed project by Tom Origer & Associates, a records search of the North Central Information Center (NCIC) of the CHRIS was conducted for the project site. In addition, Tom Origer & Associates contacted the NAHC requesting a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) for traditional cultural resources within or near the project site on January 21, 2022. Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter 4.13, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this EIR, pursuant to AB 52, project notification letters were sent by the City to tribes who requested notification of proposed projects within this geographic area on January 27, 2022. Similarly, SB 18 notification letters were sent by the City on January 27, 2022, to a list of tribes that were identified by the NAHC as being culturally or traditionally affiliated with the project area. As such, the proposed project has satisfied the requirements of Policy HCR-1.6.

HCR-1.7 Contextual Features. The City shall promote the preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and/or reconstruction, as appropriate, of contextual features related to historic resources, including maintenance and reconversion of parkway strips to landscaping; maintenance and replication of historic sidewalk patterns; use of historic streetlamps and street signs; and maintenance or restoration of historic park features.

As discussed in Chapter 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this EIR, although known historical resource sites have been recorded on-site, all such resource sites were evaluated and considered ineligible for the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As such, the proposed project would not adversely impact any historic resources, and the project would not conflict with Policy HCR1.7.

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.

As discussed in Chapter 4.13, Tribal Cultural Resources, of this EIR, Mitigation Measures 4.13-1(a) through 4.13-1(c) would reduce impacts related to tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level. For example, Mitigation Measure 4.13-1(a) requires the applicant/contractor to provide a tribal cultural resources sensitivity and awareness training program for all personnel involved in project construction. In addition, if tribal cultural resources (such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, artifacts, or human remains) are encountered at the project site during construction, Mitigation Measure 4.13-1(b) requires construction activities to be suspended within 100 feet of the find (based on the apparent distribution of cultural materials) and the construction Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
contractor would be required to immediately notify the project’s City representative. Furthermore, if an inadvertent discovery of human remains is made at any time during project-related construction activities or project planning, Mitigation Measure 4.13-1(c) requires the City to immediately halt potentially damaging excavation in the area of the remains and notify the Sacramento County Coroner and a professional archaeologist to determine the nature of the remains. The Coroner is required to examine all discoveries of human remains within 48 hours of receiving notice of a discovery on private or State lands (HSC Section 7050.5[b]). Based on the above, the proposed project would comply with Policy HCR1.15.

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:
 Consideration of existing reports and studies,  Consultation with Native American tribes as required by State law,
 Appropriate site-specific investigative actions, and  Onsite monitoring during excavation if appropriate.

Please see response to Policy HCR-1.15, above. The Cultural Resources Study prepared by Tom Origer & Associates for the proposed project included a cultural resources literature search, archival research, consultation with the NAHC, and field surveys. Tom Origer & Associates also contacted the tribes identified by the NAHC. In compliance with AB 52 and SB 18, project notification letters were sent by the City of Sacramento on January 27, 2022 to tribes who requested notification of proposed projects within this geographic area. The City received one response to both the AB 52 and SB 18 notification letters from the UAIC, with a request to consult on the proposed project due to the cultural sensitivity of the area. The City subsequently initiated consultation with the UAIC. Consultation included the provision of the Cultural Resources Study to the UAIC for review. The UAIC provided tribespecific mitigation to be implemented as part of the proposed project, which is included in Chapter 4.13 Tribal Cultural Resources, of this EIR. Furthermore, in the event subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.5-2 requires all work to halt within a 50-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for precontact and historic archaeologist, will then be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and will have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. Based on the above, the proposed project would comply with HCR-1.17.

Mobility
M-1.5 Street Design Standards. The City shall maintain street design and operations standards that prioritize comfort and travel time for walking, bicycling, and transit, while managing vehicle speeds and traffic volumes, updating them as best practices evolve.

See response to Policy LUP-4.10, above. In addition, as further discussed in Chapter 4.12, Transportation, the proposed project would be required to comply with all building, fire, and safety codes and specific development plans would be subject to review and approval by the City’s Public Works Department and the City’s Fire Department, which would ensure that the proposed project’s internal roadway network is in compliance with all City design and operations standards. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy M-1.5 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.

See response to Policy LUP-4.10, above.

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.

Please see response to Policy M-1.5. As discussed above, the project would be served by a new internal roadway system including Airport South Industrial Drive, a modified two-lane Local Industrial roadway with a 75-foot right-of-way, that would bisect the property west to east by connecting Power Line Road to a future street (labeled “A” Drive in Figure 3-3) that would run north along the site’s eastern border and connect to a proposed round-a-bout where Bayou Way meets the project site. In addition, Mitigation Measure 4.12-2 of this EIR would require that the proposed project implement new bicycle and pedestrian improvements along the project frontage, in compliance with City standards. In addition, all internal roadways and associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements would be constructed in conformance with City standards.

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 traffic wherever feasible.

See response to Policy LUP-4.10, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
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.

Mitigation Measure 4.12-2 of this EIR would require that the proposed project implement new bicycle and pedestrian improvements along the project frontage, in compliance with City standards. In addition, all internal roadways and associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements would be constructed in conformance with City standards. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy M 2.1.2.

M-1.36 Electric Vehicles (EVs) in New Development. The City shall support minimum levels of EV infrastructure readiness and installation in new development and incentivize additional levels of EV charging, and EV car share, beyond City Code minimums.

As discussed in Chapter 4.3, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy, of this EIR, consistent with SMAQMD BMP-2, the proposed project would provide EV Ready parking spaces at the ratio with which the current CalGreen Tier 2 standards require EV Capable spaces (see Table 4.3-16 of this EIR). Given that the proposed project is anticipated to include a total of approximately 3,670 parking stalls, the project would be required to provide 1,652 EV Ready spaces, and 545 of the EV Ready spaces would be required to have EVSE. Compliance with BMP-2 would be ensured by Mitigation Measure 4.3-2(c). Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy M-1.36.

M-1.40 Contributions from New Development. The City shall require new development to construct or pay a proportionate share of the cost of improvements based on mobility-related impacts of the new development.

As discussed in the local transportation analysis (LTA) prepared for the proposed project by DKS Associates, the proposed project would be required to pay their fair share contribution towards intersection improvements within the project area. In addition, The proposed project would be required to pay their fair share contribution towards City-funded transit related improvements within the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy M-1.40.

M-2.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as Metric. Consistent with state law, the City shall evaluate transportation California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) impacts using vehicle miles traveled or other metrics as determined by the City, and shall not rely on automobile delay, as described by level of service or similar measures of vehicular delay as a measure of environmental significance. Local Transportation Analyses (LTA) shall continue to be required when necessary to aid in conditioning project entitlements for needed operational improvements.

Transportation impacts related to VMT are analyzed in Chapter 4.12, Transportation, of this EIR. As discussed therein, the proposed project does not include any retail uses in excess of 50,000 sf. Therefore, the highway commercial uses are considered to be local-serving retail, and consistent with OPR guidance, would result in a less-than-significant impact related to VMT. However, based on the SACOG SACSIM 19 travel demand model, the on-site industrial uses are anticipated to generate VMT at 128 percent of the regional average, which is above the significance threshold established for the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure 4.12-3, which requires that the owner/operator of on-site industrial building prepare and implement a VMT Reduction Plan to reduce VMT by at least Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
22 percent prior to the certificate of occupancy, consistent with the VMT Mitigation Memorandum prepared by the City’s Public Works Department for the proposed project. As noted in Chapter 4.12, with implementation Mitigation Measure 4.12-3, the proposed project would achieve a 22 percent reduction in VMT, and a less-than-significant impact related to VMT would occur. Based on the above, the proposed project would comply with Policy M2.3.

Public Facility and Safety
PFS-1.15 Development Fees for Facilities and Services. The City shall require development projects to contribute fees to ensure the provision of adequate police and fire services.

City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan Policy PFS-1.9 establishes the City’s commitment to ensuring the SPD and SFD have the necessary levels of facilities, equipment, and staffing. Accordingly, revenues generated through payment of applicable permit application fees, as well as development impact fees established pursuant to Sacramento City Code Section 18.24.050, ensure new development pays a fair share for police protection services provided by the SPD. The City funds the SFD budget, in part, through revenues generated from payment of application fees for applicable permits and clearances by new development. In addition, new development within the City is subject to applicable development impact fees to ensure a fair-share contribution is made to finance the purchase of new or expansion of existing SFD facilities, apparatus, and equipment necessary for the purposes of maintaining adequate service levels. Similar to the proposed project, cumulative development within the City’s General Plan policy area would be subject to applicable taxes and fees, including, but not limited to, property taxes, franchise taxes, business license taxes, and license and permit fees. Additionally, new residents generated by cumulative development would be subject to local sales taxes. Thus, revenues generated through fee payments associated with cumulative development would pay fair shares toward any new SPD and/or SFD facilities deemed necessary by the City, all of which would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable regulations and standards, and if necessary, undergo CEQA review.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy PFS-1.15.

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.

The development standards established by Sacramento City Code Section 17.220.250 for the M-1-PUD zoning district require compliance with the City’s wall, fence, and gate regulations, which are set forth in Sacramento City Code Chapter 17.620. The aforementioned regulations allow for enhanced fencing materials capable of providing additional security for nonresidential structures and requirements for gated entrances. Such features would reduce the demand for police protection services associated with the proposed project. In addition, all structures included as part of the proposed project would be constructed in accordance with the applicable standards set forth by the CBC and CFC. Consistent with the CBC, the design of the proposed buildings would include the installation and use of automatic fire sprinklers. Fire alarm systems would be incorporated pursuant to CFC requirements. Such features would reduce the potential for fires to occur and spread within the proposed structures, thereby reducing the demand for fire protection services associated with the proposed project. Based on the above, the proposed project would incorporate safety features and include the SPD and the 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. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy PFS-1.16.

PFS-3.1 Provision of Adequate Utilities. The City shall continue to provide reliable water, wastewater, and stormwater drainage utility services.

As discussed under Impact 4.11-6 in the Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems chapter of this EIR, the total average daily water demand for the proposed project would be 313.54 acre-feet per year (AFY). The City is anticipated to have a surplus of water supplies in all hydrologic conditions through 2045, and the lowest projected surplus is expected to be 198,436 AFY in 2045 during the fifth consecutive year of drought. Therefore, given the substantial amount of surplus projected for the City’s water supplies in all hydrologic conditions, the City’s existing water supplies would be able to accommodate the demand anticipated to be Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
generated by the City’s existing commitments, as well as the water demand projected for the proposed project. With respect to wastewater service, as discussed under Impact 4.11-7 in the Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems chapter of this EIR, the project’s cumulative average dry weather flow (ADWF) and peak wet weather flow (PWWF) demand is estimated to be 0.81 mgd and 2.09 mgd, respectively. The Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP) is permitted to treat ADWF of 181 mgd. Since the opening of the SRWTP, system improvements have been made to accommodate regional growth and to add capacity to SacSewer’s interceptor system. Accordingly, the SRWTP would maintain sufficient capacity to treat wastewater flows generated by the proposed project, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. With respect to storm drainage service, as discussed under Impact 4.8-4 in the Hydrology and Water Quality chapter of this EIR, the runoff from impervious surfaces created as part of the proposed project would be routed to six new detention basins located adjacent to the RD 1000 ditches and canals that border the western and southern boundaries of the project site, and areas adjacent to the RD 1000 L Drain (which bisects the eastern portion of the project site). The basins would be connected to the RD 1000 system through weirs to meet the pre-project spill conditions and to provide on-site floodplain storage. The proposed on-site stormwater drainage system is a closed system that would only experience external influences during larger events like the 100-year event. As summarized in Table 4.8-1 of this EIR, the proposed detention basins would be sufficiently sized to meet the required storage volumes. Thus, project runoff would be properly treated, and would not pollute downstream waterways. In addition, as summarized in Table 4.8-2 of this EIR, the outflow that would occur during post-project conditions closely mirrors the existing conditions of the project site. Thus, the proposed drainage system would not result in extensive period of standing water in the basins.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy PFS-3.1.

PFS-3.3 Development Impacts. Through the development review process, including through development impact fees and offsite improvements constructed by new development, the City shall ensure that adequate public utilities and services are available to serve new development.

See responses to Policies PFS-1.15, PFS-3.1 and PFS-3.13 above.

PFS-3.10 Meet Projected Needs. The City shall foster the orderly and efficient expansion of facilities and infrastructure to adequately meet projected needs, comply with current and future regulations, and maintain public health, safety, and welfare. Infrastructure and facility planning should discourage oversizing of infrastructure that could induce growth at the edges of the city beyond what is anticipated in the General Plan.

As discussed under Impact 4.11-6 in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this EIR, the Targeted Municipal Services Review prepared for the proposed project evaluated total buildout of the project site in accordance with the proposed land uses and the proposed utility improvements have been sized to accommodate full buildout of the project site, including the industrial park footprint and the nonparticipating parcels. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy PFS-3.10.

PFS-3.12 Safe and Compatible Utility Design. The City shall ensure that public utility facilities are designed to be safe and compatible with adjacent uses.

As discussed under Impact 4.11-5 in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this EIR, the proposed project would include a new pump station, which would be sited in Lot F. The new pump station would be designed and constructed in accordance with SacSewer Standards and Specifications, which provides that new pump stations must include natural screening to allow the facility’s architecture to blend into the local surroundings. All other utility improvements constructed as part of the proposed project would be installed underground and designed in compliance with applicable standards set forth by the City of Sacramento Standard Specifications and the SacSewer Standards and Specifications. In addition, in accordance with Sacramento City Code Section 12.12.260, new electrical infrastructure extended to the project site to serve the proposed project would be installed underground. As such, all new underground infrastructure constructed as part of the proposed project would be safe and compatible with adjacent uses. Based on the above, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy PFS3.12.

PFS-3.13 Impacts to Environmentally Sensitive Lands. The City shall consider the impacts on environmentally sensitive areas and habitats when locating and designing municipal utilities.

The proposed project would include new connections to existing water and storm drainage infrastructure in the immediate project vicinity, as well as connection to the North Natomas interceptor line within East Commerce Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Way through one of three optional off-site sewer alignments. To ensure that potential impact do not occur to environmentally sensitive areas as a result of the proposed project, the project would be subject to a wide range of mitigation to minimize all potential adverse effects to habitat for specialstatus species and other protected biological resources. With respect to potential impacts that could occur to special-status plant and wildlife species, mitigation measures would require implementation of applicable Natomas Basin HCP Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures for Covered Species to address potential impacts that could occur as a result of all project-associated construction activities, regardless of whether they occur within or outside of the Natomas Basin HCP permit area. For species not covered under the Natomas Basin HCP, such as northern harrier, white-tailed kite, song sparrow, and other nesting birds and raptors protected under the MBTA and CFGC, mitigation measures are also included to address potential impacts. As detailed in the Biological Resources chapter of this EIR, with implementation of the mitigation measures established therein, potential impacts to protected biological resources would not occur. In addition, new utility infrastructure would be designed and constructed in accordance with the applicable standards set forth by the City of Sacramento Standard Specifications or the Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) Standards and Specifications, ensuring the utility improvements are constructed in conformance with proper materials and sizing. Compliance with the applicable standards established by the City of Sacramento and SacSewer, as well as the mitigation measures set forth in this EIR would reduce potential impact to environmentally sensitive areas to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy PFS-3.13.

PFS-3.14 Underground Utilities. The City shall require new development to underground utility lines wherever feasible and coordinate with electricity and telecommunications providers to underground existing overhead lines where feasible.

Please see response to Policy PFS-3.12, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
PFS-3.15 Adequate Drainage Facilities. The City shall ensure that all new municipal drainage facilities are adequately sized and constructed to accommodate stormwater runoff, including incorporating “green infrastructure” design and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, where appropriate, stormwater treatment features, and, if applicable, trash capture devices for its stormwater facilities.

As discussed in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR, according to the Preliminary Drainage Study prepared for the proposed project, the proposed project would include an on-site storm drain system composed of post construction stormwater quality measures such as Low Impact Development (LID) components, dedication of landscaping areas, and six on-site detention basins, consistent with the Sacramento region Stormwater Quality Design Manual. The proposed LID features would be sufficiently sized to meet the required storage volumes. Furthermore, compliance with the Sacramento region Stormwater Quality Design Manual, and, by extension, the City’s NPDES permit, would be further enforced through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-2. Based on the above discussion, the proposed project would comply with Policy PFS-3.15.

PFS-3.16 Stormwater Design in Private Development. The City shall require proponents of new development and redevelopment projects to submit drainage studies that adhere to City stormwater design requirements and incorporate measures, including “green infrastructure”, Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, stormwater treatment, and, if applicable, trash capture devices, to prevent on- or off-site flooding and improve runoff water quality.

Please see response to Policy PFS-3.15, above.

PFS-4.8 New Development. The City shall ensure that water supply capacity is in place prior to granting building permits for new development.

As discussed under Impact 4.11-6 in Chapter 4.11, Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems, of this EIR, based on the data presented in Table 4.11-5, the proposed project’s associated water demand would be 314.35 acre-feet per year (AFY). As shown in Table 4.11-1 of this EIR, based on estimations from the City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City is anticipated to have a water supply surplus from 2025 to 2045 during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years, with the minimum surplus in all years expected to be 198,436 AFY in 2045 during the fifth consecutive year of a five-year drought. Thus, the City of Sacramento would have sufficient water supplies to serve existing demand, as well as the demand generated by the proposed project, in normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy PFS-4.8.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Environmental Justice
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.

As discussed in Chapter 4.3, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy, the analysis protocol and guidance provided by the SMAQMD’s CEQA Guide, including screening criteria and pollutant thresholds of significance, was used to analyze the proposed project’s air quality impacts. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(a) would ensure the proposed project’s compliance with SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs). Furthermore, an operational Health Risk Assessment (HRA) was prepared for the proposed project in order to assess the health risk impacts of DPM emissions from heavy-duty trucks travelling to and from the project site on nearby sensitive receptors, such as the single-family residences located east of the project site and the Paso Verde K-8 School located south of the project site. Based on the results of the HRA, operation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to excess concentrations of pollutants, and the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to DPM.

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.

Potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are addressed throughout Chapter 4.7 of this EIR. The analysis therein is based primarily on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared for the project site by Environmental Investigation Services, Inc. Based on the Phase I ESA, the EIR concludes that implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.7-2(a) and 4.7-2(b), which require testing of on-site soils for hazardous materials and appropriate actions if such materials are discovered, would be sufficient to ensure that a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, the proposed project would comply with Policy EJ1.8.

Environmental Resources and Constraints
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 As discussed in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR, according to the Preliminary Drainage Study prepared for the proposed project, the proposed project would include an on-site storm drain system composed of post construction stormwater quality measures such as LID components, dedication of landscaping areas, and six on-site detention basins, consistent with the Sacramento region Stormwater Quality Design Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
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.

Manual. The proposed LID features would be sufficiently sized to meet the required storage volumes. Furthermore, compliance with the Sacramento region Stormwater Quality Design Manual, and, by extension, the City’s NPDES permit, would be further enforced through the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.8-2, which would require the applicant to submit a detailed BMP and water quality maintenance plan to the City for review and approval prior to approval of final project improvement plans for any on-site development. As discussed under Impact 4.6-2 in Chapter 4.6, Geology and Soils, of this EIR, in accordance with the NPDES General Construction Permit, the project would be required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The SWPPP would include details of the sediment and erosion control practices. Furthermore, in compliance with Chapter 15.88 of the City Code, the project applicant would be required to prepare a grading plan and a sediment and erosion plan. The grading plan and a sediment and erosion plan would include erosion control measures and sediment control measures to ensure the stability of the ground surface and soil within the project site during construction activities.

ERC-2.2 Biological Resources. The City shall ensure that adverse impacts on sensitive biological resources, including specialstatus species, sensitive natural communities, sensitive habitat, and wetlands are avoided, minimized, or mitigated to the greatest extent feasible as development takes place.

See response to Policy PFS-3.13 above.

ERC-2.3 Onsite Preservation. The City shall encourage new development to preserve and restore on-site 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.

The proposed project would result in the loss of existing on-site habitat that has varying levels of potential to support various special-status plant and wildlife species. However, as discussed in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, all potential impacts to protected plant and wildlife species would either be less than significant, or would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the mitigation measures established by this EIR. Where a potential impact could result to a Covered Species protected by the Natomas Basin HCP, this EIR requires the proposed project to comply with the applicable Natomas Basin HCP Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures to address the Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
impact. For example, because special-status plant species could become established within the on-site grasses and canals of the industrial park footprint and nonparticipating parcels prior to commencement of construction activities, Mitigation Measure 4.4-1(a) requires compliance with Natomas Basin HCP Section V.A.1, which necessitates preconstruction surveys and, if necessary, implementation of other measures. Additionally, for potential impacts that could occur to protected species and other biological resources that are not covered under the Natomas Basin HCP, this EIR includes mitigation measures that establish various requirements, including, but not limited to, preconstruction surveys; additional measures to prevent impacts for species that are identified to be on-site; and/or compliance with applicable provisions of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) and Clean Water Act (CWA), including obtaining applicable permits and complying the provisions established therein. Thus, with implementation of the mitigation measures set forth within this EIR, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.3.

ERC-2.6 Wetland Protection. The City shall preserve and protect wetland resources including creeks, rivers, ponds, marshes, vernal pools, and other seasonal wetlands, to the extent feasible. If not feasible, the mitigation of all adverse impacts on wetland resources shall be required in compliance with State and Federal regulations protecting wetland resources, and if applicable, threatened or endangered species. Additionally, the City shall require either on- or off-site permanent preservation of an equivalent amount of wetland habitat to ensure no-net-loss of value and/or function.

As discussed under Impact 4.4-11 in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, a total of 1.501 acres of tributary waters and 0.58-acre of other waters potentially subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction occur within the grading limits of the proposed industrial park. The features are potential tributary waters and other waters of the State, subject to Central Valley RWQCB jurisdiction, as well as aquatic/riparian habitat, subject to requirements set forth by CWA Section 401 and CFGC Section 1600, respectively. In addition, the nonparticipating parcels feature similar land cover and aquatic resources as those that occur in the proposed industrial park footprint. To address the potential impacts, the EIR sets forth Mitigation Measures 4.4-11(a) through 4.4-11(f). Mitigation Measures 4.4-11(a) through 4.4-11(d) require that development of the proposed industrial park obtains authorization for the fill of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. through the CWA Section 404 process, obtains and complies with the provisions of a Section 401 water quality certification, and files a report of waste discharge with the Central Valley RWQCB. In addition, future development of the nonparticipating parcels must complete an Aquatic Resources Delineation (ARD) (conducted by a Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
qualified biologist) and obtain Section 404 and 401 permits to address potential impacts, consistent with the provisions of Mitigation Measures 4.4-11(a) through 4.4-11(d). With compliance with Mitigation Measures 4.4-11(a) through 4.4-11(f), the EIR concludes that the potential impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.6.

ERC-2.7 Annual Grasslands. The City shall preserve and protect native grasslands and vernal pools that provide habitat for rare and endangered species. If not feasible, the mitigation of all adverse impacts on annual grasslands shall comply with State and Federal regulations protecting foraging habitat for those species known to utilize this habitat.

As discussed in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, the project site does not include annual grasslands or vernal pools. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.7.

ERC-2.8 Wildlife Corridors. The City shall preserve, protect, and avoid impacts to natural, undisturbed habitats that provides movement corridors for sensitive wildlife species. If corridors are adversely affected, damaged habitat shall be replaced with habitat of equivalent value or enhanced to enable the continued movement of species.

As discussed under Impact 4.4-13 in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, the overall project site largely does not function as a wildlife corridor to terrestrial wildlife, as the site is bounded by physical barriers (i.e., roads, urban development, agricultural fields). However, because the canals within project site could support transient giant garter snake on a temporary basis, construction activities associated with the proposed industrial park and future development of the nonparticipating parcels could interfere substantially with the movement of giant garter snake through the site. To address the potential impact, the proposed project would be subject to Mitigation Measure 4.4-12, which requires implementation of applicable Natomas Basin Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures related to the protection of giant garter snake. With compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.4-12, the EIR concludes that the potential impact would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.8.

ERC-2.9 Habitat Assessments. The City shall consider the potential impact on sensitive plants and wildlife for each project requiring discretionary approval. If site conditions are such that potential habitat for sensitive plant and/or wildlife species may be present, the City shall require habitat assessments, prepared by a qualified biologist, for sensitive plant and wildlife species. If the Please see response to Policy ERC-2.3, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
habitat assessment determines that suitable habitat for sensitive plant and/or wildlife species is present, then either:

1. Protocol-level surveys shall be conducted (where
survey protocol has been established by a resource agency), or, in the absence of established survey protocol, a focused survey shall be conducted consistent with industry-recognized best practices; or

2. Suitable habitat and presence of the species shall be assumed to occur within all potential habitat locations identified on the project site. Survey Reports shall be prepared and submitted to the City and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (depending on the species) for further consultation and development of avoidance and/or mitigation measures consistent with state and federal law.

ERC-2.10 Agency Coordination. The City shall coordinate with State and Federal resource agencies (e.g., California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to protect areas containing rare or endangered species of plants and animals.

Where a potential impact could result to a Covered Species protected by the Natomas Basin HCP, this EIR requires the proposed project to comply with the applicable Natomas Basin HCP Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures to address the impact, which includes coordination with the CDFW and USFWS. Additionally, for potential impacts that could occur to protected species and other biological resources that are not covered under the Natomas Basin HCP, this EIR includes mitigation measures that establish various requirements, including, where applicable, coordination with relevant agencies. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.10.

ERC-2.11 Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan. The City shall continue to participate in and support the policies of the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan for the protection of biological resources in the Natomas Basin.

Please see response to Policy ERC-2.3. The project site supports suitable habitat for several Natomas Basin HCP Covered Species; however, the project site is adjacent to and largely surrounded by existing urbanized areas including residential neighborhoods, I-5, Metro Air Park, and the Sacramento International Airport master plan area. The goal of the Natomas Basin HCP is the conservation of Covered Species through the acquisition (conservation easement or fee title), protection, and enhancement of existing habitats in Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
the Natomas Basin, minimizing impacts of Covered Activities, including development activities, water facility maintenance, and reserve management activities, and focusing upon the preservation of the overall habitat values in the Natomas Basin. The Natomas Basin HCP was developed to allow some urban development to occur, while ensuring that habitat values are maintained and increased, to the maximum extent practicable, within the Natomas Basin. The Natomas Basin HCP sets forth guidelines and practices including the size and acreage of reserves to be established, acquisition criteria for upland and wetland areas to be acquired and managed by the Natomas Basin Conservancy, and reserve management practices to be employed to ensure successful habitat enhancement to support the Covered Species.As previously discussed above, the proposed project would be subject to the mitigation measures set forth by this EIR, which includes, where applicable, compliance with applicable Natomas Basin HCP Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures. In addition, as discussed under Impact 4.4-14 in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, the proposed project would not affect the effectiveness of the 0.5:1 mitigation ratio for the 17,500 acres of urban development authorized by the Natomas Basin HCP, as the project would not alter the habitat value of land authorized for development under the Natomas Basin HCP, nor adversely affect the habitat value of existing Natomas Basin Conservancy reserves established under the Natomas Basin HCP. Furthermore, the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect the connectivity of reserve habitat, relative to avian species covered under the Natomas Basin HCP, due to the species’ highly mobile and migratory nature. Similarly, the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect the connectivity of aquatic habitat in the Natomas Basin, given that the proposed project would be subject to applicable Natomas Basin Take Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures related to the protection of giant garter snake.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Finally, the Natomas Basin HCP stipulates that, by the end of its 50-year lifespan, the Natomas Basin Conservancy reserve system will have reached 8,750 acres with one habitat block at least 2,500 acres in size and the balance of reserve lands in habitat blocks of at least 400 acres in size. Development of the proposed project would not prevent the Natomas Basin Conservancy from establishing 8,750 acres of reserves in the Natomas Basin, as identified in the Natomas Basin HCP, as the project site constitutes only 0.89 percent of the acreage in the Natomas Basin and the Natomas Basin Conservancy is well on its way to securing all the reserve lands required to meet its obligations. Based on the above, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-2.11.

ERC-2.13 Climate Change-related Habitat Shifts. The City shall support the efforts of The Natomas Basin Conservancy and other habitat preserve managers to adaptively manage wildlife preserves to ensure adequate connectivity, habitat range, and diversity of topographic and climatic conditions are provided for species to move as climate shifts.

See response to Policy ERC-2.11, above.

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.

As discussed under Impact 4.4-13 in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, various trees occur in and along the boundaries of the nonparticipating parcels that could be developed in the future with industrial uses. The EIR requires Mitigation Measures 4.4-13(b) and 4.4-13(c), which require future development of the nonparticipating parcels to identify trees that meet the definition of a Private Protected Tree, as established by Sacramento City Code Section 12.56.020. If protected trees are identified in areas proposed for disturbance of nonparticipating parcels, Mitigation Measure 4.4-13(c) requires the applicant to implement Mitigation Measure 4.4-13(a), which requires obtaining a Tree Permit from the City of Sacramento Community Development Department. Should any on-site tree that would be potentially impacted by the proposed project be found to qualify as a Private Protected Tree, the project applicant shall obtain a Tree Permit from the City of Sacramento Community Development Department. It should be noted that oak woodlands were not identified in the industrial park footprint.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
In addition, the proposed project would be subject to applicable requirements established by the City of Sacramento, including Sacramento City Code Chapter 15.92, which establishes the City’s requirements related to landscape design, installation, maintenance, and management, including those related to newly planted trees. In addition, for new “Street Trees” planted in a City right-of-way, new development must comply with the City’s list of approved shade trees. Thus, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-3.3.

ERC-3.7 Trees of Significance. The City shall promote stewardship of city trees and private protected trees and ensure that the design of development projects provides for the retention of these trees where possible. Where removal cannot be avoided, the City shall require replacement or appropriate remediation.

Please see response to Policy ERC-3.3, above.

ERC-4.3 Project Design. The City shall promote the incorporation of new technologies, materials, and design and construction techniques in private development projects that minimize air pollution, noise, excess heat, and other forms of pollution and its impacts.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(a) would ensure the proposed project’s compliance with SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs). Additionally, all construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated per the CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is intended to help reduce emissions associated with off-road diesel vehicles and equipment, including DPM. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable SMAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(b) would require the use of cleaner engine construction equipment, such as Tier 4 final equipment, during project construction, which would further help to reduce DPM emissions during construction. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 would require design features to be incorporated into the proposed project, such as complete sidewalks, and new technologies, such as allelectric equipment and zero-emission forklifts and heavy-duty vehicles, which would minimize air pollution. With respect to noise, as discussed in Chapter 4.10, Noise, impacts related to construction-related noise would be less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 would ensure that operational noise is reduced to a less-than-significant-level by incorporating project design features.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy ERC-4.3.

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.

An operational HRA was prepared for the proposed project in order to assess the health risk impacts of DPM emissions from heavy-duty trucks travelling to and from the project site on nearby sensitive receptors, such as the single-family residences located east of the project site and the Paso Verde K-8 School located south of the project site. Based on the results of the HRA, operation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to excess concentrations of pollutants, and the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to DPM.

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).

Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(a) would ensure the proposed project’s compliance with SMAQMD’s Basic Construction Emissions Control Practices (BMPs). Additionally, all construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated per the CARB’s In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is intended to help reduce emissions associated with off-road diesel vehicles and equipment, including DPM. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable SMAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. Given the above, implementation of SMAQMD construction BMPs and Mitigation Measure 4.3-1(a) would ensure the proposed project’s consistency with Policy ERC-4.5.

ERC-4.6 Gas-Powered Landscaping Equipment. The City shall encourage alternatives to gas- powered landscaping equipment that would reduce exposure to air and sound pollution caused by the use of these machines.

AB 1346 would require that all small off-road engines purchased after January 1, 2024 are all-electric. Thus, future landscaping and maintenance equipment used on-site during operations would include allelectric equipment. As such, the proposed project would be consistent with Policy ERC-4.6.

ERC-4.7 Operational Emissions. The City shall require development projects that exceed Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) reactive organic gas (ROG) and nitrogen oxide (NOX) operational thresholds to incorporate design or operational features that reduce emissions equal to 15 An AQMP was prepared, as required by Mitigation Measure 4.3-2, and includes all feasible measures to reduce emissions during project operations, including the prohibition of natural gas, participation in a TMA, use of zero-emission forklifts, use of zero emission vehicles in three percent of the heavy-duty vehicle fleet, and the provision of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
percent from the level that would be produced by an unmitigated project.

Given the above, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 would ensure the proposed project’s consistency with Policy ERC-4.7.

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.

Please see response to Policy PFS-3.15. Additionally, Mitigation Measures 4.8-1 and 4.8-2 would require the implementation of BMPs during construction and operation of the proposed project.

ERC-6.4 Floodplain Requirements. The City shall regulate development within floodplains in accordance with State and federal requirements and maintain the City’s eligibility under the National Flood Insurance Program.

As discussed under Impact 4.8-5, in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR, the entirety of the project site is located within Zone A, which is designated as a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). However, due to levee improvements, portions of the Natomas Basin are now classified as A-99 flood zones, including the eastern portion of the project site. A-99 is an interim designation that allows new development to proceed without elevation verification while the improvements needed to provide 100-year protection are under construction. Nonetheless, the A99 flood zone is still a SFHA until construction of the levees is complete, and the levees are certified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In addition, given that the majority of the project site is classified as Zone A, FEMA requires a more detailed local drainage assessment to remove the site from the SFHA, in addition to addressing the levee flooding issues. As such, Mitigation Measure 4.8-5 requires the project applicant to obtain from FEMA a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) or Conditional Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (CLOMR-F) for fill within a SFHA, if required. Compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.8-5 would ensure that the proposed project would be developed in accordance with State and federal requirements.

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.

Please see response to Policy ERC-6.4, above.

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 As discussed under Impact 4.8-5, in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR, because the project site is located within a SFHA, the site must be raised above the existing 100-year floodplain. Pursuant to Section 15.104.050 of the City’s Municipal Code, new construction is required to place the lowest floor of structures at least one foot above the Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
meet federal and State regulations and minimize the risk of damage in the event of a flood. base flood elevation. In addition, Section 11 of the City’s Design and Procedure Manual requires the new construction places the lowest floor of structures at least one foot above the overland release path. Figure 4.8-3, Proposed On-Site Drainage Conditions, provides a grading crosssection that illustrates the relationship between the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE) in the off-site RD 1000 canals, the detention basins, public roadways, parking, and industrial warehouse building elevations. As shown therein, the proposed project would raise the building pads above the 100-year base flood elevation, in compliance with Section 15.104.050. Furthermore, as discussed in Impact 4.8-4, the proposed project would result in reduced WSEs relative to existing conditions for the design storm event. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable hydromodification requirements, and would not increase the rate or amount of runoff leaving the project site during the design storm event. Because pre-development and post-development flows associated with the project site would be the same, the proposed project would not have the potential to impede or redirect flood flows.

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.

As discussed in Impact 4.6, the Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration, performed by ENGEO, determined that while liquefaction of the select subsurface soil layers is possible at the project site, the overall ground surface deformation, as a result of theoretical liquefaction-induced settlement, would not be considered severe. Nonetheless, the Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration concluded that the results of the liquefaction analysis are preliminary, and should be further evaluated with a designlevel geotechnical exploration. Without confirmation from such a report, the potential exists for the proposed project to be exposed to substantial risks related to liquefaction. In addition, the Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration determined that the project site contains soils made of clay with high to very high expansion potential. The Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration includes recommendations to reduce potential damage to the proposed project, such as underlying building pads that extend at least ten feet laterally Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
beyond building areas with low-expansive fill or lime treatment, and designing other structural elements, such as pavements and flatwork, for highly expansive soil conditions. The project applicant would select one or more of the measures in consultation with qualified engineers before grading activities begin. However, without implementation of the aforementioned corrective actions, the proposed project would have the potential to be exposed to substantial risks related to expansive soils. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 requires the grading plans to incorporate the geotechnical recommendations specified in the Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration prepared for the proposed project. Based on the above, the proposed project would comply with Policy ERC7.1.

ERC-7.2 Seismic Stability. In accordance with the California Building Code, the City shall regulate structures intended for human occupancy to ensure they are designed and constructed to retain their structural integrity when subjected to seismic activity.

As discussed in Chapter 4.6, Geology and Soils, the project site is not currently within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for seismically induced land sliding and the project site does not contain any slopes that could be subject to landslide risks. Furthermore, the proposed project would be required to comply with CBSC requirements related to seismic design. As discussed in Policy ERC-7.1, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 would be required. Based on the above, the proposed would comply with Policy ERC-7.2.

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.

As shown in Table 4.10-9, Project-Related Traffic Noise Level Increases, in Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this EIR, neither the existing nor the existing plus project noise levels would exceed those shown in Table ERC-1. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 would ensure that operational noise is reduced to a less-than-significant-level by incorporating project design features, such as an eight-foot-tall sound wall along the eastern project boundary. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy ERC-10.1.

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 With respect to noise, as discussed in Chapter 4.10, Noise, impacts related to construction-related noise would be less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.10-2 would ensure that operational noise is reduced to a less-than-significant-level by incorporating project design features, such as an eight-foot-tall sound wall along the eastern project boundary.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
 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.

Please see response to Policy ERC-10.1, above.

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 pass-bys), the City shall evaluate interior noise impacts at proposed sensitive receptors. The evaluation shall incorporate measures necessary to meet the 45 dBA Ldn standard.

As discussed under Impact 4.10-4 in Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this EIR, the project site is included within the SMF ALUCP. The site is generally located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. More specifically, the project site is located approximately 0.43-mile outside of the 75 dBA CNEL noise contour. The normally acceptable noise environment for industrial uses is defined as a noise exposure level of less than 75 dBA CNEL. As such, the effects of frequent, high-noise events have been evaluated in this EIR, and impacts related to such have been concluded to be less-than-significant.

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.

As discussed under Impact 4.10-3 in Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this EIR, sensitive receptors would be located at a sufficient distance from the project site such that they would not be significantly impacted by vibration generated by project construction. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy EC 3.1.5.

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, construction equipment, and sound attenuation devices.

Impacts related to construction noise associated with project buildout are addressed under Impact 4.10-1 in Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this EIR. As discussed therein, noise levels at the nearest sensitive noise receptors, approximately 200 feet from the project site boundaries, would range from 64 to 78 dB. The noise increase during construction would be of short duration and would likely occur primarily during daytime hours. The City of Sacramento’s Noise Ordinance (Section 8.60.060 of the Municipal Code) exempts construction activities from the City’s noise standards, provided that construction takes place between the hours of 7:00 AM and Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
6:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM Sundays and holidays. Although construction activities associated with the proposed project could result in infrequent periods of high noise, the construction noise would not be sustained and would only occur only during the City’s permitted construction noise hours. Based on the above, the effects of construction noise associated with the proposed project have been evaluated in this EIR, and impacts related to such have been concluded to be less-than-significant.

ERC-10.11 Hazardous Noise Protection. The City shall discourage outdoor activities or uses in areas within the 70 dBA CNEL airport noise contour where people could be exposed to hazardous noise levels.

As discussed under Impact 4.10-4 in Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this EIR, the project site is included within the SMF ALUCP. The site is generally located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. More specifically, the project site is located approximately 0.43-mile outside of the 75 dBA CNEL noise contour. The normally acceptable noise environment for industrial uses is defined as a noise exposure level of less than 75 dBA CNEL. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy ERC-10.11.

Youth, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space
YPRO-1.5 Incentivizing Onsite Public Facilities. The City shall continue to provide Park Impact Fee (PIF) credit for development projects that provide publicly accessible parks, plazas, and parkways onsite that promote active or passive recreational opportunities and serve as neighborhood gathering points.

The proposed project would not include parks, plazas, and parkways. However, the project would be subject to the City’s PIF. In addition, the proposed project primarily consists of industrial uses, with a limited number of commercial uses also proposed. Non-residential development employees are expected to use park facilities at a lesser rate than residents. Within the Remaining City, workers are not expected to use Neighborhood parks (which are typically designed to serve local residents only), but are expected to use Community and Citywide parks and facilities about 20 percent as much as local residents.13 Impacts were considered less than significant after application of these policies (Impacts 4.9-1 and

4.9-2). Thus, the project would not be anticipated to generate a substantial amount of new school-aged population within the City of Sacramento, as the project does not include new residential units and the majority of jobs 13 City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento Park Impact Fee Nexus Study Update. October 12, 2016.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
created by the project would be filled primarily by those already residing within the region. Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with Policy YPRO-1.5.

SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan

1.5.1 Land Use Actions for which Referral is Always Mandatory:

Prior to approving any of the following types of Land Use Actions, the Local Agency (see Policy 1.2.24) always must refer the Land Use Action to the ALUC for determination of consistency with the Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan:
a) Local Agency adoption or approval of any new general or specific plan or any amendment thereto that affects lands within the Airport Influence Area. b) Local Agency adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation, including any proposed change or variance to any such ordinance or regulation, that (1) affects land within the Airport Influence Area and (2) involves the types of airport impact concerns listed in Policy 1.3.1(b).

As discussed in Section 4.9.3, Regulatory Setting, of this chapter, the SACOG Board of Directors serves as the ALUC for the project area. The project site is included within the Sacramento International Airport’s ALUCP, and the proposed project would include a GPA, as well as other entitlements. As noted in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, the ALUC is included as a Responsible and Trustee Agency. Thus, the ALUC will have access to the EIR and all associated technical reports for their review. Furthermore, on July 27. 2023, SACOG prepared an ALUC Preliminary Review14 to determine the proposed project’s compatibility with the SMF ALUCP. SACOG has provided the following conditions of approval, which will need to be completed for the proposed project:

1. Dedication of an avigation easement to the County of Sacramento as owner of SMF for the areas within Safety Zones 3 and 4, and in the 65 CNEL noise contour (ALUCP Policy 4.1.1). For ease of implementation, it is recommended that the avigation easement cover the entire project site (e.g., portions withing Safety Zone 6). The avigation easement will include language allowing “a continuing right-of-entry onto the property, with 48 hours advance notice, for the purposes of removing, altering, or mitigating exterior lighting that creates a visual airspace hazard.”

2. Filing of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 7460-1 for the Project through the FAA’s online system (https://oeaaa.faa.gov). Filing is required for the proposed project structures (top elevations for each corner and high-points of structures), as well as the construction cranes and/or any rooftop 14 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. ALUC Preliminary Review – Airport South Industrial. July 27, 2023.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
structures that may be proposed by future tenants (e.g., antennas or solar panels).

3. Incorporation of sound attenuation measures to achieve an interior maximum of CNEL 45 dB for the proposed hotel and 50 dB for any office or noise-sensitive indoor spaces of the proposed warehouse distribution center located in the CNEL 65 dB noise contour.

4. Dedication of an avigation easement to the County of Sacramento as owner of SMF for the areas within Safety Zones 3 and 4, and in the 65 CNEL noise contour (ALUCP Policy 4.1.1). For ease of implementation, it is recommended that the avigation easement cover the entire project site (e.g., portions withing Safety Zone 6). The avigation easement will include language allowing “a continuing right-of-entry onto the property, with 48 hours advance notice, for the purposes of removing, altering, or mitigating exterior lighting that creates a visual airspace hazard.”

5. Filing of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 7460-1 for the Project through the FAA’s online system (https://oeaaa.faa.gov). Filing is required for the proposed project structures (top elevations for each corner and high-points of structures), as well as the construction cranes and/or any rooftop structures that may be proposed by future tenants (e.g., antennas or solar panels).

6. Incorporation of sound attenuation measures to achieve an interior maximum of CNEL 45 dB for the proposed hotel and 50 dB for any office or noise-sensitive indoor spaces of the proposed warehouse distribution center located in the CNEL 65 dB noise contour.

1.5.4. Major Land Use Actions: The scope or character of certain Major Land Use Actions, as listed below in Paragraphs (a) through (f), is such that their compatibility with Airport activity is a potential concern. Even though these actions may be basically consistent with the local general plan or specific plan, sufficient detail may not be known to enable a full airport compatibility evaluation at the time that the general plan or specific plan is reviewed. To enable better According to Map 1, Compatibility Policy Map: Airport Influence Area, of the SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan, the project site is located within Referral Area 1. In addition, the proposed project includes multiple Major Land Use Actions listed in Policy 1.5.4, including requesting approval of a SOI Amendment and Prezone. As such, pursuant to Policy 1.5.4, this EIR and all associated technical reports shall be submitted to ALUC for review.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
assessment of compliance with the compatibility criteria set forth herein, ALUC review of these actions may be warranted. If there is uncertainty as to whether an action should be referred to the ALUC for review, Local Agencies should consult with the ALUC Secretary. The circumstances under which ALUC review of these actions is to be conducted are indicated in Policies 1.5.2 and 1.5.3 above. a) Actions Affecting Land Uses within Referral Area 1:

1. Any proposed expansion of the sphere of influence
of a city or special district.

2. Proposed pre-zoning associated with future
annexation of land to a city.

3. Proposed development agreements or
amendments to such agreements.

4. Proposed Residential Development, including land
divisions, consisting of 5 or more dwelling units or parcels.

5. Any discretionary Development Proposal for
Projects having a building floor area of 20,000 square feet or greater unless only ministerial approval (e.g., a building permit) is required.

6. Any discretionary Development Proposal for
Projects expected to attract more than 100 people (including employees, customers/visitors) to outdoor activities to the Project site during a typical busy period.

7. Major infrastructure or other capital improvements
(e.g., water, sewer, or roads) that would promote
urban uses in undeveloped or agricultural areas to the extent that such uses are not reflected in a previously reviewed general plan or specific plan.

8. Any proposal for non-aviation use of land within
Safety Zone 1.

9. Proposed land acquisition by a government entity
for any facility (for example, a school or hospital)
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
designed to accommodate more than 100 people during a typical busy period.

10. Any proposed object (including buildings, poles,
antennas, and other structures) having a height that requires review by the Federal Aviation Administration in accordance with Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

11. Any Project having the potential to create electrical or visual hazards to aircraft in flight, including:  Electrical interference with radio communications or navigational signals;
 Lighting which could be mistaken for Airport
lighting;
 Glare in the eyes of pilots of aircraft using the
Airport; and
 Impaired visibility near the Airport.

12. Any project having the potential to create a thermal plume extending to an altitude where aircraft fly.
b) Actions Affecting Land Uses within Referral Area 2: Only the actions listed in Paragraphs (a)(10), (a)(11) and (a)(12)of this policy require referral to the ALUC for review. c) Proposed non-aviation development of Airport property if such development has not previously been included in an airport master plan or community general plan reviewed by the ALUC. (See Policy 1.2.11 for definition of aviationrelated use.) d) Proposed Redevelopment (see Policy 1.2.35) if the Project is of a type listed in Paragraph (a) of this policy.
e) Any other proposed Land Use Action, as determined by the Local Agency, involving a question of compatibility with Airport activities.

2.1.2. Responsibilities for Project Consistency Analysis: The ALUC and Local Agencies are each responsible for analyzing a Project proposal for compliance with the compatibility criteria set forth in this Compatibility Plan.

See response to Policy 1.5.1, above. As discussed therein, the proposed project shall be formally referred to the ALUC; following submittal of this EIR, the ALUC will have the responsibility to prepare a consistency determination. Based on the analysis presented throughout this EIR, the Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
a) Local Agency staff may choose to initially evaluate
proposed Projects and work with the Project applicant to bring the proposal into compliance with Compatibility Plan criteria. The ALUC Secretary will provide informal input at this stage if requested. b) When a proposed Project is formally referred to the ALUC, the ALUC Secretary shall review the proposal to determine if it is consistent with the Compatibility Plan policies. Projects of a type that require a formal consistency determination by the ALUC (those listed in Policy 1.5.1) will be placed on the agenda for action. c) Subsequent to when a Local Agency’s general plan and applicable specific plans have been determined by the ALUC to be consistent with the Compatibility Plan, the Local Agency and its staff are responsible for the consistency analysis of Major Land Use Actions. The ALUC Secretary will provide informal input if requested or the Local Agency can voluntarily refer the Land Use Action to the ALUC for a consistency determination. Land Use Actions for which referral to the ALUC is mandatory regardless of the general plan and specific plan consistency status (actions listed in Policy 1.5.1) must continue to be referred for a consistency determination by the ALUC. d) The Local Agency and its staff are responsible for ensuring that a development continues to comply with Compatibility Plan criteria on an on-going basis following completion of the Project (Intensity and height limitations in particular). proposed project is anticipated to be consistent with all applicable requirements of the SMF ALUCP.

3.1.1 Evaluating Compatibility of New Development: The
compatibility of proposed land uses within Sacramento International Airport Influence Area shall be evaluated in accordance with:
a) The specific noise, safety, airspace protection, overflight, and other compatibility policies set forth in Sections 3.2 through 3.5 and in Section 4; See response to Policy 1.5.1, above. Furthermore, as discussed in Chapter 4.10, the project site is located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. The normally acceptable noise environment for industrial uses is defined as a noise exposure level of less than 75 dBA CNEL. Therefore, noise levels related to the SMF at the project site would be within the City’s criteria for the normal acceptable noise environment. Based on the analysis presented throughout this EIR, the proposed Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
b) The criteria listed in Table 1, Noise Compatibility Criteria, and Table 2, Safety Compatibility Criteria; and
c) The Compatibility Zones depicted on the Compatibility Policy Maps in this chapter.
project is anticipated to be consistent with all applicable requirements of the SMF ALUCP.

3.2.1 Evaluating Noise Compatibility for New Development: The noise compatibility of proposed land uses within the influence area of Sacramento International Airport shall be evaluated in accordance with the policies set forth in this section, including the criteria listed in Table 1, Noise Compatibility Criteria and the noise exposure contours depicted on Map 2, Compatibility Policy Map: Noise. a) The criteria in Table 1 indicate the maximum acceptable Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) exposure for new residential land uses and a range of nonresidential land uses. Within the various noise exposure ranges, each land use type is shown as being either “normally compatible,” “conditional,” or “incompatible.” b) “Normally Compatible” means that the proposed land use shall be presumed to be acceptable within locations having the indicated noise exposure.

1. Indoor uses are “normally compatible” if either: they involve activities that are inherently noisy; or, standard construction methods will sufficiently attenuate exterior noise to an acceptable indoor CNEL. For land use types that are compatible because of noise levels inherent with the activity, sound attenuation must be provided for associated office, retail, and other noise-sensitive indoor spaces sufficient to reduce exterior noise to an interior maximum of CNEL 50 dB.

2. Outdoor uses are “normally compatible” if the
activities associated with the land use may be carried out with minimal interference from aircraft noise at the indicated CNEL.

See response to Policies 1.5.1 and 3.1.1, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
c) “Conditional” means that the conditions indicated in Table 1 must be satisfied in order for the proposed land use to be acceptable.

1. Indoor uses must have building structures that are
capable of attenuating exterior noise from all noise sources to the indoor CNEL indicated by the number in the cell.

2. The acceptability of outdoor uses is dependent
upon characteristics of the specific use. Caution should be exercised with regard to Noise-Sensitive Outdoor Land Uses because these uses are likely to be disrupted by aircraft noise events. This caution is directed at the Project proponent and is not intended to preclude approval of the Project. d) “Incompatible” means that the proposed land use shall not be allowed under any circumstances except as noted in Paragraph (3) below.

1. Indoor uses would have unacceptable noise levels
if windows are open. At exposures above CNEL 65 dB, extensive mitigation techniques would be required to make the indoor environment acceptable for performance of activities associated with the land use even with windows closed.

2. Outdoor uses would be exposed to severe noise
interference that would prevent performance of
activities associated with the land use.

3. Exceptions to an “incompatible” designation may
only be made if site-specific special conditions exist. See Policy 4.1.5.

3.3.1. Evaluating Safety Compatibility for New Development: The safety compatibility of proposed land uses within the influence area of Sacramento International Airport shall be evaluated in accordance with the policies set forth in this section, including the criteria listed in Table 2, Safety Compatibility Criteria, and the See response to Policies 1.5.1 and 3.1.1, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
safety zones depicted on Map 3, Compatibility Policy Map: Safety. a) The criteria in Table 2 indicate whether a particular type of land use is “normally compatible,” “conditional,” or “incompatible” with the exposure to Sacramento International Airport aircraft accident risks. b) “Normally Compatible” means that the proposed Land Use Action is presumed to comply with the indicated Intensity limits and other criteria for the zone. However, atypical examples of a use may require review to ensure compliance with the criteria. c) “Conditional” means that the proposed Land Use Action must comply with the conditions listed in the table.
d) “Incompatible” means that proposed Land Use Action shall not be permitted under any normal circumstances within the indicated safety zone. Limited exceptions are possible for site-specific special conditions. See Policy 4.1.5.

3.3.3. Nonresidential Development Criteria: Proposed
Nonresidential Development shall be evaluated in accordance with the following criteria:
a) The usage Intensity (people per acre) limit indicated in Table 2 for each safety zone is the fundamental criterion against which the safety compatibility of most nonresidential land uses shall be measured. The Intensity limits set the total number of occupants allowed on the Project site during normal busy use. Other criteria may be applicable to uses of special concern (see Policy 3.3.7). b) All nonresidential uses, including uses listed in Table 2, Safety Compatibility Criteria, as “Normally Compatible,” must comply with both the “sitewide average” and “singleacre” usage Intensity limits indicated below and listed in Table 2 for each safety zone.

1. The “sitewide average” Intensity equals the total
number of people expected to be on the entire site
See response to Policies 1.5.1 and 3.1.1, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
divided by the site size in acres (i.e., the gross acreage of the project site).

2. The “single-acre” Intensity equals the number of
people expected to occupy the most intensively used 1.0-acre area(s) of the site. c) The need to calculate the usage Intensity of a particular Project proposal for compliance with the Intensity criteria in the Paragraph (b) table is to be governed by the following:

1. Land use categories indicated in Table 2 as
“Normally Compatible” for a particular safety zone are presumed to meet the Intensity criteria indicated in the Paragraph (b) table. Unless the particular Project proposal represents an atypical example of the usage type, calculation of the usage Intensity is not required.

2. Calculation of the usage Intensity must be done for
all proposed Projects where the land use category for the particular safety zone is indicated in Table 2 as “Conditional” and the criteria column says “Ensure Intensity criteria are met.”

3. Where Table 2 indicates that land use category is
“Conditional” for the particular safety zone, but the criteria are other than “Ensure Intensity criteria are met,” calculation of the usage Intensity is not necessary for typical examples of the use. However, the Project proposal must comply with the other criteria listed for the applicable land use category and safety zone. d) No new structures intended to be occupied regularly are allowed in Safety Zone 1.
e) Usage Intensity calculations shall include all people (e.g., employees, customers/visitors) who may be on the Project site at any single point in time, whether indoors or outdoors.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency

1. For the purposes of these calculations, the total
number of occupants during normal busiest periods shall be used.

2. The Project site may be composed of multiple
parcels.
f) Each component use within a Nonresidential Development that has multiple types of uses shall comply with the safety criteria in Table 2, Safety Compatibility Criteria, unless the use is ancillary to the primary use.

1. To be considered an Ancillary Use, the use must
be associated with the primary use (e.g. a cafeteria in an office building) and occupy no more than 10% of total building floor area.

2. Ancillary Uses must be considered in the sitewide
average Intensity limits, but may be excluded from the single-acre Intensity calculations.

3. An Ancillary Use may be more intensively occupied
(more people in a given area) than the primary use, provided that the Ancillary Use is neither:  An assembly room having more than 750 square feet of floor area (this criterion is intended to parallel building code standards) and a capacity of 50 people; nor  A K-12 school, day care center, or other risksensitive use that is “incompatible” within the safety zone where the primary use is to be located.
g) Other criteria may be applicable to uses of special concern (see Policy 3.3.7 and conditions in Table 2, Safety Compatibility Criteria). h) Local Agencies may make exceptions for “Conditional” or “Incompatible” land uses associated with rare special events (e.g., an air show at the Airport) for which a facility is not designed and normally not used and for which extra safety precautions can be taken as appropriate.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency

3.4.1 Evaluating Airspace Protection / Object Height Compatibility for New Development: The object height compatibility of proposed land uses within the influence area of Sacramento International Airport shall be evaluated in accordance with the policies in this section, including the Airspace Protection Surfaces depicted on Maps 4a, 4b, and 4c, Compatibility Policy Maps: Airspace Protection/Object Heights. a) The airspace protection/height limit surfaces are drawn in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, Subpart C, and reflect the runway lengths, runway end locations, and approach types for each of the three runway configuration scenarios: existing, north-only extension of east runway, and split extension of east runway. Maps 4a, 4b, and 4c depict the approach protection/height limit surfaces for these respective scenarios. b) The Critical Airspace Protection Zone consists of the Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 primary surface and the area beneath portions of the approach and transitional surfaces to where these surfaces intersect with the horizontal surface.

See response to Policy 1.5.1, above. The M-1-PUD zoning district allows for buildings with a maximum height of 70 feet and the HC-PUD zoning district allows for buildings with a maximum height of 35 feet. According to the proposed PUD Guidelines, the maximum building height for the hotel in the proposed HC-PD zone would be 80 feet. Following approval of an SOI Amendment and Annexation, it is anticipated that the proposed industrial buildings would comply with the height requirements of the M-1-PUD zoning district. With the exception of the proposed hotel, the commercial uses (i.e., restaurants and a fueling stating/carwash) would comply with the height requirements of the HC-PUD zoning district. The proposed project would comply with the requirements of Airspace Protection Surfaces, depicted on Maps 4a, 4b, and 4c of the SMF ALUCP.

3.4.2 Object Height Criteria: The criteria for determining the acceptability of a Project with respect to height shall be based upon the standards set forth in Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, Subpart C, Safe, Efficient Use and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace and applicable airport design standards published by the FAA. Additionally, where an FAA aeronautical study of a proposed object is required as described in Policy 3.4.5, the results of that study shall be taken into account by the ALUC and the Local Agency. a) Except as provided in Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this policy, no object, including a mobile object such as a vehicle or temporary object such as construction crane, shall have a height that would result in penetration of an Airspace Protection Surface depicted for Sacramento International Airport on Maps 4a, 4b, or 4c. Any object that penetrates See response to Policies 1.5.1 and 3.4.1, above.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
one of these surfaces is, by FAA definition, deemed an obstruction. b) Objects not situated within a Critical Airspace Protection Zone (see Policy 3.4.1(b)) may be allowed to have heights that penetrate the Airspace Protection Surfaces defined by Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 criteria.

1. The maximum allowable height for these objects is
35 feet above ground level.

2. The height of all objects is subject to Local Agency zoning limits.
c) Unless exempted under Paragraph (b) of this policy, a proposed object having a height that exceeds the Airport’s Airspace Protection Surface shall be allowed only if all of the following apply:

1. As the result of an aeronautical study, the FAA
determines that the object would not be a hazard to air navigation.

2. FAA or other expert analysis conducted under the
auspices of the ALUC or SCAS as Airport owner concludes that, despite being an airspace obstruction (not necessarily a hazard), the object would not cause any of the following:  An increase in the ceiling or visibility minimums of the Airport for an existing or planned instrument procedure (a planned procedure is one that is formally on file with the FAA);  A diminution of the established operational
efficiency and capacity of the Airport, such as by causing the usable length of the runway to be reduced; or  Conflict with the visual flight rules (VFR)
airspace used for the Airport traffic pattern or en route navigation to and from the Airport.

1. Marking and lighting of the object will be installed as directed by the FAA aeronautical study or the
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
California Division of Aeronautics and in a manner consistent with FAA standards in effect at the time the construction is proposed.27

2. An Avigation Easement is dedicated, in accordance
with Policy 4.1.1, to the County of Sacramento as owner of the Airport.

3. The proposed Project/plan complies with all
policies of this Compatibility Plan related to noise and safety compatibility.

3.4.3. Evaluating Airspace Protection/Wildlife Hazard Compatibility for New Development: The foundation for regulation of land uses that could attract hazardous wildlife on and near airports is set by the federal government. The ALUC’s role and policy with regard to regulating wildlife hazards in the Airport environs is limited to new development as well as general plans, specific plans, master plans, and zoning ordinances that set standards for new development. The ALUC has no authority to regulate Existing Land Uses, including agriculture, even if these uses include land use characteristics that attract hazardous wildlife. a) Any proposed Land Use Project that could attract wildlife to the Airport Influence Area is a potential concern. Federal regulations and guidelines referred to above identify specific land uses that the federal government deems incompatible near airports. b) Crop selection and other routine agricultural activities that do not involve construction or otherwise constitute a Land Use Project and do not need Local Agency approval are not subject to ALUC authority and are not regulated by the policies of this Compatibility Plan. c) For proposed Land Use Projects to be located within 10,000 feet of the Sacramento International Airport Air Operations Area (AOA; see Map 5) and that include a zoning amendment and that could attract hazardous wildlife, the project proponent shall document consideration of current See response to Policy 1.5.1 and City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan Policy ERC-2.8.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.9 – Land Use and Planning/Population and Housing

Table 4.9-7
City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan and SMF Land Use Compatibility Plan Policy Discussion Policy Project Consistency
FAA or other federal regulations and guidelines pertaining to hazardous wildlife attractants. d) Elsewhere within the Airport Influence Area, but beyond 10,000 feet from the AOA, or for projects within 10,000 feet from the AOA that do not include a zoning amendment, a formal Project review and compatibility determination by the ALUC shall not be required. It is recommended that the project proponent consider current FAA or other federal regulations and guidelines pertaining to hazardous wildlife attractants.

3.4.4. Other Flight Hazards: Land uses that may cause visual or electronic hazards, to aircraft in flight or taking off or landing at the Airport shall be allowed within the Airport Influence Area only if the uses are consistent with FAA rules and regulations. a) Specific characteristics to be avoided, especially within areas beneath the Airspace Protection Surfaces (see Map 5), include:

1. Sources of glare (such as from mirrored or other
highly reflective buildings or building features) or bright lights (including search lights and laser light displays);

2. Distracting lights that could be mistaken for airport lights;

3. Sources of dust, steam, or smoke that may impair
pilots’ vision;

4. Sources of steam or other emissions that cause
thermal plumes or other forms of unstable air; and

5. Sources of electrical interference with aircraft
communications or navigation.
b) To resolve any uncertainties with regard to the significance of the above types of flight hazards, Local Agencies should consult with FAA and Sacramento International Airport officials.

See response to Policy 1.5.1.

4.10 NOISE

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

4.10.1 INTRODUCTION
The Noise chapter of the EIR describes the existing noise environment in the project vicinity, and identifies potential impacts and mitigation measures related to noise and vibration associated with construction and operation of the proposed project. The method by which the potential impacts are analyzed is discussed, followed by the identification of potential impacts and the recommended mitigation measures designed to reduce significant noise and vibration impacts to less-than-significant levels, if required. The Noise chapter is primarily based on the Environmental Noise Assessment prepared for the proposed project by Saxelby Acoustics, LLC. (Saxelby) (see Appendix J),1 as well as the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan2 and the City of Sacramento 2040 Master EIR (MEIR).3
As discussed further in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, the project site is divided into two portions: the industrial park, which consists of the majority of the western portion and the northeast corner of the overall site, and the nonparticipating parcels, primarily located in the southeastern portion of the overall site. While the proposed project would require approval of a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Amendment and Annexation of the entire project site into the City of Sacramento limits, only the industrial park is currently proposed for development. In addition, the proposed project would include construction of an off-site force main to convey wastewater generated from the proposed uses to the 48-inch Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) North Natomas interceptor line in East Commerce Way.

4.10.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Existing Environmental Setting section provides background information on noise and vibration, a discussion of acoustical terminology and the effects of noise on people, existing sensitive receptors in the project vicinity, existing sources and noise levels in the project vicinity, and groundborne vibration.

Fundamentals of Acoustics
Decibels (dB) are logarithmic units that compare the wide range of sound intensities to which the human ear is sensitive. The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the typical range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable and can be approximated by filtering the frequency response of a sound level meter by means of the standardized A-weighting network. A-weighting of sound levels best reflects the human ear’s reduced sensitivity to low frequencies, and the use of A-weighted sound level, expressed as dBA, has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. Table 4.10-1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations. 1 Saxelby Acoustics, LLC. Environmental Noise Assessment: Airport South Industrial Park. April 24, 2024. 2 City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan. Adopted February 27, 2024. 3 City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Climate Action & Adaptation Plan Master Environmental Impact Report. August 2023.

4.10 NOISE
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-1
Typical Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise Level
(dBA) Common Indoor Activities
N/A 110 Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 meters (1,000 feet) 100 N/A
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 meter (3 feet) 90 N/A
Diesel Truck at 15 meters (50 feet),
at 80 km/hr. (50 mph) 80 Food Blender at 1 meter (3 feet) Garbage Disposal at 1 meter (3 feet)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 meters (100 feet) 70 Vacuum Cleaner at 3 meters (10 feet) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 meters (300 feet) 60 Normal Speech at 1 meter (3 feet) Quiet Urban Daytime 50 Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime 40 Theater, Large Conference Room (Background)
Quiet Suburban Nighttime 30 Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime 20 Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background)
N/A 10 Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing 0 Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans, Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September 2013.

Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which can be used to compare the noise level of neighborhoods, is the weighted average noise level over time, presented in dB. Community noise is also commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the overall noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq). The Leq is the foundation of the day-night average noise descriptor (DNL or Ldn) and represents a correlation with community response to noise.

DNL/Ldn is based on the average noise level over 24 hours, with an additional 10 dB weighting applied to noise that occurs during nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The 10 dB nighttime penalty is applied to account for the assumption that people are more sensitive to nighttime noise exposures as compared to daytime noise exposures.

Stationary sources of noise, including construction equipment, attenuate at a rate of approximately six dB per doubling of distance from the source depending on ground absorption.

Physical barriers located between a noise source and the noise receptor, such as berms or sound walls, increase the efficacy of noise attenuation that occurs by distance alone.

Surrounding Land Uses and Existing Sensitive Receptors
The site is bound to the north by Interstate 5 (I-5) and to the east by the City of Sacramento (City).

A portion of Bayou Way is located within the project site and is generally laid out in an east-towest direction. Land uses surrounding the project site include a Life Storage facility, Egret Park, and the Westlake single-family residential subdivision to the east; the West Drainage Canal, vacant agricultural land, open space land, and the Paso Verde K-8 School to the south; Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

undeveloped agricultural land to the west; the Sacramento International Airport to the northwest, across I-5; and the Metro Air Park, Amazon SMF-1 Fulfillment Center, and the under-construction Northlake (Greenbriar) subdivision to the north, across I-5.

Certain land uses are more sensitive to ambient noise levels than others due to the amount of noise exposure (in terms of both exposure time and shielding from noise sources) and the type of activities typically involved. Noise sensitive land uses typically include residences, schools, childcare centers, hospitals, long-term health care facilities, convalescent centers, retirement homes, and recreation areas. Sensitive noise receptors may also include threatened or endangered noise sensitive biological species; however, many jurisdictions have not adopted noise standards for wildlife areas. Noise sensitive land uses are typically given special attention in order to achieve protection from excessive noise.

The closest noise sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family residences, park, and the Paso Verde K-8 School located approximately 200 feet east and south of the project site.

Existing Ambient Noise Environment
The existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity is primarily defined by traffic on I-5 and operation of the Sacramento International Airport. To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity, Saxelby conducted continuous (24-hour) noise level measurements at four locations, to the south and east of the project site, as shown in Figure 4.10-

1. The sound level meters were programmed to record the maximum, median, and average noise levels at each site during the survey. The maximum value, denoted as Lmax, represents the highest noise level measured. The average value, denoted as Leq, represents the energy average of all of the noise received by the sound level meter microphone during the monitoring period. The median value, denoted as L50, represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the monitoring period.

A summary of the noise level measurement survey results is provided in Table 4.10-2. As shown in Table 4.10-2, the average measured on-site noise levels were 63 dB Ldn at LT-1 and LT-4, and 64 dB Ldn at LT-2 and LT-3.

Saxelby also evaluated the existing traffic noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors along each roadway segment in the project area, the results of which are presented in Table 4.10-3, below.

It should be noted that the Sacramento International Airport is located approximately 1.6 miles north of the project site and aircraft overflights were observed by Saxelby during visits to the project site; the project site is located within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).

The project site is generally located within the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. Figure

4.10-2 shows the noise contours for the airport, pursuant to the Sacramento County General Plan.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-1
Noise Measurement Locations
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-2
Summary of Existing Background Noise Measurement Data
Location Date Ldn
Daytime
Leq
Daytime
L50
Daytime
Lmax
Nighttime
Leq
Nighttime
L50
Nighttime
Lmax
LT-1: 920 feet from I-5
3/29/2022 62 58 51 75 56 53 68 3/30/2022 67 62 56 75 61 53 77 3/31/2022 60 56 53 70 54 52 68 Average 64 59 54 74 58 53 73
LT-2: 1,870 feet from I-5
3/29/2022 59 55 42 75 52 47 65
3/30/2022 57 55 45 75 50 41 66 3/31/2022 58 53 49 69 52 48 67 Average 58 54 46 74 51 46 66
LT-3: 850 feet from Paso Verde
K-8 School
3/29/2022 60 57 42 77 53 46 67
3/30/2022 60 59 44 79 53 43 67 3/31/2022 73 74 46 74 53 46 66 Average 69 69 44 77 53 45 67
LT-4: 740 feet from Power Line
Road
3/29/2022 64 62 55 79 56 49 71
3/30/2022 62 60 53 80 55 47 68 3/31/2022 63 58 53 75 57 50 67 Average 63 60 54 78 56 49 69
Notes:
 All values are shown in dBA.  Daytime hours: 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM; Nighttime hours: 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-3
Baseline Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing Exterior Noise
Level (dBA Ldn) at Closest
Sensitive Receptors
Metro Air Parkway I-5 to Pacific Gateway Drive 42.4
Metro Air Parkway Pacific Gateway Drive to Meister
Way

43.2 Metro Air Parkway Meister Way to Elkhorn
Boulevard 43.0
West Elkhorn Boulevard Lone Tree Road to Baidee Drive 58.7 Power Line Road Garden Highway to Del Paso
Road 33.8
Power Line Road Bayou Way to Del Paso Road 53.2
Power Line Road Bayou Way to Pacific Gateway
Drive 56.7
Power Line Road West Elkhorn Boulevard to
Pacific Gateway Drive 27.7
Del Paso Road Power Line Road to Hovnanian
Drive 49.7
El Centro Road Del Paso Road to Hawkview
Drive 47.2
El Centro Road Hawkview Drive to Bayou Way 56.5
Garden Highway Power Line Road to Radio Road 47.1
Garden Highway Radio Road to San Juan Road 52.3
Garden Highway San Juan Road to City Limit 50.7
Metro Air Parkway I-5 to Airport South Industrial
Drive -
Airport South Industrial Drive Power Line Road to Metro Air Parkway -
Airport South Industrial Drive METRO Air Parkway to "A" Drive -
"A" Drive Airport South Industrial Drive to
Bayou Way -
Bayou Way A Drive to El Centro Road 58.8
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Fundamentals of Vibration
Vibration is similar to noise in that both involve a source, a transmission path, and a receiver.

However, while noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, vibration is usually associated with transmission through the ground or structures. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s response to vibration depends on their individual sensitivity, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source.

Vibration can be described in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration in terms of velocity in inches per second (in/sec) peak particle velocities (PPV) or root-mean-square (VdB, RMS). Standards pertaining to perception, as well as damage to structures, have been developed for vibration in terms of PPV and RMS velocities. As vibrations travel outward from the source, they excite the particles of rock and soil through which they pass and cause them to oscillate.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-2
Airport Noise Contours (CNEL)
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Differences in subsurface geologic conditions and distance from the source of vibration result in different vibration levels characterized by different frequencies and intensities. In all cases, vibration amplitudes decrease with increasing distance.

Human response to vibration is difficult to quantify. Vibration can be felt or heard well below the levels that produce any damage to structures. The duration of the event has an effect on human response, as does frequency. Generally, as the duration and vibration frequency increase, the potential for adverse human response increases. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, operation of construction equipment and construction techniques generate ground vibration. Roadway traffic can also be a source of such vibration. At high enough amplitudes, ground vibration has the potential to damage structures and/or cause cosmetic damage. However, traffic rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage.

Existing Sources of Vibration
The project site is currently undeveloped and the existing residential and agricultural uses in the project vicinity are not typical sources of vibration. In addition, the self-storage facility located east of the project site is unlikely to generate substantial levels of vibration. However, vehicle traffic from I-5 and air traffic from the Sacramento International Airport to the north of the project site does constitute an existing source of vibration.

4.10.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT
In order to limit exposure to physically and/or psychologically damaging noise levels, the State of California, various county governments, and most municipalities in the State have established standards and ordinances to control noise. Applicable federal laws or regulations pertaining to noise or vibration that would directly apply to the proposed project do not exist. The following provides a general overview of the existing State and local regulations that are relevant to the proposed project.

State Regulations
The following are the State environmental laws and policies relevant to noise.

California Building Code
The California Building Code (Title 24, Part 2 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]) establishes uniform minimum noise insulation performance standards to protect persons within new buildings that house people, including hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than single-family dwellings. Title 24 mandates that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn or CNEL in any habitable room. Title 24 also requires that for structures containing noise-sensitive uses to be located where the Ldn or CNEL exceeds 60 dB, an acoustical analysis must be prepared to identify mechanisms for limiting exterior noise to the prescribed allowable interior levels. If the interior allowable noise levels are met by requiring that windows be kept closed, the design for the structure must also specify a ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment.

Local Regulations
The following are the local environmental goals and policies relevant to noise and vibration.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan
The City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan Environmental Constraints Element contains policies for assessing noise impacts within the City. The following goals and policies related to noise and vibration are applicable to the proposed project.

Environmental Resources and Constraints Element
Goal ERC 10 A healthy sound environment conducive to living and working.

Policy 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 (recreated as Table 4.10-4, below) to the extent feasible.

Table 4.10-4
Exterior Noise Compatibility Standards for Various Land Uses
Land Use Type
Highest Level of Noise
Exposure that is Regarded
as “Normally Acceptable”
(Ldn or CNEL)
Residential – Low Density Single Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes 60 dBA
Residential – Multi-family 65 dBA
Urban Residential Infill and Mixed-Use Projects 70 dBA
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels 65 dBA
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing
Homes 70 dBA
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters Mitigation based on site-specific study
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports Mitigation based on site-specific study
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 dBA
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries 75 dBA
Office Buildings – Business, Commercial, and
Professional 70 dBA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 75 dBA Source: City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan [Table ERC-1], 2024.

Policy 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.

Policy ERC-10.3 Interior Noise Standards. The City shall require new development to include noise attenuation to assure
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

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.

Policy 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 pass-bys), the City shall evaluate interior noise impacts at proposed sensitive
receptors. The evaluation shall incorporate measures
necessary to meet the 45 dBA Ldn standard.

Policy 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.

Policy ERC-10.6 Effects of Vibration. The City shall consider potential effects of vibration when reviewing new residential and commercial projects that are proposed in the vicinity of rail lines or light rail lines.

Policy ERC-10.7 Vibration. The City shall consider the potential for vibrationinduced 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.

Policy 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.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Policy 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, construction equipment, and sound attenuation devices.

Policy ERC-10.10 Airport Land Use Compatibility. The City shall restrict new residential development within the 65 dBA CNEL airport noise contour, or in accordance with plans prepared by the Airport Land Use Commission and shall only approve noisecompatible land uses.

Policy ERC-10.11 Hazardous Noise Protection. The City shall discourage outdoor activities or uses in areas within the 70 dBA CNEL airport noise contour where people could be exposed to
hazardous noise levels.

City of Sacramento Municipal Code
The City of Sacramento Municipal Code, Section 8.68.060 establishes an allowable exterior noise level limit of 55 dBA L50 and 75 dBA Lmax during daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) hours and 50 dBA L50 and 70 dBA Lmax during nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) hours for sources of noise which occur for more than 30 minutes per hour (L50).

If the existing ambient noise level exceeds the 50/55 dBA L50 standard, the allowable limit is increased in 5 dBA increments to encompass the ambient noise level. If the existing ambient noise level exceeds the 70/75 dBA Lmax noise standard, the limit becomes the measured Lmax existing ambient noise level. For example, if measured existing ambient daytime noise levels are 57 dBA L50 and 77 dBA Lmax, the noise ordinance limits would be 62 dBA L50 and 77 dBA Lmax.

The City of Sacramento Municipal Code standards are summarized in Table 4.10-5, below.

Table 4.10-5
Stationary Noise Source Noise Standards
Noise Level Descriptor
Outdoor Activity
Areas Daytime
(7 AM to 10 PM)
Outdoor Activity
Areas Nighttime
(10 PM to 7 AM)
Hourly equivalent sound level (L50), dB 55 50
Maximum sound level (Lmax), dB 75 70
Source: City of Sacramento Municipal Code, Section 8.68.060.

4.10.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The following section describes the standards of significance and methodology used to analyze and determine the proposed project’s potential impacts related to noise and vibration. In addition, a discussion of the project’s impacts, as well as mitigation measures where necessary, is also presented.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Standards of Significance
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the effects of a project are evaluated to determine if they would result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. For the purposes of this EIR, an impact is considered significant if the proposed project would result in any of the following:
 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;  Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; or  For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Summary of Applicable Noise Standards
According to the City of Sacramento, the proposed project, which shall be considered to be a “Stationary” noise source, shall not be permitted to generate noise levels exceeding 55 dBA L50 or 75 dBA Lmax during daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) hours and 50 dBA L50 or 70 dBA Lmax during nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) hours at the adjacent noise sensitive receptors.

Generally, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for adjoining areas or expose people to severe noise levels. In practice, more specific professional standards have been developed. The standards state that a noise impact may be considered significant if it would generate noise that would conflict with local project criteria or ordinances, or substantially increase noise levels at noise sensitive land uses.

The potential increase in traffic noise from the project is a factor in determining significance.

Research into the human perception of changes in sound level indicates the following:
 A 3-dB change is barely perceptible;
 A 5-dB change is clearly perceptible; and
 A 10-dB change is perceived as being twice or half as loud.

A limitation of using a single noise level increase value to evaluate noise impacts is that it fails to account for pre-project noise conditions. Table 4.10-6 is based upon recommendations made by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) to provide guidance in the assessment of changes in ambient noise levels resulting from aircraft operations. The recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by the noise. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, it has been accepted that they are applicable to all sources of noise described in terms of cumulative noise exposure metrics such as the Ldn.

Table 4.10-6
Significance of Changes in Noise Exposure
Ambient Noise Level Without Project,
Ldn
Increase Required for Significant
Impact
<60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60 – 65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
Source: Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON)
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Based on the Table 4.10-6 data, an increase in the traffic noise level of 5 dB or more would be significant where the pre-project noise levels are less than 60 dB Ldn, or 3 dB or more where existing noise levels are between 60 to 65 dB Ldn. Extending this concept to higher noise levels, an increase in the traffic noise level of 1.5 dB or more may be significant where the pre-project traffic noise level exceeds 65 dB Ldn. The rationale for the Table 4.10-6 criteria is that, as ambient noise levels increase, a smaller increase in noise resulting from a project is sufficient to cause annoyance.

Vibration
The City of Sacramento does not have specific policies or standards pertaining to vibration levels.

However, vibration levels associated with construction activities and project operations are addressed as potential vibration impacts associated with project implementation. Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events.

Construction operations have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground vibration depending on the specific construction equipment used and operations involved. Table

4.10-7 indicates that pursuant to California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards, the threshold for architectural damage to structures is 0.2 in/sec PPV and continuous vibrations of 0.1 in/sec PPV, or greater, would likely cause annoyance to sensitive receptors.

Table 4.10-7
Effects of Vibration on People and Buildings
PPV
mm/sec in/sec Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.15 - 0.30 0.006 - 0.019 Threshold of perception;
possibility of intrusion
Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of
any type

2.0 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible
Recommended upper level of the
vibration to which ruins and ancient
monuments should be subjected

2.5 0.10 Level at which continuous
vibrations begin to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural”
damage to normal buildings

5.0 0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in
buildings (this agrees with the
levels established for people
standing on bridges and subjected
to relative short periods of
vibrations)
Threshold at which there is a risk of
“architectural” damage to normal
dwelling - houses with plastered walls
and ceilings. Special types of finish
such as lining of walls, flexible ceiling
treatment, etc., would minimize
“architectural” damage
10 - 15 0.4 - 0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant
by people subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable to
some people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than
normally expected from traffic, but
would cause “architectural” damage
and possibly minor structural damage
Source: California Department of Transportation, 2002.

Method of Analysis
Below are descriptions of the methodologies used to measure background and ambient noise and estimate future traffic noise, construction noise, and vibration associated with the project.

Further modeling details and calculations are provided in Appendix J to this EIR. The results of Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

the noise and vibration impact analyses were compared to the standards of significance discussed above in order to determine the associated level of impact.

To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity, Saxelby conducted continuous (24-hour) noise level measurements at four locations to the south and east of the project site. Noise measurement locations were taken between March 29th and 31st, 2022 and are shown on Figure 4.10-1. The sound level meters were programmed to record the maximum, median, and average noise levels at each site during the survey. Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) model 820 integrating sound level meters were used for the ambient noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before and after use with a CAL 200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).

To predict existing noise levels due to traffic, Saxelby used the Federal Highway Administration Highway (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model RD-77-108 (FHWA model). The model is based upon the Calveno reference noise factors for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site. The FHWA model was used in conjunction with project-specific traffic volumes provided by DKS Associates to analyze the potential impact of project-generated traffic under Existing Plus Project conditions and future Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Existing Plus Project conditions indicate buildout of the industrial park and nonparticipating parcel components of the proposed project, while Cumulative Plus Project conditions refer to full buildout of the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels in combination with future development in the project area.

The FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to predict noise levels for standard construction equipment used for roadway improvement projects. The assessment of potential significant noise effects due to construction is based on the standards and procedures described in the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) guidance manual and FHWA’s RCNM. The RCNM is a Windows-based noise prediction model that enables the prediction of construction noise levels for a variety of construction equipment based on a compilation of empirical data and the application of acoustical propagation formulas. The RCNM enables the calculation of construction noise levels in more detail than the manual methods, which eliminates the need to collect extensive amounts of project-specific input data. RCNM allows for the modeling of multiple pieces of construction equipment working either independently or simultaneously, the character of noise emission, and the usage factors for each piece of equipment. Noise sources in the RCNM database include actual noise levels and equipment usage percentages.

Saxelby predicted operational noise levels from only the industrial park portion of the project, as well as the full buildout of the project site, including the nonparticipating parcels. To predict noise levels from operational noise, Saxelby used the SoundPLAN noise prediction model to calculate noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors. Inputs to the model included loading dock noise and on-site vehicle circulation noise associated with the warehouses and the commercial uses.

To determine typical noise levels associated with the proposed loading docks, noise level measurement data from a United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI) warehouse was used. The noise level measurements were conducted at a distance of 200 feet from the center of the loading dock and circulation area. Activities during the peak hour of loading dock activities were assumed to include truck arrival/departures, truck idling, truck backing, air brake release, and operation of truck-mounted refrigeration units. Noise generation associated with operation of the commercial Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

component of the proposed project was calculated using trip generation information supplied by DKS Associates.

Project-Specific Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following discussion of impacts is based on implementation of the proposed project in comparison with the baseline and standards of significance identified above. As previously discussed, while the proposed project would require approval of a SOI Amendment and Annexation of the entire project site into the City limits, only the industrial park is currently proposed for development; however, the following analysis addresses impacts of both the proposed industrial park development and future development of the nonparticipating parcels.

4.10-1 Generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

Although construction of the industrial park and the nonparticipating parcels would take place at different times, because both periods of construction would occur within the same project site, the following discussion applies to the potential for both project components to result in the generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in excess of applicable standards. In addition, the analysis includes evaluation of the proposed off-site improvements.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
Construction activities associated with the proposed project, including off-site improvements, would require the use of numerous pieces of noise-generating equipment, such as excavating machinery (e.g., backhoes, bulldozers, excavators, front loaders) and other construction equipment (e.g., compactors, scrapers, graders).

Construction worker traffic and construction-related material haul trips would raise ambient noise levels along local haul routes, depending on the number of haul trips made and types of vehicles used.

Table 4.10-8 shows maximum noise levels associated with typical construction equipment. However, it is noted that equipment such as concrete saw and jackhammer are primarily used for demolition activities, and, thus, are unlikely to be used during on-site construction of the proposed project. Based on the table, activities involved in typical construction would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 76 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet. However, as one increases the distance between equipment, or increases separation of areas with simultaneous construction activity, dispersion and distance attenuation reduce the effects of combining separate noise sources. The noise levels from a source decrease at a rate of approximately six dB per every doubling of distance from the noise source. Thus, noise levels at the nearest sensitive noise receptors, including the single-family residences located approximately 200 feet east of the industrial park portion of the project site, and the Paso Verde K-8 School located approximately 200 feet south of the nonparticipating parcels, would conservatively range from 64 to 78 dB. At off-site locations, maximum construction Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

noise levels associated with development of off-site improvements could be as high as 90 dB.

Table 4.10-8
Construction Equipment Noise
Type of Equipment Maximum Level, dB at 50 feet
Auger Drill Rig 84
Backhoe 78
Compactor 83
Compressor (air) 78
Concrete Saw 90
Dozer 82
Dump Truck 76
Excavator 81
Generator 81
Jackhammer 89
Pneumatic Tools 85
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide, January 2006.

The noise increase during construction would be of short duration and would likely occur primarily during daytime hours. The City of Sacramento’s Noise Ordinance (Section 8.60.060 of the Municipal Code) exempts construction activities from the City’s noise standards, provided that construction takes place between the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM Sundays and holidays. Although construction activities associated with both components of the proposed project could result in infrequent periods of high noise, the construction noise would not be sustained and would only occur only during the City’s permitted construction noise hours. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.10-2 Generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Based on the analysis below and with implementation of mitigation, the impact is less than significant.

The primary sources of noise associated with the proposed project would be traffic noise associated with traffic on local roadways, as well as operational noise associated with the loading docks and truck circulation, and parking lot circulation. It is noted that while the following analysis of traffic noise addresses buildout of both the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels, operational noise of the industrial park and full buildout of the annexation area are addressed separately. Because the proposed offsite force main, including each of the three potential force main segment options, would be installed underground and would not involve generation of vehicle trips during operation, operation of the force main would not generate a substantial Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of applicable standards established by the City of Sacramento.

Traffic Noise
Using the methodology described in the Method of Analysis section above, traffic noise levels under Existing and Existing Plus Project conditions were estimated as part of the Environmental Noise Assessment and are presented in Table 4.10-9. It is noted that because the data presented in Table 4.10-9 was calculated based on buildout of the industrial park as well as future development of the nonparticipating parcels. As such, the following analysis addresses both components of the proposed project.

Industrial Park and Nonparticipating Parcels
Because Table 4.10-9 presents traffic noise level increases related to full buildout of the project site, traffic noise levels generated by the industrial park portion of the proposed project would be less than what is presented. Traffic noise levels were predicted for the sensitive receptors located at the closest typical setback distance along each project-area roadway segment. Predicted traffic noise levels were then compared to the noise level increase significance criteria presented in Table 4.10-6.

Table 4.10-9
Project-Related Traffic Noise Level Increases
Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level at Closest
Sensitive Receptors (dBA Ldn)
Existing No
Project
Existing +
Project Change
Metro Air
Parkway
I-5 to Pacific
Gateway Drive 42.4 45.1 2.7
Metro Air
Parkway
Pacific Gateway
Drive to Meister
Way

43.2 45.5 2.3
Metro Air
Parkway
Meister Way to
Elkhorn
Boulevard

43.0 45.3 2.3
West
Elkhorn
Boulevard
Lone Tree Road
to Baidee Drive 58.7 59.9 1.2
Power Line
Road
Garden Highway
to Del Paso Road 33.8 35.3 1.5
Power Line
Road
Bayou RoaWay
to Del Paso Road 53.2 57.6 4.4
Power Line
Road
Bayou Way to
Pacific Gateway
Drive

56.7 57.0 0.2
Power Line
Road
West Elkhorn
Boulevard to
Pacific Gateway
Drive

27.7 27.9 0.1
Del Paso
Road
Power Line Road
to Hovnanian
Drive

49.7 51.6 1.9
(Continues on next page)
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-9
Project-Related Traffic Noise Level Increases
Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level at Closest
Sensitive Receptors (dBA Ldn)
Existing No
Project
Existing +
Project Change
El Centro
Road
Del Paso Road to
Hawkview Drive 47.2 48.3 1.1
El Centro
Road
Hawkview Drive
to Bayou Way

56.5 58.5 2.0
Garden
Highway
Power Line Road
to Radio Road 47.1 48.5 1.4
Garden
Highway
Radio Road to
San Juan Road 52.3 53.4 1.1
Garden
Highway
San Juan Road
to City Limit 50.7 50.9 0.2
Metro Air
Parkway
I-5 to Airport
South Industrial
Drive
- 41.4 -
Airport
South
Industrial
Drive
Power Line Road
to Metro Air
Parkway
- 44.6 -
Airport
South
Industrial
Drive
Metro Air
Parkway to "A"
Drive
- 44.1 -
"A" Drive
Airport South
Industrial Drive to
Bayou Way
- 54.1 -
Bayou Way A Drive to El
Centro Road 58.8 61.0 2.3
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

FICON guidelines specifies criteria to determine the significance of traffic noise impacts, as shown in Table 4.10-6. A traffic noise increase of 5 dB or more is significant if pre-project levels are under 60 dB Ldn, or 3 dB or more if existing levels are 60 to 65 dB Ldn. For higher levels exceeding 65 dB Ldn, a 1.5 dB increase would be considered be significant.

The existing ambient noise level along Power Line Road is 53.4 dBA; thus, the allowable increase in noise levels along the road segment is 5 dB. As shown in Table

4.10-9, above, development of the proposed project would result in a maximum noise level increase of 4.4 dBA Ldn along Power Line Road, which is below the maximum allowable increase in noise level. The highest existing ambient noise level in the project vicinity, 62.9 dBA, occurs directly adjacent to Bayou Way. The noise level increase along Bayou Way is predicted to be 1.0 dBA, which is less than the applicable significant increase criterion of 3 dB where noise levels range from 60 to 65 dB Ldn.

Therefore, the increase in traffic noise levels at existing sensitive receptors due to the proposed project would be considered less than significant.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Operational Noise
As discussed above, the City of Sacramento Municipal Code, Section 8.68.060, establishes an allowable exterior noise level limit for residential uses of 55 dBA L50 and 75 dBA Lmax during daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) hours and 50 dBA L50 and 70 dBA Lmax during nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM).

Operational noise associated with the proposed project would include noise generated from the loading dock and on-site truck circulation, as well as on-site vehicle circulation associated with the commercial component of the proposed project. Operational noise impacts associated with buildout of the industrial park, as well as noise impacts associated with full buildout of the nonparticipating parcels, are discussed separately below.

Industrial Park
Using the methodology described in the Method of Analysis section, operational noise levels generated by the industrial park portion of proposed project were estimated by Saxelby. It is noted that in estimating operational noise levels of the industrial park, Saxelby assumed that the peak day and peak night levels would be same; as such, Figure 4.10-3 shows the noise level contours for the nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) medians (L50). As shown therein, operational noise associated with the industrial park is anticipated to range from 40 to 48 dBA L50, which would comply with the City’s noise level standards.

In addition, it should be noted that operational noise associated with the restaurant buildings and fueling station/carwash in the proposed Highway Commercial Planned Unit Development (HC-PUD) zones would not be anticipated to result in substantial increases to the existing ambient noise levels at existing receptors in the project vicinity, given the distance from the Paso Verde K-8 School (nearest receptor) to the closest boundary of a HC-PUD zone (3,500 feet). Furthermore, noise from on-site HCPUD uses would be shielded by the proposed Parcel 3, Parcel 4, and Parcel 5 warehouse buildings, further attenuating HC-PUD noise at existing sensitive receptors.

Nonparticipating Parcels
Saxelby also estimated operational noise levels generated by the future development of the nonparticipating parcels to assess operational noise associated with full buildout of the annexation area. The project noise level contours for the daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) medians (L50) are shown in Figure

4.10-4 and Figure 4.10-5, respectively.

As presented therein, peak hour noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors to the east of the project site, including the contribution of noise generated from on-site operations, would range from 45 to 51 dBA L50.

As shown in Figure 4.10-4, the proposed project, as well as the future development of the nonparticipating parcels, would comply with the City’s daytime dBA L50 noise level standard.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-3
Nighttime Noise Levels – Proposed Project (dBA L50)
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-4
Daytime Noise Levels – Full Buildout of the Annexation Area (dBA L50) Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-5
Nighttime Noise Levels – Full Buildout of the Annexation Area (dBA L50) Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

However, as shown in Figure 4.10-5, full buildout of the annexation area would exceed the City’s nighttime 50 dBA L50 noise level standard. Therefore, the increase in noise levels at existing sensitive receptors due to on-site operations would be potentially significant.

Conclusion
Based on the above, although the proposed project would not result in an increase in traffic noise levels at existing sensitive receptors that would be considered significant, Saxelby determined that operational noise associated with the proposed project, including the future development of the nonparticipating parcels, could result in noise increases in exceedance of the applicable noise standards. However, as shown in Figure 4.10-6, Saxelby calculated that the inclusion of an eight-foot-tall sound wall along the eastern frontage of the project site would reduce nighttime noise levels at the existing sensitive receptors to between 44 and 48 dBA L50, which is below the City’s nighttime 50 dBA L50 noise level standard.

As such, without the inclusion of a sound wall along the project site’s eastern frontage, full buildout of the annexation area could result in the generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, and a significant impact could occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

4.10-2 Prior to approval by the City’s Public Works Department of the final Improvement Plans for the nonparticipating parcels portion of the proposed project, the Improvement Plans shall include the following requirements:
 An eight-foot-tall sound wall shall be constructed along the eastern project boundary, in the location indicated in Figure 4.10-6 and the Environmental Noise Assessment prepared for the proposed project by Saxelby Acoustics, in order to achieve the City’s nighttime 50 dBA L50 noise level standards.
 Noise barrier walls shall be constructed of concrete panels, concrete masonry units, earthen berms, or any combination of these materials that achieve the required total height. Wood is not recommended due to eventual warping and degradation of
acoustical performance.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Figure 4.10-6
Nighttime Noise Levels with an Eight-Foot Wall – Full Buildout of the Annexation Area (dBA L50)
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

4.10-3 Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

According to the Environmental Noise Assessment, operations associated with the proposed project would not result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. However, construction activity associated with the proposed project would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary ground vibration depending on the specific construction equipment used and operations involved. Accordingly, the analysis below focuses on construction vibration only.

Although construction of the industrial park and the nonparticipating parcels would take place at different times, because both periods of construction would occur within the same project site, the following discussion applies to the potential for both project components to result in the exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groudborne noise levels. In addition, the analysis includes evaluation of the proposed off-site improvements.

Industrial Park, Nonparticipating Parcels, and Off-Site Improvement Area
Project construction would use typical construction equipment and would not require significant sources of vibration such as pile driving or blasting. Table 4.10-10 below shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction equipment.

As shown in Table 4.10-10, construction vibration levels associated with development of the proposed project would be less than the 0.20 in/sec PPV threshold for structural damage at distances of 26 feet, and less than the 0.10 in/sec PPV threshold for human annoyance at distances of 50 feet. Sensitive receptors which could be impacted by construction-related vibrations, especially vibratory compactors/rollers, would be located approximately 200 feet, or further, from typical construction activities at the project site. As such, construction activities would not be anticipated to exceed the acceptable levels at such distances.

Table 4.10-10
Vibration Levels for Various Construction Equipment
Type of Equipment
PPV at 25 feet
(in/sec)
PPV at 50 feet
(in/sec)
PPV at 100 feet
(in/sec)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.031 0.011
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.027 0.010
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.000 0.000
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.031 0.011
Jackhammer 0.035 0.012 0.004
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.025 0.009
Vibratory
Compactor/roller

0.210
(Less than 0.20 at 26
feet)

0.074 0.026
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Conclusion
Based on the construction equipment to be used and the distance from construction activities to the nearest sensitive receptors, vibration from the project would not be a concern. Additionally, construction activities would be temporary in nature. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.10-4 For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose persons residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Based on the analysis below, the impact is less than significant.

Given that both the industrial park and nonparticipating parcels are located within the same project site, the following discussion applies to impacts related to the project’s proximity to the Sacramento International Airport for both components of the proposed project. In addition, the analysis includes evaluation of the proposed off-site improvements. Because the proposed off-site force main would not result in the creation of permanent jobs within two miles of Sacramento International Airport, the force main would not expose persons residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels associated with the airport.

Industrial Park and Nonparticipating Parcels
The Sacramento International Airport is located approximately 1.6 miles north of the project site. As such, the site is included within the ALUCP. As shown in Figure 4.10- 2, the project site is located within the 60 to 70 dBA CNEL airport noise contours. As discussed above and shown in Table 4.10-4, the normally acceptable noise environment for industrial uses is defined as a noise exposure level of less than 75 dBA CNEL. Therefore, noise levels related to the Sacramento International Airport at the project site would be within the City’s criteria for the normal acceptable noise environment.

Because the project site is located within the 60 to 70 dBA CNEL airport noise contours, development of the proposed project with industrial uses would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures
As defined in Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, “cumulative impacts” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, compound, or increase other environmental impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.

For further detail related to the cumulative setting of the proposed project, refer to Chapter 6, Statutorily Required Sections of this EIR.

4.10-5 Generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels associated with development of the proposed project in combination with future development. Based on the analysis below, the project’s incremental contribution to this significant cumulative impact is less than significant.

Future development projects within the project area, including the industrial park and the future development of the nonparticipating parcels, in combination with future development associated with buildout of the City’s 2040 General Plan, would incrementally affect the future cumulative ambient noise environment. Because the proposed off-site force main, including each of the three potential force main segment options, would be installed underground and would not involve generation of vehicle trips during operation, operation of the force main would not generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in combination with future development in the vicinity of the project in excess of applicable standards established by the City of Sacramento.

Industrial Park and Nonparticipating Parcels
Using the methodology described above in the Method of Analysis section, traffic noise levels under Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project conditions were estimated as part of the Environmental Noise Assessment and are shown in Table 4.10-11. Traffic noise levels were predicted at the sensitive receptors located at the closest typical setback distance along each project-area roadway segment. Predicted traffic noise levels were then compared to the noise level increase significance criteria presented in Table 4.10-6. As shown in Table 4.10-11, the proposed project would not result in an increase in traffic noise levels under Cumulative Plus Project conditions and, as a result, impacts related to cumulative traffic noise would not occur.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-11
Predicted Cumulative Traffic Noise Level Increases
Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level at Closest
Sensitive Receptors (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
No Project
Cumulative +
Project Change
Metro Air
Parkway
I-5 to Pacific
Gateway Drive 46.2 47.3 1.1
Metro Air
Parkway
Pacific Gateway
Drive to Meister
Way

46.1 47.2 1.0
Metro Air
Parkway
Meister Way to
Elkhorn Boulevard 45.4 45.8 0.5
West
Elkhorn
Boulevard
Lone Tree Road to
Baidee Drive 62.9 63.0 0.1
Power Line
Road
Garden Highway to
Del Paso Road 39.9 40.6 0.7
Power Line
Road
Bayou Way to Del
Paso Road 57.1 60.1 3.0
Power Line
Road
Bayou Road to
Pacific Gateway
Drive

57.5 58.5 1.0
Power Line
Road
West Elkhorn
Boulevard to Pacific
Gateway Drive

28.7 29.8 1.0
Del Paso
Road
Power Line Road to
Hovnanian Drive 50.0 51.4 1.3
El Centro
Road
Del Paso Road to
Hawkview Drive 52.7 52.3 -0.4
El Centro
Road
Hawkview Drive to
Bayou Way

62.7 61.9 -0.9
Garden
Highway
Power Line Road to
Radio Road 53.3 54.0 0.6
Garden
Highway
Radio Road to San
Juan Road 58.8 59.2 0.4
Garden
Highway
San Juan Road to
City Limit 55.7 56.0 0.3
Metro Air
Parkway
I-5 to Airport South
Industrial Drive - 43.0 -
Airport
South
Industrial
Drive
Power Line Road to
Metro Air Parkway - 46.4 -
Airport
South
Industrial
Drive
Metro Air Parkway
to "A" Drive - 45.9 -
(Continues on next page)
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.10 – Noise

Table 4.10-11
Predicted Cumulative Traffic Noise Level Increases
Roadway Segment
Predicted Exterior Noise Level at Closest
Sensitive Receptors (dBA Ldn)
Cumulative
No Project
Cumulative +
Project Change
"A" Drive
Airport South
Industrial Drive to
Bayou Way
- 56.4 -
Bayou Way A Drive to El Centro
Road 62.9 63.8 1.0
Source: Saxelby Acoustics, LLC., 2024.

Planned and future development within the City’s 2040 General Plan policy area or areas within Sacramento County in the project vicinity include the Greenbriar Development Project, the Metro Air Park Project, and the Elkhorn Boulevard Extension Project. Such development would contribute to the cumulative noise environment during the Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. However, traffic noise generated by the future developments in the project vicinity have been included in the cumulative noise analysis presented herein. In addition, the potential future developments are not expected to generate substantial noise levels during operations beyond what has been anticipated for full buildout of the project site, as presented above.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. The project’s incremental contribution to cumulative noise impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure(s)
None required.

4.11 PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES,

AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

4.11.1 INTRODUCTION
The Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems chapter of the EIR summarizes the setting information and identifies potential new demands resulting from the proposed project on public services and utilities, including fire protection and law enforcement services, schools, parks, and recreation facilities, as well as water, sanitary sewer, electric power, natural gas, telecommunication, and solid waste disposal services. The chapter evaluates the sufficiency of water supplies to meet the project’s water demand and assesses the adequacy of the wastewater treatment system required to serve the project. Pursuant to Section XV of CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, potential impacts to public services are identified if the proposed project would require the development of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could have adverse physical effects on the environment. Information for the Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems chapter was primarily drawn from the Targeted Municipal Services Review (Targeted MSR) (see Appendix K of this EIR),1 the Airport South Industrial Preliminary Water Study (Preliminary Water Study) (see Appendix L of this EIR),2 and the Airport South Industrial Level 1 Sewer Study (Sewer Study) (see Appendix M of this EIR),3 all of which were prepared for the proposed project by Wood Rodgers. In addition, information was sourced from the City of Sacramento 2040 General Plan,4 the City of Sacramento 2040 Master EIR (MEIR),5 and the City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).6 Impacts related to groundwater and storm drainage facilities are addressed in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR. In addition, as discussed further in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, the project site is divided into two portions: the industrial park, which consists of the majority of the western portion and the northeast corner of the overall site, and the nonparticipating parcels, primarily located in the southeastern portion of the overall site. While the proposed project would require approval of a Sphere of Influence (SOI) Amendment and Annexation of the entire project site into the City limits, only the industrial park is currently proposed for development. In addition, the proposed project would include construction of an offsite force main to convey wastewater generated from the proposed uses to the 48-inch Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer) North Natomas interceptor line in East Commerce Way. As such, the project would also require Annexation into the SacSewer service area.

4.11.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The following section describes the existing public services in the City of Sacramento, including fire protection and law enforcement services, schools, parks, and recreation facilities, as well as 1 Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Targeted Municipal Services Review, Sacramento, Local Agency Formation Commission. January 2024. 2 Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Preliminary Water Study, City of Sacramento, California. May 11, 2023. 3 Wood Rodgers. Airport South Industrial Level 1 Sewer Study. November 2022. 4 City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan. Adopted February 27, 2024. 5 City of Sacramento. Sacramento 2040 General Plan and Climate Action & Adaptation Plan Master Environmental Impact Report. August 2023. 6 City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021.

4.11 PUBLIC SERVICES, UTILITIES, AND

SERVICE SYSTEMS
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

the existing utilities and service systems in the project area, including water supply, wastewater conveyance and treatment, solid waste, and gas, electric, and telecommunication infrastructure.

Fire Protection Services
The project site is currently provided fire protection services by the Natomas Fire Protection District (per contract with Sacramento Fire Department [SFD] for services). The SFD’s service area consists of approximately 99.2 square miles within the City limits and 47.1 square miles in Sacramento County, including two contract areas for the Pacific Fruitridge Fire Protection District and Natomas Fire Protection District. The department is a full-service fire department, with the responsibility for responding to and mitigating incidents involving fires, medical emergencies, hazardous material incidents, and water rescue within its service area.

The SFD also provides a full range of support services, including fire prevention, public education, fire investigation, and domestic preparedness planning and response. The department participates in an automatic aid agreement with neighboring fire jurisdictions, as well as State and federal agencies. According to the City’s currently approved budget, the SFD has approximately 761 budgeted personnel positions that respond to approximately 109,342 calls and provide service to approximately 518,161 residents and more than 20,000 businesses in the City.7 At full staffing levels, the SFD daily operation staff consists of a total of 177 on-duty personnel for fire and emergency medical service (EMS) first responder emergencies. The SFD maintains a goal to have its first responding company, which provides for fire suppression and paramedic services, arrive within four minutes.

The SFD is organized into the following divisions:
 Fire Administrative Services, which is responsible for departmental support of budget, revenues, accounts payable, procurement, contracts, council reports and grants, and various personnel services;
 Fire/Emergency Medical Services, which responds to fires, rescues, hazardous materials incidents, wildland fires, and other emergencies and medical services;  Office of the Chief, which is responsible for developing and providing the department’s overall direction;
 Technical Services, which provides essential support functions to all divisions, including equipment acquisition and repair, information technology, facility maintenance and repair coordination, and fleet maintenance. The division also enforces fire codes and ordinances, conducts plan reviews and construction inspections, and investigates fires;  Training/Professional Standards, which is responsible for essential fire recruit training including in-service, continuing education, and outreach/recruitment.

The SFD is headquartered at the City’s Public Safety Center, located at 5770 Freeport Boulevard in Sacramento. The facility also serves as the Sacramento Police Department’s (SPD) headquarters. The SFD operates 24 fire stations, which are strategically located throughout the City. The nearest SFD station to the project site is Station 43, which is located at 4201 El Centro Road, approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the site. Although each SFD station operates within a specific response district encompassing the immediate geographical area around the station, all of the fire agencies within Sacramento County (i.e., SFD, Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, Sac Airport Fire, Cosumnes Community Services District Fire Department, and the 7 City of Sacramento. Approved Budget Fiscal Year 2023/24. July 1, 2023.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Folsom Fire Department) share an automatic aid agreement that allows response from the closest fire unit regardless of jurisdiction. The nearest existing fire station in Sacramento County to the project site is the Sac Airport Fire station, located at the Sacramento International Airport, approximately 2.1 miles to the north of the project site.

All but one of the SFD engine companies are staffed with four personnel, consisting of a Company Officer (captain), engineer, and two firefighters. The remaining engine company, located at Station 3 in the rural portion of the contracted Natomas Fire Protection District, is staffed with three personnel (a captain, an engineer, and a firefighter). In addition, SFD truck companies and the department’s lone rescue company are also staffed with personnel that are identical to the four-person engine companies. Ambulances are staffed with two firefighters/paramedics or a firefighter/paramedic and firefighter/emergency medical technician (EMT) combination.

Metro Air Park, a master planned industrial development, is also scheduled to provide land and facilities for a new fire station near the project site. The 10,000-square-foot (sf) fire station will be located approximately 1.4 miles north of the site and operated by the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District. Construction of the facility is planned at such time that Metro Air Park reaches 30 percent buildout.

Law Enforcement Services
The project site is currently located within the unincorporated portion of Sacramento County, which is provided law enforcement services by the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office. Upon annexation into the City of Sacramento, the site would be served by the SPD. The SPD provides law enforcement services within the City limits and is staffed with approximately 1,132 employees, including 619 police officers, 25 police lieutenants, and various professional and non-career staff.8 The SPD is managed by the Chief of Police, as well as three Deputy Chiefs and a captain who oversee the Offices of Operations, Investigations, and Specialized Services.

As discussed previously, the SPD is headquartered at the City’s Public Safety Center at 5770 Freeport Boulevard and is supported by several substations throughout the City. The substations include the William J. Kinney Police Facility, which serves the SPD’s North Area from 3550 Marysville Boulevard; the Joseph E. Rooney Police Facility, which serves the SPD’s South Area from 5303 Franklin Boulevard; and the Central Command Richards Police Facility, which is located at 300 Richards Boulevard.

The North Area substation provides police services to the northern portion of the City, from the American River to the south, to the City limits to the west, north, and east. The South Area substation provides police protection services to the southern portion of the City, from U.S. Route 50 (US-50) to the north, to the City limits to the west, south, and east. The Central Command Richards Police Facility provides police response to three main beats in the central portion of the City, which are bounded by the American River to the north, US-50 to the south, the Sacramento River to the west, and the City limits to the east. The nearest police substation to the project site is the Central Command Richards Police Facility, which is located approximately 5.4 miles to the southeast of the site.

The SPD does not have an adopted officer-to-resident ratio. The department uses geographic information systems (GIS) data, call and crime frequency information, and available personnel to 8 City of Sacramento. Approved Budget Fiscal Year 2023/24. July 1, 2023.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

rebalance its deployment on an annual basis in order to meet the changing demands of the City.

The SPD maintains an unofficial goal of 2.0 to 2.5 sworn police officers per 1,000 residents and one civilian support staff per two sworn officers.

Schools
The project site is within the Natomas Unified School District (NUSD), which is located in the northwestern portion of the City of Sacramento and Sacramento County and encompasses 36.78 square miles. The NUSD is bounded by the Sacramento River to the south and west and the American River to the south, and bisected by I-5 and Interstate 80 (I-80). The 15 schools/programs within the NUSD include the following:
 Early Learning Program (Preschool, Transitional Kindergarten [TK], and K) at various NUSD facilities;
 American Lakes School (TK-8) at 2800 Stonecreek Drive;  Bannon Creek School (K-8) at 2775 Millcreek Drive;
 H. Allen Hight Elementary (TK-5) at 3200 North Park Drive;  Heredia-Arriaga Dual Immersion School (TK-K) at 1800 Club Center Drive;  Heron School (TK-8), Jefferson School (TK-8) at 5151 Banfield Drive;  Jefferson School (TK-8) at 2001 Pebblewood Drive;
 Natomas Park Elementary (TK-5) at 4700 Crest Drive;
 Paso Verde K-8 School (TK-8) at 5240 PV Scholars Lane;  Two Rivers Elementary (TK-5) at 3201 West River Drive;  Witter Ranch Elementary (TK-5) at 3790 Poppy Hill Way;  Natomas Middle School at 3200 North Park Drive;
 Discovery High School at 3401 Fong Ranch Road;
 Inderkum High School at 2500 New Market Drive; and
 Natomas High School at 3301 Fong Ranch Road.

Of the aforementioned schools, the nearest NUSD facility to the project site is Paso Verde K-8 School, which is located immediately south of the southeast corner of the annexation area. In addition, the following charter schools are located within the NUSD: Leroy Greene Academy, NP3 Charter Elementary School, NP3 Charter Middle School, NP3 Charter High School, Natomas Charter School, and Westlake Charter School.

Including charter schools, the current NUSD enrollment is 16,598, and the current capacity is 18,344 students.9 The NUSD 2017 Master Plan Update provides updates on the major facilities constructed within the school district since 2015, when a 2008 moratorium on new construction within Natomas Basin was lifted, and details the future development projects the NUSD has determined necessary to accommodate students within the school district through 2032. The 2017 Master Plan Update identifies two undeveloped sites in the City of Sacramento (Northpointe on Club Center Drive and 88 Acres on El Centro Road), which are planned for future NUSD school facilities.10 In addition, Measure L, a $172 million school facilities bond to serve NUSD schools, was approved by voters in November 2018. Funds from Measure L serve to upgrade existing facilities and construct new facilities identified by the NUSD in the 2017 Master Plan Update. 9 Mellor, Jennifer, Facilities & Strategic Planning Director. Personal Communication [email] with Joseph Baucum, Senior Associate, Raney Planning & Management, Inc. June 29, 2023. 10 Natomas Unified School District. 2017 Master Plan Update. December 13, 2017.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

The NUSD administers development impact fees on new construction within the district, which fund the cost of improving and expanding school facilities and equipment needed to accommodate additional student population induced by new development. Currently, the NUSD development impact fee rate is $4.79 per sf of new residential development, and $0.78 per sf of new commercial/industrial development.

Parks and Recreation Facilities
The City of Sacramento maintains a network of parks, open spaces, and recreation areas that contribute to the identity and character of the City’s neighborhoods and urban areas. Park and tree maintenance is managed by the City’s Youth, Parks, and Community Enrichment (YPCE) Department, which also directs future park design and planning, administrative services, marketing, recreation and human services, and special events.

Approximately 4,360 acres of parks, parkways, open space, community centers, aquatic facilities, and bike trails are accessible to Sacramento residents at more than 235 park sites; 21 lakes, ponds, and beaches; 16 aquatic facilities; 18 community centers; and over 70 miles of shareduse paths, including extensive river parkways along the Sacramento and American rivers. Parks in Sacramento range in size between 0.1-acre and 625 acres and are interwoven with urban areas and neighborhoods. Park types within the City of Sacramento include the following:
 Neighborhood Parks: The City’s neighborhood parks range in size between two and 10 acres and each serve a 0.5-mile radius. Some facilities are located adjacent to elementary schools where park programming can be oriented to the recreational needs of children.

Other neighborhood-serving park types include urban plazas and pocket parks, which are strictly less than five acres in size and typically placed in the urban core.  Community Parks: Community parks are generally six to 60 acres in size and provide a broader range of amenities for several neighborhoods within a three-mile radius. In addition to the types of amenities provided at neighborhood parks, community parks are sized to provide additional amenities such as restrooms, on-site parking, community centers, swimming pools, lighted sports fields or courts, and/or other specialized facilities.  Citywide/Regional Parks: Citywide/regional parks are generally 75 to 200 acres in size and are intended to serve the City. Citywide/regional parks typically incorporate amenities that are not found in smaller neighborhood or community parks and may include facilities such as golf courses, aquatic centers, marinas, amusement areas, nature areas, and/or shared-use trails. Parkways are also included in the classification and typically consist of linear, narrow corridors with limited recreational uses that are primarily used for pedestrian/bicycle linkages between residential neighborhoods, schools, parks, and shopping areas.
 Open Space and Shared-Use Paths: The City’s open space and shared-use paths are for natural areas within the City that are used to protect environmental amenities, such as native plant communities or wildlife habitat. Open space areas generally have limited recreational use. While classified separately, parkways are similar to the open space classification, due to their limited recreational use and design.

The nearest park to the project site is Egret Park, which is located immediately to the east of the site within the Westlake Subdivision community (see Figure 3-2 of the Project Description chapter). An open space buffer area extends northwest of Egret Park for potential expansion of Egret Park. In accordance with Sacramento City Code Section 18.56.230, new development within the City is required to pay a Park Development Impact Fee prior to issuance of a building Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

permit. According to the City of Sacramento’s Fees and Charges database, the Park Development Impact Fee is currently assessed at a total rate of $0.22 per square-foot (sf) for new industrial development not in the Central City or a Housing Incentive Zone, which includes a $0.17 per sf rate for Neighborhood/Community fees and a $0.05 per sf rate for Citywide fees.11 As shown in Figure 1.4 of the City of Sacramento Park Impact Fee Nexus Study Update, the project site is not located in the Central City or a Housing Incentive Zone.12 Revenues generated through the Park Development Impact Fee pay for park facilities, including the design, construction, installation, improvement, and acquisition of park facilities for neighborhood parks within two miles of a project site, community parks within five miles of a site, and regional and citywide park facilities located anywhere in the City.

In addition, the City of Sacramento Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2005-2010, which establishes policies to guide decision-making by City staff and officials related to park facilities, identifies growth opportunity areas, the closest of which to the project site is the City-approved Northlake (Greenbriar) subdivision, to the north of the site, across I-5. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan does not identify parks and recreation growth opportunity areas within the project site, as the site is currently within the unincorporated portion of Sacramento County. The nearest park facility within the unincorporated County to the project site is the Teal Bend Golf Club, located

2.4 miles to the northwest of the project site.

Other Public Facilities
The Sacramento Public Library (SPL) serves the cities of Sacramento, Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, Galt, Iselton, Rancho Cordova, and the County of Sacramento. The SPL authority is governed by a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between the cities and County to provide public library services to all citizens in the combined jurisdiction. Currently, SPL operates a total of 27 branches, including 11 branches within the City of Sacramento and 16 branches in other cities and throughout Sacramento County.13 SPL also operates a bookmobile. Residents of Sacramento County have access to all library branches both inside and outside the City of Sacramento. In addition, 16 new libraries are planned for construction in the City and County of Sacramento by 2025. Based on plans set forth in the SPL Authority Facility Master Plan, the SPL expects to provide 1,007,274 sf of library space throughout the SPL’s service area by 2025. The North Natomas Public Library is the closest SPL branch to the project site and is located approximately

2.5 miles to the east of the site at 4660 Via Ingoglia Street.

Water Supply and Delivery Infrastructure
The project site is not currently provided potable water service, as the site does not contain structures necessitating water demand and has only limited utility infrastructure. Upon annexation into the City as part of the proposed project, the City would be responsible for providing water to the project site. According to the Targeted MSR and as detailed in the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City of Sacramento is both a water retailer and a water wholesaler and maintains facilities that produce, treat, store, and deliver drinking water to customers. The City’s retail water service area is approximately 101 square miles and serves customers predominantly located within the City limits and foreseeable future City expansions. The City also serves a small number of customers outside its boundaries in an adjacent, unincorporated portion of Sacramento County. Additionally, 11 City of Sacramento. Fees and Charges. Available at: https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/finance/fees-and-charges.

Accessed April 2024. 12 City of Sacramento. City of Sacramento Park Impact Fee Nexus Study Update. October 12, 2016. 13 Sacramento Public Library. Locations. Available at: https://www.saclibrary.org/Locations. Accessed February 2024.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

the City provides wholesale water service to other agencies from its entitlements, including the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) (which includes the Sacramento International Airport and SCWA Zone 40), Sacramento Suburban Water District, and California American Water.

The City’s water infrastructure network consists of two surface water treatment facilities, two pressure zones, and a supporting system of groundwater wells, pumping facilities, storage tanks, and distribution/transmission pipelines (see Figure 4.11-1). The City treats surface water diversions at the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant. Pursuant to the City’s 2020 UWMP, the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant treats Sacramento River water and has a maximum processing capacity of 160 million gallons per day (mgd). The City is permitted to operate the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant at 160 mgd in the summer months and 120 mgd in the shoulder months (April, May, October, and September); however, treatment capacity may be lowered to 135 mgd in the summer months, if certain low-river levels occur. The City is currently evaluating the potential of further expanding the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant to increase the plant’s diversion and treatment capacity to 310 mgd. According to the City’s 2020 UWMP, the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant treats American River water and is currently rated for a diversion capacity of 200 mgd, with a permitted treatment capacity of 160 mgd. The E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant was designed to be expanded in stages to an ultimate treatment capacity of 404 mgd. However, due to several factors, the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant’s current reliable capacity during peak demand periods is 80 mgd, with the ability to operate at up to 100 mgd for short time periods.

High-service pumps at each treatment plant pump water into the distribution system to create a pressure zone that serves most of the City. In addition, a second pressure zone occurs in the northeast portion of the City. On average the City maintains approximately 45 pounds per square inch (psi) throughout its system with a minimum pressure threshold of 30 psi.

In regard to groundwater wells, the City overlies two subbasins of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin (the North American Subbasin, located north of the American River, and South American Subbasin, located south of the American River). The North American Subbasin is bounded by Bear River to the north, Feather River to the west, the Sacramento and American rivers to the south, and a north-to-south line extending from Bear River to Folsom Lake to the east. The South American Subbasin is bounded by the Sierra Nevada Mountain range to the east, the Sacramento River to the west, the American River to the north, and the Cosumnes and Mokelumne rivers to the south. The City currently operates and maintains 26 permitted groundwater wells that draw from the North American Subbasin and two permitted wells in the South American Subbasin. Of the total, 23 are operated regularly to supply municipal water.

Additionally, the City operates 22 irrigation/park supply wells. The total maximum pumping capacity of all wells is approximately 23 mgd; however, factoring in a reduced availability of well production, the typically available total pumping capacity is approximately 14 to 20 mgd.

The City operates and maintains 17 water storage facilities, including 12 reservoirs located throughout the City and five finished water clear wells located at each water treatment plant. The system’s total reservoir storage capacity is 49 million gallons and the total clear-well capacity is approximately 45 million gallons.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Figure 4.11-1
City of Sacramento Water Treatment and Distribution System Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Finally, the City maintains approximately 1,800 miles of transmission and distribution system mains throughout the City, ranging in size between two and 72 inches in diameter. Approximately 415 miles of pipelines exceed 12 inches in diameter, while approximately 70 percent of the systems consists of six- and eight-inch diameter pipelines. The City has one dedicated pipeline that conveys recycled water from the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant to the Sacramento Power Authority Cogeneration Facility.

Within the project vicinity, the City of Sacramento operates and maintains a 30-inch water transmission main in Bayou Way that terminates near the eastern boundary of the project site (see Figure 4.11-2). The transmission main was originally constructed to “wheel” the City’s water through the County of Sacramento to nearby development areas, including the Sacramento International Airport and Metro Air Park, both located north of the project site, across I-5. Wheeling service refers to when the City diverts, treats, and conveys water to another agency using that agency’s water supply entitlements.

Existing on-site water infrastructure includes a 16-inch to 24-inch transmission main and a parallel 12-inch redundant main in Bayou Way, which are operated and maintained by Sacramento County. The aforementioned facilities extend westward into the site from a City/County metering station, which is located immediately east of the project site. In addition, from the City’s existing 30-inch transmission main, a 30-inch SCWA Zone 50 transmission main extends westward into the site. The County’s system ties to other transmission mains that serve Metro Air Park and the Sacramento International Airport and includes two, 1.4-million-gallon water tanks that are located immediately west of the project site, near the southwest intersection of I-5 and Power Line Road.

Water Supply and Demand
According to the City’s 2020 UWMP, the City has relied on river water for its primary source of supply since 1854. The City has multiple surface water entitlements, consisting of five appropriative water right permits issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), pre-1914 rights, and a water rights settlement contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). The five appropriative water right permits are comprised of one permit for the diversion of Sacramento River water and four permits for the diversion of American River water. Diverted water is treated at the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant and the E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant, prior to distribution to customers through the City’s network of water pipelines, tanks, and pumping facilities.

The City has both pre-1914 and post-1914 appropriative rights for water from the Sacramento River. The City has used Sacramento River water since 1854 and claims a pre-1914 appropriative right to divert 75 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the Sacramento River. The City also has one post-1914 Sacramento River permit (Permit 992). Permit 922 has a priority date of March 30, 1920 and authorizes the City to take water from the Sacramento River by direct diversion. Under Permit 992, the City may divert up to 81,800 acre-feet per year (AFY) with a maximum flow of 225 cfs. Water diverted from the Sacramento River under Permit 992 may be used within the City limits and, as the boundaries of the City limits changes from time to time, through annexations.

American River Permits 11358 and 11361 have priority dates of October 29, 1947, and September 22, 1954, respectively. The permits authorize the City to divert water from the American River by direct diversion, with a combined maximum diversion of 245,000 AFY in 2030 at an allowable rate of diversion of 675 cfs. The City’s other two American River permits (Permits 11359 and 11360) have priority dates of February 13, 1948 and July 29, 1948, respectively.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11
– Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Figure 4.11-2
Existing Water Facilities
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

The latter two permits authorize re-diversion for consumptive uses of American River tributary water previously diverted by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) Upper American River Project (UARP). The combined maximum allowable diversion under the two permits includes re-diversion of up to 1,510 cfs of UARP direct diversion water and up to 589,000 AFY of UARP stored water. The Place of Use for these two permits is 96,000 acres within and adjacent to the City.

With respect to the City’s 1957 water rights Settlement Contract with the USBR, the City agreed to limitations on the City’s rate and amount of diversion under its existing water rights permits in exchange for the USBR’s agreement to operate USBR facilities in a manner that assures the City has a permanent reliable supply of surface water under the City’s permits. The City agreed to limit its total combined diversions of the Sacramento and American rivers to a Maximum Combined Diversion, as outlined in the Settlement Contract. The City also agreed to limit its Sacramento River diversions to a maximum of 225 cfs and a maximum amount of 81,800 AFY and to limit its American River water diversions to a maximum of 675 cfs and up to a maximum amount of 245,000 AFY in 2030, with combined diversions from both rivers not exceeding the Maximum Combined Diversion. With respect to groundwater, while the City’s wholesale agreements primarily rely on surface water, SCWA’s Sacramento International Airport and Metro Air Park service areas receive groundwater from the City. The groundwater supply is pumped from the North American Subbasin. Finally, the City’s 2020 UWMP includes projected demands for normal, single dry, and five consecutive dry years. Further information on how each scenario was calculated is provided in the Method of Analysis subsection of this chapter. The projected supply and demands for existing retail and wholesale customers are summarized in Table 4.11-1.

Table 4.11-1
Retail Water Supply and Demand During Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years (AFY) in the Sacramento Service Area Hydrologic Condition 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Normal Year
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 108,432 114,809 121,187 127,564 133,942
Surplus 224,769 235,391 229,014 222,636 216,258
Single Dry Year
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 108,432 114,809 121,187 127,564 133,942
Surplus 224,769 235,391 229,014 222,636 216,258
Multiple Dry Year 1
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 108,432 114,809 121,187 127,564 133,942
Surplus 224,769 235,391 229,014 222,636 216,258
Multiple Dry Year 2
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 109,707 116,085 122,462 128,840 138,397
Surplus 223,493 234,116 227,738 221,360 211,803
Multiple Dry Year 3
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 110,983 117,360 123,738 130,115 142,853
Surplus 222,218 232,840 226,463 220,085 207,347
(Continues on next page)
Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Table 4.11-1
Retail Water Supply and Demand During Normal, Single Dry, and Multiple Dry Years (AFY) in the Sacramento Service Area Hydrologic Condition 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Multiple Dry Year 4
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 112,258 118,636 125,013 131,391 147,308
Surplus 220,942 231,565 225,187 218,809 202,892
Multiple Dry Year 5
Supply Totals 333,200 350,200 350,200 350,200 350,200
Demand Totals 113,534 119,911 126,289 132,666 151,764
Surplus 219,667 230,289 223,912 217,534 198,436
Source: City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, 2021.

Wastewater Conveyance and Treatment
The project site is not currently provided sewer conveyance and treatment services, as the site does not contain structures and has only limited utility infrastructure. Upon annexation into the City as part of the proposed project, the project site would be provided wastewater collection and treatment services by the Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer). It should be noted that prior to December 26, 2023, SacSewer was represented by two independent special districts, a previous iteration of SacSewer and the Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District (Regional San). However, Sacramento LAFCo authorized a reorganization of the districts, dissolving the former SacSewer, annexing the district into Regional San, and subsequently naming the wastewater special district “Sacramento Area Sewer District.” The City of Sacramento provides wastewater collection for a portion of the City; however, the Cityoperated wastewater collection system does not include the City’s North Natomas lands and other areas of the City. The community of Natomas’ collection system is owned and operated by SacSewer and discharges to SacSewer’s interceptor system. SacSewer provides wastewater collection for Metro Air Park, the Sacramento International Airport, and existing North Natomas lands. In addition, SacSewer provides conveyance, treatment, and single source of disposal service to a number of contributing agencies, including the City of Folsom, the City of Sacramento, City of Citrus Heights, City of Rancho Cordova, City of Elk Grove, and the City of West Sacramento. In total, SacSewer serves approximately 1.6 million residential, commercial, and industrial customers.

Collected wastewater is discharged into SacSewer’s interceptor system and treated at the district’s Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP) located in South Sacramento County. Wastewater is treated to a tertiary standard and discharged into the Sacramento River; however, some effluent is used by the City of Elk Grove for landscape irrigation. The SRWTP is permitted to treat an average dry weather flow (ADWF) of 181 mgd.

According to the Targeted MSR, an upgrade of the SRWTP was completed in spring of 2023. The upgrade, known as the EchoWater Project, was conducted to meet new water quality requirements that were issued by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as part of compliance with the requirements established by Regional San’s 2014 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (No. CA0077682). The requirements were designed primarily to help protect the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem downstream by removing most of the ammonia and nitrates and improving the removal of pathogens from wastewater discharge. The upgrade includes deployment of new treatment Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

technologies and facilities and increases the quality of effluent discharged into the Sacramento River to ensure that the SRWTP discharge constituents are below permitted discharge limits specified in the NPDES permit.

Flows to the SRWTP have decreased as a result of water conservation efforts over the last 10 years. Additionally, according to the Targeted MSR, adequate capacity for wastewater treatment is anticipated well into the future. Flows in 2014 were approximately 141 mgd, compared to the current permitted capacity of 181 mgd. Further improvements to the SRWTP are not anticipated to be required until after 2050.

As the project site does not contain structures, existing sewer infrastructure is not currently present on-site. An existing SacSewer trunk line is located within Greg Thatch Circle, to the east of SR 99. From the existing SacSewer trunk line, flows are conveyed to the 48-inch SacSewer North Natomas interceptor line, which connects with the trunk line to the southeast of the Club Center Drive/Hampton Falls Way intersection and proceeds south of Del Paso Road within East Commerce Way.

Solid Waste
The project site is not currently provided solid waste collection services. Upon annexation into the City, the site would be provided services by the City of Sacramento’s Recycling and Solid Waste Division, which collects solid waste generated throughout the City, including household waste, recycling, construction and demolition materials, and organic wastes. According to the Targeted MSR, more than 660,000 tons of solid waste are generated annually, with the City collecting approximately 250,000 tons. The remainder is collected by franchised waste haulers and individual residents.

Waste collected by the City is initially transported to two locations, including the Sacramento Recycling and Transfer Station (SRTS), which accepts waste from the southern region of the City, and the Sacramento County North Area Recovery Station (NARS), which accepts waste from the north region of the City. Refuse is hauled from both locations to the Sacramento County Kiefer Landfill for processing. Solid waste generated by commercial uses (including multi-family residences of five units or more) is collected by private haulers and transported to the SRTS, NARS, Sacramento County Kiefer Landfill, as well as other facilities, including the Yolo County Central Landfill, L and D Landfill, the Florin Perkins Public Disposal Site, and the Elder Creek Transfer Station. According to the Targeted MSR, the Sacramento County Kiefer Landfill, located at Kiefer Boulevard and Grand Line Road, includes 1,084 acres of total area, with approximately 660 acres of landfill area. The Kiefer Landfill is the primary location for the City of Sacramento’s disposal of solid waste. The waste delivered to the landfill is from municipal and industrial sources, with an average of approximately 2,423 tons per day accepted.

Gas, Electric, and Telecommunication Infrastructure
The SMUD is responsible for the acquisition, generation, transmission, and distribution of electrical service throughout the City of Sacramento. In addition to the City of Sacramento, SMUD’s service area includes most of Sacramento County and a portion of Placer County.

Electricity is produced from a variety of resources, including hydroelectric, thermal (natural gas), wind, and solar facilities. SMUD prepares an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) that includes targets for system demand, system energy sales, renewable energy, and greenhouse gases. The IRP evaluates various methods and options to meet SMUD’s long-term needs and evaluates the impacts of various resource portfolios on SMUD’s strategic policies.

Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E) provides natural gas service to residents and businesses in the Sacramento area. In the winter months, most natural gas resources are imported from Canada on a supply and demand basis, with the balance supplied from production wells in California. In the summer months, gas is acquired at a lower price and is stored in underground storage facilities for use during winter peak use periods.

Telecommunications infrastructure in the area is provided by Xfinity. Existing electrical and telecommunication distribution lines are located along I-5 and Power Line Road in the project vicinity.

4.11.3 REGULATORY CONTEXT
The following discussion contains a summary of regulatory controls pertaining to public services and utilities, including State and local laws and ordinances.

Federal Regulations
The federal environmental laws and policies relevant to public services and utilities are primarily related to water quality, which is addressed in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR.

State Regulations
The following are applicable State regulations associated with public services and utilities related to the proposed project.

Uniform Fire Code
The Uniform Fire Code with the State of California Amendments contains regulations related to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code (CFC) include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.

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

California Health and Safety Code
State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 15000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, include regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code [CBC]), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.

Proposition 1A/Senate Bill 50
Proposition 1A/Senate Bill (SB) 50 (Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998) is a school construction measure primarily for modernization and rehabilitation of older school facilities and construction of new school facilities. Proposition 1A/SB 50 implemented significant fee reforms by amending the laws governing developer fees and school mitigation.

Proposition 1A/SB 50 also prohibits local agencies from using the inadequacy of school facilities as a basis for denying or conditioning approvals of any “[…] legislative or adjudicative act […] involving […] the planning, use, or development of real property” (Government Code 65996[b]).

Additionally, a local agency cannot require participation in a Mello-Roos for school facilities; Draft EIR
Airport South Industrial Project
May 2024
Chapter 4.11 – Public Services, Utilities, and Service Systems